Zimmerman is finished in life

These are typical responses from arrogant, ignorant people. The simple truth, a man got away with murder and you cheerlead for him. Very sad. As a neighborhood watch captain, he was not even suppose to be carrying a gun on his person, whether he had a personal concealed carrying permit or not. That's why he lost his job in that organization. He broke the rules of the program. Then, he continues to pursue after being told not to by a police dispatcher. It's clear to me that this man had a problem with, "the rule of law" and being told what to do. What's more "vigilante" than that? Someday, someone probably will get him vigilante style. Call it poetic justice.

 

If you mean actual truth.... he was tried for manslaughter and acquitted based on self-defense.

You can't go around twisting what you call "the simple truth" and at the same time call those that actually know what happened "arrogant" and "ignorant".


Spouting off your own feelings as facts, and ignoring what actually happened... might just be the definition of "arrogant ignorance".

Jus' sayin'

 

Thats fine. Most people understand Trayvon was a thug and arms can be swung to inflict pain, and that the child was bigger than Zimmerman, and there because he was too cool for school I am sure, totally sure hes in honors English in heaven by now.

- - - Updated - - -

LOL. The neighborhood watch woman who implemented the program was glowing about George on the stand. Oh, please prove when you are a volunteer you loose your second amendment rights to carry, lol. I mean seriously, educate yourself before spewing these lies, because thats what they are at this point.

 

What I stated were some FACTS about what actually happened. I feel that what actually happened concerning the confrontation between them was not represented because it's just not known by anybody but them. What was known is that Trayvon WAS unarmed and Zimmerman WAS, when he shouldn't have been. He WAS told to not pursue but took it upon himself to do that anyway. Zimmerman caused this encounter to go the way that it did. Do you really know what Zimmerman said to Trayvon when he confronted him. Do we really know those details? No, nobody does. We know what he said happened but that doesn't mean it was the truth. What I take from the whole situation was that a young unarmed black kid was going to the store the quickest way he knew how in the rain when he was confronted by a man carrying a gun he wasn't suppose to have on him, who by many accounts of his character, thought he was a cop of some sort. He defied the rules of his neighborhood watch program by carrying a weapon and defied the police by pursuing the kid after being told not to. I guess I'm suppose to not think that George Zimmerman didn't lie about the fine details of the entire encounter. All he really had to do was say that the police had been notified and keep an eye from a distance until the police showed up. That's all, and it would have most likely been enough. No, I don't have all the facts. However, I base my feelings off of the facts that I do have and what they tell me. You don't have all the facts either but you can't even try to deduce a situation with a common sense approach with what is known to be FACT.

 

http://www.speroforum.com/a/AUAEXGX...against-neighborhood-watch-rules#.Ug5Tw-3D-X8

http://www.examiner.com/article/geo...-of-neighborhood-watch-by-concealing-a-weapon

Carrying a weapon was against the guidelines of the program. FACT
Pursuing and approaching Trayvon was against the guidelines of the program. FACT
He was told to back off by police dispatch. FACT
Just why were arms being swung in this incident? Nothing to point to as FACT, just Zimmerman's account of things.
Do people really understand that Trayvon was a thug? Pre-conceived notions because he was suspended from school. I got suspended from school before, more than once. Does that automatically make someone a thug. Oh, but he had a hoodie on! OK, I guess that makes it so.

 

Book deal,movie rights?...nahh,he won't be broke

 

Pretty amazing what you sheep can twist the "FACTS" into.

Despite the FACT that he was NOT "told to back off by police dispatch" as you claim... he was told he wasn't "needed" to follow Martin, by the 911 operator.... all your other efforts are even more moot.

Whether or not he was acting against the NNWI guidelines (can anyone link to the guidelines of his neighborhood for once?)...
he was acting in alignment with any other concerned neighbor, when seeing a suspicious person walking around in the middle of the night.

Thug or not, who even cares. He was sitting on top of Zimmerman hitting him "MMA style".... according to witnesses who aren't George Zimmerman.

FACT.

 

I'm guessing Zimmerman's life will be just as successful as OJ's is today.

 

Trayvon is dead because he was a violent punk that did something stupid and paid the price. It was his own actions that got him shot. The jury found George not guilty. Maybe you should acknowledge the facts of the case now.

