Mike S
Member
- Mar 10, 2011
- 10,313
- 1,075
-
-
-
-
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join Hidden in Him and For His Glory for discussions on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/become-a-vessel-of-honor-part-2.112306/
-
-
-
-
Trayvon Martin Shooting Case: Eyewitness Says Martin Attacked Zimmerman
- Thread starter rwbovee
- Start date
Davies
Member
- Dec 2, 2011
- 1,431
- 11
Hi ManofChrist101,
I didn't refer to race as the motivating factor, although it could be, but would suffice it to be a frustration over the violence that takes place. Of course, I don't see anyone marching the streets in protest over the hundreds and thousands of other violent crimes that happen everyday. My observation was over the fact that many people, especially the black community since they are the most visible in the tv coverage, have rushed to judge Zimmerman when they don't even know what happened or why it happened. Up until a day or so ago, the idea that Zimmerman was seriously injured was being disputed. This rush to judgment is indicative of our society as a whole because the media is propagating the rush to judgment as well.
- Davies
Mike S
Member
- Mar 10, 2011
- 10,313
- 1,075
You don't know the details of what went on that night, and I don't know, and apparently neither does the prosecution. The only people who will know are those investigating, and those in the courtroom if it goes to trial. It's irresponsible to listen to a few tapes released by the media and decide you know someone is guilty.
[video=youtube;CK2urBwIm9c]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CK2urBwIm9c&feature=related[/video]
Mike
Member
- Mar 13, 2010
- 15,286
- 1,475
I agree. We need to allow the process to play itself out. All this speculation based on limited knowledge is serving only to deepen the racial divide. I'm afraid you have some people on both sides who don't care if true justice is served as much as they do that their agenda is front and center.
Danus
Member
- Jan 17, 2010
- 3,674
- 142
Not everyone has an agenda around this case. Mostly me.
I'm white. I'm a conservative republican, and I think people should have the right to own and carry a weapon to defend themselves, but....,based on what I know of this case, and the stand your ground law, Zimmerman will walk.
He has an advantage because the victim is not here to defend himself and there are no clear witnesses. (That we know of)
Zimmerman can say he turned to walk back to his car and was attacked. Unless someone can appear to counter that part of the story that only he and Trayvon know about....Then Zimmerman will be protected from prosecution under the stand your ground law; based on the evidence that has so far been brought into this.
We know Zimmerman was following Trayvon in his car. Trayvon knew he was being followed by a man in a car....We know this as a fact. Zimmerman get's out and approaches Trayvon . We know this is a fact, but here is where the story get's murky.
There was a fight, or struggle. Fact.
Trayvon was shot to death. Fact
Could Zimmerman have provoked a physical altercation with Trayvon and in the process of loosing the fight shot him to death? Yes he could. He has the advantage of saying he did not start the fight, because there are no clear witnesses and Trayvon is dead.
Zimmerman can alter his story ever so slightly to match the use of deadly force in the state of FL, under the Stand you ground law, and not be prosecuted because there is no one to say otherwise.
In this case the law practically makes subtle perjury (The offense of willfully telling an untruth in a court after having taken an oath or affirmation)..... necessary if your desire is not to go to prison; and I think we can all agree Zimmerman does not want to go to prison.
Under this law Stand your ground) The court will have to accept the terms of Zimmermans account, he will walk out of that courtroom, and under that law all the victims family can do is go after him for wrongful death, which is a long shot. Zimmerman can't even be charged for manslaughter, because the SYG law, protects him from even that.
Zimmerman did not know Trayvon. Trayvon did not know him. They where strangers. Trayvon was walking home, perfectly legal, but he was being followed and confronted by a strange man, also perfectly legal, but a bit sideways to do among people.
Trayvon had to have felt threatened and the evidence suggest he did. He fought Zimmerman. Should he have? Most likely he should have, but that depends on how Trayvon and Zimmerman engaged in the altercation, and we don't know how that was, and only Zimmerman can say.
