FBI considering hate crime charges against Zimmerman #1

Elley Mae said:

I wonder how long they have to make that decision/determination?

Click to expand...

I think the FBI is like the IRS. Feels like they can wait forever and just when you think you are in the clear. They show up at your door..."greetings." They also don't share information well. jmo

HiHater said:

So GZ is describing everything about Trayvon, even down to the fact that he was wearing a button on his shirt, but he leaves out the part about his vehicle being circled?

Click to expand...

I had hoped the doc dump would help clarify this but I haven't see anything about GZ's statement(s) to the police so far. If TM circled the truck then GZ should have damn well mentioned it in his 2/26 police statement, but his non-emergency call wasn't intended to be a full incident report by him and shouldn't be treated that way by others. When a person calls the police and says someone is acting "suspicious" or there is "something wrong" the expectation is that one is initiating a process to get police attention where one can add more specific information later on if needed with a detailed statement. It's that statement, not the call that really counts.

I do still think it is important to try understand when the circling happened and I think we can do that with the available information. At 1:30 into his call GZ suddenly interrupts the dispatcher and says "how long till you get an officer here?" My theory is that moment was when GZ realized that TM was not walking past his car but actually had looped in front of it again, which freaked GZ out hence the interruption. He could have also said something like, "OMG, he is circling my car!" but I think in that moment he was just thinking he needed assistance ASAP. Then by the time the dispatcher had finished responding to him TM had completed the circle and kept walking so it didn't seem imperative to GZ that he report it at the time.

Alecto said:

I had hoped the doc dump would help clarify this but I haven't see anything about GZ's statement(s) to the police so far. If TM circled the truck then GZ should have damn well mentioned it in his 2/26 police statement, but his non-emergency call wasn't intended to be a full incident report by him and shouldn't be treated that way by others. When a person calls the police and says someone is acting "suspicious" or there is "something wrong" the expectation is that one is initiating a process to get police attention where one can add more specific information later on if needed with a detailed statement. It's that statement, not the call that really counts.

I do still think it is important to try understand when the circling happened and I think we can do that with the available information. At 1:30 into his call GZ suddenly interrupts the dispatcher and says "how long till you get an officer here?" My theory is that moment was when GZ realized that TM was not walking past his car but actually had looped in front of it again, which freaked GZ out hence the interruption. He could have also said something like, "OMG, he is circling my car!" but I think in that moment he was just thinking he needed assistance ASAP. Then by the time the dispatcher had finished responding to him TM had completed the circle and kept walking so it didn't seem imperative to GZ that he report it at the time.

Click to expand...

Logically, GZ would have reported the "circling" immediately if it were true, if for nothing else than to emphasize the urgency of the situation. That would have been the first thing he said on the 911 call about TM's behavior that could have been considered remotely threatening. JMO.

gator said:

Logically, GZ would have reported the "circling" immediately if it were true, if for nothing else than to emphasize the urgency of the situation. That would have been the first thing he said on the 911 call about TM's behavior that could have been considered remotely threatening. JMO.

Click to expand...

It doesn't seem credible to me that Zimmerman would not have told that detail to the dispatcher. I think that this is more of his after the fact embellishments, like Trayvon telling him he's going to die tonight and Trayvon, shot in the heart and the lung having time to say not once but twice "You got it. You got it."

gator said:

Logically, GZ would have reported the "circling" immediately if it were true, if for nothing else than to emphasize the urgency of the situation. That would have been the first thing he said on the 911 call about TM's behavior that could have been considered remotely threatening. JMO.

Click to expand...

People aren't always "logical" though.

It's also not true that it was the first thing GZ said about TM's behavior that "could have been considered remotely threatening." Anyone listening to that call should honestly be able to tell that TM approached GZ's vehicle in a way that seemed intimidating and that GZ felt threatened before the 1:30 mark. It's just many people and the MSM decided they knew what was really going on and decided GZ was really describing TM just innocently walking home, but that was never what GZ described at all.

Here is what's really illogical:

• TM "rushing" to get home yet taking 45 minutes to go 0.8 miles.
• TM running and walking fast to escape GZ but taking 6 minutes to go ~ 700 feet.

That's from TM'a girlfriend's narrative which superficially fits what people want to believe happened but doesn't make any sense looking at a map of the area compared with the times involved. TM wasn't just walking home and TM wasn't trying to escape GZ. The girlfriend is obviously lying. Considering that the next stage of the incident has TM beating GZ's head into the concrete while GZ screams for help for an extended period of time arguing that GZ was "profiling" and committed a "hate crime" without having any evidence of GZ starting the fight seems wildly inappropriate to me.

