matt770 Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 from the comments section in one of the above links_ "Al and Jessie could do more for race relation improvement if they would show up at events such as the funeral for the white, female, police officer that was gunned down by a young black man last month, in Florida, as she approached his car." While I won't give my thoughts here on Al and Jesse, I do wonder why I have'nt seen this story of this female police officer on the news. Has anyone? It would be very racist of the news organizations to report such a story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 was he told this by a police officer or some fat dude that sits on his ass eating cheetos answering phones? Ummm he called 911. I don't think he had time to Skype with him before drawing down on the unarmed guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 (edited) Ummm he called 911. I don't think he had time to Skype with him before drawing down on the unarmed guy The unarmed guy who by witness accounts punched him in the nose and banged his head of the curb? I"ll prefer to wait for the facts, you obviously don't. I bet you thought the Duke lacrosse team should burn in hell too.. edit: I will add that if the facts show beyond a resonable doubt that this kid was murdered then I hope Zimmerman rots in hell Edited March 27, 2012 by HowboutthemCowboys Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEC=UGA Posted March 27, 2012 Author Share Posted March 27, 2012 The unarmed guy who by witness accounts punched him in the nose and banged his head of the curb? I"ll prefer to wait for the facts, you obviously don't. I bet you thought the Duke lacrosse team should burn in hell too.. 3 questions.... Did Zimmerman get out of his car and follow the kid? Did Zimmerman take his pistol with him? Do you honestly believe that Zimmerman simply walked up to the kid and the kid just started beating his ass? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 Me thinks that when you confront someone and ask them if they have a problem (Martin talking to Zimmerman) and you respond back no. Then you reply " You Do Now" (martin talking to Zimmerman again). Then you proceed to assult that person and he has a gun. Result is that you get shot. You will find that when this is all said and done that Martin was looking for Zimmerman and not the other way around. Zimmerman last reply was that he lost him. At least thats what the White Hispanic said. So, Martin allegedly asked Zimmerman if he had a problem and Zimmerman allegedly said "no". Interesting. Now, I'm not a gun owner, so this may be out of my area. But, does one typically grab their gun and approach someone that they don't "have a problem" with? I would think, were I a gun owner, that if I was to break out my gun, it would be because, at very least, "I had a problem" with someone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
electricrelish Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 Wasn't he told by the cops to NOT follow him on the 911 transcripts? If he didn't obey the cops, then everything afterward is on his head, IMO It doesn't matter that he was instructed not to follow him by the 911 operator. He's under no legal obligation to follow that instruction as far as I know; however, I do see the point of not him not listening to sound advice and using poor judgement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 3 questions.... Did Zimmerman get out of his car and follow the kid? Did Zimmerman take his pistol with him? Do you honestly believe that Zimmerman simply walked up to the kid and the kid just started beating his ass? sounds like it sounds like it I have no clue and neither do you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 It doesn't matter that he was instructed not to follow him by the 911 operator. He's under no legal obligation to follow that instruction as far as I know; however, I do see the point of not him not listening to sound advice and using poor judgement. This. I've met a few 991 operators. They were'nt police officers. Did the 911 operator tell him " I don't think it'd be a good idea to follow him"? " Sir, I advise you not to follow him"? " Sir, if you follow him you'll be in violation of the law"? Noone knows exactly what he was told or by whom, at least to my knowledge. Well except BP I guess.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 (edited) So, Martin allegedly asked Zimmerman if he had a problem and Zimmerman allegedly said "no". Interesting. Now, I'm not a gun owner, so this may be out of my area. But, does one typically grab their gun and approach someone that they don't "have a problem" with? I would think, were I a gun owner, that if I was to break out my gun, it would be because, at very least, "I had a problem" with someone. Well, if his version of the events is true, then it was not that he had a "problem" then, it was once the kid started assaulting him, where there are witnesses that said he was being beaten and one said Zimmerman asked him for help, before he went inside and the shooting happened. If that was the case, then the "problem" only happened once it became a matter of "self-defense"; However, I tend to agree with SEC that I really don't buy that the kid just came up and started beating his ass unprovoked.... But IMO, there are more facts that we need to come out before we can start tearing apart the accounts of the event. Edited March 27, 2012 by delusions of granduer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 Well, if his version of the events is true, then it was not that he had a "problem" then, it was once the kid started assaulting him, where there are witnesses that said he was being beaten and one said Zimmerman asked him for help, before he went inside and the shooting happened. If that was the case, then the "problem" only happened once it became a matter of "self-defense"; However, I tend to agree with SEC that I really don't buy that the kid just came up and started beating his ass unprovoked.... But IMO, there are more facts that we need to come out before we can start tearing apart the accounts of the event. My point is, Zimmerman seemingly "had a problem" with the kid the minute he saw him. Which is why he called the cops, grabbed his gun, and followed the