Zimmerman, would not have been arrested if people did not stand up and call for this. What's sad is that some in the black community felt the need to make this racial ruckus for this to get to trial. Did that need to happen? Well, according to the special prosecutor No, but In my opinion yes. This would not have ever gone to trial if some in the black community and others did not protest, but what also made it easy to not go to trial is the stand your ground law. Guy get's into fight, kills his opponent with his gun to defend himself. Evidence suggest there was indeed a fight. Case closed. next. That's it.
We fight for the rights of the unborn harder than this. Where is the righteous mirror of justice in this law of defending yourself in this case? Where?
Trayvon may have been a punk kid that got into punk kid trouble, but if Trayvon took Zimmerman's gun away from him and shot him to death with it in defense of himself, then Trayvon would have been arrested and charged for the death of Zimmerman. Trayvon would not have many of the same protections that Zimmerman has because he is 17, can not legally carry or use a weapon, and we'd have to take his word under the stand your ground law. The story would then be, man follows kid, get out of his car and confronts kid, kid beats him up, takes his gun and shoot him. You think Trayvon would walk? He'd be charged and most likely convicted for murder, for defending himself, and let's face it, if that had happened, that one little change in what we know so far, where Zimmerman is killed with his own gun, could we say that Trayvon was in fact defending himself? Think about where Trayvon is now before answering that question.
If Zimmerman's story s true then should he walk free without even facing manslaughter charges? Should the law protect someone that much for using a weapon like this and not also take into account all the led up to it? That's what the SYG law does in this case. It only looks at using the weapon in defense.
Last edited by a moderator:
handy
Member
- Jun 21, 2007
- 10,028
- 99
Good post, Danus... you and I are on the same page with this.
I'm glad the marches and the outcry took place because Zimmerman was going to just walk without even facing a trial over the situation.
I don't know if Zimmerman is guilty of murder, manslaughter or if somehow, in the course of events, things flipped-flopped from Zimmerman stalking and behaving in a threatening manner towards this kid to the kid being the aggressor....
But, that is what our trial system is for... to have all the evidence presented to judge and jury and have it be decided.
Not for an armed, 200 lb man to shoot and kill an unarmed 17 year old kid on a snack run during half-time... and it all be OK.
This case clearly should go to trial... and it took the outcry of the black community and the media circus to make it so.
The "Stand Your Ground" law was cited as the reason why Zimmerman wasn't charged at first. That was the cause of the outcry and deservedly so.
Here in Idaho we have a law call the "Castle" law, as in "a man's home is his castle". If someone kills an intruder in their home, the law dictates that the first assumption is self-defense. The intruder doesn't even have to act aggressively, the very act of breaking into someone's home is considered threatening enough to warrant use of deadly force. But, even this law has the criteria that the police do an adequate investigation that the person was indeed an intruder... not some guy that someone invited over, invited in, then murdered and simply say, "he broke into my home".
The aggravating thing about the Zimmerman case is that Trayvon wasn't doing anything wrong. Other than some minor school stuff (and even his teachers are on record saying he was a good kid) he had never been in any trouble. This wasn't a gangsta out looking for trouble... he was just a kid that ran down to the store for some snack during half-time and was simply returning home when he was spotted, stalked and somehow confronted by an armed man.
Oh yea... this needs to go to trial.
I'm glad the marches and the outcry took place because Zimmerman was going to just walk without even facing a trial over the situation.
I don't know if Zimmerman is guilty of murder, manslaughter or if somehow, in the course of events, things flipped-flopped from Zimmerman stalking and behaving in a threatening manner towards this kid to the kid being the aggressor....
But, that is what our trial system is for... to have all the evidence presented to judge and jury and have it be decided.
Not for an armed, 200 lb man to shoot and kill an unarmed 17 year old kid on a snack run during half-time... and it all be OK.
This case clearly should go to trial... and it took the outcry of the black community and the media circus to make it so.
The "Stand Your Ground" law was cited as the reason why Zimmerman wasn't charged at first. That was the cause of the outcry and deservedly so.
