Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Well at least no we know the guy can follow someone when he has no right to without instigating a deadly confrontation.

*runs for cover*

 LordofHats wrote:
Well at least no we know the guy can follow someone when he has no right to without instigating a deadly confrontation.

*runs for cover*

the PI wasn't black /sarcams /darkhumor

 Ouze wrote:
Why won't the libs leave this innocent man in peace?

Because he's not?

He got out of his car and followed someone half his size down an unlit pathway. What did he expect Martin to do? Women aren't the only people who get raped. Martin just exercised HIS right to defend HIMSELF.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

epronovost wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
The dude is a living gak magnet, the sooner he learns to keep off the radar, or just disappear, the better for everyone. He seems to always need to take some situation he finds himself in and do his best Chappelle's show "when keeping it real goes wrong" impression.

I think the guy might be a little cuckoo - what do you think? Perhaps driven mad by hundreds of thousands of death threats and being the most hated man in america.

That certainly doesn't help mental equilibrium, but he was a bit bunker before that. He shot a kid after playing vigilante against the best advice of police and 911 services. These are not the actions of a sane and balanced man.

He had a desire to defend his community for whatever reason. I'm not sure what encourages people to want to do that - could be insanity - could be a lot of things. It also sounds a lot worse when you don't mention the fact that the kid he shot was on top of him and beating him.

It seems a lot better when you mention he followed the kid half his size around in his car, then got out of his car to follow the kid down an unlit path.

A kid half his size.

While he claim to be MMA trained.

Sorry, Z-man, you went looking for trouble and FOUND IT.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Xenomancers wrote:

You lose all right to victim-hood when you throw the first punch when you could have easily run away.

Except we have exactly ONE person's word - Zimmermans - and zero video or physical evidence that Martin threw the first punch. And we can safely assume Zimmerman has a VERY strong interest in making Martin look bad, making him a decidedly biased witness.

 Vulcan wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Why won't the libs leave this innocent man in peace?

Because he's not?

He got out of his car and followed someone half his size down an unlit pathway. What did he expect Martin to do? Women aren't the only people who get raped. Martin just exercised HIS right to defend HIMSELF.

Martin was NOT half the size of Zimmerman. Martin was a good deal taller and much more in shape. Also what came out in the trial was that Martin thought Zimmerman was homosexual and told his friend on the phone he was going to teach him a lesson. Even in Florida with their stand-your-ground laws you have no obligation to retreat, but if you do retreat to safety, and then intentionally reengage you open yourself up to liability.


As for this PI, how many times has the PI tried to call Zimmerman before Zimmerman harassed him? It's never mentioned. Was it once, twice, 50 times? How many times did he call Zimmerman's relatives? I once had a collection agent calling me for over a month (not me, wrong person, same name). I eventually cracked on them too.

Well, maybe someday Zimmerman will let the law handle just one of his problems rather than going off the deep end getting charges filed against him.

Well, he did pull that one guy out of a Car Wreck, so not all of his publicity has been bad.

I wonder if this is how the OJ Simpson backers felt in the years after his acquittal?

Are we seriously going to rehash the Zimmerman trial all over again? The initial response from the police upon examining the scene and interviewing Zimmerman was that there wasn’t enough evidence to charge him with a crime. The DA bowed to public pressure and pressed charges anyway and the evidence submitted in court didn’t support the charges and Zimmerman was acquitted. We’ve been over this all before and the facts don’t change.

Prestor Jon wrote:
Are we seriously going to rehash the Zimmerman trial all over again? The initial response from the police upon examining the scene and interviewing Zimmerman was that there wasn’t enough evidence to charge him with a crime. The FA bowed to public pressure and pressed charges anyway and the evidence submitted in court didn’t support the charges and Zimmerman was acquitted. We’ve been over this all before and the facts don’t change.

Thanks for pointing this out.

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Why won't the libs leave this innocent man in peace?

Because he's not?

He got out of his car and followed someone half his size down an unlit pathway. What did he expect Martin to do? Women aren't the only people who get raped. Martin just exercised HIS right to defend HIMSELF.

Martin was NOT half the size of Zimmerman. Martin was a good deal taller and much more in shape. Also what came out in the trial was that Martin thought Zimmerman was homosexual and told his friend on the phone he was going to teach him a lesson. Even in Florida with their stand-your-ground laws you have no obligation to retreat, but if you do retreat to safety, and then intentionally reengage you open yourself up to liability.