kid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEC=UGA Posted March 27, 2012 Author Share Posted March 27, 2012 Well, if his version of the events is true, then it was not that he had a "problem" then, it was once the kid started assaulting him, where there are witnesses that said he was being beaten and one said Zimmerman asked him for help, before he went inside and the shooting happened. If that was the case, then the "problem" only happened once it became a matter of "self-defense"; However, I tend to agree with SEC that I really don't buy that the kid just came up and started beating his ass unprovoked.... But IMO, there are more facts that we need to come out before we can start tearing apart the accounts of the event. And tragically therein rests the problem... Not a single living person saw how this started. There are conflicting reports as to the scenario that played out and seemingly people who "witnessed" it have changed their story. We know that Trayvon was on the phone with some girl. She has stated that Trayvon was nervous that someone was following him. She also claims that she heard a scuffle start and then the phone disconnected. This story is corroborated by phone records that show the call ended 5 minutes prior to police getting there. So, it would seem that Trayvon was walking and was somehow confronted by an individual causing him to either hang up or drop his phone in such a manner causing it to hang up (Being grabbed from behind, possibly. Tackled?) You have the report from a person in the neighborhood who initially said that Zimmerman was on top of the kid and then changed his story stating that the kid was on top of Zimmerman. In all likelihood, both parts are true. You have a report that states the homicide investigator filed a report with the DA seeking to charge Zimmerman with manslaughter because Zimmerman's story didn't ring true. It was declined for lack of evidence. It also seems logical to me that the kid may have been defending himself against some 28 year old, 200+ LB man that came at him in a hostile manner. I know one ting for a fact and that is enough to convince me that Zimmerman is at fault... He got out of his car, with a pistol and confronted the kid. I will surmise another thing, Zimmerman didn't nicely walk up to the kid and simply say: "Hey, one second, I'm George, I'm on neighborhood watch patrol and would like to verify who you are and who you are staying with. You have a minute..." Something he could easily have done from the safe confines of his car with his pistola in his hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEC=UGA Posted March 27, 2012 Author Share Posted March 27, 2012 At the very least, this thing has man slaughter or negligent homicide written all over it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delusions of grandeur Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 (edited) My point is, Zimmerman seemingly "had a problem" with the kid the minute he saw him. Which is why he called the cops, grabbed his gun, and followed the kid. Ah gotcha... All I was saying is that according to his story, the "problem" (I assumed you meant the shooting), didn't happen until, he says, he stopped following the kid, but the kid then confronted/initiated him at his car. If that's the truth (which I'm very skeptical it is), then there is nothing unlawful about being armed or following someone until you call the police, nor am I sure that he was required to desist following the kid. The problem to me is whether he was the one who initiated contact (whether verbal or physical) with the kid first, which if so, I think should be at least manslaughter, when he in no way should have confronted the kid. That's still what I want to know, because I just don't see much wrongdoing in him being armed, suspicious, and following a kid, and then only using deadly force after the kid provoked a fight and he was being beaten. It may not be classy, but I think it's two different actions, unless there's something I'm missing here that this has to do with anything more than whether he initiated contact or not. (ETA: and again, in case this is taken the wrong way, I do think Zimmerman's story is a load of crap.) Edited March 27, 2012 by delusions of granduer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 At the very least, this thing has man slaughter or negligent homicide written all over it. Maybe, maybe not. You forming this opinion from what you've been fed by our nation's media is disturbing to me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 This. I've met a few 991 operators. They were'nt police officers. Did the 911 operator tell him " I don't think it'd be a good idea to follow him"? " Sir, I advise you not to follow him"? " Sir, if you follow him you'll be in violation of the law"? Noone knows exactly what he was told or by whom, at least to my knowledge. Well except BP I guess.. Pretty sure the 911 operator said not to follow him. Pretty sure that is public record and has been made public Pretty sure you started in with character assassinations of the freakin 911 call person Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 Maybe, maybe not. You forming this opinion from what you've been fed by our nation's media is disturbing to me An unarmed man was killed by a man with a gun. The man with the gun was following the unarmed man after being told not to by a 911 operator So after taking media bias out, can you see why people think he should be charged with involuntary manslaughter at least? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
