George Zimmerman Arrested On Domestic Violence And Weapons Charge

[Arctish]

Setting aside the bickering about posting styles and histories, is there anything more to discuss? If not, we should just let this thread R.I.P.

 

[EPresence2]

Despite my doubts about whether Zimmerman must have grabbed Trayvon, I do sympathize with those who view him as a young martyr/innocent victim. Even if he did respond aggressively to being confronted, we're also talking about a young man here. Zimmerman was older and should have known better than to create a situation that leaves reasonable people wondering about what really happened after the phone dropped. I assume myself to be reasonable, and so do you (ignoring "peanut gallery" commentary). But I don't assume you haven't examined the "other side" just because you mostly focus on your apparent side. That doesn't make you a defender of Trayvon Martin beyond what the evidence suggests. Neither does it make me a defender of Zimmerman beyond what the evidence suggests. It's both impossible and unnecessary to try equally hard to see both sides; with patience and respect, the two sides can learn from each other to some degree... Thanks to Arctish (mostly) for the exchange of perspectives and f*ck the commentary.

This is what started the "bickering" - thanks dude. I'm done with this thread.

P.S. Unfortunately, I failed to ignore the peanut gallery. Boo hoo

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Setting aside the bickering about posting styles and histories, is there anything more to discuss? If not, we should just let this thread R.I.P.

I wonder, given his problems with crime after Trayvon, if Zimmerman is still considered to be white. Or is he only an honorary white because he did what one forum member has expressed a desire for and shot a black kid.

 

[Arctish]

Setting aside the bickering about posting styles and histories, is there anything more to discuss? If not, we should just let this thread R.I.P.

I wonder, given his problems with crime after Trayvon, if Zimmerman is still considered to be white. Or is he only an honorary white because he did what one forum member has expressed a desire for and shot a black kid.

We won't know for sure unless Fox News hosts start talking about domestic violence and gunslinging machismo being part of Hispanic culture. That will be the sign he is shifting from white to light brown in the public perception.

 

[Arctish]

Not exactly on topic for this thread, but very closely related:

Man assaulted by vigilante at Florida Walmart

A simple errand turned violent for Clarence Daniels this week when he went to Walmart for some coffee creamer and wound up in a chokehold.

Upon arriving at the Walmart in Florida’s Hillsborough County on Tuesday, the 62-year-old Daniels, who is black, grabbed his handgun from his car and slipped it into a hip holster underneath his coat. Watching this from inside the store was Michael Foster, a 43-year-old white man described by the Tampa Bay Times as “a well-intentioned vigilante.” As soon as Daniels walked into the store, Foster tackled him, shouting, “He’s got a gun!” Ignoring Daniels’ repeated yells of, “I have a permit!” Foster proceeded to put him into a chokehold. When sheriff’s deputies arrived on the scene, they confirmed that Daniels was indeed a concealed carry permit holder and Foster was arrested and charged with battery.
<link>

It appears Mr. Foster made some assumptions about Mr. Daniels based on his race, the same sort of assumptions Zimmerman made about Martin, and Ronald Ritchie made about John Crawford.

 

[laughing dog]

Not exactly on topic for this thread, but very closely related:

Man assaulted by vigilante at Florida Walmart

A simple errand turned violent for Clarence Daniels this week when he went to Walmart for some coffee creamer and wound up in a chokehold.

Upon arriving at the Walmart in Florida’s Hillsborough County on Tuesday, the 62-year-old Daniels, who is black, grabbed his handgun from his car and slipped it into a hip holster underneath his coat. Watching this from inside the store was Michael Foster, a 43-year-old white man described by the Tampa Bay Times as “a well-intentioned vigilante.” As soon as Daniels walked into the store, Foster tackled him, shouting, “He’s got a gun!” Ignoring Daniels’ repeated yells of, “I have a permit!” Foster proceeded to put him into a chokehold. When sheriff’s deputies arrived on the scene, they confirmed that Daniels was indeed a concealed carry permit holder and Foster was arrested and charged with battery.
<link>

It appears Mr. Foster made some assumptions about Mr. Daniels based on his race, the same sort of assumptions Zimmerman made about Martin, and Ronald Ritchie made about John Crawford.

Foster's big mistake was letting Daniels survive.

 

[Nexus]

And Mr Daniels mistake was allowing an unarmed man to put him in a choke hold while he was armed.

 

[Toni]

And Mr Daniels mistake was allowing an unarmed man to put him in a choke hold while he was armed.

Well, he's black so of course he's going to make mistakes. If blacks want to be treated like whites, they're going to have to start acting white: he should have shot him dead and claimed SYG.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Mr. Foster was way out of line. There is nothing about his story that is worthy of admiration.

Of course I'm sure that some here would approve of his anti-gun paranoia, but that's only because they share that paranoia.

And one person, who claimed the right to kill minorities, would approve of Mr. Foster's choice of targets.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Mr. Foster was way out of line. There is nothing about his story that is worthy of admiration.

Of course I'm sure that some here would approve of his anti-gun paranoia, but that's only because they share that paranoia.

And one person, who claimed the right to kill minorities, would approve of Mr. Foster's choice of targets.

You think this was anti-gun paranoia?

 

[laughing dog]

Mr. Foster was way out of line. There is nothing about his story that is worthy of admiration.

Of course I'm sure that some here would approve of his anti-gun paranoia, but that's only because they share that paranoia.

And one person, who claimed the right to kill minorities, would approve of Mr. Foster's choice of targets.

What makes you think Mr. Forster acted out of "anti-gun" paranoia? Perhaps he acted out of "black man with a gun paranoia".