Here in Idaho we have a law call the "Castle" law, as in "a man's home is his castle". If someone kills an intruder in their home, the law dictates that the first assumption is self-defense. The intruder doesn't even have to act aggressively, the very act of breaking into someone's home is considered threatening enough to warrant use of deadly force. But, even this law has the criteria that the police do an adequate investigation that the person was indeed an intruder... not some guy that someone invited over, invited in, then murdered and simply say, "he broke into my home".
The aggravating thing about the Zimmerman case is that Trayvon wasn't doing anything wrong. Other than some minor school stuff (and even his teachers are on record saying he was a good kid) he had never been in any trouble. This wasn't a gangsta out looking for trouble... he was just a kid that ran down to the store for some snack during half-time and was simply returning home when he was spotted, stalked and somehow confronted by an armed man.
Oh yea... this needs to go to trial.
jasoncran
Member
- May 17, 2009
- 38,271
- 185
hmm so we shouldnt have armed security guards at nuke plants? where i know that if travon trespassed there and didnt stop. a shot would be fired and nothing done. interesting roe for that place.or also armed neigborhood watch persons.
most of you dont know this, last year i helped a distraught woman with her son. she thought he was dead. yup dead for hours. cops havent charged her and nothing was said the in the paper except an obituary. cops didnt call me to get my statement. she lost her kids and also just dissapeared. i would like to know what went done with that.
if she and her boyfriend both users murdered that boy then why not a trial? yet nothing. i deliover papers while most of you slept and have been threatened once. if i had a gun and someone said stay in the truck and had a knife and i cant drive off a shot will be fired so that i might live.
most of you dont know this, last year i helped a distraught woman with her son. she thought he was dead. yup dead for hours. cops havent charged her and nothing was said the in the paper except an obituary. cops didnt call me to get my statement. she lost her kids and also just dissapeared. i would like to know what went done with that.
if she and her boyfriend both users murdered that boy then why not a trial? yet nothing. i deliover papers while most of you slept and have been threatened once. if i had a gun and someone said stay in the truck and had a knife and i cant drive off a shot will be fired so that i might live.
Danus
Member
- Jan 17, 2010
- 3,674
- 142
Aside from the other issues surrounding this case, it's really about gun laws, and specifically concealed carry laws.
I'm not a gun person in that I don't own one, but I know a lot of people who do. Most are hunters, many have a gun for home protection, and then there are those who carry. It's the last type of gun owners I'm most concerned about, and it's the last type of gun owner that need better laws for the safety of the public as well as the person carrying the weapon I think.
When I speak to these people (Conceal carry gun people) they often display a mild type of paranoia about society and their general safety. Sort of a suspicion and mistrust of people or their actions without evidence or justification. They will talk about their gun and how they don't worry because they have it.
These are often the types of people who want to carry a weapon on their person, and it's that weapon that gives them comfort to be out and about, or to engage others. You can just about profile these types of people. They have many psychological and personality commonalities.
I honestly feel that Zimmerman's gun gave him the feeling of empowerment so that he could cruse his parents neighborhood like a supper hero for justice and the American way approach that he would otherwise not have. when he had his gun, he became someone else. No longer a frightened man, but a powerful man who could now fight.
I think if he had not had a gun and permit he'd not have even got out of his car that night, much less drive around. His bravery came from that weapon, his license to carry it, and his knowledge of using it. Wow what a man. What a supper guy in the neighborhood just out protecting his neighbors.
Zimmerman started by thinking the worst of someone. Regardless of race, he said on the 911 call, "this guy looks like he's up to no good. He's walking in the rain." Really? par·a·noi·a - Suspicion and mistrust of people or their actions without reasonable evidence or justification.
The black community and the Martin family is barking up the wrong tree on this. They may have some angst about racism here, but they need to go after the stand your ground law. This us vs them mentality needs to just settle down. It's all of us regardless of race, including responsible gun owners who want to have the right to own a gun, vs people like Zimmerman who could be dangerous and further jeopardize gun laws and rights to bare arms by their irresponsible actions under the current laws in some sates.
About a year ago, just a street over from my office, a man shot another man over a parking space outside a restaurant. The two men involved exchanged words. Both where mouthy rednecks and neither one could let it go, but the guy who shot, had a permit to carry and a gun. He was trained and licensed, and all that gave him the power to be a big man in his little heart, and he killed another man in cold blood right in front of that man's three children.
