Child killed by Neighborhood Watch captain while walking home

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The governor had the state attorney step down and appointed an independent state attorney. So governor felt that the SA was bias and failing to perform his duties in this case. Wow.

Wow is right... wow to where youre getting your news or how you interpret the news.

On Thursday, Seminole County State Attorney Norman R. Wolfinger recused himself from the case, sending a letter to Scott requesting that another prosecutor be assigned. “In the interest of the public safety of the citizens of Seminole County and to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest, I would respectfully request the executive assignment of another state attorney for the investigation and any prosecution arising from the circumstances surrounding the death of Trayvon B. Martin,” Wolfinger said in a statement.

And why do you think the state attorney waited until after meeting with the governor that he realized there might be a conflict of interest. He did not realize there was a conflict before He was not worried about the appearance of impropriety until well after meeting with the governor. You can dress it up any way you want. The man was waiting to convene a grand jury three weeks from now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

He's a teenager...so everyone can act like a teenager but the kid who guy killed? Have you never been young?? Kids take stupid pics. Is it ok to rape young girls who dress slutty?? NO!!! So why should it be ok to shoot a teenage kid who's being a kid??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The photo on top is of Trayvon Benjamin Martin, who was killed by George Zimmerman.

The bottom photo is not- the boy's name apparently is also Trayvon Martin, and he seems to be a boy from Georgia. That photo was taken from this Facebook page. http://www.facebook.com/people/Trayvon-Martin/100001791912868

You can see another photo of the boy in the bottom photo on his Facebook page. He looks nothing like the Trayvon who was killed in Florida. Except for one way, which I suppose is all that matters to the people who are so eager to slander a dead teen that they're trying to pass off other people's photos as being of him...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:well, unfortunately, I'm guessing 90% of the robberies in that neighborhood were committed by black teens wearing hoodies. that is the unfortunate reality. so while it means nothing with respect to guilt or innocence, it was not totally unreasonable for Z to think the victim was up to no good. Right?

Which is it? You're guessing, or it's reality?

jesus, look at the FBI crime statistics for violent crime in Florida and get back to me. it sucks, but burying your head in the sand will not help.

[Anonymous]

Not sure if anyone's mentioned it but the killer looks Hispanic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:well, unfortunately, I'm guessing 90% of the robberies in that neighborhood were committed by black teens wearing hoodies. that is the unfortunate reality. so while it means nothing with respect to guilt or innocence, it was not totally unreasonable for Z to think the victim was up to no good. Right?

Which is it? You're guessing, or it's reality?

jesus, look at the FBI crime statistics for violent crime in Florida and get back to me. it sucks, but burying your head in the sand will not help.

I'm not talking about crime statistics for Florida in general. I'm asking you to clarify- first you state you're "guessing" and then you say it's reality. Just be clearer about which it is that you mean.

[Anonymous]

I really do not see what the people posting these photos are trying to suggest. He's a teenager!! This is what they do- push the boundaries of self expression. Does that mean they deserve to be hunted down and shot??

[Anonymous]

The attitudes of the apologists for GZ on this thread are not only scary, but truly indicate how something like this could have happened in the first place. By posting some of the pics, are you saying that Trayvon's crime was not being black, but ACTING black? And what about the Stand Your Ground law? Is the only reason this law cannot be applied to T is because he's DEAD? Z persued T after the police suggested he not do so. I don't know about you, but even I was the real Neighborhood Watch captain, I would probably listen to the police, whether they suggested or ordered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:well, unfortunately, I'm guessing 90% of the robberies in that neighborhood were committed by black teens wearing hoodies. that is the unfortunate reality. so while it means nothing with respect to guilt or innocence, it was not totally unreasonable for Z to think the victim was up to no good. Right?

Which is it? You're guessing, or it's reality?

jesus, look at the FBI crime statistics for violent crime in Florida and get back to me. it sucks, but burying your head in the sand will not help.

LOL, crime statistics list what the perpetrators are wearing? How about YOU give us the crime statistics. You're the one "guessing" here. So back it up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are those gold teeth?

Yes, they're gold teeth, tacky, but so what:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grill_%28jewelry%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_teeth

My beloved Grandma who grew up in South Carolina had roughly 4-6 gold inlaid front teeth on her bottom row. She wasn't into hip hop, just gospel music and a little jazz. She was making a fashion statement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not sure if anyone's mentioned it but the killer looks Hispanic.

Yes, he does. For whatever it's worth, he self identifies as white.

[Anonymous]

...yeah, when its CONVENIENT!!!!!


SICKENING.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Actually, under the scenario presented, it would likely come out as self defense. If Z chased T and then T attacted, such that Z thought he was in danger, the self defense doctrine would apply. This is exactly why I think that a lot of the outrage is missplaced. The travesty is that the issue was not INVESTIGATED and that Z was not ARRESTED. It could theoretically turn out that he is not convicted. And if so, I would be fine with that. But he should still be put through the process.

This is exactly right. The lack of an investigation, combined with the (absurd, in my opinion) Stand Your Ground law could very well lead to an aquittal (or even no charged being filed).

To follow up, the key (well, one of them) is whether Zimmerman was acting unlawfully - if he was, the defense is unavailable.

Whew. Thanks for correcting that ! For a minute I thought I must have been wrong my whole crim law class.

That's right folks you can't chase somebody down and then claim self defense when they whoop your ass... Well you can claim it - but it probably will not fly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not sure if anyone's mentioned it but the killer looks Hispanic.

This is another pic of Zimmerman. Looks white to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Actually, under the scenario presented, it would likely come out as self defense. If Z chased T and then T attacted, such that Z thought he was in danger, the self defense doctrine would apply. This is exactly why I think that a lot of the outrage is missplaced. The travesty is that the issue was not INVESTIGATED and that Z was not ARRESTED. It could theoretically turn out that he is not convicted. And if so, I would be fine with that. But he should still be put through the process.

This is exactly right. The lack of an investigation, combined with the (absurd, in my opinion) Stand Your Ground law could very well lead to an aquittal (or even no charged being filed).

To follow up, the key (well, one of them) is whether Zimmerman was acting unlawfully - if he was, the defense is unavailable.

Whew. Thanks for correcting that ! For a minute I thought I must have been wrong my whole crim law class.

That's right folks you can't chase somebody down and then claim self defense when they whoop your ass... Well you can claim it - but it probably will not fly.

Florida's aggressor statute appears to disagree with your interpretation. Moreover, you misunderstand my point - or rather, you assume that Z chasing T was unlawful. That's not clear to me. I mean, if T noticed Z watching/following him, started walking fast/running away, and Z started chasing him, exactly what law would Z have broken? Taken a step further, T gets tired, stops, Z catches up to him, words are exchanged - at that point, have any laws been broken? Doesn't it all turn on who struck first? And unfortunately, the only living witness to that is Z, at least as far as I'm aware. I personally believe Z is responsible for the whole altercation, and likely took the first swing, and I think most other people do as well, but that doesn't really matter. The Stand Your Ground law, combined with Florida's aggressor statute and the lack of eyewitnesses at critical times in the altercation, really make this a mess (as far as establishing to the legally required level of proof what happened - apart from that it's a tragedy and a travesty).