George Zimmerman to be charged in Trayvon Martin shooting, official says

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
It doesn't matter that 911 operators aren't police officers, they are trained to deal with situations like this, they were right in telling Zimmerman that he needed to stay put and leave Trayvon to the real police officers, but Zimmerman wanted to be a police officer himself.

It does matter, because they are nothing but call center reps. They are not in any position of authority to give lawful orders. That matters a great deal when people say he "disobeyed an order". They simply made a suggestion, and I don't disagree with that suggestion but he broke no law, nor disobeyed any order.

Zimmerman was the one who claimed that he was attacked first, this is only his claim alone. We don't know who initiated the attack first, but even if it was Trayvon, possibly he felt threatened by the fact that he was being followed by a man in the middle of the night, maybe he saw the gun and thought he was in danger, maybe Zimmerman shouted verbal threats to him, it goes both ways. In the end, as evident from the audio tape, Trayvon was not the one that started instigated the confrontation. He may have possibly been the one to physically attack first, but this is something only Trayvon and Zimmerman will know.

If he was the one to physically attack first, and if he did get on top of a weaker Zimmerman and start bashing his skull into the ground, Zimmerman was acting in self defense from that point. If Trayvon felt he was in danger, yet had time to talk to his girlfriend, he had time to call 9-1-1. He could have asked why he was following him and they may have cleared up the misunderstanding, instead of "you got a problem?" and start swinging. As long as we're discussing what Zimmerman should and shouldn't have done, we can have the same discussion about Trayvon. To me it seems clear that both acted stupidly, and both turned the situation into a life and death struggle.

So because Trayvon may have been an angry teen, he deserved to be shot? Is this your reasoning? Because this certainly will not help Zimmerman in court.

As usual, you resort to asinine comments like this. You know damn well that's not what I was saying. I was clearly referring to how the media has painted the situation, as Trayvon being a sweet innocent boy. He had anger issues, as well as clear criminal behavior. He didn't "deserve" to die, but neither did Zimmerman. And I don't think Zimmerman's intent was to kill him, just to stop the beating. If the shot had wounded Trayvon and he stopped bashing his head into the ground, I believe Zimmerman would not have shot him again to finish him off. That's the big difference between say manslaughter and murder. There has to be intent to kill, and I don't think they're gonna prove that. If Trayvon was the one who initiated the physical confrontation, he was just as responsible for his death as Zimmerman. After how many bashes against the ground did Zimmerman have the right to determine his life was in danger from the raging football player on top of him? What's the number? Or should he just have let himself be killed or rendered brain dead?

reply to post by 27jd
Good post.

If the shot had wounded Trayvon and he stopped bashing his head into the ground, I believe Zimmerman would not have shot him again to finish him off. That's the big difference between say manslaughter and murder.

Technically, I believe that they have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman had 'a depraved indifference' towards Trayvon Martin's life, in order to get a second degree murder conviction.
My guess would be that they will not get a conviction on that charge, but may find that manslaughter occurred.

Originally posted by 27jd

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
It doesn't matter that 911 operators aren't police officers, they are trained to deal with situations like this, they were right in telling Zimmerman that he needed to stay put and leave Trayvon to the real police officers, but Zimmerman wanted to be a police officer himself.

It does matter, because they are nothing but call center reps. They are not in any position of authority to give lawful orders. That matters a great deal when people say he "disobeyed an order". They simply made a suggestion, and I don't disagree with that suggestion but he broke no law, nor disobeyed any order.

Zimmerman was the one who claimed that he was attacked first, this is only his claim alone. We don't know who initiated the attack first, but even if it was Trayvon, possibly he felt threatened by the fact that he was being followed by a man in the middle of the night, maybe he saw the gun and thought he was in danger, maybe Zimmerman shouted verbal threats to him, it goes both ways. In the end, as evident from the audio tape, Trayvon was not the one that started instigated the confrontation. He may have possibly been the one to physically attack first, but this is something only Trayvon and Zimmerman will know.

If he was the one to physically attack first, and if he did get on top of a weaker Zimmerman and start bashing his skull into the ground, Zimmerman was acting in self defense from that point. If Trayvon felt he was in danger, yet had time to talk to his girlfriend, he had time to call 9-1-1. He could have asked why he was following him and they may have cleared up the misunderstanding, instead of "you got a problem?" and start swinging. As long as we're discussing what Zimmerman should and shouldn't have done, we can have the same discussion about Trayvon. To me it seems clear that both acted stupidly, and both turned the situation into a life and death struggle.

So because Trayvon may have been an angry teen, he deserved to be shot? Is this your reasoning? Because this certainly will not help Zimmerman in court.