He claimed self defense and if there where no other witnesses other than his own redneck wife who also got involved, he could have walked on his and his wife's account of what happened. Here is that story.
http://www.ksl.com/?nid=333&sid=5548291
In this case there where clear witnesses and the shooter is now serving time on 2nd degree murder, but It draws the question; is an armed society a safer society? Who are these people really; that carry guns?
I'm not a gun person in that I don't own one, but I know a lot of people who do. Most are hunters, many have a gun for home protection, and then there are those who carry. It's the last type of gun owners I'm most concerned about, and it's the last type of gun owner that need better laws for the safety of the public as well as the person carrying the weapon I think.
When I speak to these people (Conceal carry gun people) they often display a mild type of paranoia about society and their general safety. Sort of a suspicion and mistrust of people or their actions without evidence or justification. They will talk about their gun and how they don't worry because they have it.
These are often the types of people who want to carry a weapon on their person, and it's that weapon that gives them comfort to be out and about, or to engage others. You can just about profile these types of people. They have many psychological and personality commonalities.
I honestly feel that Zimmerman's gun gave him the feeling of empowerment so that he could cruse his parents neighborhood like a supper hero for justice and the American way approach that he would otherwise not have. when he had his gun, he became someone else. No longer a frightened man, but a powerful man who could now fight.
I think if he had not had a gun and permit he'd not have even got out of his car that night, much less drive around. His bravery came from that weapon, his license to carry it, and his knowledge of using it. Wow what a man. What a supper guy in the neighborhood just out protecting his neighbors.
Zimmerman started by thinking the worst of someone. Regardless of race, he said on the 911 call, "this guy looks like he's up to no good. He's walking in the rain." Really? par·a·noi·a - Suspicion and mistrust of people or their actions without reasonable evidence or justification.
The black community and the Martin family is barking up the wrong tree on this. They may have some angst about racism here, but they need to go after the stand your ground law. This us vs them mentality needs to just settle down. It's all of us regardless of race, including responsible gun owners who want to have the right to own a gun, vs people like Zimmerman who could be dangerous and further jeopardize gun laws and rights to bare arms by their irresponsible actions under the current laws in some sates.
About a year ago, just a street over from my office, a man shot another man over a parking space outside a restaurant. The two men involved exchanged words. Both where mouthy rednecks and neither one could let it go, but the guy who shot, had a permit to carry and a gun. He was trained and licensed, and all that gave him the power to be a big man in his little heart, and he killed another man in cold blood right in front of that man's three children.
He claimed self defense and if there where no other witnesses other than his own redneck wife who also got involved, he could have walked on his and his wife's account of what happened. Here is that story.
http://www.ksl.com/?nid=333&sid=5548291
In this case there where clear witnesses and the shooter is now serving time on 2nd degree murder, but It draws the question; is an armed society a safer society? Who are these people really; that carry guns?
Lewis
Member
- Aug 5, 2005
- 15,483
- 621
Good post Danus, and am also a Republican a black one at that. But what really got to me about this case is, that this kid was stalked, from a cop wanna be. If he had just left the kid alone he would still be with us. Not all kids who wear a hoodie are bad kids. I am the type of Republican who is for guns, but I am against the misuse of them. Now this kid was STALKED after the cops told him to not follow. Now that bugs me to no end. Now if I was being stalked and the stalker jumps out of his car there is a good possibility that there is going to be a altercation. First of all being stalked is a scary thing, which women all over the world knows to well. Zimmerman had no right to stalk Trayvon. And this I know for sure if you are being stalked (FEAR) will make you very jumpy, because you don't know what the stalker is going to do. And I know for sure that Zimmerman provoked what ever went on. This case will be tried real careful, and I mean real real careful.
jasoncran
Member
- May 17, 2009
- 38,271
- 185
i dont carry and wont for personal reasons but given that when seconds count cops are minutes away.i have called the cops to move along a homeless man who in the hot sun and sleeping in the parking lot. i made sure he wasnt dead and he wasnt. i called 911 and the dispatcher didnt even know the location where i was telling him! these guys only make 14 and hour starting.imigane if that homeless guy if he was attacking me. forget it i wouldnt have to injure to the point that i could call after he was disabled.