 

[Nexus]

I assumed it was anti-black with a concealed gun phobia. Another mistake Mr Daniels made was letting someone see his concealed weapon. While I'm sure he didn't intend to brandish it some one did see it and lead to all of this. But the fault is still 100% with the would be vigilant/attacker.

 

[Arctish]

I assumed it was anti-black with a concealed gun phobia. Another mistake Mr Daniels made was letting someone see his concealed weapon. While I'm sure he didn't intend to brandish it some one did see it and lead to all of this. But the fault is still 100% with the would be vigilant/attacker.

I don't think the situation would have been much improved if Daniels had been observed making furtive motions like he wanted to hide something before he entered the store. He probably wouldn't have been tackled, but Foster could have called the cops on the suspicious character (read: black man hiding something) in the Wal Mart, and we all know how badly that might have ended.

 

[Frikki]

Setting aside the bickering about posting styles and histories, is there anything more to discuss? If not, we should just let this thread R.I.P.

I wonder, given his problems with crime after Trayvon, if Zimmerman is still considered to be white. Or is he only an honorary white because he did what one forum member has expressed a desire for and shot a black kid.

Hispanics can be white the only thing it means is that you originate from a Spanish speaking country Spaniards are Hispanic and they are white.

 

[Jayjay]

There's another possibility that fits the evidence.

It is possible Zimmerman did not follow Martin but instead hurried to cut him off.

I used to believe this when it was first discussed on the forums way back then, but changed my mind because the timeline just doesn't match.

If you're using Zimmerman's timeline, don't bother trying to get anything to match. The 911 call doesn't match what he told Serino, and neither one matches the walk-through.

I went back to check the discussion at the old forum archives. The timeline is not dependent on what Zimmerman told the police, it's constrained by the call log between Zimmerman and 311 on one hand, and Jenteal and Martin on the other. I just don't see there being enough time for Zimmerman to cut Martin off and chase him back towards the T before the fight.

Furthermore, Zimmerman's keys were dropped near the T, which is consistent with his version of events. Not saying that Zimmerman is necessarily telling the truth especially about who confronted whom, but at least based on what we know, it requires less mental gymnastics to assume that he was where he says he was than theories about him running around the neighbourhood.

 

[Jayjay]

Came to meet him as in "changed his mind about avoiding the creeper from the car", or came to meet him as in "resumed walking home too soon and encountered the creeper from the car who was still lingering on the sidewalk"?

And if Jeantel's story is true, that he made it to the house and then went back, M starts the confrontation.

Jeantel never said Martin made it to the house. As you yourself posted:

Her story was always "Back by his house, near his house"

Not "at his house".

Her answer on the stand was "the back of his house" She then changed her answer later. I think she realized her mistake.

I think you misunderstood what Jeantel and Zimmerman's attorney West were talking about. I just reviewed that clip you posted. In it, West says he wants to talk about what happened after Martin ran. West seeks confirmation that Jeantel's impression was that at the time Martin ran he was intending to go to the back of his house, that about 20 seconds later she reconnected with Martin, and she didn't know where he was. She agrees this is correct. West then says and she agrees that at that point she believed he was close to home. So the summary I posted earlier appears to be accurate:

It is not accurate. I watched her testimony recently, and while it's a bit painful to follow because she's asked to repeat things over and over again, I think this list confuses the order of things. What Jeanteal said was that at first Martin saw a creepy ass cracker, and ended the call. Then when Martin had ditched him, he called her again and they started talking about basketball, and after a while he noticed the "nigga was still following", and then the confrontation started. Martin did not try to lose him at that point again, only earlier when Zimmerman was still in his truck.

As to the question whether Martin as almost at home or not, how would she know where he was? I don't think her testimony is at all relevant in establishing Martin's whereabouts.

 

[RavenSky]

There's another possibility that fits the evidence.

It is possible Zimmerman did not follow Martin but instead hurried to cut him off.

I used to believe this when it was first discussed on the forums way back then, but changed my mind because the timeline just doesn't match.

If you're using Zimmerman's timeline, don't bother trying to get anything to match. The 911 call doesn't match what he told Serino, and neither one matches the walk-through.

I went back to check the discussion at the old forum archives. The timeline is not dependent on what Zimmerman told the police, it's constrained by the call log between Zimmerman and 311 on one hand, and Jenteal and Martin on the other. I just don't see there being enough time for Zimmerman to cut Martin off and chase him back towards the T before the fight.

yet the alternate theory has Trayvon getting all the way home AND all the way back to the T to ambush Zimmerman.

 

[Jayjay]

There's another possibility that fits the evidence.

It is possible Zimmerman did not follow Martin but instead hurried to cut him off.

I used to believe this when it was first discussed on the forums way back then, but changed my mind because the timeline just doesn't match.

If you're using Zimmerman's timeline, don't bother trying to get anything to match. The 911 call doesn't match what he told Serino, and neither one matches the walk-through.

I went back to check the discussion at the old forum archives. The timeline is not dependent on what Zimmerman told the police, it's constrained by the call log between Zimmerman and 311 on one hand, and Jenteal and Martin on the other. I just don't see there being enough time for Zimmerman to cut Martin off and chase him back towards the T before the fight.

yet the alternate theory has Trayvon getting all the way home AND all the way back to the T to ambush Zimmerman.

I don't see how the alternate theory requires that Martin got all the way home, nor does it assume that he was deliberately ambushing Zimmerman. But it does seem likely that for whatever reason Martin did turn back.

 

[arkirk]

I think Z has been given his last bye. From here on, if he persists, he is eventually going to wind up in jail...then prison. It is amazing...this is post 619 on an old dead case and here the Z comes again with his pistol. Glad I don't live in Florida.

 

[EPresence2]

Setting aside the bickering about posting styles and histories, is there anything more to discuss?

Apparently not [/snark]... for my part