As usual, you resort to asinine comments like this. You know damn well that's not what I was saying. I was clearly referring to how the media has painted the situation, as Trayvon being a sweet innocent boy. He had anger issues, as well as clear criminal behavior. He didn't "deserve" to die, but neither did Zimmerman. And I don't think Zimmerman's intent was to kill him, just to stop the beating. If the shot had wounded Trayvon and he stopped bashing his head into the ground, I believe Zimmerman would not have shot him again to finish him off. That's the big difference between say manslaughter and murder. There has to be intent to kill, and I don't think they're gonna prove that. If Trayvon was the one who initiated the physical confrontation, he was just as responsible for his death as Zimmerman. After how many bashes against the ground did Zimmerman have the right to determine his life was in danger from the raging football player on top of him? What's the number? Or should he just have let himself be killed or rendered brain dead?

edit on 12-4-2012 by 27jd because: (no reason given)

Ahhh it's posts like yours that make me feel that all is not lost on ATS. Totally agree with every word. Too much has been speculated over this case but there are two people who know what happened, one of them is dead, so its about finding out the facts and piecing them together, which will mostly revolve around finding holes in Zimmermans claims and story.
Once the media gets involved, all can be lost very quickly. Take over here with the apparent racist murder of Stephen Lawrence, two guys have gone to jail on nothing evidence, they were definately there and were in the gang, but the evidence they had for murder was nothing, it was the media that got them the conviction. Nobody speaks about Lawrence's mate unable to identify any of them at the time, witnesses speaking of a sixth guy with blonde hair holding the knife, but never being brought in or even the fact that this gang attacked whites galore prior to the murder. The media is massively powerful and many people hold on to every word said, especially if it supports their cause.
I think Zimmerman goes to jail, but it will be on nothing evidence and based on public outcry rather than factual evidence.

people just dont understand, its not about being white, black, or yellow. its all about the culture you grow up in... doesnt take a genius to figure that out...

reply to post by Libertygal

You look absolutely brilliant posting this when just a couple posts above yours and several times throughout the thread it was pointed out he was not "on duty" that night, then turn around and call people stupid.

Your are welcome, was not aware something so simple could amuse somebody so much. Did you stop to think, even for a moment, that it took time for me to formulate my post, maybe I even was away from the keyboard for a little while and did not see those, that they may have been posted in that time? Maybe I was replying to an earlier post and had not seen them yet?

Really, I am glad I could help you out, but maybe you should talk to a professional about that problem.

reply to post by anon72


I am still very confused as to where to stand on this case

reply to post by votan


That is good, it means you dont have all the facts yet and reserve the right to decide either way till you know more, if only more people would think this way, this would not be such a big deal right now. Emotion has taken over

There is no way they will get murder, manslaughter maybe. I think it will be not guilty personally but this is only by what evidence is now known to us.

Originally posted by sting130u
Ok, I am confused on why this is about race? Why is everyone making a big fuss about race? On which end, anyways? Zimmermans or the medias?

It's not as though Zimmerman wouldn't have killed him had he learned that he was hispanic, or white, or asian. I don't think color would have changed the outcome of this situation.

And what happened to innocent until proven guilty? The courts need to their job, and we need to support our crappy justice system.

It's about race on the end that black residents of Sanford, FL have a history of coming up on the bottom due to corruption or negligence.

Originally posted by Libertygal
reply to post by DZAG Wright

 

Excellent. Only error is, he wasn't "on duty". Zimmerman was going to the grocery store. (you said stop me when I'm wrong or something heheheh)

Other than that yep, pretty straight up from what mostly can be discerned.

No one ever made any argument about there being an investigation in this thread? So uhm, whats the point again? Good outline of events though!

edit on 12-4-2012 by Libertygal because: (no reason given)

Got tired of typing or I wouldn't have cut it short.

My point is that with out bias there is NO WAY anyone could defend Zimmerman. By our very nature and common sense, we should ascertain that since Trayvon was unarmed, WHERE did the need to shoot him enter the equation?

To go the other route...and jump to conclusions that "Trayvon must have done ???" shows some type of bias. Why is that happening? If we remove the faces and race of both gentleman and have just the list I provided...any normal person would want an extensive investigation.

I'll say again...A armed adult found it necessary to shoot a unarmed teen...nothing more should need be said.

And if the stink hadn't been raised, this incident was going to be swept under the rug as other Sanford incidents had been.

Originally posted by votan
reply to post by anon72

 

I am still very confused as to where to stand on this case

Why not join it on the sidelines with me. Let the court sort it out when actual evidence is presented (such as gunpowder residue location on Trev, etc).

What happened is simple...Some dude seen some black youth in a gated community that he didn't think fit..he followed, confronted, and the rest is up for the courts to decide...
The only solid opinion I have at the moment is racial profiling is bad..and Zimm is probably regretting becoming overly concerned about some black dude in a hoodie in his community...

Besides, what a stupid concept anyhow..if there is trouble, its not some single dude wandering around a neighborhood...its a suspicious van circling slowly around the neighborhood looking for a good house to hit. At worse, the single dude wandering around is selling something to someone, and though possibly illegal, its not really anyones business (note: Trev was not selling anything..unless he is the local skittles dealer..just saying in general)

But ya, comfy on the sidelines...I was on the sidelines of the Casey Anthony case also...and I called it correct when I was able to objectively look at the evidence presented...once you become emotionally invested in either side, you quickly lose your ability to reason no matter which side your on...then its a crusify or martyr mentality verses logical understanding.