 

It's looking dim for the "Zim!"

 

Trayvon didn't get to take the stand cuz he was murdered. Only the killer got to take the stand. They might not have had enough evidence to convict since the victim is umm errr dead- but it doesn't make him any less of a victim and it doesn't make vigilante wannabe Zimmerman any less of a murderous killer.

 

How do you think safety training would have helped ? He used it exactly the way he intended to .

 

You didn't even check out the links, did you? You think there's a difference between "back off" and "we don't need you to follow him"? Both mean stop what you are doing!

http://www.wftv.com/videos/news/raw-911-call-zimmerman-made-to-sanford-police/vGZq9/

The homeowners association at Retreat at Twin Lakes did ask him to go on his fateful dog-walking patrols of the neighborhood, but he carried his Kel-Tec pistol against neighborhood guidelines. - from the link I provided already.

http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/06/26/see-neighorhood-watch-presentation-give-zimmerman - PDF guidelines towards bottom of article.

The witnesses sounded uncertain to me about what they think they saw. They were almost positive that Martin was on top though. Maybe he was. Like I stated before, how did Zimmerman confront this kid. What exactly did he say. Maybe something that incited the confrontation from the very start. He was an over zealous wanna be cop and that's a big red flag in my book. We'll never know exactly what happened though, will we?

 

Uh... when you legally carry a gun for personal protection and some thug ends up straddling you on the ground punching you in the face....

How did he use the gun incorrectly ?!

 

If George Zimmerman’s Jury Had Seen This Chilling Video, Would They Still Have Let Him Go Free ?

http://www.policymic.com/articles/6...g-video-would-they-still-have-let-him-go-free


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUKzDANF6QU

 

Laughed my ass off.

Itw asn't a stand your ground case. The law did protect the victim. The victim was Zimmerman. The Aggressor was Martin

 

Where is George Zimmerman?

 

Zimmys Biggest Defender and Buddy ... A White Racist Criminal ~ Frank Taaffe

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/08/frank-taaffe-george-zimmerman-racist-white-voice

Frank Taaffe who regards Zimmy as a hero and was to appear as a defense witness ... and whom Taaffe said Zimmy confided that when he spotted Martin ... he was standing on Taaffes' lawn casing the joint ... goes bezonkers on white-raciss rants ...


Frank Taaffe, Zimmerman's unofficial media emissary, is a convicted criminal who recently appeared on The White Voice, a virulently racist podcast.

In April 2012, two days before George Zimmerman was arrested for the shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, he huddled with a fellow neighborhood watch volunteer, Frank Taaffe.

According to Taaffe, who disclosed the meeting on Fox News, Zimmerman asked him to share "several talking points" with the media.
Taaffe obliged.

Indeed, as Zimmerman's legal drama unfolded over the next year and a half, Taaffe emerged as his most visible and outspoken defender.
He gave hundreds of interviews to media outlets, ranging from the New York Times to Fox News to CNN, and made near-daily appearances on cable news shows during Zimmerman's trial.


Taaffe used this platform to cast Martin as a drug-addled hoodlum and Zimmerman as a community-minded do-gooder ("the best neighbor you would want to have") who had every reason to suspect the black teen was up to mischief.

He also railed against Zimmerman's critics, whom he accused of staging a witch hunt.
"It's really sad that he has already been convicted in the public media and has already been sentenced to the gas chamber," he lamented in an interview with NBC's Miami affiliate last year.


Taaffe was hardly the ideal person to be weighing in on a case suffused with racial angst—or commenting on criminal-justice matters, period.

A Mother Jones investigation has found that the 56-year-old New York native has a lengthy criminal record that includes charges of domestic violence and burglary, and a history of airing virulently racist views.

Just last Sunday, he appeared on The White Voice, a weekly podcast hosted by a man named Joe Adams, who has deep, long-standing ties to white-power groups and has authored a manual called Save The White People Handbook. (Sample quote: "A mutt makes a great pet and a mulatto makes a great slave.")


During a previous White Voice appearance, on July 27, Taaffe argued that whites and blacks have no business mingling.

("They don't want to be with us and we don't want to be with them.")

