I don't know where in the world people get the notion that if a guy is bigger or outweighs the other guy he couldn't possible lose a fight to the smaller guy. I've seen a lot of much smaller guys give the rear end kicking of a lifetime to bigger, heavier guys that mistakenly had that false notion.

That is not true at all. If someone is on top of you smashing your head against pavement and punching you in the nose, unless you have some training you probably don't know what to do.

 

And you honestly believe who attacked who doesn't matter?

 

To the bolded absolutely not. Zimmerman initiated the confrontation as soon as he approached a defenseless kid. I know if I'm walking through a dark unfamiliar neighborhood at night and a man starts following me and then comes after me, I'm in defense mode from the get go. If I have to throw the first punch, to combat the danger, then so be it. That's self-defense.

 

Just as Martin was breaking no laws walking through a neighborhood weaponless. You keep mentioning that Zimmerman broke no laws. Neither did Martin, yet he got targeted and ended up dead.

 

Okay. It's obvious you think Trayvon was murdered. I choose to wait and see what the investigation reveals.

 

To the bolded absolutely not. Zimmerman initiated the confrontation as soon as he approached a defenseless kid. I know if I'm walking through a dark unfamiliar neighborhood at night and a man starts following me and then comes after me, I'm in defense mode from the get go. If I have to throw the first punch, to combat the danger, then so be it. That's self-defense.

 

Who said Zimmerman approached him? The media? Because I don't believe that's what Zimmerman said. Maybe I just haven't read that...

Who said Zimmerman approached him? The media? Because I don't believe that's what Zimmerman said. Maybe I just haven't read that...

 

Of course that's not what he said. He's trying to beat a murder rap, he'll say whatever he has to to make himself look like a victim.

 

I mean no one in their right mind actually believes the head of a gated communities neighborhood watch had to get out of his car to look for street signs because he was lost, do they? He got out to confront or follow Martin. There's no other viable explaination.

Okay. It's obvious you think Trayvon was murdered. I choose to wait and see what the investigation reveals.

 

You'll wait to see what the investigation reveals because you are open minded. Yet, you say "it's obvious" that I believe that Martin was murdered. That's rich. :lol:

 

For the record, I don't believe that Martin was murdered. I could be wrong, but I don't feel that Zimmerman got out of his vehicle with the intent to kill Martin. I do not believe that Zimmerman was lost and got out of his vehicle to find a road sign. I believe that he got out to either confront or follow Martin on foot. I believe that Martin felt threatened by the man that was not a cop following him in his vehicle, then getting out of his vehicle and moving toward him. Martin had no motive to harm Zimmerman. By himself and with Zimmerman bigger than he was, it's unlikely that he'd attack the guy for fun. particularly since I haven't seen anything to show that Martin had done that sort of thing in the past.

 

Again, I don't know who threw the first punch. It could be either of them and Martin could have still ended up on top of Zimmerman. Unless another eye witness comes forward, or surveillance footage is found, we won't know, and for that reason, I don't think that Zimmerman can be tried for murder or manslaughter. Perhaps he could be found negligent in civil court. Regardless, Zimmerman's unthinking, reactionary, egotistic actions resulted in Martin's death and makes him morally responsible in my eyes. All he had to do was simply wait a few minutes for the cops to arrive and Martin would have made it back home with his Skittles and tea, Zimmerman wouldn't be in the situation he is in and we wouldn't be having this conversation.

To the bolded absolutely not. Zimmerman initiated the confrontation as soon as he approached a defenseless kid. I know if I'm walking through a dark unfamiliar neighborhood at night and a man starts following me and then comes after me, I'm in defense mode from the get go. If I have to throw the first punch, to combat the danger, then so be it. That's self-defense.

While I agree with you about the defense mode, and I don't have a problem with throwing the first punch to protect yourself, it's the jumping on top of them part (if true) that presents a problem. Hit and get out quick makes much more sense to me.

You'll wait to see what the investigation reveals because you are open minded. Yet, you say "it's obvious" that I believe that Martin was murdered. That's rich. :lol:

 

For the record, I don't believe that Martin was murdered. I could be wrong, but I don't feel that Zimmerman got out of his vehicle with the intent to kill Martin. I do not believe that Zimmerman was lost and got out of his vehicle to find a road sign. I believe that he got out to either confront or follow Martin on foot. I believe that Martin felt threatened by the man that was not a cop following him in his vehicle, then getting out of his vehicle and moving toward him. Martin had no motive to harm Zimmerman. By himself and with Zimmerman bigger than he was, it's unlikely that he'd attack the guy for fun. particularly since I haven't seen anything to show that Martin had done that sort of thing in the past.