As for this PI, how many times has the PI tried to call Zimmerman before Zimmerman harassed him? It's never mentioned. Was it once, twice, 50 times? How many times did he call Zimmerman's relatives? I once had a collection agent calling me for over a month (not me, wrong person, same name). I eventually cracked on them too.

That’s what I was wondering. If the investigator was harassing him and his family over what is obviously a sensitive topic, then it could be understood why Zimmerman was triggered.
Not saying the response was appropriate, but understandable how he could have been motivated.

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Why won't the libs leave this innocent man in peace?

Because he's not?

He got out of his car and followed someone half his size down an unlit pathway. What did he expect Martin to do? Women aren't the only people who get raped. Martin just exercised HIS right to defend HIMSELF.

Martin was NOT half the size of Zimmerman. Martin was a good deal taller and much more in shape. Also what came out in the trial was that Martin thought Zimmerman was homosexual and told his friend on the phone he was going to teach him a lesson.

Are you sure that last part came out in the trial there? Are you sure you're not repeating something Rush Limbaugh invented?

 Ouze wrote:
Are you sure that last part came out in the trial there? Are you sure you're not repeating something Rush Limbaugh invented?

Rush Limbaugh and also Drudge, if I can remember my schlock right wing liars correctly. I think in Jeantel's testimony she said Zimmerman might be a rapist which is a problem for any guy who's not in to that, or something like that, because what the Zimmerman trial had lacked up to that point was some casual homophobia.

Rush and co then took that as what Martin himself was thinking and declaring it was 'proof' that Martin confronted Zimmerman and his motivation why, because those guys are liars. And then people who listen to those liars come here and repeat it.

Prestor Jon wrote:
Are we seriously going to rehash the Zimmerman trial all over again? The initial response from the police upon examining the scene and interviewing Zimmerman was that there wasn’t enough evidence to charge him with a crime. The DA bowed to public pressure and pressed charges anyway and the evidence submitted in court didn’t support the charges and Zimmerman was acquitted. We’ve been over this all before and the facts don’t change.

I don't think we are. The point was that Xenomancers did not include the full story of what occured up to that point. We might never know what exactly happened. But it isn't a stretch to say that Zimmerman acted very threatening on that evening. Put the scenario of a man following you in his car and when you run he starts running after you to anyone and see what their response is. I asked my partner and she said what boils down to "this is how I'm going to get raped/murdered."

 sebster wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Are you sure that last part came out in the trial there? Are you sure you're not repeating something Rush Limbaugh invented?

Rush Limbaugh and also Drudge, if I can remember my schlock right wing liars correctly. I think in Jeantel's testimony she said Zimmerman might be a rapist which is a problem for any guy who's not in to that, or something like that, because what the Zimmerman trial had lacked up to that point was some casual homophobia.

Rush and co then took that as what Martin himself was thinking and declaring it was 'proof' that Martin confronted Zimmerman and his motivation why, because those guys are liars. And then people who listen to those liars come here and repeat it.

Jenteal states that she suggested to Martin that Zimmerman might be a rapist but Martin dismissed that concern.
http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1306/26/cnr.10.html


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:
Are we seriously going to rehash the Zimmerman trial all over again? The initial response from the police upon examining the scene and interviewing Zimmerman was that there wasn’t enough evidence to charge him with a crime. The DA bowed to public pressure and pressed charges anyway and the evidence submitted in court didn’t support the charges and Zimmerman was acquitted. We’ve been over this all before and the facts don’t change.

I don't think we are. The point was that Xenomancers did not include the full story of what occured up to that point. We might never know what exactly happened. But it isn't a stretch to say that Zimmerman acted very threatening on that evening. Put the scenario of a man following you in his car and when you run he starts running after you to anyone and see what their response is. I asked my partner and she said what boils down to "this is how I'm going to get raped/murdered."

Believing that you are being followed doesnt justify the use of force or assaulting somebody. Zimmerman’s injuries, the bullet wound that killed Martin and the trajectory of that shot along with other physical evidence all supports Zimmerman’s account of being assaulted by Martin and shooting in self defense while Martin was on top of him and beating him. That’s why he wasn’t initially charged and that’s why he was acquitted at his trial.

Prestor Jon wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Are you sure that last part came out in the trial there? Are you sure you're not repeating something Rush Limbaugh invented?