Davies
Member
- Dec 2, 2011
- 1,431
- 11
Now this is what I'm talking about. Both Danus and Lewis know what went on. I think this is a rush to judgment. Can you imagine if Zimmerman is found not guilty? He's already guilty because we all 'know' he's going to use the law to his own advantage and lie about what really happened. The man can't be trusted. Everyone 'knows' that.
- Davies
Mike S
Member
- Mar 10, 2011
- 10,313
- 1,075
This is precisely the problem with this case, and precisely the outcome desired by those involved. The liberal, anti-gun, foment racial divisions every chance you get crowd is setting up a political win/win situation regardless of outcome for itself by manipulating the narrative. Either there is a criminally flawed justice system if Zimmerman is acquited, or they get credit for forcing the just outcome if he's guilty.
Statistically, the category of black killed by white (even "white hispanic") is among the least common category for murder in the country. White killed by black occurs more than twice as often, and black killed by black about ten times as often. Where are Jackson and Sharpton and the rest of the political agitators who want to see this case tried in the court of public opinion in those far more common cases? Those cases don't serve their agenda, so "move along, nothing to see here."
If Zimmerman is guilty of a crime, I want to see him punished. If it was just a case of, no heros here, a tragic confrontation that ended in death because a man defended himself, I want to see that as well. Only the justice system can produce that, not the rantings of Jackson and Sharpton, or even judgements expressed on this forum based on gut reactions to media reports.
Last edited by a moderator:
Car Guy
Member
- Oct 15, 2011
- 420
- 3
The stand your ground laws are VITAL to protect the law abiding citizen from the SCUMBAG CRIMINAL from suing the victim when they get injured or killed while COMMITTING THEIR CRIME.
Don't buy into the left wing, gun hating, hype people. This manufactured controversy is all apart of their long standing agenda to strip people of the 2nd amendment rights and to give the criminal rights at the expense of the citizens they harm and victimize.
Don't buy into the left wing, gun hating, hype people. This manufactured controversy is all apart of their long standing agenda to strip people of the 2nd amendment rights and to give the criminal rights at the expense of the citizens they harm and victimize.
handy
Member
- Jun 21, 2007
- 10,028
- 99
I don't think the controversy is about pushing an agenda... although people have certainly jumped on the bandwagon.
But, the original controversy, what prompted the parents to get the media involved in the first place, was that their unarmed son was walking back from the store, talking to his girlfriend that someone was stalking him...and that someone shot and killed him and was not going to be charged with a crime and brought to trial.
It's up to the court system, judge and jury to determine if Zimmerman is guilty or innocent. But, for the police to merely cite "Stand Your Ground" and refuse to bring charges... that's wrong.
From the Sanford Herald (I always like to quote a newspaper as close to the source as possible):
Sanford Police did not originally arrest Zimmerman because he had claimed the shooting occurred in self-defense.
Then Police Chief Bill Lee Jr. cited the Stand Your Ground Law, saying it would be a violation of Zimmerman’s civil rights to arrest him. Corey stated that if the Stand Your Ground Law becomes an issue later in the case, prosecutors will fight it.
That's what was wrong with this case... that a man could ignore the police telling him not to follow a young kid, wind up killing the kid and no charges ever be brought in the first place.
If it wasn't for the public pressure, Zimmerman would have walked... and perhaps, after his trial he will. But, at least now, there will be a trial, not just a few police making up their minds that nothing wrong happened.
But, the original controversy, what prompted the parents to get the media involved in the first place, was that their unarmed son was walking back from the store, talking to his girlfriend that someone was stalking him...and that someone shot and killed him and was not going to be charged with a crime and brought to trial.
It's up to the court system, judge and jury to determine if Zimmerman is guilty or innocent. But, for the police to merely cite "Stand Your Ground" and refuse to bring charges... that's wrong.