 

Again, I don't know who threw the first punch. It could be either of them and Martin could have still ended up on top of Zimmerman. Unless another eye witness comes forward, or surveillance footage is found, we won't know, and for that reason, I don't think that Zimmerman can be tried for murder or manslaughter. Perhaps he could be found negligent in civil court. Regardless, Zimmerman's unthinking, reactionary, egotistic actions resulted in Martin's death and makes him morally responsible in my eyes. All he had to do was simply wait a few minutes for the cops to arrive and Martin would have made it back home with his Skittles and tea, Zimmerman wouldn't be in the situation he is in and we wouldn't be having this conversation.

 

You are getting picky over words again. You clearly think Zimmerman should have been arrested immediately. Just from skimming the first couple of pages of this thread that is obvious. So you obviously feel he is guilty of something.

 

I've been following it for a couple of days and agree with all of the above. I did read somewhere that (I believe it was) Zimmerman's father said that when the whole story comes out that his son will be cleared of wrong doing. I just can't imagine what would do that, though.

Just to be clear, I don't believe a word of Zimmerman's defense. IMO, he should have been in jail immediately. I am just reporting what is being said in his defense.

I haven’t had much to add since all of these threads have run off the rails along with our frenzied, juvenile media. I think most of the dialogue has departed from the case at hand and moved toward race more broadly anyway. I don’t think there’s much more to add, not at least until all of the evidence is made available or this case is tried in a court. But, I think the perception has somehow changed that with NBC’s ridiculous editing of the 911 tapes (I had only heard the full versions, not NBC’s hack job, for the record) and CNN’s ratings-chasing “analysis” of the possible use of a racial slur that those of us who initially found this case compelling or were otherwise skeptical of the “official” story are somehow proven wrong or were somehow duped into following the case in the first place. I think it’s unfortunate how the media has handled this, but it’s also worth reiterating my thoughts from these various threads. There are many issues in this case that have not been dealt with and the further investigation by the state was justified.

 

The Initial Investigation

 

A lot of people have found the initial investigation of the case to be suspect. What that boils down to is an appearance of an outright acceptance of Zimmerman’s story despite very little objective evidence. It also seems that the investigation unfolded in a manner that seemed to have already accepted Zimmerman’s story. It also didn’t help that Chief Lee struggled to answer questions on the case and often tried to make himself sound like the victim. Coupled with the following points and that a lot of people were given the impression Lee was making excuses for problems with the case instead of dealing with them I think a lot of people feel this wasn’t flawlessly executed.

 

1. There were only a few (two?) “eyewitnesses,” which is among the least reliable forms of evidence. To wit, one of these eyewitnesses has since come forward and claimed they weren’t sure what they saw, but police suggested to them that it was Zimmerman getting the worst of the fight and they simply agreed. None of them claim to have seen how the altercation began.

2. Martin was taken to the hospital/morgue as a John Doe. His parents had to file a missing persons report and weren’t able to confirm he was dead and where his body was for at least three days. This means that the initial investigation was unaware of what Martin was doing in the neighborhood, where he was going, etc. Relevant information, no? It also suggests that the only available account of Martin that night was Zimmerman’s, who said he was “up to no good” or “on drugs or something.”

3. Martin was also allegedly on the phone around the time of the incident. His phone records and the person he was last talking to were not checked. It would seem that an interview with his interlocutor would be important evidence. I wonder how tainted that evidence is now since it has emerged after the media firestorm.

4. Again following from the acceptance of Zimmerman’s story, Martin’s body was tested for drugs and alcohol. Zimmerman, the one who possessed and fired a weapon, was not. Again, isn’t this relevant? Is this standard practice is potential homicide cases?

5. Martin’s parents were eventually informed that Zimmerman was not arrested or charged in part because he had a “squeaky clean record.” I don’t think that is a good reason to charge or not charge someone. But, it is also false. Zimmerman did have a record of battery against a police officer.

 

Zimmerman’s Story

 

I think one of the main issues that has motivated outrage in the case are the facts that Zimmerman was armed and Martin was not, Zimmerman assumed Martin was up to no good, followed him, shot him dead, and was able to claim self-defense. Perhaps this is justice, but many do not see it that way as has oft been pointed out: if Zimmerman simply waited for the police this wouldn’t be an issue. Beyond that, there are some reasons to be skeptical of Zimmerman’s claims and the original investigators (Chief Lee) didn’t do a very good job in affirming them to the public.