Taaffe also opined that if Zimmerman had racially profiled Martin, he was justified in doing so because "young black males" had burglarized homes in their neighborhood.
"What if I—a middle-aged white man—wore a hoodie and went through Trayvon Martin's neighborhood?" he asked defiantly.
Adams replied that "no sane white person" would dare walk down their "local Marcus Garvey Boulevard."

"I'd only be there for one or two things," Taaffe shot back.
"And I'm sure the vice squad would want to be interested in that."

"This trial is waking up white America, man," Taaffe told The White Voice.

Later, Taaffe accused African Americans of committing "self-genocide" by failing to address the "ills and diseases that are festering" in the black community—especially the absence of black fathers, which "leaves young black males growing up without direction."

And he bemoaned the fact that some white women choose to date black men, saying that they invariably end up becoming single mothers.

"Guess who winds up paying the tab on that ?
You and me and the rest of America," Taaffe grumbled.
"It's called entitlement, man.
It's called food stamps.
It's called welfare."


By the end of the show, Taaffe was so worked up that he was calling for a revolution.

"This trial is waking up white America, man," he said.
"I'm fed up with the bull(*)(*)(*)(*) and the glad-handing to this one group of people who now control what we do and say.

Come on, man, wake up America!"

 

Thank you for your post but I respectfully disagree. If you confine your opinions and statements to known facts and truthful definitions of words then you will have a much tougher time projecting an anti Zimmerman narrative.

There is no evidence or testimoney that Martin was murdered. You CAN say that he was killed resulting from an unknown confrontation.

There is no evidence that Martin was a 'victim'. He is dead from an unknown scenario in which he could have caused his own death.

There is no evidence or testimoney that Zimmerman was a vigilante. A vigilante is someone who circumvents due process and substitutes themselves. Zimmerman had every legal right to follow and observe Martin for any reason and without cause or justification. There is no local, state or federal law that prohibits Zimmerman from doing just that.

There is no evidence, history or testimony that demonstrates that Zimmerman was a 'wanna-be cop' beyond what is typical of anyone desiring to be in law enforcement.

To say that Zimmerman was a wanna be cop vigilante is subjective hyperbole intending to discredit him personally as a substitute for lack of proofs.

Thanks again.

 

911 operator told him to not follow him. He followed him. He CHOSE to follow (I see it as stalking- not in traditional sense where it's on-going- but he stalked him like an animal would stalk prey.) If Trayvon were a girl dressed in girl scout uniform carrying cookie order sheet- would he have done it? (Maybe if she was black- but I digress.)

Martin created a situation that caused a youth to die. A youth minding his own business.

 

Thank you for your post yet I respectfully disagree. The neighborhood watch program has no authority and doesn't limit Zimmerman's rights as a citizen. Zimmerman cannot disobey an entity that is simply a loose knit group of concerned citizens.

The watch program had no authority to place any encumbrances on Zimmerman's right to carry a gun. Zimmerman's contrary actions against the watch guidelines doesn't constitute guilt in any form.

You asked "how did Zimmerman confront this kid?" There is no evidence or testimony that Zimmerman confronted Martin.

You asked, "What exactly did he say. Maybe something that incited the confrontation from the very start." The error here is that you are trying to reconcile events to a pro-Martin narrative and not a narrative of the truth. I could likewise ask, "What exactly did MARTIN say. Maybe something that incited the confrontation from the very start?" Both statements do not attempt to discern the truth but to make a case for something plausible independent of the truth.

There is no evience, history or testimony that he was an overzealous wanna be cop. This is just an accusation to discredit him personally as a substitute for facts. A watchman driving through his own neighborhood seeing some man(6'-1" 158 lbs with a hood) walking behind homes in the dark in the rain and following him as to maintain a visual observance of him until PD arrived hardly warrants an accusation of being overzealous.

Lastly, you say "We'll never know exactly what happened though, will we?" That is correct, we will never know if Martin would have cased out homes or burglarized homes on the way to his house or if he would have murdered an innocent and well meaning watchman that was unarmed, or if Martin was going to make 'Purple Drank' with his tea and Skittles.

As for me in the absense of known facts I will favor the volunteer, the benefactor, the taxpayer, the homeowner, the do'er and the patriot.

Thanks again.

 

MuslimAmericanWoman, thank you for your kind response.

