17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #10

Status
Not open for further replies.
Why leave this part from the article out which puts it in better context?



JMHO

He was hired BEFORE those days.

I snipped for copyright reasons. It was a short article.

I provided the link so the entire article could be read.
 
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/police-investigated-trayvon-martin-jewelry-16015168

Women's jewelry and a watch found in Trayvon Martin's school backpack last fall could not be tied to any reported thefts, the Miami-Dade Police Department said Tuesday.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-He-suspended-times-caught-burglary-tool.html

Trayvon Martin was suspended from school three times in the months before he was shot dead by a neighborhood watchman, it emerged today.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin-dogged-disciplinary-problems-school/story?id=16011674

Last year Martin was suspended for spraying graffiti on school grounds. The Miami Herald reported that the school guard who stopped him searched his backpack and found 12 items of women's jewelry and a flathead screw driver that the guard believed to be a "burglary implement." But Martin was never charged or specifically disciplined for the incident.
 
Trayvon did not seek out George. GZ was the one. The death of Trayvon is on GZ's hands. No matter how it is spun. GZ killed Trayvon for walking down the street looking up to no good. We will never know the truth. It is only the words of a man with a gun, a truck, and the ability to leave the area. GZ chose this end. He is responsible.

Doesn't matter.

Who laid hands on who first?

We don't know, but that certainly matters in a self defense case.
 
If you run like the wind for safety and you have long legs as he would because he was 6'3" he would have been almost home. :moo:
I am not so sure he was scared enough to run...he may have been thinking... OH good he can’t drive his car into this area I am clear of him now.
But then he saw him and we do not know what happened at that stage....
:moo:
Good explanation! We need to think this through.
I just experienced my own teen grandson being expelled for doing silly things like passing notes. Angry at the system, you're darn right he was. Incident with his girlfriends mother compiled more anger at adults and the system. He had enough he ran away to a very dangerous place. Kids get mad.
 
my point is, i don't think the entire "innocent kid wearing a hoodie who is black, walking home from store with skittles and iced tea shot by racist vigilante is the entire story like the family/media would want us to believe.

ditto!
 
(CBS News) - An anonymous former co-worker of George Zimmerman, the man who shot and killed unarmed teen Trayvon Martin five weeks ago, told a newspaper that Zimmerman "loved being in charge ... loved the power" and could become violent.

The New York Daily News reported Friday that Zimmerman was fired in 2005 from his job as a party security guard for being too aggressive, quoting a former co-worker as saying that "usually he was just a cool guy. ... But it was like Jekyll and Hyde. When the dude snapped, he snapped."


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505263_...and-hyde/?tag=storyMediaBox;postSpecialReport
 
Are you sure Crump didn't approach the family? That's not legal, but it could happen and has many times. At any rate, then need a civil rights attorney, because there is a worse civil rights problem in the US than most would admit and it is sickening. I'm not white, I'm not black, I'm human and hispanic!

I believe the article stated TM's father contacted Crump on day 2.

ETA: Or cousin??? I'll have to go back to read it.
 
Morning :seeya:

Here's a thought:


GZ and TM got into a scuffle. In the commotion of the scuffle, the gun was unholstered and fought over. The gun, then went off with the bullet hitting and killing TM.

When LE got there - GZ told them "I shot him".

OK

IF you were in a fight with an unknown assailant and both of you had a hand on that gun and that gun ending up being fired - then WHY wouldn't you tell LE -

"I don't know, we were fighting over the gun and it went off" OR

"The gun just went off - we both had on hands on it" OR

"I don't know - it all happened so fast - the trigger got pulled" OR

Something to that effect? Why would you simply say "I shot him"?

If you were fighting and knew this was a self defense shooting - why wouldn't your first words include something about TM's hands being on the gun as well? Or at least something about struggling over the gun? Why would you simply conceed to "I shot him and the gun is in holstered in my waistband"?

Plus, GZ re-holstering the gun. He had the presence of mind to re-holster it. IF it was such a chaotic, unnerving event - wouldn't the gun just have been dropped? Since TM was face down and not moving - the chances of that gun being grabbed up and used again was slim to none. There was nobody else around, so the chances of someone else grabbing it was slim to none.

