Justice for Trayvon [Protest Rally in Grand Circus Park]

**hudkina** · July-17-13, 08:35 AM

Originally Posted by EastsideAl

It was apparently much more dangerous for Trayvon Martin to be the "stranger" [[who, again, had every right to be where he was, doing what he was doing). Especially since he was the unarmed one. Zimmerman "protected" his neighborhood by killing the relative of one of its residents going about his perfectly legal business.

It's very easy to know that after the fact, but in the moment, how could you expect Zimmerman to know that? How was Zimmerman supposed to know the man he was following was a visiting family member of a resident? How was Zimmerman supposed to know the man he was following wasn't casing the neighborhood? How was Zimmerman supposed to know the man he was following wasn't carrying a gun or other weapon? It's easy to know these things after the fact, but you can't blame him for his actions leading up to the event based on the information gathered afterwards.

**Downtown Lady** · July-17-13, 08:36 AM

Originally Posted by hudkina

I don't blame Zimmerman for getting out of the car in an effort to keep another suspicious individual from getting out of sight

But that's the whole point -- he was deemed a "suspicious individual" why? By virtue of being a young, black male walking down the street?

**hudkina** · July-17-13, 08:40 AM

Originally Posted by bailey

I don't understand how this simple point is continually ignored. THE ONLY ONE ATTESTING TO ANY [[so called) "AGGRESSIVE" BEHAVIOR BY THE THE DEAD KID IS THE ONE WHO SHOT HIM.

witnesses have given testimony on how the fight ended...not how it started. not who made "aggressive" contact with whom. not who threw the first punch. NONE of that.

Further, the only person to make any claim about Martin's "casing" of the condos or "suspicious" behavior is again THE GUY WHO SHOT HIM.

MARTIN IS NOT HERE TO TESTIFY TO REFUTE ZIMS TESTIMONY BECAUSE HE"S FUCKING DEAD.

jesus.

I don't understand how this simple point is continually ignored. THERE IS NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO DETERMINE WHAT HAPPENED THAT NIGHT. YOU CAN'T CONVICT A PERSON OF A CRIME WHEN THERE IS ENOUGH REASONABLE DOUBT THAT HE DID NOT COMMIT THAT CRIME.

jesus

**Ltdave** · July-17-13, 08:51 AM

Originally Posted by Downtown Lady

But that's the whole point -- he was deemed a "suspicious individual" why? By virtue of being a young, black male walking down the street?

no he was a "suspicious individual" because he was casing the homes in the gated community of which he DID NOT LIVE. he was going to VISIT his dad...

well, as a point of fact, there was no evidence proving Z's "innocence" either.

going back about 237yrs the nation was founded with the precept that you are INNOCENT until PROVEN GUILTY. in a court of law you DO NOT have to prove innocence. you have to prove GUILT...

the prosecution didnt prove his guilt. [[and to contradict myself, they nearly DID prove his innocence!) the jury made the right decision...

how many here have heard or read the transcripts from the 911 calls? they are pretty conclusive in what ive seen and experienced [[yes former LEO here) that George Zimmerman was in the right with his actions...

**EastsideAl** · July-17-13, 08:57 AM

Originally Posted by hudkina

It's very easy to know that after the fact, but in the moment, how could you expect Zimmerman to know that? How was Zimmerman supposed to know the man he was following was a visiting family member of a resident? How was Zimmerman supposed to know the man he was following wasn't casing the neighborhood? How was Zimmerman supposed to know the man he was following wasn't carrying a gun or other weapon? It's easy to know these things after the fact, but you can't blame him for his actions leading up to the event based on the information gathered afterwards.

How is Trayvon Martin supposed to know that the creepy man following him and approaching him in the dark for no discernible reason is actually a guy trying to "help" the neighborhood [[by acting as a self-appointed armed vigilante)?

**Downtown Lady** · July-17-13, 08:59 AM

Originally Posted by Ltdave

no he was a "suspicious individual" because he was casing the homes

He was "casing the homes" according to whom? Oh, according to the person on trial for shooting him? OK, thanks, that clears that up.

**bailey** · July-17-13, 09:05 AM

Originally Posted by hudkina

I don't understand how this simple point is continually ignored. THERE IS NOT ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO DETERMINE WHAT HAPPENED THAT NIGHT. YOU CAN'T CONVICT A PERSON OF A CRIME WHEN THERE IS ENOUGH REASONABLE DOUBT THAT HE DID NOT COMMIT THAT CRIME.

jesus

Did I say Zim was guilty? No. I agree with you, there is not enough evidence to determine with certainty what happened that night...SO TAKING ZIM's STATEMENTS ABOUT IT AS UNIMPEACHABLE FACT IS JUST AS WRONG.

Why is this a difficult concept?

