Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Zimmerman TrialFollow

#552 Aug 03 2013 at 9:31 PM Rating: Good
Almalieque wrote:
Not only that, if you think that you're being stalked, you wouldn't just run directly home leading the person to your home either.


No, I probably would, without thinking about it. Home = safety, and that's all I would be thinking at that point. Is there anything suggesting that when he started running he didn't run for his house?
#553 Aug 03 2013 at 9:35 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
Belkira wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Not only that, if you think that you're being stalked, you wouldn't just run directly home leading the person to your home either.


No, I probably would, without thinking about it. Home = safety, and that's all I would be thinking at that point. Is there anything suggesting that when he started running he didn't run for his house?


Gbajis argument is that since Martin didn't go directly home, then he must have been up to no good. Personally, if I think someone is following me, I wouldn't go STRAIGHT home. I might go there in a round about way, but not directly to my home. That also depends on the level of paranoia at the time.
#554 Aug 03 2013 at 9:39 PM Rating: Good
Almalieque wrote:
Gbajis argument is that since Martin didn't go directly home, then he must have been up to no good. Personally, if I think someone is following me, I wouldn't go STRAIGHT home. I might go there in a round about way, but not directly to my home. That also depends on the level of paranoia at the time.


The only way I wouldn't go straight home is if I knew there was a more populated area closer.

However, I don't see how that can suggest he was "up to no good." He was a scared kid.
#555 Aug 03 2013 at 9:52 PM Rating: Default
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
Belkira wrote:


The only way I wouldn't go straight home is if I knew there was a more populated area closer.


Maybe it's my paranoia, but I would try to lose the person either through "hidden areas" and/or populated areas. In no way would I let a person who's following me know exactly where I live.

Belkira wrote:

However, I don't see how that can suggest he was "up to no good." He was a scared kid.


The same way he doesn't comprehend that people typically drag their feet, walk in circles, along with other mannerisms when outside on a cell phone with no sense of urgency. I don't know how many times I thought someone was crazy before I realized that they had an earpiece.
#556 Aug 03 2013 at 9:53 PM Rating: Good
Almalieque wrote:
I don't know how many times I thought someone was crazy before I realized that they had an earpiece.


Smiley: lol I was eating alone at a restaurant on my lunch hour one day and I thought the lady next to me was animatedly talking to the centerpiece on her table. Then she finally reached up and took the blue tooth out of the ear I couldn't see.

I was a bit relieved.
#557 Aug 03 2013 at 10:03 PM Rating: Decent
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
Belkira wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
I don't know how many times I thought someone was crazy before I realized that they had an earpiece.


Smiley: lol I was eating alone at a restaurant on my lunch hour one day and I thought the lady next to me was animatedly talking to the centerpiece on her table. Then she finally reached up and took the blue tooth out of the ear I couldn't see.

I was a bit relieved.


I would say that happens often.

Given the fact that Zimmerman didn't know that Martin was on the phone, it's obvious that he thought the same thing as well. So Martin's "suspicious activities" weren't at all suspicious when you factor in the fact that he was on the phone. Add in the sentiment that you mentioned about talking on the phone with a significant other, there was probably no rush to go home.
#558 Aug 05 2013 at 8:04 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
idiggory, King of Bards wrote:
gbaji wrote:
The recording of Zimmerman's call is the "best evidence" we have of the sequence of events at that portion of their encounter. You're free to conclude that this isn't "reliable evidence", if you want. But then I've got to ask what better evidence you have to argue that this isn't what happened? Other than you wanting things to have happened differently because it fits a narrative you've been told, that is.


The testimony of the defendant is never best evidence of anything. Ever.


Sure. But this isn't the testimony of the defendant. It's a recording of a call to police made before the shooting occurred. The reason testimony is always to be taken with some grain of salt is because it's what someone says about an event after it happened. We recognize that this gives that person the opportunity to tailor their testimony to the event that happened in order to influence other people's perception of that event. But since this recording was what Zimmerman reported before the shooting, it is the "best evidence" of what happened during that time period. He had no ability to alter it after the fact.