If you had a post removed recently it was OT and has been moved to the Sound Off Forum. PLease continue on there,but be aware that the rules are quite different. Or you may start a new thread in the Political Pavilion.
Thanks.

So politicans can comment on this case but we cannot comment on the politicans doing so...or the effect that coul have on the trial. I mean no disrespect but these are the facts of this case. Numerous politicans have joyfully stepped into it.

How can we discuss federal charges without at least pondering the effect of those political "comments." The FBI is a government entity.

Is there a thread here where we can discuss the implications of political pressures on this case. AS the politicans have CAUSED this...not we posters?

stmarysmead said:

So politicans can comment on this case but we cannot comment on the politicans doing so...or the effect that coul have on the trial. I mean no disrespect but these are the facts of this case. Numerous politicans have joyfully stepped into it.

Is there a thread here where we can discuss the implications of political pressures on this case. AS the politicans have CAUSED this...not we posters?

Click to expand...

There is a thread in SOUND OFF about this case. We can discuss political pressures there.

stmarysmead said:

So politicans can comment on this case but we cannot comment on the politicans doing so...or the effect that coul have on the trial. I mean no disrespect but these are the facts of this case. Numerous politicans have joyfully stepped into it.

How can we discuss federal charges without at least pondering the effect of those political "comments." The FBI is a government entity.

Is there a thread here where we can discuss the implications of political pressures on this case. AS the politicans have CAUSED this...not we posters?

Click to expand...

Yes in the sound off forum which is exactly why it was created.

also for future questions:

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=170530"]Threadiquette- Questions about rules welcome here - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

I hope, if there are charges, they are filed because the Law supports those filings. Reading Atty Dershowitz analysis of the thinness of the criminal case and his outrage that these charges were even filed...makes me concerned.

Alecto said:

People aren't always "logical" though.

It's also not true that it was the first thing GZ said about TM's behavior that "could have been considered remotely threatening." Anyone listening to that call should honestly be able to tell that TM approached GZ's vehicle in a way that seemed intimidating and that GZ felt threatened before the 1:30 mark. It's just many people and the MSM decided they knew what was really going on and decided GZ was really describing TM just innocently walking home, but that was never what GZ described at all.

Here is what's really illogical:

• TM "rushing" to get home yet taking 45 minutes to go 0.8 miles.
• TM running and walking fast to escape GZ but taking 6 minutes to go ~ 700 feet.

That's from TM'a girlfriend's narrative which superficially fits what people want to believe happened but doesn't make any sense looking at a map of the area compared with the times involved. TM wasn't just walking home and TM wasn't trying to escape GZ. The girlfriend is obviously lying. Considering that the next stage of the incident has TM beating GZ's head into the concrete while GZ screams for help for an extended period of time arguing that GZ was "profiling" and committed a "hate crime" without having any evidence of GZ starting the fight seems wildly inappropriate to me.

Click to expand...

I listened to that call and I did not conclude that TM approached the vehicle in a threatening manner. When I listened to the call I thought Zimmerman was making a big dramatic deal about nothing.

It is not obvious to me that the girlfriend is lying.

Teenagers dawdle, especially when they are talking on the phone to a girl and don't want others (like BG's son) to overhear them.

JBean said:

SANFORD, Fla. —
WFTV has learned charges against George Zimmerman could be getting more serious.
State prosecutors said Zimmerman, a neighborhood watchman, profiled and stalked 17-year-old Trayvon Martin before killing him, so the FBI is now looking into charging him with a hate crime.

http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/fbi-seeks-charge-george-zimmerman-hate-crime/nN5pR/

Click to expand...

State prosecuters have not PROVEN that GZ "stalked" and "profiled" TM, have they? So how does this support new charges?

Will the demographics of crime in that condo area that caused GZ to be concerned about a stranger-teenager in the area...be considered to ameliorate this "profiling" charge? Or are we to pretend that GZ had no , none, zip reason to...."watch" TM? That this was crime free utopia....and there was no commonaity at all among the majority of previous crimes?

Is that fair?

When does "watching" become "stalking?" Getting out of a car in your own neighborhood? After YOU call police?

stmarysmead said:

State prosecuters have not PROVEN that GZ "stalked" and "profiled" TM, have they? So how does this support new charges?