Originally Posted by Ltdave

going back about 237yrs the nation was founded with the precept that you are INNOCENT until PROVEN GUILTY. in a court of law you DO NOT have to prove innocence. you have to prove GUILT...

and being found not guilty is not a verdict of "innocent". All I'm saying. ONE person out walking a dog that witnessed the altercation from start to finish MIGHT have had a different story. Zim being found not guilty is not a ruling that his statements were factual...just that there was no evidence to disprove them.

how many here have heard or read the transcripts from the 911 calls? they are pretty conclusive in what ive seen and experienced [[yes former LEO here) that George Zimmerman was in the right with his actions...

no calls discuss how the fight started. None of them. Did Zim come at Martin with gun out and Martin feared for his life? Did Zim lay hands on Martin and try to restrain or detain him for the cops? We don't know. Zim claims he didn't... but we'll never know. THAT IS ALL I AM SAYING.

**Kevgoblue** · July-17-13, 09:08 AM

Originally Posted by Ltdave

no he was a "suspicious individual" because he was casing the homes in the gated community of which he DID NOT LIVE. he was going to VISIT his dad.

So how did we get to the point where now we've determined he was "casing" homes? Was he seen peeping thru windows, looking for valuables? Did he walk up and check to see if any doors were unlocked? Or maybe he just continued to walk in GZ's neighborhood, while being a black teen.

Originally Posted by Ltdave

going back about 237yrs the nation was founded with the precept that you are INNOCENT until PROVEN GUILTY. in a court of law you DO NOT have to prove innocence. you have to prove GUILT.

So since GZ was a person who aspired to be a police officer, and studied law enforcement in school he should have known this. That innocence should equally apply to teen boys as well as 28 year old self appointed neighborhood watch captains.

**Wesley Mouch** · July-17-13, 09:58 AM

Originally Posted by EastsideAl

How is Trayvon Martin supposed to know that the creepy man following him and approaching him in the dark for no discernible reason is actually a guy trying to "help" the neighborhood [[by acting as a self-appointed armed vigilante)?

Why are you describing Zimmerman as 'creepy'? Do you see that your prejudice of Hispanic males is showing? Or do you at least see that this could easily be said of you?

The stereotyping seems to go both ways here. This was a tragedy. Maybe I'm applying my prejudices. But I'm not sitting on a jury.

**Downtown Lady** · July-17-13, 10:13 AM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Why are you describing Zimmerman as 'creepy'? Do you see that your prejudice of Hispanic males is showing?

OMG Wesley, you cannot be serious. ANY DUDE following me in the dark, for no apparent reason = CREEPY. This is regardless of race or ethnic group. Get real.

**bailey** · July-17-13, 10:16 AM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Why are you describing Zimmerman as 'creepy'? Do you see that your prejudice of Hispanic males is showing? Or do you at least see that this could easily be said of you?

The stereotyping seems to go both ways here. This was a tragedy. Maybe I'm applying my prejudices. But I'm not sitting on a jury.

If some guy is following me around a neighborhood at night, and enough so that I know he's following me and watching me... a) yes I'm going to find that creepy;and b) if it goes on long enough, there is going to be a confrontation as to why he's following me.

**Downriviera** · July-17-13, 10:44 AM

MARTIN IS NOT HERE TO TESTIFY TO REFUTE ZIMS TESTIMONY BECAUSE HE"S FUCKING DEAD.

This is true. However, the investigating officers can refute Zimmerman's testimony. Thats there job. But if you listen to their testimony, the placement of Zimmerman's flashlight, his cell phone, his injuries, no injuries to Martin other than the bullet wound, and everything in totality...they concluded all the facts lined up with what Zimmerman said. And as another poster mentioned earlier, they lied to him and told him everything was on video tape. Zimmerman's reaction to that was a sigh of relief and he said Thank God. Now add to all this the timeline. Martin was 85 yards away with 4 minutes of time. Plenty of time to continue on his way. If this goes the other way and Zimmerman is found guilty, does that mean none of us are allowed to defend ourselves when viciously attacked?

**Downriviera** · July-17-13, 10:53 AM

Originally Posted by Downtown Lady

He was "casing the homes" according to whom? Oh, according to the person on trial for shooting him? OK, thanks, that clears that up.

He wasn't casing homes according to whom? Over an hour to walk a short distance from the store to where his father is staying, in the rain. Wouldn't you want to walk fast and go straight home to get out of the rain. Previously found by police with a breakin tool and jewlery. Suspended from school.

**bailey** · July-17-13, 10:55 AM

Originally Posted by Downriviera

. If this goes the other way and Zimmerman is found guilty, does that mean none of us are allowed to defend ourselves when viciously attacked?

again, and for the last time... the ONLY one attesting that Martin "viciously attacked" Zimmerman, is ZIMMERMAN.

Martin got the upper hand in the fight, but was that before or after Zim being armed became apparent? Maybe martin was fighting for his life because he came to know that Zim had a gun?

And lets not forget Zims violent history of assualting police officers while we're talking about Martin's prior acts. What actually happened is speculation. which is why Z walked- which again, for the last time, pursuant to the evidence, is the right ruling.

**Ltdave** · July-17-13, 10:57 AM

Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch

Why are you describing Zimmerman as 'creepy'? Do you see that your prejudice of Hispanic males is showing? Or do you at least see that this could easily be said of you?

The stereotyping seems to go both ways here. This was a tragedy. Maybe I'm applying my prejudices. But I'm not sitting on a jury.

eastsideAl seems to just be parroting Travon's girlfriend who couldnt enunciate, or string a coherent sentence together, who claimed Zimmerman was a creepy cracker...

**Downriviera** · July-17-13, 11:09 AM

What actually happened is speculation.

Very true. But I'll go with the trained police investigators conclusions. This should have never gone to trial. The prosecution had no chance.

**Detroitnerd** · July-17-13, 11:47 AM

Originally Posted by EastsideAl

Zimmerman was never called to testify.

How does that change his reaction? It seems to be the reaction of a person who has told the truth, as it would to any reasonable person.

**Detroitnerd** · July-17-13, 11:52 AM

Personally, I think this piece got it closest to right. Almost everybody thinks they know what happened that night with only a handful of the evidence or testimony, or even without knowing what laws the case hinged on. This writers thought he knew too ... until he sat down and reviewed the entire trial. His conclusion is that the same problems that conducted to the shooting are the same problems with the aftermath of the verdict.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...reactions.html

**Downriviera** · July-17-13, 12:15 PM

Passions and emotions are high because a 'child' died at the hands of an adult. In most peoples minds that should not happen under any circumstances. The media showing pictures of a 12 year old Martin next to a mug shot of Zimmerman only inflammed this. As an adult who was viciously attacked and beaten by 3 teenagers gives me a different perspective. I just don't view all 17 year olds as completely innocent.

**Jimaz** · July-17-13, 12:15 PM

DetroitYES Home » Non Detroit Issues » Thom Hartmann » Caller: Evidence was Suppressed in the Zimmerman Case

**Gistok** · July-17-13, 12:49 PM

I'm totally with DetroitNerd and Hudkina on this one... but as I read thru this entire thread for my first and only peek into it... I'm amazed and reminded of the "justice be damned" mentality that lead to the vigilante justice and lynchmob mentality that was part of our country in the 19th and early 20th century. It seems that the emotions and calls to actions appears to still be with us [[at least in spirit) on into the 21st century...

**Jimaz** · July-17-13, 12:50 PM

DetroitYES Home » Non Detroit Issues » GoLeft TV » Pap and Sam: Did Trial Location Play A Role In Zimmerman Verdict?

**Detroitnerd** · July-17-13, 01:11 PM

What's really a shame is that we SHOULD be having a deep and thoughtful discussion about what it feels like to be black in America, about stop-and-frisk, about death by cop, about stereotypes, etc. And this case has instead taken that premise and turned it into an ugly experiment in mob psychology.

**EastsideAl** · July-17-13, 01:37 PM

Originally Posted by Ltdave

eastsideAl seems to just be parroting Travon's girlfriend who couldnt enunciate, or string a coherent sentence together, who claimed Zimmerman was a creepy cracker...

I'll leave my own educational and occupational background out of this and just say that, insofar as I know, being inarticulate is not a crime. Nor does it necessarily mean that one is telling more or less truth than someone else.

**Downtown Lady** · July-17-13, 01:41 PM

Originally Posted by Detroitnerd

What's really a shame is that we SHOULD be having a deep and thoughtful discussion about what it feels like to be black in America, about stop-and-frisk, about death by cop, about stereotypes, etc. And this case has instead taken that premise and turned it into an ugly experiment in mob psychology.

It's very easy to have a deep and thoughtful discussion, in a calm and measured manner, when you are not part of the ethnic group being stopped and frisked, being stereotyped, or on the receiving end of death by cop. The conversation doesn't have the same relaxed, academic tone when you are living it.

This is not by any means meant to condone any type of rioting, but a peaceful protest is a right of the people, and often is the catalyst to bring about real change.

Not every law should be a law. Just because something is legal doesn't make it right. And every law needs to be applied equally across the board, but is not -- just look at the case of Marissa Alexander, a black woman in Florida who fired two warning shots in self-defense, with neither bullet hitting anyone. She's currently serving 20 years for that crime.

Fair-minded citizens wanting to protest the system does not necessarily equal mob mentality.