Quote:
Even when you don't have contrary evidence, you don't just assume it's true. And in this case, we do have contrary evidence in the form of the testimony of the girlfriend, who was on the phone with Martin at the time. Which you've consistently forgotten exists.


I haven't forgotten it. I'm placing less weight on anything she might say which counters what's in the recording. Same rules apply to her testimony as well, right? She has the luxury of crafting her testimony *after* knowing what happened. This should always be given less weight than information we have that was generated prior to the event itself.

Quote:
When it comes down to it, her testimony, given under oath at a trial at which she has nothing to lose, is more reliable than his, given as his statement to the police after shooting a teenager, when he has everything to lose. That doesn't make her right and him wrong, but it would be more shocking for her to be lying. If you force me to make an inference, that's the one I'll make.


Ok. But, as I pointed out earlier, nothing in her testimony refutes the sequence of events that occurred in the phone call. She did not testify that Zimmerman followed Martin in his car. She didn't testify about when Martin ran from Zimmerman, much less why he ran. She did testify that Martin told him someone was following him and he was trying to get home, but this clearly occurred *after* Zimmerman left his car (so he was following Martin at that time, thus no contradiction between the two accounts).

I'm not sure what you think was in her testimony that acts as evidence that Zimmerman followed Martin in his car prior to Zimmerman getting out of the car and following Martin on foot. Just because there are two different accounts of events from two different "sides" of the issue, does not mean that the two are contradictory.

Quote:
And here's the grand part - I don't need to posit a new scenario in order to doubt Zimmerman's testimony. I'm perfectly within my rights to doubt the testimony of one man, offered without any substantiating evidence. You arguing otherwise is submitting to a relatively basic fallacy.


Again, it's not testimony. It's an audio recording. Unless you're suggesting that Zimmerman pre-planned this whole thing and faked everything in the phone call in order to allow him to then chase down and kill a black man? Cause that's a huge stretch.

Quote:
Furthermore, if you feel the need to reduce the scenario to something so ridiculous as Zimmerman just sitting in his car, twiddling his thumbs, while Martin bashes in windows and runs naked through the street in order to make your argument, you should probably seek mental help.


Huh? Why do you feel the need to invent a crazy description of what Martin was doing? Zimmerman never claimed he was doing those things, so why not accurately state what you are claiming is "ridiculous"?

Is it ridiculous to believe that a member of the neighborhood watch might be sitting in his car on a rainy night, see someone who appears to be acting suspiciously, and then continued to sit in his car, watching that person, and reporting what he saw to police? You label this as "ridiculous", but isn't that exactly what we'd expect a member of a watch to do?

Your cart is way out ahead of your horse IMO.

Edited, Aug 5th 2013 7:07pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#559 Aug 05 2013 at 8:26 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Belkira wrote:
Almalieque wrote:
Not only that, if you think that you're being stalked, you wouldn't just run directly home leading the person to your home either.


No, I probably would, without thinking about it. Home = safety, and that's all I would be thinking at that point. Is there anything suggesting that when he started running he didn't run for his house?


The timeline of events, firmly established via the logs of the phone call by Zimmerman, the calls by Martin, and numerous calls made to 911.

There was too much time between when Martin ran from Zimmerman (clearly timestamped in the call he made to police), and when Martin was shot, and far far too little distance covered. We're talking about 3 and a half minutes, yet the spot where they were seen to be fighting (and where Martin was shot), was maybe 100-120 feet from where Martin ran into the complex.

If he was even just walking briskly directly home, he should have been inside his house well before the two of them encountered each other on that walkway (and he should have been 150 feet or so south of where they ran into each other). This calls into question the claim that Martin was heading home the whole time. He simply could not have been doing so. He either looped around via some route that took him away from the direction towards his home *or* he was hiding somewhere in the vicinity where he eventually encountered Zimmerman.