 

We obviously have no idea what happened between Zimmerman and Martin. We only have Zimmerman’s side to tell, and he has a fairly strong reason to tell it in a particular way. But, from the informational available to the public I think there has been some reason for skepticism. Zimmerman claimed that he was not following Martin, and his father wrote a piece for the newspaper that claimed unequivocally that his son in no way followed Martin. But, the 911 tapes indicate that this isn’t true, Zimmerman was following Martin.

 

The shooting also took place on a path between buildings where people often walk their dogs, which from the Google map of the neighborhood is not something accessible to vehicles. All of this seems to suggest Zimmeran was out of his vehicle and following Martin on foot, which seems to contradict the official story.

 

Additionally, Zimmerman also says the reason he was out of his vehicle was to read the street signs. This is interesting since there are only three streets in this neighborhood and Zimmerman had been “patrolling” them for upwards of ten years. Many find it hard to believe he didn’t know where he was, especially as the 911 tapes indicate he was directing police to locations in the neighborhood with ease. It also appears from the 911 call that Zimmerman was not in his truck when he was following Martin (or maybe he had the windows down, but it was a rainy night) as wind was audible. This again makes one suspicious of Zimmerman’s story of getting out of his truck to read a street sign and getting blindsided, especially when he was on the dog-walking path off the road.

 

Obviously, there might be more to the story or a good explanation that absolves all of this, but for all of the people defending Zimmerman: this is one of the reasons why his story has not been completely bought by the public and why people have felt the investigation wasn’t entirely diligent. Coupled with the racial angle, it again makes Zimmerman out to be the instigator. I should also add that this case didn’t erupt nationally until the 911 tapes were released, which is what drove many people’s suspicion of Zimmerman’s story as it appears to not match up cleanly.

 

Much has been made of the size and age differences of the two men, particularly that the much older and bigger man was allegedly being manhandled so much so that he “reasonably believed” his life was in danger. I don’t think that necessarily suggests anything one way or another, but as Hatz has said I do think forensics could help corroborate or challenge this. I don’t know a lot about it, but it would seem that they would be able to find the angle of the shot, the distance of the shot, etc. that would tell investigators quite a bit. I’m not sure if this was done or is being done, but from the way the investigation proceeded I imagine it was not.

 

What Has Made This a Controversy

 

Obviously, the racial aspect of this case helped draw it to national attention. Zimmerman described Martin as “real suspicious,” a criminal “*******,” and “on drugs or something” all based on his appearance. That’s basically the trifecta of young black male stereotypes. It’s hard to believe that Martin’s race wasn’t the primary driver of Zimmerman’s behavior that night.

 

I also think many people looked at the available facts of the case and the investigation and asked themselves the counterfactual: if Martin were white and Zimmerman were black would things have played out exactly the same way? For many, “not likely” is probably the answer. I imagine most feel that if Martin were white Zimmerman would not have suspected him to be up to no good. I also imagine most feel the investigation might have proceeded differently if Martin were white. Obviously hypotheticals can’t be proven. But, our answers to a question like this reflect the lens with which we view the case and it’s not surprising that it breaks down along partisan lines (which has also contributed to the bitterness over the case).

 

Lastly, Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law also made this case controversial, as Zimmerman’s use of deadly force was justified under the law according to the Sanford Police. I think many people were troubled by the law’s ability to protect the armed, wrongheaded vigilante in this situation and not the unarmed. It seems the law opens the door for unrestrained vigilantism. If you can put yourself in a situation like this, claim to feel threatened, and respond with legal deadly force, when can’t you? The law only requires that the person using deadly force “reasonably believe” it necessary.

 

I don’t know what happened that night. I don’t think any of us ever will. But, I think there are some reasons to be skeptical based on the information available, which is why I think more needs to be done on this case (and wouldn’t have been done if it weren’t for the national outcry). Either there needs to be a trial where both sides can present their case, challenge one another, and allow a jury to decide, or the investigators need to do a much better job of presenting the evidence that absolves Zimmerman of all wrongdoing. As of now, it’s his word against a dead man’s with just enough evidence available to the public to make most skeptical of the investigation’s conclusions. I don’t think that’s a good situation.

You are getting picky over words again. You clearly think Zimmerman should have been arrested immediately. Just from skimming the first couple of pages of this thread that is obvious. So you obviously feel he is guilty of something.

 

Explain how I am getting picky over words. If you are not meaning what you say, then clarify.