Zimmerman did not call 911 and didnt talk to a 911 operator. He did call a non emergency line to the Saford Police department and spoke to a civilian dispatcher. That dispatcher in not an agent of the law and has no authority to limit Zimmerman's civil right to walk, move, speak to and follow someone. You want to incumber Zimmerman's actions with Laws and rules that do not exist accept in peoples minds and opinions.

You are correct, Zimmerman DID choose to follow. He had a duty as a concerned citizen to follow a suspicious person in a neighborhood of frequent criminal behavior.

You say that Zimmerman stalked Martin. Let me remind you that Zimmerman was 5'-8" tall and 205 pounds and talking on the phone with dispatch. He was wearing a heavy jacket, jeans and hiking boots. Martin was a 17 year old football player that was 6'-1" tall and 158 pounds wearing light clothing and running shoes. Surely you don't actually believe that Zimmerman intended to, or even had the ability to even TOUCH Martin if he tried!
I suppose in the 4 minutes of time between the phone call before witnesses heard the screaming outside that Martin could have literally ran around the building and passed the chubby Zimmerman once or twice like a race track! It was Martin that was fast and fleet of foot and would thus dictate any physical altercation. Remember also that Martin was uninjured from fist fighting while Zimmerman had a broken nose and gashes on his head(witnesses saw those injuries at the scene, paramedics saw those injuries and asked Zimmerman ifd he wanted to go to the hospital several times, those paramedics created a report saying as much. Their were pictures of Zimmerman at the scene and at the police station also.

There is no proofs or testimony that Martin was minding his own business. Zimmerman's call to police indicated that Martin was looking into homes and was walking behind houses. That phone call occurred before any contact or words between Martin and Zimmerman.

Respectfully,

 

So people have the right to follow other people around.
Okay.
If someone were following me----- I would feel threatened. Just because it doesn't break a law per se- does not make it threatening and provacative behavior. Remember- Zimmerman is the adult here. Martin the child here. An adult chose to provoke a child with threatening behavior. Seriously- can't believe you want to defend this man on technicalities. How about what is right and moral and logical. Don't follow young people around and cause their death. How is that?

 

Thanks again for your reply,

Yes, you have the right to follow anyone you want and do so without cuase or justification. Yet there are legal boundaries. Zimmerman was well within his right to follow Martin. But let me add this, its clear that Zimmerman had no intention of actually apprehending or detaining Martin. The ONLY action by Zimmerman following Martin was that Zimmerman got out of his car and stood next to it. Martin walked toward Zimmerman who was on the phone with the dispatcher. Martin then turned and ran around the corner. Zimmerman ran while speaking on the phone and turned that same corner.........and thats it! Thats the following! Zimmerman ran some 150 foot to a corner that Martin turned moments before and thats it. Zimmerman walked around in the dark for some 4 minutes and subsequently headed back to the clubhouse where he was going to meet the police car. Thats it, that's all.
Get out of the car, Martin runs. Zimmerman runs a 150 foot and sees nothing and walks around a while. That was the 'stalking'.
Consider this, if Martin is an innocent child then why is it dangerous for Zimmerman to get out of his car and follow? Why is that stupid, illegal or dangerous? He's a child right? No, to the extent that Martin is dangerous is that it is dangerous to follow him. You cant have it both ways.
Martin feeling threatened or provoked at a distance from a man he can outrun doesn't give him license to punch Zimmerman in the face. You are being duplicitous here in that hold Zimmerman accountable to his actions while you hold Martin accountable to his intentions.
To say that Martin was a child is simply disingenuous. Martin meets the legal and ethical standard for an adult. Martin declared his adulthood by his many and varied adult actions including being able to overpower Zimmerman.

Technicalities? You have made many claims and statements that I have responded to. I am a defender of the truth. Which statement was it that I have made that is in error or not factual?

In closing, mankind in his ordinary economy has a history and duty to watch over his community and his neighbor.

I wished that George Zimmerman was around when my house got burglarized.

I wished that George Zimmerman was around when my aunt was raped.

I wished that George Zimmerman was around when my cousin was raped.

I wished that George Zimmerman was around when my friend was murdered.

I wished that George Zimmerman was around when my mother was shoved to the ground and her purse stolen.

Thanks again.