Be rational and logical, not emotional. So what you are saying is that a kid who did not even live in the community and was just visiting was a part of the established chain of burglaries in that neighborhood.

Now you're grasping for straws.

Again, merely reporting suspicious behavior and acting on one's expressions regarding suspicious behavior, WHILE on the phone with police are two different things.

Zimmerman was guilty of the latter.

You're not comprehending clear language. My basis for the case is the dangerous conduct that Zimmerman exemplified when he shot and killed Martin. The criminal profiling element is merely a supporting argument that logically reinforces the fact that Zimmerman acted irresponsibly and grossly in error when he left his vehicle to pursue a teenager that he mistakenly thought was a burglar.

When you were told by a police neighborhood watch representative not to, told by the dispatch that the police were only a few minutes away and then having to be reminded that pursuit was not necessary, it is wrong. It all adds up to dangerous and reckless conduct. Being armed amplifies his culpability.

Being on the losing end of a conflict that could have been avoided completely if one had stayed in their vehicle and let the police do their jobs is not an excuse to shoot anyone. Self defense flies out of the window when established provocation is an element in the case. And it is.


Flawed analysis yet again. Like I said earlier, taking race out of the case actually hurts Zimmerman even more because it means that he criminally profiled an innocent teenager that was walking down the street minding his own business without due cause, due process or the legal authority to do so.


If it comes up, I will. I'm just putting information out there for persons to read and make up their own minds.

Zimmerman was stating a fact. There have been a series of break-ins in the neighborhood. Were they done by blacks? I haven't seen the reports. Have you?

Again with this shit.
https://gfy.com/showpost.php?p=18882670&postcount=91

Zimmerman said Treyvon was black because the police dispatcher specifically asked him.

Then at 1m4s he confirms that the guy, which he previously said "looks black" is indeed black.

The problem with PROVING murder two is that it's being based on assumptions. Manslaughter would have been a better case to argue.

Here's another take on that for you to chew on
http://realclearpolitics.com/video/2...unethical.html

Then if you hold a permit to carry, you need to hand it in and give up any weapon that you own.

Are you serious that you believe that in a conflict a person who knows that they are armed with a weapon that can kill does not have a higher level of legal (and moral) accountability?

Some people keep saying that he "pursued and confronted". There is nothing on the 911 tape, no witnesses, nothing that would suggest this. To me, this is a key point in the incident. For someone to "observe from a safe distance" is not the same.[/QUOTE]Leaving his vehicle after Martin ran away is pursuit.

Done. Is that clear?

Confrontation means that both parties met at some point, correct? The girl on the phone with Trayvon stated that she specifically heard an exchange of words between the two men before the handset went dead.

Other witnesses also describe a struggle between the two men. That fits the description of a confrontation, correct?

Done. Is that clear?

I'm hardly grasping at anything. You are constantly attempting to form facts from speculation, and I am disproving your speculation. Everything you are saying is speculation.

Once again, the officer asked him if he was white, black or hispanic. zimmerman answered that he looks black, and later confirmed it clearly after he got a good look at him. That is not racial profiling. At no time on the phone did he say that the robberies were conducted by black people. He simply said "we've had some break ins in my neighborhood and there's this real suspicious guy". Once again, you are trying to form facts from speculation.

Acting irresponsibly is not grounds for a murder charge.... unless they can prove that his intend was to harm trayvon, which they cannot. Manslaughter? Sure. But murder? not hardly.

He's a civilian, not a trained officer. Police officers, military personnel and the like forget their training at some point or another when under a stressful situation. And when the officer on the phone told him he doesn't need to follow him, it sure as shit sounded like he stopped following him.

Once again, you are trying to form fact from speculation. The kid ran off and the officer asked him where he was headed. I doubt that ANYONE would have just stayed in the car. Also, you have not proven that zimmerman was the aggressor. There is no evidence one way or another as to whom initiated the conflict.


No it wouldn't. First and foremost, if race weren't the only point in the equation, then we wouldn't even be having this conversation because it probably wouldn't even have seen page 3 let alone become some national ordeal.


No, you are twisting just about everything with speculation and are attempting to present said speculation as fact.

The lawyers should definitely use his 911 call to prove he was following Martin and they would be crazy not to. But thats as far as it's useful to go with it in the trial. To establish that he felt some need to follow him.

Personally, I think the fact that he tied burglaries to blacks is what disrupts any usefullness of using the phrase racial profiling in the legal case. That falls under a person fitting the description of a known burglar. In other words you cant say that he wouldnt have said nearly the same things if it was that 7 foot redhead and there've been reports of tall redheads commiting burglaries. Whats the key phrase there? It's not his description, it's the actions tied to a person of that description.