Originally posted by Wiz4769
There is no way they will get murder, manslaughter maybe. I think it will be not guilty personally but this is only by what evidence is now known to us.

I think it may be plea bargained down to MS also actually, just going on the evidence presented.
The guy is in trouble, but I am hard pressed to believe this was a old school "lynching". 10 years, suspended sentence (or like a year in the pokey and probation). Juist a wild guess.

Originally posted by EPH612
reply to post by anon72

 

I hate how apparently if you kill a young black man in self-defense (and even have injuries to show it) you get called a racist. Yes, it's unfortunate. Yes, I feel for the kid's parents. But sending Zimmerman to prison isn't "justice". What happened was terrible, but it doesn't make him a racist and I think the prosecution has very little with which to make a case. Zimmerman's lawyers have plenty of evidence to support his accounts of self-defense. If Zimmerman ultimately DOES get convicted, I'm guessing it'll probably all be circumstantial evidence and he'd only be convicted because the prosecution inflamed the jury.

And here's the problem: How can any unbiased person come to the conclusion that it was self defense? How does a armed adult vs a unarmed teen to you equal self-defense...are you paraplegic?

reply to post by 27jd


How was a grown man weaker than a 17 year old kid, and the kid playing football means nothing...

My point is that with out bias there is NO WAY anyone could defend Zimmerman. By our very nature and common sense, we should ascertain that since Trayvon was unarmed, WHERE did the need to shoot him enter the equation? ...
To go the other route...and jump to conclusions that "Trayvon must have done ???" shows some type of bias. .

Actually you are showing bias here. Your conclusion is based upon spin and hype from the MSM. People assuming Martin did something wrong are jumping to conclusions ... but for you to make a blanket statement that Zimmerman must be wrong because Martin was unarmed .. that's also jumping to conclusions. Unarmed people jump others all the time. Armed or not. We don't know if Martin was aware that Zimmerman was armed. We don't know anything. Heck .. even Martins mother today said that she thought the whole thing was an accident.

Bottom line ... we do not know what happened. The trial will be the only place to find out.

reply to post by DZAG Wright


Stop throwing around the word unbiased...cause you sure as hell are not.

You were not there, he did not know he was not armed, for all you know Trayvon reached in his pocket like he was armed, I have seen this done before, a bluff to get out of a situation, or reached for his phone. You dont have time to think for too long, if you do you might just die...its real easy to look at it after the point in your cushy computer chair, but when your in an actual fight or flight situation, you have no clue and instincts kick in. You can kill with just hands, quite easily. No weapon is needed. His age is 17, but he was bigger than Zimmerman. But this doesnt even matter as size does not always matter, I know some light weight MMA fighters that are 5ft and 120lbs that could kill you or hurt you badly and quickly. So with what is known so far, an unbiased would want more info and some questions need to be answered, but in no way can you consider Zimmerman guilty of murder, that is emotion and bias.

reply to post by DZAG Wright


Trayvon was a 6 foot 2" 17 year old "child" who played american football

Originally posted by DZAG Wright
reply to post by 27jd

 

How was a grown man weaker than a 17 year old kid, and the kid playing football means nothing...

Sorry, but this made me chuckle.

I have known quite a few 'grown' men that are completely out of shape. Being 'grown' does not equate with being strong. It also has nothing to do with being fast or flexible.

Strong, fast and flexible has a whole lot to do with who wins a physical altercation.

Do you realize that football is a game that emphasizes physical fitness, especially stamina and strength?

Originally posted by yeti101
reply to post by DZAG Wright

 

Trayvon was a 6 foot 2" 17 year old "child" who played american football

oh please. it does not really matter if he was 6' 6" 250 lbs fact is he was unarmed not commiting any crime and he was followed and confronted by an over zealous wannabe cop who has a history of violence. the only crime trayvon was that he looked like a "suspicious thug". i guess some people would like every "suspicious looking thug" followed and harrased. newsflash this is not the wild wild west or the jim crow law south.

Originally posted by ButterCookie

Originally posted by antonia
Good luck finding him. Rumor has it that hes fled the state.

The attorneys said that if anyone wanted to look for Zimmerman, they'd better look much farther than Florida....

Where is he?

Seriously... did you guys read the aritcle??

He is in custody.

reply to post by DZAG Wright


Ah, so according to you, strength has nothing to do with physical activity, or weight training, but has to do with age? Wow, all this time I've been working out I never realized I didn't have to do anything to be strong and healthy. Don't know if you've seen recent photos of Trayvon with no sleeves, tattoos, and muscular arms, versus Zimmerman who looks like a classic couch potato. In less than a year, Trayvon would have been considered a grown adult, guess that's when he would automatically receive his strength, until then he was just a weak little kid. The media was very effective creating their manufactured narrative, weren't they?