Will the demographics of crime in that condo area that caused GZ to be concerned about a stranger-teenager in the area...be considered to ameliorate this "profiling" charge? Or are we to pretend that GZ had no , none, zip reason to...."watch" TM? That this was crime free utopia....and there was no commonaity at all among the majority of previous crimes?

Is that fair?

When does "watching" become "stalking?" Getting out of a car in your own neighborhood? After YOU call police?

Click to expand...

My personal opinion is that Zimmerman set this thing in motion. I do think he crossed the line from watching.

if Zimmerman called cops and stayed in his car as the average law abiding citizen might do-then the story has a different ending.

I am not of the mind that Zimmerman specifically profiled him in a racist sense, but defintely profiled him in terms of being a youth walking around seemingly without purpose. My kids were profiled all the time when they were teens simply because they were teens. It is a discrimination to be sure, but not motivated by racism in particular.

Ask yourself this. If I were walking around seemingly without purpose do you think Zimmerman would have had the same reaction? Assume I am doing everything that Trayvon was doing, visitor in the tract, hoodie, talking on the phone, everything the same.
Do you believe that Zimmerman would have behaved similarly? Remember, Trayvon was not committing a crime and was not engaging in any contact with Zimmerman prior to the entire episode.

I do not believe he would have, yet there are female criminals everywhere. If he is truly watching out for the neighborhood, and we know he reports a lot of activity, then he should report me for doing what Trayvon was doing-but in my heart of hearts I do not think that would have happened. If you cannot say he would have reacted the same-then you must agree there was some profiling involved and if there was profiling involved then one must figure out what kind of profiling it was. Enter the FBI-but unless they know more than we do- I don't see these charges going anywhere.

Think about the 7-11 clerk. He saw Trayvon moments before Zimmerman did-yet he did not seem to profile him as a thief when Trayvon came in the store with a hoodie on! Thisa is only my opinion and can only base it off the tape but,he didn't watch him with any intensity and even turned his back on him- completely unremarkable reaction. Yet 5 minutes later Zimmerman has him profiled as a burglar?What? Don't get that at all.

IMO, from what I know now I do not see enough proof that this was racially motivated and so proving any kind of hate crime charges is not on my personal radar.

But I do think Zimmerman has got to take responsibility for his part in making this happen. The notion that Zimmerman is not at fault in any way is not possible,imo. But there may not be a crime against behaving irresponsibly under the cloak of responsible citizen.

I feel completely comfortable and confidant in saying that Zimmerman set the wheels in motion for this to all go down in his own passive-aggressive way. I would bet that Zimmerman himself wishes he had handled this completely differently and stayed in the car or gone home.

Great post JBean...and I love a good debate.

Here is my issue with your premise. GZ was reacting to the crime statistics of previous incidents when he chose to watch TM closer than he might have watched you. To me, this is common sense and if the majority of incidents in that condo complex involved teenage Black males...it is THEIR fault that other innocent young men are watched with more suspicion...NOT the fault of residents trying to keep safe. This a a multi-racial neighborhood of people working and trying to live in peace. They have rights to try to protect themselves. If descriptions of numerous criminals are similar...unfortunately, a stranger of THAT description WILL BE watched. I have no problem with that logic. Do you? Should the neighbors have followed old Chinese men to make it "fair?"

I was once "profiled" because I was "dressed up" and looked like a group of people going door to door prosletyzing. TM WOULD NOT have been watched by that police officier. But he had reason based on factual data and observation to watch me.

Had the convenience store been plaqued by thefts and incidents with young teenage Black males? If not, and I do not think this was the case...of course, he had ZERO reason to worry about anyone who looked like TM. Unfortunately, any "profiling" done to TM was the result of the descriptions of perpetrators of previous crimes iN THAT CONDO COMPLEX. That makes "watching" TM sad but reasonable. If old blonde women have committed the majority of crime in my neighborhood...of course. I as a stranger, fitting that description...will be watched more closely. Why should that be a federal crime of "profiling?" It's a natural human reaction to factual statistics.

As for the hoodie....that was a media dust-up.

"profiling" occurs normally in all humans. On another thread a poster relates that many AA do not report things to police because of distrust. In essence they "profile" the police in their area...based on things other police have done.

We are composed of responses to our particular enviorment.

stmarysmead said:

Great post JBean...and I love a good debate.