electricrelish Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 (edited) This. I've met a few 991 operators. They were'nt police officers. Did the 911 operator tell him " I don't think it'd be a good idea to follow him"? " Sir, I advise you not to follow him"? " Sir, if you follow him you'll be in violation of the law"? Noone knows exactly what he was told or by whom, at least to my knowledge. Well except BP I guess.. The 911 call was recorded. You can listen to it here or read the unofficial transcript. Unofficial meaning someone listened to it and wrote down what they believe they heard, but it's not a transcript that's been authorized as the official transcript. Here's the exchange between the 911 dispatcher and George Zimmerman regarding him following Trayvon Martin. 911 dispatcher: Are you following him? [2:24] Zimmerman: Yeah. [2:25] 911 dispatcher: OK. We don’t need you to do that. [2:26] Zimmerman: OK. [2:28] Edited March 27, 2012 by electricrelish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted March 27, 2012 Share Posted March 27, 2012 (edited) The 911 call was recorded. You can listen to it here or read the unofficial transcript. Unofficial meaning someone listened to it and wrote down what they believe they heard, but it's not a transcript that's been authorized as the official transcript. Here's the exchange between the 911 dispatcher and George Zimmerman regarding him following Trayvon Martin. 911 dispatcher: Are you following him? [2:24] Zimmerman: Yeah. [2:25] 911 dispatcher: OK. We don’t need you to do that. [2:26] Zimmerman: OK. [2:28] Zimmerman mumbles "Ok, but I'm doing it anyway." Seems he was looking for a fight. As I said before I think we can all picture the confrontation. And Martin even getting upset at the guy for questioning him. Or accusing him of doing something wrong. Maybe Martin even calls him some names. But I have a hard time picturing Martin attacking him first. We'll see what facts come out. But hearing now (for the first time) that an investigator didn't believe him and wanted to file charges doesn't pass the smell test that Zimmerman was totally honest. He initiated the whole thing, then ended it. Hard to see where he isn't at fault (but then their crazy "don't back down law" in Florida sounds like its meant to defend people for using deadly force when they simply feel threatened by another person. Edited March 27, 2012 by stevegrab Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 Pretty sure the 911 operator said not to follow him. Pretty sure that is public record and has been made public Pretty sure you started in with character assassinations of the freakin 911 call person Looks like they said "Ok, we don't need you to do that". He broke no laws according to that An unarmed man was killed by a man with a gun. The man with the gun was following the unarmed man after being told not to by a 911 operator So after taking media bias out, can you see why people think he should be charged with involuntary manslaughter at least? I don't see how people can think he should be charged with anything at this time. It's not my job to charge him with a crime. I don't base my feelings on what Fox news or the Today Show or Al Sharpton wants me to believe. Frankly I have no idea whether he's guilty of a crime or not. Now again I ask you, and be honest, you had the Duke Lacrosse team dead to rights when that story first broke did'nt you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clubfoothead Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 The unarmed guy who by witness accounts punched him in the nose and banged his head of the curb? For some reason, that kid was fighting for his life. Oh, that's right... he was being stalked by a dude with a gun, who came at him and eventually killed him. Turns out to be a pretty good call on the part of the corpse. Asking what laws Zimmerman broke is silly. How about telling me what law the dead kid broke. Nobody is alleging the kid broke any at all. Zimmerman should go to jail because he killed an unarmed kid for the crime of walking down the street. You have to be right if you are going to shoot and kill kids. You have to be,and Zimmerman wasn't. If that is not a crime in Florida, then Florida is f*cking stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 Looks like they said "Ok, we don't need you to do that". He broke no laws according to that I don't see how people can think he should be charged with anything at this time. It's not my job to charge him with a crime. I don't base my feelings on what Fox news or the Today Show or Al Sharpton wants me to believe. Frankly I have no idea whether he's guilty of a crime or not. Now again I ask you, and be honest, you had the Duke Lacrosse team dead to rights when that story first broke did'nt you? Hopefully you aren't too dumb to know the difference between being charged with a crime and being found guilty of a crime. But I doubt it based on your posts in this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wiegie Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 Hopefully you aren't too dumb to know the difference between being charged with a crime and being found guilty of a crime. Let's be clear on one point though, if the prosecutor doesn't think there is a reasonable chance of the person being found guilty of a crime, then it makes a whole lot of sense to not charge the person with anything. (If for no other reason than charging a person too early would result in a weak trial and if evidence later came out that made the case a whole lot stronger, the prosecutor wouldn't be able to go back after the person due to the probition on double-jeopardy.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whomper Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 I read on FB that Spike Lee tweeted what he thought was Zimmermans address and it turned out to be an incorrect address. Now the people at the address he gave had to temporarily move out due to being harrased because of this Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HowboutthemCowboys Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 Hopefully you aren't too dumb to know the difference between being charged with a crime and being found guilty of a crime. I may do some dumb things at times, but I'm smart enough to not spew all over the internet that this guy's guilty off of what I've read on the internet and seen on tv. Now, one more time, you thought Duke's lacrosse team was guilty as hell when that story broke too did'nt you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted March 28, 2012 Share Posted March 28, 2012 Possible outcomes: 1) They never charge Zimmerman with anything... black people riot. 2) They charge Zimmerman with something, but he is either acquitted or receives a slap on the wrist... black people riot. 3) They charge and convict Zimmerman, and he gets multiple years in prison... black people kill Zimmerman in prison. 4) Spike Lee and the Black Panthers find and kill Zimmerman. Anything else I may have missed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.