I linked to some maps of the complex earlier in this thread (and you're free to look them up yourself). The approximate location where Zimmerman was parked is not difficult to determine, nor is the route that Martin had to have taken when initially running away from Zimmerman and into the houses (there's literally only one pathway along that stretch of road). From that point, if he was headed home, he should have turned either south at the T intersection in the walkway *or* gone straight and then turned south at the other end of that walkway along the street on the other side. From either location it's then a direct south path to his home. No turns. No twists. This complex is not a labyrinth of confusing pathways. It's incredibly straightforward. Two parallel streets running north/south. Two rows of houses facing those streets. A walkway that connects one street to the other across the north end of the two rows. One walkway that heads south from that walkway (the T intersection they talk about) that runs behind both rows of houses (so the fronts face the streets, and the backs face the walkway).

Martin had ample time to run south either along the walkway behind the houses, or along the street that the front of his home faced. Either was a straight shot home. But somehow, despite several minutes time, he runs into Zimmerman right at the T intersection where that north walkway is. It makes absolutely zero sense for him to be there if he'd been heading home the whole time.


Again, this is not about testimony. This is about timestamps on various phone calls. Unless, of course, we assume that Zimmerman lied about every single thing in his initial phone call to police, including where he was, what street he was on, what part of the complex he was watching, etc. And that's a pretty crazy assumption to make. And it would be a silly thing for him to make up, given that he was calling the police and telling them where to meet him. If he wasn't parked where he said he was, what did he expect would happen? It's reasonable to assume that at least the most basic information in that phone call is accurate (what street he's looking down, the direction Martin was walking, the path Martin took, etc). We can choose to discount whether Zimmerman was objective in his interpretation of what Martin was doing, but not where he was when he was doing it.


That's why there's a huge question about this claim that Martin was just innocently trying to get home. It's one of the things at least one of the jurors mentions in an interview about the case too. They also could not accept that Martin didn't have some responsibility for the encounter precisely because the time line didn't add up. It clearly indicated that if Martin had just wanted to go home, he could have done so. We don't know why he didn't, but it's clear that this is the case. And once we reject that notion of him just trying to get home, then it becomes harder to assume that Zimmerman had to be the aggressor in the encounter. Doesn't prove things one way or the other, but it does take it from "he chased Martin down, so he was the aggressor" to "he couldn't have chased him down, cause there wasn't enough walkway for there to have been a chase". That leaves us in "we have no clue who started the fight". And that's sufficient doubt to end that line of inquiry.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#560 Aug 05 2013 at 8:59 PM Rating: Decent
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
Gbaji wrote:
We can choose to discount whether Zimmerman was objective in his interpretation of what Martin was doing, but not where he was when he was doing it.


Which brings us back to the question, what are the facts and/or evidence that suggests that Martin was "checking out people's yards and houses along the way" as opposed to simply talking on the cellphone with no sense of urgency?

Enough with the distractions. It's a simple question.
#561 Aug 05 2013 at 10:26 PM Rating: Good
GBATE!! Never saw it coming
Avatar
****
9,957 posts
gbaji wrote:
Unless you're suggesting that Zimmerman pre-planned this whole thing and faked everything in the phone call in order to allow him to then chase down and kill a black man? Cause that's a huge stretch.
A stretch? Sure. Out of the realm of possibility? No.
____________________________
remorajunbao wrote:
One day I'm going to fly to Canada and open the curtains in your office.

#562 Aug 06 2013 at 2:30 AM Rating: Decent
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Unless you're suggesting that Zimmerman pre-planned this whole thing and faked everything in the phone call in order to allow him to then chase down and kill a black man? Cause that's a huge stretch.
A stretch? Sure. Out of the realm of possibility? No.