I imagine that if you are in a struggle over a gun and that gun fires - it would be a very confusing, upsetting, and very distressing moment - yet, GZ had the presence of mind to re-holster the gun? Plus, if both GZ's hand and TM's hand had been on that gun - there is evidence of that on the gun - DROP IT and preserve that evidence.

I'm not sure about the "shock" that GZ supposedly felt if he had the presence of mind to re-holster that gun instead of just dropping it. And then he confession of "I shot him" instead of saying at least something about "we fought over it" or "he tried to grab it from me" - SOMETHING that would let LE know (who have YOU at gunpoint at the moment BTW) that you didn't mean it - that it was an accident - that it could have been TM's finger on that trigger?

Do ya get what I'm trying to say here?

Why would GZ just openly offer up "I shot him" as his first words to LE? Why admit to a crime when you really believe that you aren't guilty of? Sure, GZ is the one the gun belonged to - but if it was self-defense and TM was trying to get the gun - then why not make some type of statement about that - first words outta your mouth.

I know if I had been GZ and there was a fight/struggle over the gun and it was fired and TM took the bullet - first thing I would have said was 'I don't know - it just went off. He tried to grab it from me" - something like that. But Icertainly wouldn't take complete and total blame right from the get-go. And then, weeks later - turn around and say it was self-defense.




JMHO

To hear Zimmerman's brother tell it, he was in such bad shape, he was barely conscious, and the last thing he remembered was trying to lift his head off the concrete so he wouldn't be in diapers for the rest of his life, so taking this into consideration, how in the world did he manage to get that gun back into the holster?



~JMO~
 
No, not the fact that he's dead but the whole 'innocent 17 year old kid shot for no reason other than wearing a hoodie, being black, and walking back home from a store carrying nothing more than skittles and iced tea'

That we've been hearing about for the last month.

It cannnot be THAT cut and dry.

What is cut and dry is what we know.

GZ's background
GZ's future plans to be employed by the legal system - Criminal Justice Course
GZ's call to LE dispatch in which he describes TM as a suspect: "something's wrong with him, he putting his hand in his waistband, he's walking towards me, comin to check me out, he's on drugs or something, headed towards the back gate, they always get away, cursing under breath, etc. clearly by his own words painting a picture of someone who he suspects is up to some criminal behavior.
GZ's the man who had already determined that TM was a suspect while TM was standing under an awning at the Clubhouse pulling up his hood before he even made the call to LE. Nothing at the beginning of his call to LE was suspicious until after he made the call.
GZ's attempt to follow - Told he did not have to by LE and he tells the dispatcher what he feels the dispatcher wants to hear...okay. Hangs up and proceeds to follow regardless, knowing he's not suppose to according to NWP rules, knowing LE thinks he is sitting back in his vehicle, he does what he wants to do not what is safe for everyone involved including himself.
GZ knows at this point he may be following TM but he also knows he is stalking.
GZ fails to notify LE he is carrying a weapon, again, putting himself, LE, TM and the lives of bystanders at risk, but he does it anyway.
GZ claims he's lost him but knows he's headed for the back gate by fails to drive his car back to the rear entrance and wait for LE. If GZ knew, if fact, that is how they "all get away" why didn't he just head to the back, call LE back and say, "I'm at the back gate waiting for the guy."
GZ failed to follow the very rules he helped set up because he initially contacted LE about the program. Why? Did he feel it would give him greater control to get out there and physically take on the responsiblity that belonged to LE. Was the NWP set up by GZ for the specific reason to give him more control, a reason to stop and question people, to call complaints in about neighbors taking away their ability to complain harassment...."I was just doing my duty."

This is not a gun issue, this is not a race issue, this is not an issue about GZ's family or TM's family, how they got their attorney, it's not an issue about critizing how a young woman handled herself before or after the death of her friend. The issue is GZ took control of the situation when he stepped out of the car when asked politely not to. GZ took it as "not an order" but he knew differently. What happened next is tragic but it did not have to happen. All GZ had to do when he was on the phone with LE was to ask TM a simple question, "Excuse me son, do you live here?" Why didn't he do that? What stopped him? GZ wanted TM to be up to something is the only logical answer or he would have used that opportunity while on the phone with LE to ask a question when he had a witness instead of waiting.

If you take GZ out of the equation this would have never happened.