Here is my issue with your premise. GZ was reacting to the crime statistics of previous incidents when he chose to watch TM closer than he might have watched you. To me, this is common sense and if the majority of incidents in that condo complex involved teenage Black males...it is THEIR fault that other innocent young men are watched with more suspicion...NOT the fault of residents trying to keep safe. This a a multi-racial neighborhood of people working and trying to live in peace. They have rights to try to protect themselves. If descriptions of numerous criminals are similar...unfortunately, a stranger of THAT description WILL BE watched. I have no problem with that logic. Do you? Should the neighbors have followed old Chinese men to make it "fair?"

I was once "profiled" because I was "dressed up" and looked like a group of people going door to door prosletyzing. TM WOULD NOT have been watched by that police officier. But he had reason based on factual data and observation to watch me.

Had the convenience store been plaqued by thefts and incidents with young teenage Black males? If not, and I do not think this was the case...of course, he had ZERO reason to worry about anyone who looked like TM. Unfortunately, any "profiling" done to TM was the result of the descriptions of perpetrators of previous crimes iN THAT CONDO COMPLEX. That makes "watching" TM sad but reasonable. If old blonde women have committed the majority of crime in my neighborhood...of course. I as a stranger, fitting that description...will be watched more closely. Why should that be a federal crime of "profiling?" It's a natural human reaction to factual statistics.

As for the hoodie....that was a media dust-up.

Click to expand...

BBM

Weren't the crimes committed by young black males solved? I thought they were arrested?

stmarysmead said:

"profiling" occurs normally in all humans. On another thread a poster relates that many AA do not report things to police because of distrust. In essence they "profile" the police in their area...based on things other police have done.

We are composed of responses to our particular enviorment.

Click to expand...

And we know that the FBI often profiles killers by evidence they get from the victims in order to catch them. jmo

stmarysmead said:

Great post JBean...and I love a good debate.

Here is my issue with your premise. GZ was reacting to the crime statistics of previous incidents when he chose to watch TM closer than he might have watched you. To me, this is common sense and if the majority of incidents in that condo complex involved teenage Black males...it is THEIR fault that other innocent young men are watched with more suspicion...NOT the fault of residents trying to keep safe. This a a multi-racial neighborhood of people working and trying to live in peace. They have rights to try to protect themselves. If descriptions of numerous criminals are similar...unfortunately, a stranger of THAT description WILL BE watched. I have no problem with that logic. Do you? Should the neighbors have followed old Chinese men to make it "fair?"

I was once "profiled" because I was "dressed up" and looked like a group of people going door to door prosletyzing. TM WOULD NOT have been watched by that police officier. But he had reason based on factual data and observation to watch me.

Had the convenience store been plaqued by thefts and incidents with young teenage Black males? If not, and I do not think this was the case...of course, he had ZERO reason to worry about anyone who looked like TM. Unfortunately, any "profiling" done to TM was the result of the descriptions of perpetrators of previous crimes. That makes "watching" TM sad but reasonable. If old blonde women have committed the majority of crime in my neighborhood...of course. I as a stranger, fitting that description...will be watched more closely. Why should that be a federal crime of "profiling?" It's a natural human reaction to factual statistics.

As for the hoodie....that was a media dust-up.

Click to expand...

So I think we can agree that he was profiled and that is step 1 in the FBI charges,imo. They have to determine how he was 'watched and profiled" because the boy ended up dead. They may determine it was not a hate crime- I don't know-but they have got to investigate it and I don't understand the outrage at all. It's an investigation and I would be peeved if my son died under similar circumstances and FBI did not investigate.

I have 2 questions for everyone.

Do you think, and please be honest, if you had a 28 yo son (and I do) would you advise him to do everything that George did that night? I do not even mean with hindsight and knowing what we know, I mean in general would you tell your son to do exactly what George did?
All circumstances identical.


My next question is do you think in your heart of hearts that Trayvon just attacked George Zimmerman for no reason at all-out of the blue-completely unprovoked? Just saw George and started beating on him?

Dr.Fessel said:

BBM

Weren't the crimes committed by young black males solved? I thought they were arrested?

Click to expand...

But the effect of those crimes remain...in the same way that suspicion of police remains in the AA community even to those who have never experienced it themselves. The fact that the arrest of ONE Black teenager did not stop the NEXT, and the Next...from coming in and targeting that neighborhood...meant that the neighbors could not say "problem solved" with one. two, three arrests.

The problem continued. It is the fault of those who harrassed this neighborhood that TM was viewed with suspicion. Can anyone say that AA neghbors, particularly any who had break-ins...would not have "watched"this stranger in their area that night?