Gabji is blatantly overlooking the obvious of "Zimmerman became suspicious of Martin, reported what he thought to be true to the police, only to be wrong and decided to take matters in his own hands because he knew if he were in danger, he could just shoot him and call self-defense."
#563 Aug 06 2013 at 7:09 AM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
Belkira wrote:
I was eating alone at a restaurant on my lunch hour one day and I thought the lady next to me was animatedly talking to the centerpiece on her table. Then she finally reached up and took the blue tooth out of the ear I couldn't see.

I was a bit relieved.
How do you know the bluetooth wasn't just a prop? She was only wearing it so her crazy ranting to the centerpiece appeared normal?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#564 Aug 06 2013 at 3:19 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
We can choose to discount whether Zimmerman was objective in his interpretation of what Martin was doing, but not where he was when he was doing it.


Which brings us back to the question, what are the facts and/or evidence that suggests that Martin was "checking out people's yards and houses along the way" as opposed to simply talking on the cellphone with no sense of urgency?

Enough with the distractions. It's a simple question.


And I've already answered this, at least three times. The statements Zimmerman made to the police are "facts" (in that he made them). Those facts constitute "evidence" regarding what Zimmerman saw:

Quote:
This guy looks like he's up to no good, or he's on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around, looking about.

...

OK, he's just walking around the area…

...

looking at all the houses.


We can disagree with Zimmerman's assessment of Martin's behavior, but it's clear that Zimmerman thought that Martin's behavior was sufficiently suspicious to warrant calling the police. What more do you want? What burden would you require for someone to be allowed to call the police and report suspicious behavior?


Now I'll ask you a simple question (which you haven't answered): Why specifically do you think Martin ran from Zimmerman? I don't want "he was suspicious" as an answer. I want specifics. I've asked this at least 3 or 4 times now and you've steadfastly refused to answer. Meanwhile, you keep asking the same question over and over and I've provided you with exact information each time. What's bizarre is you don't even argue that my answer isn't sufficient. You just pretend I didn't give it and demand I answer you again.


Can you answer my question? And if you can't, then shouldn't we just reasonably speculate that Martin was acting strangely that night?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#565 Aug 06 2013 at 3:21 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Friar Bijou wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Unless you're suggesting that Zimmerman pre-planned this whole thing and faked everything in the phone call in order to allow him to then chase down and kill a black man? Cause that's a huge stretch.
A stretch? Sure. Out of the realm of possibility? No.


Sure. But a far more likely possibility is that Zimmerman actually did see behavior he interpreted as suspicious and called the police to report it. You know, just like any one might do.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#566 Aug 06 2013 at 3:35 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
I've think we've all made the same arguments 3 times over. Let's go for 4 though ya? Where's the fun in quitting early? Smiley: wink

gbaji wrote:

Quote:
This guy looks like he's up to no good, or he's on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around, looking about.

...

OK, he's just walking around the area…

...

looking at all the houses.

Isn't there a better quote? This one just makes it sound like Martin is lost or something...

gbaji wrote:
Why specifically do you think Martin ran from Zimmerman?
Because he was scared of him.

____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#567 Aug 06 2013 at 3:38 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
17,302 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Why specifically do you think Martin ran from Zimmerman?
Because he was scared of him.
Because he didn't have a gun to defend himself.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#568 Aug 06 2013 at 3:43 PM Rating: Decent
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
Gbaji wrote:
And I've already answered this, at least three times. The statements Zimmerman made to the police are "facts" (in that he made them). Those facts constitute "evidence" regarding what Zimmerman saw:
Maybe you didn't read my response three times.Zimmerman calling the police doesn't suggest one over the other especially when HE DID NOT EVEN KNOW THAT MARTIN WAS ON THE PHONE OR WHAT WAS IN HIS HANDS.
Gbaji wrote:
We can disagree with Zimmerman's assessment of Martin's behavior, but it's clear that Zimmerman thought that Martin's behavior was sufficiently suspicious to warrant calling the police.