GZ created an opportunity for crime to happen even though he knew what he was doing was wrong. jmo
 
He was hired BEFORE those days.

I snipped for copyright reasons. It was a short article.

I provided the link so the entire article could be read.

No it doesn't say he was HIRED before those days. It says he was called. he also said;

"I believed in my heart of hearts they were going to arrest him," Crump said Thursday in an interview. "I said, 'Oh, they are going to arrest him. You don't need me on this.'"
More than a month later, there still has been no arrest.

He said he told them they didn't need him, he's not saying he was HIRED. A MONTH LATER, it states there was still no arrest, he became involved.


JMHO
 
Perfect. Thank you very much, teh! :blowkiss:

BTW Beach my shirt tucked in comment came from the police station video when he got out of the squad car with his shirt tucked in. Now that we know that the time between the fight and arriving at the station, I'm not sure how believable it would be that he would find the time to tidy himself back up (tuck his shirt back in) after being in a fight.

Either that or it was the neatest fight that your ever saw...
 
BECAUSE GZ knew he had shot TM - the facts of the scuffle are separate,
and noted. He still shot him, so he said the truth, I shot him.
Maybe TM never touched his gun in the first place, was GZ afraid that TM was a strong athletic taller than him guy? Who may be able to get his gun away from him? Maybe.. lot of maybe’s here. :moo:

Ok, point taken. The self-defense claim. My opinion is that GZ better hope TM's fingerprints/handprints are somewhere on that gun. Here's why:

If TM was attacking GZ and beating him like he says - and GZ manages to pull the gun without TM getting a hand on it. Once a gun is pulled - human reaction is to stop - actually most people would probably put their hands up with palms turned outward. IF that is what happened - now GZ has the upper hand. He's got the gun, its out and pointed at TM. If TM doesn't lunge for it or try to grab it and you have enough distance (even a few feet is enough) between you - you step back one, two, three or even more steps to keep that attacker from grabbing it. The attacker NOW is certainly not going to lunge at you or that gun - you'll simply pull the trigger and it'll be over.

So, if GZ got that gun out and TM didn't even manage to get a hand on it - then GZ had TM at gunpoint. RIGHT THERE - its over. The fight, the altercation, everything - its over. GZ knew LE were on their way. The first officer was there in less than a minute after the shot. So, why wouldn't GZ just continue to hold TM at gunpoint? Order him to the ground, face down - arms out to side? C'mon. Like I just keep saying.....

He pulled the trigger.

If TM's prints fail to show up on that gun - then once that gun is pulled - GZ then immediately had the upper hand and simply could have backed up and held TM at gunpoint.

When GZ re-holstered that gun - he could have wiped off critical, crucial, important evidence that would help prove self-defense (TM's prints).

It's just not fittin' for me - that's all.




JMHO
 
Because being a black family in America, even a completley blemish free one, knows what its like to feel the indifference a lot of people give them based on nothing but bias. This why did he get a lawyer is a moot point right now to me. I mean its obvious they need one. There was a huge miscarriage of justice there. and that's coming from a near 30 year old white woman who's husband is black. I completely understand the need.

Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk


My family is mixed too, and I can tell you that some in our family yell "racist" every chance they get. YET some don’t play the race card just because it has a lot of juice. I know race is still an international problem not only for black people, but playing the race card just because it has juice only helps to create a bigger divide. :moo:
 
Please tell me you're joking. It has been stated over and over again that TM and his family are victims. Apparently they did the right thing. What with people blaming everyone but GZ and all......jmo


Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk

No. I'm not joking.

I think it's a fair question. Why a civil rights attorney on day 2?

Last mod statement I saw was that since he info is not clear, we are not sure who the real victim is.

Something like that. Posted yesterday.
 
To hear Zimmerman's brother tell it, he was in such bad shape, he was barely conscious, and the last thing he remembered was trying to lift his head off the concrete so he wouldn't be in diapers for the rest of his life, so taking this into consideration, how in the world did he manage to get that gun back into the holster?



~JMO~

And how was he able to scream for help so loudly and for so long? I wouldn't think a person who was out of breath and losing consciousness could yell and scream like that. But I suppose anything is possible?

JMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
160
Guests online
2,549
Total visitors
2,709

Forum statistics

Threads
595,167
Messages
18,020,657
Members
229,592
Latest member
ahrland
Back
Top