I don't think it's wrong to talk about race at all. I just think the prosecution should not throw it out there as if he should be convicted for racial profiling. He obviously felt he should follow him and his "reasons" are right on the phone call. Once you imply he was racist, then you're going to get a slew of friends coming in saying he wasn't.

A person that is armed does not go around looking for arguments and fights. George did not do this at all. He followed correct procedure therefore his "blameworthiness" has not increased.

Observing from a safe distance in order to answer the 911 operator's questions of the description of the suspect, location, and direction is NOT the same as pursuing. He lost sight of Trayvon and was returning to his vehicle.

No, there is a difference between George confronting Trayvon and the other way around. George did not pursue nor confront Trayvon. Trayvon was the one to confront and assault George, who was returning to his vehicle.

Both of Zimmerman's friends AND his lawyer stated in their interviews that Zimmerman was reacting in frustration to the rash of burglaries in the neighborhood by BLACKS. Running into Martin was described as the "perfect storm" by one of the friends.

Of course the dispatcher asked him what Martin's race was. It only becomes relevant when listening to what he says after identifying Martin as black and then leaving his vehicle to act on his suspicions.

As implied in that video, the move to push the affidavit was just to get the indictment. The prosecutor will have another opportunity to put more information in.

It's interesting that they mention that there likely will be a plea bargain.

That is your opinion, but everything I have stated thus far can be traced back to evidence through the tapes or the interviews/


I'm repeating myself yet again.

I did not say that Zimmerman said that the break-ins were done by blacks. The additional information about the robberies came from the three separate interviews of Zimmerman's two friends and his lawyer.

If you doubt what I say then simply ask me where I got it from.

The problem at hand is that you do not know the definition of second degree murder and likely are applying principles of first degree murder to this case.

EXACTLY. Yet he proceeded to act like one without due cause or process.

Any reasonable person who was not armed would not be stupid enough to follow a complete stranger who ran away in the dark at night.

If you listened to several of the other calls, the dispatchers asked if the callers could go outside to see what was happening. NONE of them did and one flatly refused.

So the killing of a teenager by a man who mistakenly thought he was a criminal based on nothing but a description in the dark wouldn't make the news? How about adding to the fact that the police did not charge the man in the case initially and refused to for weeks? Do you think that it would make the national news then? I would definitely believe so.

Hearsay and speculation. Again.

It can also be argued that Zimmerman didn't know that Martin was black.

See? Zimmerman wasn't sure of Treyvon's skin color. "He looks black".

I can assume he wasn't certain. Then, later on when he has a better view he confirms that Treyvon is indeed black.

See how wonderful making assumptions is? You can make almost anything fit your desired outcome.

Again, Zimmerman's innocence or guilt will be determined by facts. The problem I see is that the prosecution is in my opinion overreaching with murder two. The evidence against Zimmerman, or should we say what we have been told, is circumstantial at best.

Even the police neighborhood watch representative stated that he did not follow procedure by initiating a pursuit. A procedure that she discussed with Zimmerman to merely observe, not follow.

Following someone is not pursuing them? :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Clearly Zimmerman pursued Martin further than where he could have been observed from his vehicle.

The standard that will be applied is whether a reasonable person, a civilian at that, would normally feel comfortable following someone at night who is suspicious enough to call 911 about. Knowing the risk of a confrontation would a reasonable person even get out of their vehicle?

So are you saying that Zimmerman's lawyer lied?

The facts are that he determined certainty of Martin's race within the first minute of the call, then proceeds to add personal and profane commentary in reference to Martin.

That is the important issue at hand. When he proceeds to refer to Martin as part of a group of "assholes", who "always get away" and "fucking punks", that is when anyone with some semblance of logic could see that Zimmerman had profiled Martin as a criminal for just walking down the street.

Zimmerman knows that he made a grave error. He probably will plea bargain his way out of this and serve a lesser sentence.

Okay, let's take the definition of murder two:
Zimmerman is in his gated neighborhood. He can assume a certain level of security. It's not like if he was walking around the worst neighborhood in the state. He sees an unknown person and decides to approach them.

How can that be considered a dangerous act? Specially if the person is an innocent, clean cut with nothing to hide upright citizen.

Did Zimmerman approach Martin with his gun drawn out? The facts up to now say no. Did he yell to Martin to stop or he'd shoot? Again, what we know up to now says no.

Now we get into determining Zimmerman's state of mind. Please try to prove how Zimmerman showed disregard for human life in approaching Martin.