So, you disagree with Zimmerman's assessment? Or do you believe that Martin was crazy and high at the time?
Gbaji wrote:
What more do you want? What burden would you require for someone to be allowed to call the police and report suspicious behavior?
Again, don't conflate Zimmerman's suspicion with your speculation. Those facts support Zimmerman's suspicion; however, they do not support your speculation. I'm asking you to provide facts that support your speculation.If you want to use Zimmerman's phone call as a supporting fact, then you need to be able to differentiate "maliciously looking at someone's house" vs "simply talking on the cell phone with no sense of urgency".
gbabi wrote:
Now I'll ask you a simple question (which you haven't answered): Why specifically do you think Martin ran from Zimmerman? I don't want "he was suspicious" as an answer. I want specifics. I've asked this at least 3 or 4 times now and you've steadfastly refused to answer. Meanwhile, you keep asking the same question over and over and I've provided you with exact information each time. What's bizarre is you don't even argue that my answer isn't sufficient. You just pretend I didn't give it and demand I answer you again.
Can you answer my question? And if you can't, then shouldn't we just reasonably speculate that Martin was acting strangely that night?
How about we make deal? When we get to that point in my argument AGAIN and I quote myself not only saying why he ran, but agreeing with you, you will make an apology thread stating that you were WRONG? If I'm unable to do so, then I will do the same?

I gave my argument, but apparently you don't read everything and/or you skip. So, I'm re-addressing everything point by point. The questions that you are not answering were asked first. The only thing that I've been doing is addressing the points that I made on a post days ago. I've answered everyone of your questions up until that point. However, I realize, if I continue to entertain your distractions, those questions will never be answered.


Edited, Aug 6th 2013 11:44pm by Almalieque
#569 Aug 06 2013 at 4:45 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
Isn't there a better quote? This one just makes it sound like Martin is lost or something...


Or looking around to see if there's something to steal/vandalize? But let's just assume that the neighborhood watch guy can't tell the difference. Cart before horse, right? If you start with the assumption that Zimmerman was a racist who targeted a black youth to kill him, then you'll ignore all the reasonable explanations for what happened when they don't match that narrative.

I'm asking folks to assess what was said and happened without that starting assumption. When you do that, Zimmerman's actions are perfectly reasonable.

Quote:
gbaji wrote:
Why specifically do you think Martin ran from Zimmerman?
Because he was scared of him.


Why was he scared of him? At that point in time, all he knew of Zimmerman was that he was sitting in his car, talking on his phone, and had been watching him walk up the street. So you tell me what Martin thought about Zimmerman that made him so scared that he ran away.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#570 Aug 06 2013 at 4:50 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
gbaji wrote:
If you start with the assumption that Zimmerman was a racist who targeted a black youth to kill him, then you'll ignore all the reasonable explanations for what happened when they don't match that narrative.
I just assume he makes poor decisions; and that he would have ignored the dispatchers advice even if it was a white guy he was after.

gbaji wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Why specifically do you think Martin ran from Zimmerman?
Because he was scared of him.
Why was he scared of him?
Because it was dark, rainy, and someone he didn't know was watching him? Sounds creepy to me.

Edited, Aug 6th 2013 3:50pm by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#571 Aug 06 2013 at 4:56 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Almalieque wrote:
Gbaji wrote:
And I've already answered this, at least three times. The statements Zimmerman made to the police are "facts" (in that he made them). Those facts constitute "evidence" regarding what Zimmerman saw:
Maybe you didn't read my response three times.Zimmerman calling the police doesn't suggest one over the other especially when HE DID NOT EVEN KNOW THAT MARTIN WAS ON THE PHONE OR WHAT WAS IN HIS HANDS.


Um... But it does constitute "facts" and "evidence" that Martin was doing what Zimmerman said he was doing in the call. The fact that Martin was also doing something else doesn't change that.


Quote:
Gbaji wrote:
We can disagree with Zimmerman's assessment of Martin's behavior, but it's clear that Zimmerman thought that Martin's behavior was sufficiently suspicious to warrant calling the police.

So, you disagree with Zimmerman's assessment? Or do you believe that Martin was crazy and high at the time?