From the Sanford Herald (I always like to quote a newspaper as close to the source as possible):
Sanford Police did not originally arrest Zimmerman because he had claimed the shooting occurred in self-defense.
Then Police Chief Bill Lee Jr. cited the Stand Your Ground Law, saying it would be a violation of Zimmerman’s civil rights to arrest him. Corey stated that if the Stand Your Ground Law becomes an issue later in the case, prosecutors will fight it.
That's what was wrong with this case... that a man could ignore the police telling him not to follow a young kid, wind up killing the kid and no charges ever be brought in the first place.
If it wasn't for the public pressure, Zimmerman would have walked... and perhaps, after his trial he will. But, at least now, there will be a trial, not just a few police making up their minds that nothing wrong happened.
- Thread starter
- #37
I'm wondering why our news media keeps showing this almost four year old photo of a baby faced 13 year old Trayvon Martin when the Trayvon Martin who died in February had grown into a big, tough looking 6'3" star football player. Seems more like propaganda than news. Also see the photo of that night from my website of the back of Zimmerman's badly bloodied head and you can see that there was a fight there in which Zimmerman might very well have been worried about being killed. See http://famous-conspiracy-theories-w.../trayvon-martin-shooting-case-eyewitness.html
Christ_empowered
Member
- Oct 23, 2010
- 14,295
- 10,780
I don't know what to say about all this. I get the sense that Zimmerman can't get a fair trial with so much media attention and all the talking heads with agendas getting involved.
We are supposedly a nation of laws, not men, so I'm hoping that he gets a fair trial. In this day and age--especially when the prosecution is feeling pressure from all sorts of groups--that's hard to come by unless you're rich. If the killing falls under the Stand Your Ground law and the people of Florida find that unacceptable, then it should be time to change the law. In one of my Sociology classes, we talked about this--conflict and violation of norms and laws helps society clarify right and wrong and adjust standards accordingly. Basically, this case could help decide if Florida's standard for self-defense is a good thing or causes more violence. Unfortunately for us, modern laws and norms are in a constant state of flux, so law breaking helps us periodically re-assess how problems should be handled. Of course, if laws were based more on Christian concepts of mercy and justice, that would be less of an issue. But anyway...
Personally, based on my extremely limited understanding of what happened and the law, I think 2nd degree murder is a kind of extreme charge. I don't see why they can't just charge him with something a little less severe. The situation seems to be more complicated than either side is willing to acknowledge.
We are supposedly a nation of laws, not men, so I'm hoping that he gets a fair trial. In this day and age--especially when the prosecution is feeling pressure from all sorts of groups--that's hard to come by unless you're rich. If the killing falls under the Stand Your Ground law and the people of Florida find that unacceptable, then it should be time to change the law. In one of my Sociology classes, we talked about this--conflict and violation of norms and laws helps society clarify right and wrong and adjust standards accordingly. Basically, this case could help decide if Florida's standard for self-defense is a good thing or causes more violence. Unfortunately for us, modern laws and norms are in a constant state of flux, so law breaking helps us periodically re-assess how problems should be handled. Of course, if laws were based more on Christian concepts of mercy and justice, that would be less of an issue. But anyway...
Personally, based on my extremely limited understanding of what happened and the law, I think 2nd degree murder is a kind of extreme charge. I don't see why they can't just charge him with something a little less severe. The situation seems to be more complicated than either side is willing to acknowledge.
Lewis
Member
- Aug 5, 2005
- 15,483
- 621
If he had not followed him and got out of his car to confront him he would still be with us. Trayvon was not following Zimmerman. If you follow somebody and then jump out your car, what do you think is going to happen. You are in fear for your life. Trayvon even called someone and told them that he was being followed, I think it was his girlfriend. I forgot exactly who but he did make the call.
jasoncran
Member
- May 17, 2009
- 38,271
- 185
lewis i have been stalked before , three times by wifes ex. in my self-defense trainings its get the LAW involved. all he had to do is hang up and call 911. they would have then told him what was going on. when i was stalked i drove to the police station and waited for the him to show up. he went on.