I agree with the error. I think, with the little information that we have up to now is this:

Zimmerman sees Martin walking around. Martin sees Zimmerman and gets nervous. For some reason Martin runs away, Zimmerman chases him.

Zimmerman loses sight of Martin. Martin, feeling threatened attacks Zimmerman. Zimmerman freaks out and shoots Martin.

A horrible, tragic series of bad judgement calls and errors, both on Zimmerman and Treyvon's side.

What should DEFINITIVELY be investigated is why the initial incident was treated with such lightness by the police.

If the suspect goes around a building, so must you in order to "observe". You don't even hear him get out of his vehicle until the 911 operator starts asking questions about the suspect's location and where he was heading.

Absolutely not. Using the word "pursue" instead of "observe" is an indication of trying to persuade the public into thinking that there was an intent of confrontation. There was never any intent of confrontation therefore George was not "pursuing" Trayvon. He followed only to observe at a safe distance.

You using the depraved mind element of Murder 2. They wont approach it from that angle.

There are three typical situations that can constitute second degree murder:

A killing done impulsively without premeditation, but with malice aforethought
A killing that results from an act intended to cause serious bodily harm
A killing that results from an act that demonstrates the perpetrators depraved indifference to human life

The prosecutor is likely approaching the case from the first situation. This is where Zimmerman's use of profanity and the leaving of his vehicle while armed come in as factors, among other things.

Yes, and unfortunately Zimmerman will have to face some consequences for his actions.

No, it's not an opinion. It's actual fact because there is no factual evidence that supports anything you're saying. Which makes it pure speculation. You're just trying to present your speculation as fact when it's not.


And so am I

What was stated after the fact does not make it racially motivated. At the beginning of the call he wasn't even sure if the guy was black until he confirmed it later. That is a fact.

I don't care about what you say. You are entitled to your opinions and speculation... what I do care about though is you attempting to present said opinions and speculation as facts when they are not.

You know, it's funny. Every time you can't actually refute what I say, you make this play at my intelligence. It's cute.

2nd degree murder is, by definition, the same as 1st degree murder except it's not premeditated or planned in advance. The event that happened falls under neither category of murder. Manslaughter, possibly; but murder, hardly.

No, he proceeded to act like a neighborhood watchman, of which he was. And he only followed the guy because the police asked him where he went. it can and should be argued that this was his only reason for getting out of his car.


Once again, you make it sound like he was within arms reach when he wasn't. The guy ran off and zimmerman, while on the phone with the police and being asked by the police where he went, got out of his car and tried to follow him. When the police told him it wasn't necessary, he stopped following him - which of course can be argued but the sudden change in background noise on the phone call indicates he stopped following.

I didn't listen to the other calls but let me guess... they were asked to go out and see what was happening either a. while the conflict was taking place, or b. after a shot was fired. It makes absolute sense to say no for either.

It also would have made sense for zimmerman to stay in the car... but naturally, a guy running away isn't initially posed as a physical thread (my opinion), he was trying to assist the officer on the phone by keeping the guys location current (fact because the officer asked him where trayvon went), and as noted above, he didn't follow the guy that closely (could be viewed as opinion but considering the phone call it's safe to say that he wasn't within arms reach or even close considering it sounded like - by his comments of these assholes always get away - that he lost visual contact with trayvon).

Sure, it would make page 3 in the local and maybe state papers but it wouldn't be blown up the way this case has been if race wasn't involved. That is quite evident because of how the media lied and fabricated details of this case. The whole damn thing was made about race from the jump.

Also, just so you know, the police do not file charges, the district attorney does. Just thought you'd like to know.

Really now. At night? So you mean to tell me that the average person would get out of their vehicle at night to pursue someone who they called 911 on because they believe said person is a burglar. Here's a question: Do you think Zimmerman would have done that if he wasn't armed?

Pursuit is the deliberate act of following. And regardless of any intent of a confrontation (or not), a reasonable civilian would indeed consider the risk in following someone at night.

Zimmerman was reckless in carrying his pursuit of Martin and likely only felt safe enough to do it because he was armed. The prosecutor will highlight this.

I think you should just move on now lol.

Following someone is NOT the same as pursuing someone.

follow: to go or come after a person or thing in motion.

pursue: to follow in order to overtake, capture, kill, etc.; chase.

Note that none of the verbs in the definition of pursue are part of the definition of follow.

You need a dictionary

Watch the news and the case if it makes it to court before a plea deal is reached. The majority of things that I stated will be followed and put forward by the prosecutor. Some of the things I did state earlier about the case already have.