 

Actually, originally I was the one is this thread that was reporting a lot of what was being said in Zimmerman's defense. I don't think there is enough to charge him with murder or manslaughter. I don't know enough about lesser charges to know if there might be something lesser that is appropriate.

 

I will say it again. Yes, I DO think that he is guilty, through his actions, of causing the death of Martin.

Habib, "liking" that post isn't really good enough. Thank you for putting together such an excellent, detailed description of how many of us think about this case.

 

Explain how I am getting picky over words. If you are not meaning what you say, then clarify.

 

Actually, originally I was the one is this thread that was reporting a lot of what was being said in Zimmerman's defense. I don't think there is enough to charge him with murder or manslaughter. I don't know enough about lesser charges to know if there might be something lesser that is appropriate.

 

I will say it again. Yes, I DO think that he is guilty, through his actions, of causing the death of Martin.

 

I did clarify in the post you just quoted.

That is not true at all. If someone is on top of you smashing your head against pavement and punching you in the nose, unless you have some training you probably don't know what to do.

 

And you honestly believe who attacked who doesn't matter?

 

 

I weigh 220. I will not get my head pounded into the ground by 140 pound kid. Ever.

I weigh 220. I will not get my head pounded into the ground by 140 pound kid. Ever.

 

Thank you. Tommy Hearns might jab me a couple times, but I'm gonna tackle his wiry behind and beat him senseless, using every weighty advantage I have at my disposal. I'm no boxer and I don't have to play by his rules.

I haven’t had much to add since all of these threads have run off the rails along with our frenzied, juvenile media. I think most of the dialogue has departed from the case at hand and moved toward race more broadly anyway. I don’t think there’s much more to add, not at least until all of the evidence is made available or this case is tried in a court. But, I think the perception has somehow changed that with NBC’s ridiculous editing of the 911 tapes (I had only heard the full versions, not NBC’s hack job, for the record) and CNN’s ratings-chasing “analysis” of the possible use of a racial slur that those of us who initially found this case compelling or were otherwise skeptical of the “official” story are somehow proven wrong or were somehow duped into following the case in the first place. I think it’s unfortunate how the media has handled this, but it’s also worth reiterating my thoughts from these various threads. There are many issues in this case that have not been dealt with and the further investigation by the state was justified.

 

The Initial Investigation

 

A lot of people have found the initial investigation of the case to be suspect. What that boils down to is an appearance of an outright acceptance of Zimmerman’s story despite very little objective evidence. It also seems that the investigation unfolded in a manner that seemed to have already accepted Zimmerman’s story. It also didn’t help that Chief Lee struggled to answer questions on the case and often tried to make himself sound like the victim. Coupled with the following points and that a lot of people were given the impression Lee was making excuses for problems with the case instead of dealing with them I think a lot of people feel this wasn’t flawlessly executed.

 

1. There were only a few (two?) “eyewitnesses,” which is among the least reliable forms of evidence. To wit, one of these eyewitnesses has since come forward and claimed they weren’t sure what they saw, but police suggested to them that it was Zimmerman getting the worst of the fight and they simply agreed. None of them claim to have seen how the altercation began.

2. Martin was taken to the hospital/morgue as a John Doe. His parents had to file a missing persons report and weren’t able to confirm he was dead and where his body was for at least three days. This means that the initial investigation was unaware of what Martin was doing in the neighborhood, where he was going, etc. Relevant information, no? It also suggests that the only available account of Martin that night was Zimmerman’s, who said he was “up to no good” or “on drugs or something.”

3. Martin was also allegedly on the phone around the time of the incident. His phone records and the person he was last talking to were not checked. It would seem that an interview with his interlocutor would be important evidence. I wonder how tainted that evidence is now since it has emerged after the media firestorm.

4. Again following from the acceptance of Zimmerman’s story, Martin’s body was tested for drugs and alcohol. Zimmerman, the one who possessed and fired a weapon, was not. Again, isn’t this relevant? Is this standard practice is potential homicide cases?

5. Martin’s parents were eventually informed that Zimmerman was not arrested or charged in part because he had a “squeaky clean record.” I don’t think that is a good reason to charge or not charge someone. But, it is also false. Zimmerman did have a record of battery against a police officer.