Huh? I agree that at the time Zimmerman made the call he believed that "This guy looks like he's up to no good, or he's on drugs or something." Zimmerman saw something about Martin that made him think that. That's all I'm saying. There's no burden of proof to make a call to the police, yet you keep dwelling on this.

Quote:
Again, don't conflate Zimmerman's suspicion with your speculation. Those facts support Zimmerman's suspicion; however, they do not support your speculation. I'm asking you to provide facts that support your speculation.If you want to use Zimmerman's phone call as a supporting fact, then you need to be able to differentiate "maliciously looking at someone's house" vs "simply talking on the cell phone with no sense of urgency".


Huh? My speculation was about Martin's reasons for running from Zimmerman, not what Zimmerman thought about Martin. What Zimmerman thought about Martin is clearly stated in the police recording. He thinks he's either up to no good, or on drugs. He later says he's "looking at all the houses". That's what he said he saw.

My speculation was that Martin also realized that his behavior looked suspicious and believed that Zimmerman was calling the police on him, and that's why he ran. The "evidence" of this is that Zimmerman clearly did think that Martin's behavior was suspicious enough to call the police. It's not unreasonable to expect that Martin could figure this out. Whether he was actually planning on doing anything wrong at that point is irrelevant. If he realized that someone might think that what he was doing was suspicious, he could arrive at that conclusion and make the choice he did.

I'm trying to counter the idea that Martin ran from Zimmerman out of fear of some kind of criminal threat from Zimmerman. I think that the "threat" Martin was fleeing was the law.

Quote:
How about we make deal? When we get to that point in my argument AGAIN and I quote myself not only saying why he ran, but agreeing with you...


How about you quote it now, since clearly I have no freaking clue what you are talking about.


All I can remember is you continually deflecting my question off on some tangent or other without ever answering it except to say that "Martin thought Zimmerman was suspicious". And when I asked (repeatedly) for more detail, you've ignored me. Care to give it another shot?


Edited, Aug 6th 2013 4:04pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#572 Aug 06 2013 at 5:00 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
gbaji wrote:
If you start with the assumption that Zimmerman was a racist who targeted a black youth to kill him, then you'll ignore all the reasonable explanations for what happened when they don't match that narrative.
I just assume he makes poor decisions; and that he would have ignored the dispatchers advice even if it was a white guy he was after.


Great. So not a racially profiling killer. We're getting somewhere.

Now do you also agree that Martin made some poor choices that night?

Quote:
gbaji wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Why specifically do you think Martin ran from Zimmerman?
Because he was scared of him.
Why was he scared of him?
Because it was dark, rainy, and someone he didn't know was watching him? Sounds creepy to me.


Sure. Enough to keep an eye on that person in the car while you walk on by. Enough to run away though? Bit of an over reaction, right? How often do you walk down the street and realize there's someone in one of the cars you're walking past? Happens all the time. Do you normally run in terror from that person? Unless we believe that Martin was so skittish that he ran away from every random person sitting in a car on the street talking on their phones, we have to conclude that his behavior was odd at the very least.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#573 Aug 06 2013 at 7:10 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
gbaji wrote:
someproteinguy wrote:
gbaji wrote:
If you start with the assumption that Zimmerman was a racist who targeted a black youth to kill him, then you'll ignore all the reasonable explanations for what happened when they don't match that narrative.
I just assume he makes poor decisions; and that he would have ignored the dispatchers advice even if it was a white guy he was after.


Great. So not a racially profiling killer. We're getting somewhere.

Now do you also agree that Martin made some poor choices that night?


Well yeah, like I said earlier, we've already been over this. Remember I said several pages ago I thought they both made some very dumb decisions? If anything this whole thing is a great case study for thinking things through before acting.

In the interest of full disclosure here's the someproteinguy take on the whole situation:

Martin was walking home. Along the way he was spotted by Zimmerman. Zimmerman saw something that seemed out of place with Martin's behavior, and decided to keep his eye on him. Martin noticed Zimmerman watching him and got nervous. Zimmerman thought Martin's behavior crossed a threshold and decided it would be a good idea to call the cops to come check it out. Martin decided that he needed to get out of this situation and started to run. Zimmerman saw Martin run and went after him. Instead of continuing to run, Martin turned around to confront Zimmerman. The confrontation turned ugly and escalated into a fist-fight. The fist-fight got nasty enough that Zimmerman felt his well-being was seriously in danger and shot Martin.

And just for fun here's what someproteinguy thinks should have happened:

Zimmerman should have called the cops, and then stayed put. Martin shouldn't have run, and just picked up his pace and headed straight home (he certainly should have escalated the situation, or turned back to confront Zimmerman. Neither of them helped the situation with what they said.). Cops would have come and they would have been directed to the house Martin was staying at. After a quick Q&A the whole situation would have been over and done with.

[:rose-colored glasses:]

Instead they both let their fears and emotions get the better of them, and it ruined 2 lives. If I feel worse for Martin it's probably because he's dead, and no one deserves that, even the dumb people. (don't hold me to that, I may change my mind later... Smiley: tongue)

Two idiots go in, one comes out? Smiley: rolleyes

Edited, Aug 6th 2013 6:28pm by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#574 Aug 06 2013 at 9:35 PM Rating: Decent
The All Knowing
Avatar
*****
10,265 posts
Gbaji wrote:

Um... But it does constitute "facts" and "evidence" that Martin was doing what Zimmerman said he was doing in the call. The fact that Martin was also doing something else doesn't change that.


No, it doesn't. It only constitutes that Martin's actions were suspicious to Zimmerman. If Zimmerman had said "Martin is climbing a fence", then you would have a point.

How can you tell if a bum is asleep, unconscious, resting or dead at night in the rain from afar? You can't, without knowing more information. Likewise with Martin. There's nothing wrong with Zimmerman calling the police, but unless you can provide facts that support that Martin was actually maliciously looking at houses as opposed to just looking around while on the phone, the fact is just a fact. It doesn't support any malicious activity.

Gbaji wrote:
Huh? I agree that at the time Zimmerman made the call he believed that "This guy looks like he's up to no good, or he's on drugs or something." Zimmerman saw something about Martin that made him think that. That's all I'm saying. There's no burden of proof to make a call to the police, yet you keep dwelling on this.


YOU ARE NOT ZIMMERMAN. His suspicion is not in question. YOUR CLAIM is. Knowing all of the facts NOW, do you believe that Martin was mentally ill and/or on drugs at the time? If not, then you don't agree with Zimmerman's assessment. That doesn't mean Zimmerman was wrong for the call.

Gbaji wrote:
Whether he was actually planning on doing anything wrong at that point is irrelevant.
So, you are no longer alluding that Martin was maybe perhaps thinking about doing something wrong or not innocently walking home?

Gbaji wrote:
How about you quote it now, since clearly I have no freaking clue what you are talking about.


Is that a deal or not? You ignored half of my post before. I'm clearly going back, point by point in chronological order. We agreed to the following:

1. Zimmerman was suspicious of Martin.
2. Zimmerman called the police.
3. Martin became suspicious of Zimmerman.
4. Zimmeman's description of Martin to the police was inaccurate, but not intentionally

I'm leading up to the point of Martin running.
#575 Aug 07 2013 at 7:22 AM Rating: Excellent
*****
10,601 posts
Never get involved in a land war is Asia.
____________________________
01001001 00100000 01001100 01001001 01001011 01000101 00100000 01000011 01000001 01001011 01000101
You'll always be stupid, you'll just be stupid with more information in your brain
Forum FAQ
#576 Aug 07 2013 at 7:39 AM Rating: Good
Muggle@#%^er
******
20,024 posts
Sir Xsarus wrote:
Never get involved in a land war is Asia.


And never go up against a Sicilian when death is on the line.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 77 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (77)