The 911 calls and my analysis of such are not speculation. They fit certain standards of evidence that can be used in a court by a prosecutor.

A neighborhood watchman while trying to assist the police most probably would.

Look at your own definition that you quoted.

Are you saying that pursuit is not a deliberate act of following? One that has a specific intent?

The next thing you'll probably try to nitpick on is my spelling.

:1orglaugh

Even when advised not to follow suspects by the police neighborhood watch rep?

That will come up in court as well by the way. He should have known better. Plus he was armed.

Of course he would, he's neighborhood watch. He's not the average person. Most people won't help a person that's getting beaten to death right in front of them. And again, he was NOT pursuing.

What will play the biggest part in the case is who the aggressor was. From all the evidence, it's very clear the aggressor was Trayvon. Throwing in race and whether or not who was armed is nothing but grasping at straws. And again, he was NOT pursuing.

A plea bargain would actually be in his best interest for safety reasons. If there is a plea bargain, I speculate that it'll be a pretty sweet deal for zimmerman that will essentially assure his safety while he is inside. Then a year or so later he gets released, after all this bullshit hype has calmed down. Given the option between freedom anddeath or a short prison term and life, I'd make a deal also.

Yeah man, you really have no idea how prosecutors work, or lawyers for that matter. The prosecutor will present the evidence, yes absolutely, but they will also do everything they can just short of lying through their teeth in order sway the jury. Not just in this case, in every case.

Your "analysis" is nothing but speculation. Just like the prosecutors analysis of evidence is speculation. If everything a prosecutor said was cold hard fact, then there would be no need for a jury really.

It's quite evident that as soon as the police told him "you don't have to do that", he stopped.

edit: misread

Umm, you are the one that said pursuing and following are the same thing when they absolutely are not.

Nitpicking. My work is done here.

Right, because using the correct wording for a very important link in the chain of events is nit picking.

Zimmerman FOLLOWED him in order to try and keep the police updated on his location. He did not PUSURE him with the intent of capturing, attacking or killing him.

It's not nitpicking. It's the KEY FACTOR to the case. If George pursued and confronted Trayvon he'd be guilty of being the aggressor.

Following to observe at a safe distance is NOT the same as pursuing.

Using your own words could it not be said at the very least that Zimmerman pursued Martin with the intent to try and keep the police updated on his location?

*shakes head*

No, because once again, that is not the definition of the word pursue. Stop trying to make words mean what you want them to mean.

You two are hilarious.

The fact of the matter is that Zimmerman PURSUED Martin with whatever intention he had at the time.

His frame of mind can be deduced from his two profane statements and he will thus be cross examined using those very statements in regards to why he referred to Martin as an "asshole who always gets away" (paraphrasing, before you two start nitpicking again) and a "fucking punk".

He pursued Martin while armed, got into a scuffle at some point and fired hi weapon when he began losing the fight.

He knows this and likely will plea deal

Don't forget his father hand delivered a statement to the news paper sin which he stated at no time did george follow martin, lol. Weird thing to do. Makes you wonder.

No, he did not. Once again you are trying to pass your opinion off as fact.

Zimmerman followed trayvon, he did not pursue him. That is the bottom line, proven as fact by the phone call between zimmerman and the police dispatch officer.

Interesting, especially when because Zimmerman admits to the dispatcher on the tape at 2:24 that he is following Martin.

Like when the Lakers win NBA title?
Come on, we all know it doesn't take much for them to start looting.

By the end of the call George didn't even know where Trayvon was. He never pursued Trayvon. Instead, he was returning to his vehicle when violently confronted and attacked.

Even while being attacked George didn't even lay a finger on Trayvon. There is evidence that Trayvon had no injuries whatsoever. Losing the fight? George wasn't even fighting.

George was screaming for help and people heard him. Not a single person came to help him. Trayvon's decision to continue bashing George's head into the ground gave right for George to shoot Trayvon.

Yeah he also said the same thing on foxnews, so I'm not sure if it's missing context but almost certainly is. You can hardly get a clear report in print or on tv, but yesterday I cut and pasted it in one of these threads. It was from the miami herald site and also had several witness accounts.

Zimmerman got out of his car at 2:10 of the call and continued to pursue Martin even after the dispatcher told him not to which was around 15 seconds later.

Again, he was less than 15 seconds away from his vehicle when he was advised not to pursue Martin, but he continued anyway.

And as for the details of how I derived this information, I'll keep that to myself for now. :winkwink:

Zimmerman pursued Martin. Period.