 

Zimmerman’s Story

 

I think one of the main issues that has motivated outrage in the case are the facts that Zimmerman was armed and Martin was not, Zimmerman assumed Martin was up to no good, followed him, shot him dead, and was able to claim self-defense. Perhaps this is justice, but many do not see it that way as has oft been pointed out: if Zimmerman simply waited for the police this wouldn’t be an issue. Beyond that, there are some reasons to be skeptical of Zimmerman’s claims and the original investigators (Chief Lee) didn’t do a very good job in affirming them to the public.

 

We obviously have no idea what happened between Zimmerman and Martin. We only have Zimmerman’s side to tell, and he has a fairly strong reason to tell it in a particular way. But, from the informational available to the public I think there has been some reason for skepticism. Zimmerman claimed that he was not following Martin, and his father wrote a piece for the newspaper that claimed unequivocally that his son in no way followed Martin. But, the 911 tapes indicate that this isn’t true, Zimmerman was following Martin.

 

The shooting also took place on a path between buildings where people often walk their dogs, which from the Google map of the neighborhood is not something accessible to vehicles. All of this seems to suggest Zimmeran was out of his vehicle and following Martin on foot, which seems to contradict the official story.

 

Additionally, Zimmerman also says the reason he was out of his vehicle was to read the street signs. This is interesting since there are only three streets in this neighborhood and Zimmerman had been “patrolling” them for upwards of ten years. Many find it hard to believe he didn’t know where he was, especially as the 911 tapes indicate he was directing police to locations in the neighborhood with ease. It also appears from the 911 call that Zimmerman was not in his truck when he was following Martin (or maybe he had the windows down, but it was a rainy night) as wind was audible. This again makes one suspicious of Zimmerman’s story of getting out of his truck to read a street sign and getting blindsided, especially when he was on the dog-walking path off the road.

 

Obviously, there might be more to the story or a good explanation that absolves all of this, but for all of the people defending Zimmerman: this is one of the reasons why his story has not been completely bought by the public and why people have felt the investigation wasn’t entirely diligent. Coupled with the racial angle, it again makes Zimmerman out to be the instigator. I should also add that this case didn’t erupt nationally until the 911 tapes were released, which is what drove many people’s suspicion of Zimmerman’s story as it appears to not match up cleanly.

 

Much has been made of the size and age differences of the two men, particularly that the much older and bigger man was allegedly being manhandled so much so that he “reasonably believed” his life was in danger. I don’t think that necessarily suggests anything one way or another, but as Hatz has said I do think forensics could help corroborate or challenge this. I don’t know a lot about it, but it would seem that they would be able to find the angle of the shot, the distance of the shot, etc. that would tell investigators quite a bit. I’m not sure if this was done or is being done, but from the way the investigation proceeded I imagine it was not.

 

What Has Made This a Controversy

 

Obviously, the racial aspect of this case helped draw it to national attention. Zimmerman described Martin as “real suspicious,” a criminal “*******,” and “on drugs or something” all based on his appearance. That’s basically the trifecta of young black male stereotypes. It’s hard to believe that Martin’s race wasn’t the primary driver of Zimmerman’s behavior that night.

 

I also think many people looked at the available facts of the case and the investigation and asked themselves the counterfactual: if Martin were white and Zimmerman were black would things have played out exactly the same way? For many, “not likely” is probably the answer. I imagine most feel that if Martin were white Zimmerman would not have suspected him to be up to no good. I also imagine most feel the investigation might have proceeded differently if Martin were white. Obviously hypotheticals can’t be proven. But, our answers to a question like this reflect the lens with which we view the case and it’s not surprising that it breaks down along partisan lines (which has also contributed to the bitterness over the case).

 

Lastly, Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law also made this case controversial, as Zimmerman’s use of deadly force was justified under the law according to the Sanford Police. I think many people were troubled by the law’s ability to protect the armed, wrongheaded vigilante in this situation and not the unarmed. It seems the law opens the door for unrestrained vigilantism. If you can put yourself in a situation like this, claim to feel threatened, and respond with legal deadly force, when can’t you? The law only requires that the person using deadly force “reasonably believe” it necessary.

 

I don’t know what happened that night. I don’t think any of us ever will. But, I think there are some reasons to be skeptical based on the information available, which is why I think more needs to be done on this case (and wouldn’t have been done if it weren’t for the national outcry). Either there needs to be a trial where both sides can present their case, challenge one another, and allow a jury to decide, or the investigators need to do a much better job of presenting the evidence that absolves Zimmerman of all wrongdoing. As of now, it’s his word against a dead man’s with just enough evidence available to the public to make most skeptical of the investigation’s conclusions. I don’t think that’s a good situation.

 

Word. :thumb: