General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsA question for those who feel that the correct verdict was rendered in the Zimmerman trial.
What action should Trayvon Martin have taken when he realized he was being followed by George Zimmerman in order to avoid the circumstances that led to his death?
Bonus question: What would you advise a young man to do if he found himself in the same situation?
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hugabear
(10,340 posts)Just in case it's needed: 
I'd love to hear the Zimmerman defenders take on this as well.
Ecumenist
(6,086 posts)yassuh <<MASSAH>> Is more like it for those folks.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Divert one’s eye (preferably, to look down at one’s shuffling feet), while scratching behind one’s head (if not tugging one’s ear), while mumbling “yassah boss”
dkf
(37,305 posts)Hugabear
(10,340 posts)What then?
dkf
(37,305 posts)And try to strike it into his brain.
At first opportunity I'm out of there and gone!!!
EOTE
(13,409 posts)And now you're dead. Care to play again?
dkf
(37,305 posts)I wouldn't have pinned him or whacked his head continuously and would have been able to get away. No injuries, no witnesses seeing me pin him down and wail on him...
He can't get off with those facts.
EOTE
(13,409 posts)And a whole fuck lot of good it will do you to know your murderer gets locked up when you're dead. You're expecting a kid whose life is ACTIVELY being threatened to consider his murderer's trial? That's well beyond sick and stupid. "Hey, if I've got to die tonight, at least I can't plan things out so my murderer will at least serve a few months."
Christ, what a sick and twisted world is created in the little minds of Zimmerman apologists.
uppityperson
(115,681 posts)dkf
(37,305 posts)Where is your evidence? I don't see evidence Z laid a finger on TM.
Honestly, I don't think Z was fighting back at all. I think he was being beat up because that is what the evidence tells me.
EOTE
(13,409 posts)And from the very beginning there was Trayvon telling Georgie to get off of him. Combined with all evidence pointing to Trayvon minding his own fucking business and Georgie going out of his way to confront a kid with skittles, it's pretty fucking obvious who started the confrontation and who TRULY had a right to fear for his life. But good luck trying to tell that to the worthless racists defending that piece of shit Zimmerman around here.
dkf
(37,305 posts)Is that really what you recommend? Getting info fist fights with a person with a gun and injure him to the point he will shoot you?
EOTE
(13,409 posts)1) You run away and hope you don't get shot in the back...
or
2) You fight the fucker and hope not to die.
Neither one is a situation anyone wants to be in. But you still see these idiotic Zimmerman supporters asserting that Zimmerman was well within his rights to do so. These idiots will loudly claim that they're not despicable racists, but thinking people know better. They know better to think that they just happen to give every ridiculous benefit of the doubt to those who kill minorities. It's sick. And no, you're not fooling anyone with a brain.
dkf
(37,305 posts)Why did he not go home? Did he really think Z was a rapist? Really?
EOTE
(13,409 posts)Who the fuck knows what he thought. But this mad man with a gun accosting a kid who's just minding his own business is at least a rapist, probably worse. It turns out that he was worse, he killed an unarmed kid after profiling him and stalking him. Fuck you Zimmy apologists are clueless.
Hugabear
(10,340 posts)THIS is what you Zimmerman fans seem to be overlooking. You act as if Trayvon should have just gotten his black ass off the street as quickly as possible.
dkf
(37,305 posts)At the time of the shot I think there is clear evidence Z was being assaulted. Everything prior to the first punch was legal. I don't have evidence Z laid a single blow. I do have evidence that TM did.
Hugabear
(10,340 posts)Nice to know.
dkf
(37,305 posts)That's exactly how it works.
RobinA
(9,894 posts)matter if Martin had a "right" to be there or not. When you feel threatened you move to safety. Zimmerman had a "right" to follow Martin, but he, too, should have been safe and dry at home. The way I see it, neither one of these guys did anything to avoid trouble.
all american girl
(1,788 posts)Trayvon ran off and turned a corner, he thought he lost the scary dude. He went back to what he was doing before....talking on the phone (which we know for a fact) and taking his sweet time going home. He did have every right to be there, he had every right to talk on the phone, and he had every right to take his sweet time to get home.
Question: Why didn't Zimmerman go back to his truck? Quit putting this on the victim. If he was a young woman, with a short skirt, would she deserve to be raped because she thought she lost her follower and did the exact same thing as Trayvon?
dkf
(37,305 posts)He wasn't supposed to be going home yet.
all american girl
(1,788 posts)all american girl
(1,788 posts)When you think you have lost them, and they show up again, terrifying.
I'm glad to see that you THINK you would do something different than a 17 year old, but the 28 year old knew what he was doing, and the kid did not know what Zimmerman was doing....and you have no idea if Trayvon hit him. There is NO evidence of that, only the murderer's words. Sorry, but I don't believe everything he said, and never will.
And let me tell you....I dropped a hammer on my chin, not a bop, but an actual drop. The metal part landed square on my chin....and not even a bruise. It hurt like hell for a few weeks. I might add, I'm a pale, pale woman. Now, my hubby, he looks at something and he has a bruise. And let's not forget, Trayvon lost all his blood when a bullet ripped thru his heart.
Do I think Zimmerman hit Trayvon? I don't know, but he didn't lay on the ground and did nothing.
dkf
(37,305 posts)We have pictures of injuries and the trajectory of a bullet. We know who was on the top and who was on the bottom while the screams were going on.
We have TM with knuckle injuries. We have cuts on the back of Z's head. I don't know where everyone else is coming from where they think there is no evidence Z was being beaten.
all american girl
(1,788 posts)Zimmerman get the gun with Trayvon on top of him, from his waist to his armpits (Zimmerman's police statement)? Did he have the gun out before, or was Trayvon on top of him getting off? If you remember, Zimmerman's weapon was in a holster,inside his pants, back behind his right hip (Zimmerman's re-enactment statement-he shows where his weapon was at).
Trajectory of the bullet was at 90 degrees. It only shows how the thing went thru, not were bodies were place. We can make assumptions. The problem is, this mess is assumptions....I, for one, cannot believe everything Zimmerman says. He was the murderer, he has the most to lose.
The injuries on the back of his head could have been from hitting pavement (by rolling around or being hit), or could have been hit by the sprinkler head...rocks...or any debris in the area...I do believe there was an altercation, but we will never know who was "winning," again, we have to rely on the person who lived....dead kids don't talk.
His nose...well he could have been punched by a scared teen ager being followed by a creepy guy...I would have-just saying....it could have been kick back from the weapon...it could have been rolling around in a fight...here's the deal-assumptions.
The cuts on Trayvon's finger could have happened before, during or after the altercation....the ME said that....more questions.
Everything relies on assumptions and believing the word of the man who has the most to lose.
I only know how I, as a woman, would feel in that situation. I only know how my son, a 19 year old, would react I asked him...he was 18 at the time). And I can only image want was going on....I rely on the evidence-which kind of sucks (great when you believe the killer) and those nasty ass assumptions
quakerboy
(13,921 posts)from a friendly person, perhaps a policeman, who knew he would need some scuffing up if he was to pull off murder sans punishment.
Its interesting how the discussion has morphed from the first days. In the first days after the event, it was very evident from all reports and reporting that the police were VERY friendly with Zimmerman, very much on his side. I havn't seen or heard anything since then that would change that assessment. Nor anything to indicate that the police involved in the incident should be considered trustworthy to have put truth to their reports or to have brought it to their testimony.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)Theory- Zimmerman approached Martin trying in effect to arrest him, Trayvon didn't buy it, Trayvon attempted to walk away, Zimmerman went after him and tackled him to the ground,got on top and held him down, Trayvon struggled and managed to pop Zimm in the nose, the struggle continued, perhaps Trayvon saw the gun or Zimmerman attempted to pull out his gun and Trayvon started yelling for help, Zimmerman was afraid Trayvon would get the gun so he managed to pull it out and ended the struggle with a shot to the heart. This happened in a very small timeline' the way Zimmerman told it would have have taken longer.
The so-called experts didn't help Trayvon's case at all- experts have to speculate also and there were disagreements between the experts. There are so many unanswered questions, but it looks like most people believe Zimmermans story was self-serving and packed with falsehoods.
XemaSab
(60,212 posts)
lumpy
(13,704 posts)n
Amazing indeed
salin
(48,955 posts)"you got me" as if a 17 year old was in the role of a James Bond movie as the diabolical villain. Pure fantasy. I have worked with hundreds of kids like Trayvon, none would have - after such a struggle - would have had either the composure to say such a thing, or the mind set - as if it had been a chess match and he had just been check-mated.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)Zimmerman trying to indicate that Martin was confessing to being the 'bad guy'."You got me".
Ain't likely. Martin was terrified for God's sake ! He was struggling to breath and sinking fast.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)Maybe …
But your still dead!
chieftain
(3,222 posts)No one has corroborated that aspect of Zimmerman's story.
cprise
(8,445 posts)What if you don't want to run away?
What if Martin was standing his ground?
Bake
(21,977 posts)I may have the right to stand my ground, but discretion is often the better part of valor! If I CAN get the hell outta there, that's exactly what I'm going to do.
Call me a coward. At least ill be alive.
And that applies by the way whether I'm packing a gun or not. I always try to avoid trouble.
Bake
cprise
(8,445 posts)...but not what lawmakers would lead us to believe.
How often are you going to run away when you have hostile people in your neighborhood determined to stand their ground?
RobinA
(9,894 posts)"want" to run away you run the risk that the scary person has a gun. Not everything is about what one "wants" to do. Nobody is "putting this on the victim." The victim did not do what he could to keep himself safe, and unfortunately came up against a guy with a gun. If Martin had a gun and Zimmerman did not, and if Martin decided to shoot the jerk who was following him around in the dark, Zimmerman would be dead as a result of not keeping himself safe that night.
cprise
(8,445 posts)...if you or I were being followed by someone in a car. If Martin ran, Zimmerman could get back in his car and overtake Martin.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)dkf
(37,305 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)rl6214
(8,142 posts)Just your imagination.
uppityperson
(115,681 posts)Hugabear
(10,340 posts)
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)dkf
(37,305 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)dkf
(37,305 posts)It was a single case with specific facts and the facts didn't fit the charges.
Some in the public were hungry for jury nullification but to think they will get that from all jurors was unrealistic.
In any case, punishment via the law never reverses anything that happened, nor does reparations.
hlthe2b
(102,378 posts)row...
Those seem to be the choices.... Gawd, the Z and SYG supporters and blinder-wearing Pro-Gunners leave me beyond aghast.
dkf
(37,305 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)dkf
(37,305 posts)hlthe2b
(102,378 posts)
dkf
(37,305 posts)EOTE
(13,409 posts)The nutters certainly aren't getting any less nutty.
hack89
(39,171 posts)how do you concoct a reasonable "I feared for my life" scenario for shooting an unarmed man who is running away from you?
EOTE
(13,409 posts)He feared the guy was running toward his gun. Florida has illustrated quite clearly how the threat doesn't need to be real (as if anyone with more than one brain cell to rub together would think that Zimmerman actually feared for his life), it only needs to exist in the mind of the pathetic little gun-humper.
hack89
(39,171 posts)What Florida illustrated quite well is that is hard to convict people without eyewitnesses or other compelling evidence that effectively proves that the defendant's story was not true. Which means, for starters, not having prosecution witnesses collaborating the defendant's story.
What was telling to me is that the DA bypassed the grand jury and went directly to a judge to indict Zimmerman. She knew from the beginning that the evidence was not there - she didn't trust the grand jury to indict Zimmerman.
EOTE
(13,409 posts)It doesn't matter WHERE they were shot, all that matters is that the pathetic little gun nut was frightened. Have you honestly missed out on the fucked up nature of these SYG cases? Gun nuts don't need facts or logic to be on their side, they just need to be able to convince that they were skeered in those few seconds prior to murdering. But it's really not surprising to see such defense of indefensible shit coming from the usual suspects.
hack89
(39,171 posts)Last edited Fri Jul 19, 2013, 07:16 PM - Edit history (1)
so it is clear that juries are not buying any story.
An interesting observation in light of the comments that SYG is racist, the conviction rate for white shooters is twice that of black shooter (40% vice 20%)
http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/fatal-cases
cprise
(8,445 posts)Homicide convictions:
SYG laws exacerbate racial bias and raise the homicide rates for everyone living under them.
hack89
(39,171 posts)murder is primarily an intra-racial phenomena - whites kill whites, blacks kill blacks.
So you are comparing a large sample (white / white or black / black) against a very small one (white / black or black / white). Basic statistics tells you that small samples are more likely to produce extremes.
In Florida to date there have been 61 white on white SYG cases. There have been 11 white on black, 10 black on white and 26 black on black cases.
The results:
For white on white: 32 justified, 25 convicted, 4 pending
For white on black: 6 justified, 1 convicted, 4 pending
For black on white: 4 justified, 2 convicted, 4 pending
For black on black: 16 justified, 6 convicted, 4 pending
Notice the black on white SYG cases - it would appear that black shooters "get away with murder" just like white guys do.
It would appear that in Florida, the true impact is that all races get the benefit of the doubt in SYG cases. The proper lesson is that SYG favors the shooter regardless of race
Just food for thought.
http://www.tampabay.com/stand-your-ground-law/fatal-cases
cprise
(8,445 posts)hack89
(39,171 posts)you need to look more closely.
Here you have a study that is contradicted by SYG case results in Florida. I would want to see the actual numbers. I guarantee that the vast majority of cases are intra-racial with tiny samples of interracial SYG cases - just like Florida. And just like Florida, you will find that SYG favors the shooter regardless of race.
cprise
(8,445 posts)http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/criminal-justice/is-there-racial-bias-in-stand-your-ground-laws/
They also link to the data source and state their selection criteria.
Frontline says this shows a disparity, but more data would be needed for proof. I think you could wait another 15 years and still see little change in the disparity, and the burden of proof may lie with those who claim that otherwise pervasive racial bias somehow does *not* reach this corner of the criminal justice system. It would be interesting indeed if this study compared sentence severity, too, but would expect no surprises.
hack89
(39,171 posts)Last edited Sat Jul 20, 2013, 08:05 PM - Edit history (1)
which do not show a racial bias.
I am sure time will give us a better understanding. It is unreasonable to assume that each state's judicial system is the same.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Not that hard to overcome.
hack89
(39,171 posts)so it is not clear that juries are buying any old story.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)The person doing the killing initiated the confrontation, and there were witnesses to confirm that.
No witnesses, and it becomes very easy for Z to claim he was in danger. Which is what he did.
hack89
(39,171 posts)"innocent until proven guilty" and "beyond a reasonable doubt" come to mind.
Of course having prosecution witnesses collaborate the defendant's story makes it that much easier.
hlthe2b
(102,378 posts)death and deny that racism exists.... You are wRONG
dkf
(37,305 posts)Really? I would like to see this case.
hlthe2b
(102,378 posts)a kid in a packed car who supposedly trespassed with intent to commit something...
Perhaps you don't remember the homeowner who shot/killed a confused Asian teen on Halloween who went to the wrong home....
I don't have time to pull these links and it wouldn't matter anyway with you, apparently.
TheKentuckian
(25,029 posts)for getting the guy the kills them.
I can get that there is a lack of evidence leads to the outcome in the case but that lame logic doesn't really fly to me. No way that kid had any obligation to kowtow to Zimmerman and take his chances and too fucking bad he didn't bust that melon wide open.
As much as I believe Zimmerman did it, I couldn't vote to convict based on the case made but you are getting gross in the stretches to make it all okay. It isn't fucking okay but I'm not one of these burden of proof on the person claiming self defense crazies either and can separate what I believe from what is proven beyond a reasonable doubt by the state.
Hell, for capital crimes and maybe even all felonies (since peoples lives are trashed) I favor raising the standard to beyond a shadow of a doubt which would mean some heinous fuckers would literally get away with murder, I wouldn't pretend they were fine, upstanding, and decent to justify my bar though.
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)conflict with another person.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)dkf
(37,305 posts)COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)conflict refers to any conflict that doesn't involve the exchange of words.
Skittles
(153,193 posts)you're saying don't fight back so tell us WHAT he should have done
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)(although not 'targeted' or 'stalked'). I ran like hell away as fast as my feet would carry me.
Skittles
(153,193 posts)
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)parents on this post). Your argument doesn't gain any weight by trying to be melodramatic. N0t every confrontation with an armed person results in a shooting. And not every shooting results in death. So given the choice between staying around to see what might happen and getting the hell out of there, the best advice is absolutely to run away as fast as you can.
Skittles
(153,193 posts)stop defending a racist, gun humping paranoid piece of SHIT already
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)Take a deep breath. Otherwise you're liable to have a stroke, Sparky.
Skittles
(153,193 posts)now f*** off
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)
etherealtruth
(22,165 posts)RobinA
(9,894 posts)you were a moderator.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)EOTE
(13,409 posts)THOSE are the ones with hatred. The ones defending that same piece of shit, those are the ones filled with sanity and love. Gotcha.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)I'm not defending Zimmerman for reasons I have expressed previously. But the jury decided based on the evidence presented, and that is what we have to live with. You want to make proposals to somehow remedy this, go ahead.
I see hatred in some of the posters here. It has become a powerful force on DU, a liberal web site.
When juries are selected, they are supposed to be free of that force regarding the accused and victim. It's not about love, though a little sanity would be refreshing.
Response to COLGATE4 (Reply #38)
Ecumenist This message was self-deleted by its author.
Ecumenist
(6,086 posts)early age of 5 to TRY to get away, ( DO NOT RUN HOME BECAUSE IT WOULD LEAD THE NUT TO THE DOOR but to run up to the first door ad knock & ask for help). If all else fails, to, (and I will quote my mother VERBATIM), "Pop them upside the head with your lunch pail or pull up a tree and SMACK the hell out f them and then RUN like hell" She actually taught me NOT to take the same way home everyday because nuts will know to lie in wait for me. I'll be 50 in January. This is the reality of what we live in NOT a theoretical, "SHOULDA, WOULDA COULDA"!
What woould work for you WOULD NOT work for people who look like me and I am FEMALE too. How many white women have had DRUNK white guys pull up in a cars beside them while they're walking to school or home and ask "HOW MUCH FOR A PIECE OF SWEET DARKMEAT"? Or European and Arab men try to grope me because of the HYPERSEXUALISED way Black women have been portrayed as in the Media & they believe the crap they see in movies & videos that we are servants, drug addicts, street pharmacists and/or whores?
Talk about what you know cuz your theories are nowhere NEAR the facts of life for people who look like me.
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)any disagreement. I suggested that the best course of action was to run away. You say that from age 5 your Mother taught you to try to get away. What's your complaint with what I said?
Ecumenist
(6,086 posts)TOO OFTEN, when AMBUSHED by a CREEPY ASSED STRANGE &STALKERISH man, running away IS NOT an option OR when you run, the creep catches up& when that happens, "ish" get's real---quick, fast & in a hurry. PULL UP a tree, hit with a bike or try to pummel them with your bare hands, nails, AND teeth. For some UNFATHOMABLE reason, you just will not admit that TRAY more likely than not in that position. It seems that for some folks, anyway, there's an unspoken desire to return to the days of the PaddyRollers...OH and by the way, I WASN'T venting and fucking resent what you imply by accusing me of that. I was telling you what MOST black folks are taught FACTS don't make good VENTING material.
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)to escalate an encounter into a physical altercation you are legally the agressor. The law doesn't recognize provocation as grounds to allow you to get physical with someone. If in spite of that you decide to "get real, quick, fast and in a hurry" that can lead to a) legal liability and b) sometimes worse things. This applies equally if you're red, black, blue, white ot tan.
Ecumenist
(6,086 posts)is accosted by a stranger, they're NOT SUPPOSED try to fight if that person is trying to drag them off in a situation where they're trapped and should they be MURDERED, well, that's just too fucking bad! ARE YOU HIGH? You know, you're just trying to start a flamewar and I know what my world AND experience is. I don't have the time nor the incliination for the WILLFULLY ignorant.
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)occurred is not factual. You have made up your mind based on I'm not sure what - certainly not on what actually happened. You really need to educate yourself about the evidence presented in the case before charging in and demonstrating your complete lack of knowledge. Some people would call that wilful ignorance.
Ecumenist
(6,086 posts)Hell, they would've escaped both Adam Lanza & James Homes. Trayvon, in essence, DESERVED getting killed because if he had just run away FAST enough, he would still be alive...cuz he had NO RIGHT TO STAND HIS GROUND! 
Rex
(65,616 posts)I guess he could have called 911. I don't think the kid stood a chance, Zimmerman clearly was on a rampage of cop-wannabee. Not surprising considering his violent past.
Rex
(65,616 posts)things might have turned out differently. I'd have hung up with the GF and been dialing 911 as fast as my finger could punch the buttons. Let Zimmerman know that you are talking to the police, it might have changed the outcome of that night.
Okay, done. Just was my first thought...I'd dial 911.
premium
(3,731 posts)at least there would have been a police record of the confrontation and this whole incident might have turned out different.
The bottom line is that an innocent young man is dead, his family is forever changed, and, IMO, Zimmerman committed Manslaughter, but because of the ineptness of the prosecution, the weakness of the case, he walked.
Vattel
(9,289 posts)Is it the inaccuracies in Zimmerman's story that cinvinceds you of that?
premium
(3,731 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)they tell us we have to be paranoid and pack heat because the police may not show up!!! The gun humping freaks are trying a dead teenager for his own murder - fuck them ALL
EOTE
(13,409 posts)If they had had a gun, a wild-west shootout could occur and the fastest draw would still be alive, as it should be. Those who are foolish enough not to own a gun need to rely on the police... who may or may not shoot you when they arrive.
Skittles
(153,193 posts)the idea that paranoid, gun humping COWARD approached Trayvon without his weapon drawn is RIDICULOUS
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)and is trying to discuss this by explaining these piss poor laws. The other group are gun humpers that love the verdict and relish in the thought that they can go gun humping crazy now in Florida. You might or might not see any difference, but you can tell the difference after a few replies.
Yeah lots of hatred, no doubt about it.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)Are you affected by it? Just asking.
Who are those people who "...relish in the thought that they can go gun humping crazy now in Florida?" Any names here on DU? Point them out, if you please. I do catch a whiff of hatred from those who hate pro-2A folks, don't you? But I guess that's okay on DU, now. I wonder if Jimmy Carter is one of those "...relish" folks.
Get rid of the SYG laws. Would that make any difference? Most legal teams seem to suggest the SYG law was not employed by Zimmerman's team, and had the law never been enacted, the outcome would have probably been the same under a common law defense.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Nevermind, proceed I see you are on a mission now. Anything I say will be pointless.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)Not sure of what mission you reference. You know, the "Gungeon" had a discussion of the SYG laws the other day, and quite a few of us were not adverse to their repeal, esp. since there was general agreement that self-defense under common law is pretty secure in most states. You may wish to avail yourself of that mission.
Another discussion seemed to hinge on where people want to discharge their passions over this verdict. Most seem to agree that the state did a crappy job in prosecution, and perhaps there was no alternative given the evidence. Most discussion centered on racism, Florida, gun laws, Florida, SYG, Florida, and Florida boycotts.
A discussion with a point might be the best way for the Democratic Party to overhaul itself around FDR's freedoms "list." In that way we can offer a meaningful alternative to the GOPers and ameliorate some of the problems arising from this shooting incident. I believe that any event like this signifies the increasing frustration with the impotence of liberal and progressive politics resulting in a lash out to anyone we deem not to be on the side of a mysterious "Don't they get it?" cause. No, I'm afraid that many folks on DU and, if the response Democrats are getting around the nation, many folks around the nation don't get it. That is unfortunate.
Skittles
(153,193 posts)I'd say the ultimate hatred is targeting, stalking and killing an unarmed teenager
Rex
(65,616 posts)to 'assume the position.' Fucking cop-wannabee and since he is NOT a cop, he fucked the entire situation up by pretending to be one. I still cannot believe the cops behaved the way they did. I mean, they flopped over backwards to make sure Zimmerman didn't get charged with a crime. They tried really hard to find drugs in Martin's dead body. One wanted to charge Zimmerman with homicide right then and there, but was told NO.
The whole thing is a stinking pile of horseshit. This is the first time I've seen someone kill someone else and not end up with a verdict of guilt to a crime.
The SYG law is a gun humpers fantasy! 
Skittles
(153,193 posts)Zimmerman is ON TAPE relaying his disgust that "these punks, assholes always get away" - so it makes sense he pulled his weapon out in an effort to detain Trayvon
lumpy
(13,704 posts)That was what he was there to do, he made it very clear with those words and it shows his hate. He was trying to prove himself super crime fighter. He only proved himself a punk, asshole and ended up a killer with warped ambition.
anomiep
(153 posts)Police actually generally have more of a duty to protect a prisoner they've handcuffed and have in custody, legally, than someone calling 911.
That does not mean that the police will not do their job. It's just that people should not think that the police are a guarantee. They may not be *able* to come when you call, it may take a lot of time, etc.
A fair amount of the time the police don't even get there until after it's all over.
There was a 911 call in Washington or Oregon where the locality had depended on federal funding for the Sheriff, that funding went away, and the Sheriff had to pull coverage to 9 to 5 shifts. The 911 operator talked to a woman who had called on the phone while someone was breaking in to assault her - but literally could not send anyone to help her.
I am sure having someone on the phone to talk to comforted the victim, and the responsibility for the crime is entirely on the guy breaking in, but I think it might have been more productive to do almost anything that could have made it turn out differently, besides talk on the phone and wait (run out the back door quietly, while he's breaking in the front, etc). (Edit: I should probably make clearer that this is a wish there'd been a better outcome, up to and including her having successfully defended herself by any means. It is not intended as a criticism of the victim's actions, she's the victim)
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)police won't help. But, when it suits their bigotry, they blame Trayvon for not calling police.
Heck, if he had, they likely would have shot him when they arrived. In fact, when they did arrive they kept yelling for Trayvon to show his hands while he lay dead in the rain.
premium
(3,731 posts)Law Enforcement is not bound by law to protect the individual citizen, they're tasked to protecting the general public.
There have been plenty of cases cited here on DU.
The only time the police are responsible for an individual citizen is when the citizen is in their custody.
My point was that if Trayvon had called 911, there would have been a record and a recording and the results of the trial might have been much different.
Mind you, I'm not faulting Trayvon for not calling 911, I'm just offering an alternate scenario.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)premium
(3,731 posts)You just don't like it because it doesn't fit your meme.
I don't know if it would've saved Trayvon that night, none of us will ever know, but at least there would have been a recording.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)premium
(3,731 posts)Either produce a link that I ever commented on the recordings or quit fibbing about what I've said.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)at least 3 recordings that proved Zman chased Trayvon, Z stalked him, Trayvon yelled for help, etc. But, that is not enough for you guys - and I don't have to wonder why.
Now run off and come up with some BS excuse/response, like Zman would have.
premium
(3,731 posts)now back it up with a link that I ever even talked about those recordings.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)premium
(3,731 posts)And I get it far better than you ever will.
lunatica
(53,410 posts)that they tell their sons to never argue and to comply and answer politely.
I said the same thing to my white son when he was a teenager although I didn't live in fear of what might happen to him. My heart goes out to anyone who has to endure racism and hate and suspicion just because of the color of their skin.
dkf
(37,305 posts)Why start when they are teenagers?
Who doesn't tell this to their kids?
lunatica
(53,410 posts)but that it takes smarts to get out of one.
ieoeja
(9,748 posts)Then remind him that he has a gun and could just shoot me instead of crying and begging which doesn't look too good given that he's a healthy adult male with a gun.
Or scenario 2: I knock him around a little then get up and start walking home. Only to have him catch up to me with his gun pulled out. At which point I would be the one crying and begging to be killed.
But if that happened, he would be guilty of murder. Since he is not guilty of murder, scenario 1 is obviously a reasonable possibility.
I don't know where I came up with that crazy shit for scenario 2.
Arkansas Granny
(31,532 posts)following meant no harm), run away (and risk being shot in the back) or call the police (and hope they get there in time).
Any other ideas?
hack89
(39,171 posts)that's why you get away as fast as you can. Yes - being shot in the back is a possible outcome but unless you are really confident you can disarm a man with a gun, it might be your best choice.
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)Hoyt
(54,770 posts)hack89
(39,171 posts)no one does tongue in cheek better than you.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)Arkansas Granny
(31,532 posts)walking as quickly as possible to a well lit area where there would be other people around is the best I can come up with.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)When 3 punks tried to bait me by calling me a fag on 6th St. in Austin, I just smiled and walked into the nearest restaurant. On the other hand, in another incident, a punk got out of his car and confronted a guy next to me who was listening to a boombox and had no knowledge of what was happening. The punk struck the guy in the face and was getting ready to hit him again. I tackled him because of his continuing aggression (which stopped when he caught a quart bottle of beer over his head).
And yet a 3rd time as I was leaving a function in the downtown, a woman who preceded me out door was surrounded by 3 big guys and "herded" toward an idling car with an already open door, and a driver. What should I have done? What would you have done?
(I pretended to be her boyfriend, and greeted her loudly and said my car was ready and my buddies would be joining soon, smiled at the thugs, and took her by the hand. She was game, went along with it, and we cleared out. She thanked me later. Never saw her again.)
And yet another time: 2 guys (pimps?) cornered a woman on the railing of the Congress Avenue Bridge over the Texas Colorado River one night. I slowed down and asked her if she wanted a good time. She said "yes," got in quickly, and I let her off at the end of the bridge. She was a sex worker and wanted to re-pay me in kind, but I wasn't into it!
Sometimes, you have to act in the greater good beyond yourself.
CitizenLeft
(2,791 posts)don't say no - YOU ARE. 
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)there will be those who will happen along and call me a liar and a RW racist. Comes with the territory of being pro-2A.
When you've been around for 65 yrs it's not unusual for anyone to experience situations like this.
Skittles
(153,193 posts)after saying 1) do not rely on the police and 2) Zimmerman was really doing NOTHING WRONG when he stalked Trayvon with a gun - I mean, WTF - they cannot keep their stories straight
premium
(3,731 posts)mythology
(9,527 posts)Too many people confuse morality for legality and what should be for what is. The name calling is frustration, but it's still an awful way to try to make a point.
The best advice is to call the police and to get to a public place. That might not have saved his life, but that would have given him the best chance given the fact that George Zimmerman was looking for him with a gun.
Yes it sucks that he was profiled for being black, but we don't yet live in a world in which we've gotten past that.
Florida's law on stand your ground and the criminal justice system in general are in favor of the accused as both are intended. The prosecution didn't put on a strong case, but they were facing an uphill battle. The stand your ground laws should be changed so that if you are the instigator as Zimmerman was by following Trayvon, but the fact is the law in this case functioned as intended.
The morally correct thing would have been for Zimmerman to not have followed Trayvon, to have listened to the police dispatcher, to have not shot Trayvon. But the stand your ground law isn't designed to follow what I believe to be morally correct.
hack89
(39,171 posts)I would advise them to:
1. call 911
2. run as fast as possible to a public area.
aikoaiko
(34,184 posts)Run only if creep gets out of car.
Of course, this is easy to say in hindsight.
ananda
(28,877 posts).. from what I've read, because there was a 12yo stepbrother there
and he didn't know what his stalker was.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)Skittles
(153,193 posts)aikoaiko
(34,184 posts)Mostly, I wish GZ never got out of his car.
Skittles
(153,193 posts)for WHAT? according to them Zimmy did nothing wrong - gawd, it is sickening
premium
(3,731 posts)Do you realize how stupid that sounds?
Skittles
(153,193 posts)touched a nerve I see - YES - gun humpers claim Zimmerman did nothing wrong, AND they tell us do not rely on the police - yet now they say Trayvon should have called them!!! IT WAS TRAYVON WHO DID NOTHING WRONG!!!
RobinA
(9,894 posts)threatened, you head for safety. What is difficult about that concept? Why are people who are suggesting this obvious action being called names here in a thread where they were asked what should have been done?
lumpy
(13,704 posts)ditched Zimmerman and was on his way home, he was surprised to have Zimmerman come upon him while he was still on the phone. He didn't have time to run off when Z confronted him. Seems reasonable that Z might have tackled Martin, thrown him to the ground and got on top trying to keep him there, The struggle is history. Punched in the nose, gun out, shot.
aikoaiko
(34,184 posts)aikoaiko
(34,184 posts)Likely, GZ would have tailed him to the house and remained there until police arrived.
NoOneMan
(4,795 posts)The jury can do whatever they want depending on how they feel above the victim and the killer. Its a fucked up law due to its vulnerability to prejudice, and how that impacts their perception of the events.
Martin would of been better off if he killed him (and spent his life in prison) or tried to be born white.
sgsmith
(398 posts)Call 911.
Stay out of the shadows.
Act like he belongs there (which, of course, he did).
Friendly little hand wave, with all five fingers.
rl6214
(8,142 posts)Skittles
(153,193 posts)that's what he was TRYING to do
rl6214
(8,142 posts)In addition as others have said he should have hung up his phone and dialed 911 to get the cops there to take care of Z.
Skittles
(153,193 posts)he would have gotten home were it not for THAT little complication
lumpy
(13,704 posts)was still on the phone when Zimmerman approached him. Zimmerman probably tried to detain Martin wasn't buying whatever Zimmermans story was and tried to walk away, remember Zimmerman was hidebound that another 'punk' was not going to get away, that was why he was following him, after all.
When Zimmerman tried to detain Martin, that is when the struggle began. Z Tackled Martin and threw him to the ground, struggle, Z got smacked on the nose, possiblly scratched on face, gun appears , Martin screaming for help, Z afraid Martin would get the gun so he shot Martin. End of story.
rl6214
(8,142 posts)
MicaelS
(8,747 posts)Say I'm being followed by someone, give my name, phone number, description and the clothing I was wearing.
If I was close to home, go straight home, otherwise find a streetlight and stand under it in clear view.
Above all, stay on the phone with 911.
If someone physically approached me, state clearly that "I'm on the phone with 911, and am waiting on the police."
MrSlayer
(22,143 posts)Run away or call the cops. Or both.
Get away and hide.
Call your dad.
It's not the kid's fault this asshole was following him but there were some things he could have done.
DrDan
(20,411 posts)include those who do not believe there was adequate evidence to prove 2D or manslaughter.
It does NOT necessarily mean "those who feel that the correct verdict was rendered" believe in GZ's innocence.
You do realize that, right?
Skittles
(153,193 posts)something is WRONG
DrDan
(20,411 posts)(1) believing his story and (2) not having the prosecutors present evidence beyond a reasonable doubt are not the same
Skittles
(153,193 posts)you have to have some belief in Zimmerman's ridiculous story to allow for "reasonable doubt" - simply put, I do not believe Zimmerman - it's clear who the aggressor was and it was NOT Trayvon
DrDan
(20,411 posts)the prosecutor never introduced a scenario that they could stick with and prove
hence the verdict
Skittles
(153,193 posts)THERE IS ZERO DOUBT OF THAT FACT - *ZERO*
DrDan
(20,411 posts)Skittles
(153,193 posts)he can ROT IN HELL along with his supporters
DrDan
(20,411 posts)some objective thought.
It has nothing to do with supporting or not supporting anyone - it has to do with evidence and testimony and proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Oh well . . . to some, emotions trump all.
Have a good evening and weekend. I am going to do something productive.
Skittles
(153,193 posts)go over to the freak republic where you'll find people who agree that targeting, stalking and killing an unarmed teenager is peachy keen
I didn't get my way so I'll resort to insults and misrepresentations.
Got it.
You just don't like what Dr. Dan had to say, even though it was true.
Response to premium (Reply #169)
Post removed
premium
(3,731 posts)I saw what you did there.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)with every incidence. Zimmerman was hell bent on capturing the 'punk' to prove that his many calls to the police about suspicious thugs were justified.
Arkansas Granny
(31,532 posts)and the instructions from the judge, I suppose the jury gave the only verdict they could. I was really more interested in hearing opinions as to how Trayvon could have altered the outcome of the situation.
DrDan
(20,411 posts)Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)Bonus question: See above.
Please note many who think the "correct" verdict was rendered don't like what happened. Zimmerman evidently acted like a cop wanabe instead of the armed civilian he was, and violated the cardinal rule of armed or ANY self-defense: Avoid confrontation. He was a fool to pursue, stalk, follow, or whatever he was doing. But it is not a crime if he did not brandish a weapon or directly threaten Martin, and there was little or no evidence to suggest that he did. Further, had there been no SYG law in Florida, Zimmerman would have used standard self-defense based on common law, which is in fact what he did.
Now, unleash the hounds.
John1956PA
(2,657 posts)I think that the totality of Z's actions render him culpable of manslaughter. Z knew that Trayvon knew that Z was following him. Somewhere in Z's calculus should have been the following thought, "Hey, maybe this is just a visiting kid who is scared of me following him in the dark and in the rain." Z should have known that a scared African-American kid who is outdoors after dark in a gated community will not act with the poise of an older white male. Trayvon likely thought that running might cause his pursuer or some third party to conclude that he was a criminal. Also, he may have thought that danger was imminent and that there was no time to call 911.
The answer to the question as to why Trayvon doubled back may be that Trayvon spotted someone or something which suggested to him that he was being pursued into an ambush. Trayvon was scared and rightfully paranoid. He may have interpreted the presence of some third party on the street ahead of him as a sign that he was about to be ambushed.
I think that, besides being illegal (manslaughter) Z's actions were cowardly. If Trayvon has been the size of an NFL linebacker (race aside) Z would have stayed in his truck. He would not risk having an altercation with someone powerful enough to knock him unconscious with a single punch. As it was, Z viewed Trayvon as a "punk" who, in Z's worse-case scenario, was not strong enough to wrestle Z's handgun away from him if it came down to an altercation. I think that by the moment that Trayvon and Z locked gazes to begin their fateful struggle, Z was already grasping his handgun or, if not, he reached for it within seconds.
I think that the totality of Z's actions were beyond negligent. His actions were intentional and reckless. He should have been convicted of manslaughter.
Eleanors38
(18,318 posts)we know are on record. I don't know what I would have done on the jury, but I would have been looking at the contributory circumstances of Zimmerman's actions as well. I think the jury was looking at that, too. They probably didn't see enough evidence in that regard.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)n
Zoeisright
(8,339 posts)When that happens, all bets are off. All the ignorant racists who claim Trayvon could have done something believe a liar and child abuser.
Hoyt
(54,770 posts)all american girl
(1,788 posts)A 19 year old boy, with his dark grey hoodie, skull t-shirts, and jeans....what do you do if some dude is following you. I worried about him doing stupid things. I didn't worry about a Zimmerman profiling him and then kill him.
A 14 year old girl, with a creep in the neighborhood who likes to touch teen girls at the bus stops. I have always worried about her, especially the older she gets. Creepy guys are always out there.
What are we suppose to do. Trayvon did exactly what I told my kids every since they were babies.
ksoze
(2,068 posts)Chances are, that advice still applies.
all american girl
(1,788 posts)If you feel threaten by anyone, anyone at all, run...if they touch you, hit scratch and hit them in the balls...that always made my son laugh...
I had a problem when my son was around 4, a babysitter bit his face. The problem was the kid had no idea how to handle a testy 4 year old. I was a bit paranoid after that.
After have a girl, I was always wayyyyyyyy more scared for her. I realize that my kids aren't black, and that is an extra burden that their parents have (and they shouldn't have), but when I found out that I was having a girl, I was so happy.....I then realized what that meant....I was worried.
There are no easy answers, but this is all so stupid.
Captain Stern
(2,201 posts)The reason that I believe that is because I don't know exactly what happened that night. None of us do. And of course it follows, that the jury doesn't know exactly what happened that night either. The state didn't prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Zimmerman's version of events didn't happen. Because of that, the jury did the correct thing in acquitting.
That aside, I personally don't think the events of that evening took place the way Zimmerman described them. If I would have to bet my life on it, I'd say he tried to physically "detain" Martin until the police arrived.
As for your questions, I'd advise anyone (young man or otherwise) to get into a public area, and call 911 asap.
renie408
(9,854 posts)How many cases do we know what happened? That is really your rational for why its ok for George Zimmerman to shoot that kid?
This is just mind boggling to me. You can stalk, accost and kill an unarmed minor and people will say it is OK...cause nobody really knows what happened. The kid is DEAD and was unarmed. Do the math.
Captain Stern
(2,201 posts)Martin's body was found 70 yards from from where he was headed ....not 70 feet. (since you told me to do the math, I'll respectfully ask you to do the same)
And you're also mistaken about what I said. I didn't say that the jury not knowing what happened made it "ok for George Zimmerman to shoot that kid". Do you honestly think that is what I said? Be honest....is that really what you think I said? Try being somewhat objective, and at least glance at a few facts. Just because somebody disagrees with you, doesn't mean they are saying it's ok to shoot unarmed kids.
My point is that juries are presented with evidence, and then they have to make a decision based on that evidence. In this case, they needed to see actual evidence that disproved Zimmerman's version of events beyond a reasonable doubt. They didn't see that.
I don't believe Zimmerman's version of the events (which I stated in my previous post), but I don't think the prosecutors gave the jury enough to convict Martin. In my opinion, when a jury errs, it should be on the side of the defendant. I'd rather see some guilty folks go free, than see innocent folks convicted.
renie408
(9,854 posts)I just reread it and you are right. I came here yesterday angry from spending about an hour arguing with someone who LITERALLY said, "Well, if he wasn't up to no good, why did he have his hoodie up?" And then continued to spew the most vicious, hate filled CRAP. I was primed to see people excusing Zimmerman and so that is what I saw.
Captain Stern
(2,201 posts)No offense taken. It's a serious subject, and emotions run high when it's talked about.
That said, I'm sorry you had to waste an hour of your life arguing with an ignorant bigot.
renie408
(9,854 posts)What the FUCK is wrong with you?? Are you fucking crazy? Do you seriously think it is OK for someone to ignore all the rules of the Neighborhood Watch patrol they say they are a member of, to ignore the instructions of the police, to initiate a confrontation while carrying a loaded gun and to then shoot and KILL an unarmed minor??
What the fuck is wrong with you? Trayvon Martin is supposed to be picking out funky dorm room decorations right now. He should be worrying about whether or not he will get along with his roommate and if he should try to join a fraternity. But since he had the extremely poor judgment to wear his hood up in the rain while walking in his own father's neighborhood, he is dead. But he deserved it, so I guess its OK. He should know better than to wear a hoodie and be black at the same time. Stupid Trayvon. I guess he won't make that mistake again, huh??
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)I suppose you're right.
Taitertots
(7,745 posts)2. Walk home. The timetable of events indicates that he had more than enough time to walk directly home
3. Scream for help or for someone else to call the police
4. Call your parents
5. Don't punch them in the face
Ruby the Liberal
(26,219 posts)Telling a black teenager in this country to "call the police"? Noting that he was on the phone - which went dead to the point it took outside 3rd parties to ressurrect it as the FDLE people couldn't.
2. Walk home. The timetable of events indicates that he had more than enough time to walk directly home
-- Where his 12 year old step brother was alone? Some street smarts there.
3. Scream for help or for someone else to call the police
-- Well, we know that happened. Ironically the screams ended the NANOSECOND the gun fired. Musta been old "I think I missed him with a wide shot" Zimmerman just cutting off his gutteral fear reaction mid scream...
4. Call your parents
-- See above - phone was disabled at some point, call ended, and it took 3rd party forensics to pull the data off of it as it was not able to be charged in its final state.
5. Don't punch them in the face
-- You come up on me (a late 40's white female) in the dark for no reason, my elbow and your nose are about to become BFF.
So what else ya got for Stranger Danger updates for kids?
Taitertots
(7,745 posts)You don't get to attack people who have not done anything wrong. Briefly following and approaching someone can't be used in court as a reason for acting in self defense. You are basically saying that you have a shoot first ask questions later opinion regarding self defense.
And you will look like insane when you find out it was just someone approaching you because your gate was open and your dog was about to get out, or some other benign reason.
1. Instead of calling the police, he made racial insults about the person following him. He had ample time to call the police.
2. I'm just going to assume Trayvon's Father's fiancé's house has a door with a lock. Good place to wait for the police to arrive.
3. The closest witness, testified that he say Trayvon on top and Zimmerman screaming while being punched repeatedly in the face.
zencycler
(9 posts)Let's assume for the moment that reasonable doubt exists with regard to the ill-will/evil-intent requirements on 2nd degree murder. In that case, consider the fact that the serious class of manslaughter which they gave the jury to consider did NOT include any culpability for Zimmerman's negligent actions, a fact for which the jury was specifically instructed. In other words, once the jury rules out 2nd Degree, they are left with deciding on a Manslaughter charge for which any actions leading up to the "first punch" (Zimmerman's negligent acts) become irrelevant, and reasonable doubt over whether or not Zimmerman acted in self defense is relevant.
That's a shame, because there are laws for which they could have charged Zimmerman which would specifically relate to his actions leading up to the encounter, and for which self-defense at the time of the shooting would not have been a defense. Namely, Negligent Homicide. In some instances, that is included in the Manslaughter charge, but not so in the case. Naturally, Negligent Homicide would not result in any serious jail time - I'm guessing maybe 5 years. This is the same crime you'd be charged with if you spoke on a cellphone while driving, and that led to an accident which caused someone's death. And in this case, it would specifically address the question of whether Zimmerman bad judgments leading up to the encounter caused this death to occur, by actions such as getting out of the car, following, failing to identify who he was at the first opportunity, etc.
I'm guessing the prosecution did not include this deliberately because they felt pressure to get a conviction on a more serious charge, and they may have hoped that keeping this off the list would have forced a conviction on the serious form of manslaughter which they requested to be added. But whatever their motivations for not including this, I think in hindsight, it was a mistake. And now that Zimmerman has been to trial for the more serious charges, I do not believe they can go back an re-indict him for this.
zencycler
(9 posts)According to Rachel, Trayvon asked "Why are you following me?" to which Zimmerman said something like "What are you doing around here?". While I can understand not liking a question like this, I think under the circumstances, it's best to just answer the question with something like "I went shopping, I'm heading back to my father's house, and I'm on the phone with my girlfriend." Then, at that point he could ask something more argumentative like "Why do you want to know?" at which point, hopefully, Zimmerman would have finally identified himself.
Yes, I know we can't expect teenagers to be that mature, and yes, I know, it's somewhat understandable that a teenager might get angry over a question like this, and might even decide to punch someone in the nose at that point. But the fact that it's understandable doesn't mean it's justifiable. In other words, if Trayvon did indeed hit Zimmerman first, then he would have been the first one to do something illegal, and for the serious charge of Manslaughter being considered, that's all that mattered.
Unfortunately, as I discussed above, based on the serious form of Manslaughter they charged, Zimmerman's actions before the first punch became irrelevant. In order to disregard Zimmerman's claim of self-defense, and to thus find him guilty of Manslaughter, the jury would have to believe, beyond all reasonable doubt, that either: 1) Zimmerman was engaged in some illegal activity at the time of the encounter (i.e. - he physically assaulted Trayvon), 2) Zimmerman's use of lethal force was not reasonable, under the circumstances, or 2) Zimmerman was not in fear of grave bodily injury or death. But as others have stated, nothing that Zimmerman did prior to the encounter was, by itself, illegal, and the jury was specifically instructed not to include negligence in that consideration because the serious form of Manslaughter with which he was charged precluded that consideration.
Yes, I know that we don't know for sure that Trayvon through the first punch. However, while the physical evidence would suggest that this was at the very least, a possibility, and that, along with the injuries which Zimmerman sustained was enough to create sufficient reasonable doubt.
RobinA
(9,894 posts)gone home and if he was really worried about Zimmerman called 911.
I would advise any young man, old man, young woman, old woman, to do the same.
braddy
(3,585 posts)When I was a teen and one of the straights (adults) was calling the cops to check me out, I just wanted to get away without dealing with them.
dsc
(52,166 posts)I think the verdict was correct in the sense that given the evidence and the legal charge they were given they did what they had to do. I think the law and the investigation were both bad and those aren't the juror's fault. Now as to your question, it depends on something that is rather unknowable, just what Marvin did and just what Zimmerman did. We really don't know, with 100% certainty, what either person did. One thing Marvin could have done, which he didn't, was call 911 and loudly let Zimmerman know he was doing so. Would that have made a difference, I don't know, but it is what I would have done and would advise others to do, if they were in that situation.
Arkansas Granny
(31,532 posts)I was more curious about what posters thought Trayvon could have done to change the outcome. Many agree with calling 911. We'll never know if that would have saved his life, but it might have changed the verdict.
Pelican
(1,156 posts)... or approach in a friendly manner to deal with the issue.
As much as some would like to believe there isn't much to support the idea of a epithet screaming gun blazing racist firing wildly as he went.
In short "Excuse me, can I help you with something? I see you've been behind me for a few minutes now..."
Common Sense Party
(14,139 posts)Trayvon was definitely faster than tubby Zimmerman. When I was 17, if I had thought some creepy guy was following me--and I had done nothing wrong--I would have sprinted for the house and left the fat weirdo in the dust.
XemaSab
(60,212 posts)Trayvon told her that he was outside his dad's house at one point a few minutes before the end of the conversation.
CitizenLeft
(2,791 posts)...and reached for his gun in his over-zealous attempt to keep this fucking punk (or coon) from getting away. He probably meant to hold him there until the police came. Maybe he was close enough for Trayvon to grab his arm, and that's how the scuffle started.
Trayvon may have tried to hide, and that's when Zimmerman stumbled upon him "in the darkness," and the rest happened as I suggested.
Trayvon probably did not want to lead this creep back to his father's home. I wouldn't. I will drive right past my house if I see a car that I think is following me. I've done it many times.
If it happened like that, the drawn gun precludes all options. And I don't have a doubt in my mind that Zimmerman would've shot Trayvon in the back if he'd tried to run.
I don't think Trayvon had a chance.
zencycler
(9 posts)The problem with your scenario is it doesn't seem to jibe with Rachel's testimony and what she says Trayvon and Zimmerman said to each other ("Why are you following me" and "What are you doing around here", respectively). In order to void Zimmerman's claim of self-defense the prosecution would need to either prove that Zimmerman had initiated an assault that started the altercation or overcome reasonable doubt that he was not reasonably in fear of great bodily harm or death at the time of the shooting. And while it seems the jury (along with the viewing public) wanted Zimmerman to be held accountable for something, it seems the only thing which the prosecution may have been able to prove to the jury would have been the crime of Negligent Homicide. But that charge, which would specifically relate to everything questionable which GZ did leading up to the altercation (getting out of car, following, not identifying self at first opportunity), was not included among the more serious charges the jury was given to consider - perhaps because the prosecution wanted a conviction on the more serious charge so they didn't want to include a choice which would result in perhaps a five-year jail sentence. But ultimately, this was the only charge which they may have been able to prove, and for which a self-defense claim at the time of the shooting would not apply.