Rush Limbaugh and also Drudge, if I can remember my schlock right wing liars correctly. I think in Jeantel's testimony she said Zimmerman might be a rapist which is a problem for any guy who's not in to that, or something like that, because what the Zimmerman trial had lacked up to that point was some casual homophobia.

Rush and co then took that as what Martin himself was thinking and declaring it was 'proof' that Martin confronted Zimmerman and his motivation why, because those guys are liars. And then people who listen to those liars come here and repeat it.

Jenteal states that she suggested to Martin that Zimmerman might be a rapist but Martin dismissed that concern.
http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1306/26/cnr.10.html

Well take rape of the table and we're only left with the options of being mugged, violently mugged, stabbed, shot etc. etc. Again, its evening time and possibly getting dark and a man follows you in bis car and then runs after you, what would you think his intentions are? It wasn't a smart move to follow the guy like that, its why Martin ended up dead. If Zimmerman hadn't pursued, two people would still be alive.

I think the issue was more with the "he attacked him out of homophobia" statement


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Prestor Jon wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:
Are we seriously going to rehash the Zimmerman trial all over again? The initial response from the police upon examining the scene and interviewing Zimmerman was that there wasn’t enough evidence to charge him with a crime. The DA bowed to public pressure and pressed charges anyway and the evidence submitted in court didn’t support the charges and Zimmerman was acquitted. We’ve been over this all before and the facts don’t change.

I don't think we are. The point was that Xenomancers did not include the full story of what occured up to that point. We might never know what exactly happened. But it isn't a stretch to say that Zimmerman acted very threatening on that evening. Put the scenario of a man following you in his car and when you run he starts running after you to anyone and see what their response is. I asked my partner and she said what boils down to "this is how I'm going to get raped/murdered."

Believing that you are being followed doesnt justify the use of force or assaulting somebody. Zimmerman’s injuries, the bullet wound that killed Martin and the trajectory of that shot along with other physical evidence all supports Zimmerman’s account of being assaulted by Martin and shooting in self defense while Martin was on top of him and beating him. That’s why he wasn’t initially charged and that’s why he was acquitted at his trial.

I never said that violence should have been used. The self defence excuse is so hilarious, he had to go out of his way to get into the fight with Martin, self defense at that exact moment or not.

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

Spoiler:

Prestor Jon wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Are you sure that last part came out in the trial there? Are you sure you're not repeating something Rush Limbaugh invented?

Rush Limbaugh and also Drudge, if I can remember my schlock right wing liars correctly. I think in Jeantel's testimony she said Zimmerman might be a rapist which is a problem for any guy who's not in to that, or something like that, because what the Zimmerman trial had lacked up to that point was some casual homophobia.

Rush and co then took that as what Martin himself was thinking and declaring it was 'proof' that Martin confronted Zimmerman and his motivation why, because those guys are liars. And then people who listen to those liars come here and repeat it.

Jenteal states that she suggested to Martin that Zimmerman might be a rapist but Martin dismissed that concern.
http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1306/26/cnr.10.html

Well take rape of the table and we're only left with the options of being mugged, violently mugged, stabbed, shot etc. etc. Again, its evening time and possibly getting dark and a man follows you in bis car and then runs after you, what would you think his intentions are? It wasn't a smart move to follow the guy like that, its why Martin ended up dead. If Zimmerman hadn't pursued, two people would still be alive.

I think the issue was more with the "he attacked him out of homophobia" statement


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Prestor Jon wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:
Are we seriously going to rehash the Zimmerman trial all over again? The initial response from the police upon examining the scene and interviewing Zimmerman was that there wasn’t enough evidence to charge him with a crime. The DA bowed to public pressure and pressed charges anyway and the evidence submitted in court didn’t support the charges and Zimmerman was acquitted. We’ve been over this all before and the facts don’t change.

I don't think we are. The point was that Xenomancers did not include the full story of what occured up to that point. We might never know what exactly happened. But it isn't a stretch to say that Zimmerman acted very threatening on that evening. Put the scenario of a man following you in his car and when you run he starts running after you to anyone and see what their response is. I asked my partner and she said what boils down to "this is how I'm going to get raped/murdered."

Believing that you are being followed doesnt justify the use of force or assaulting somebody. Zimmerman’s injuries, the bullet wound that killed Martin and the trajectory of that shot along with other physical evidence all supports Zimmerman’s account of being assaulted by Martin and shooting in self defense while Martin was on top of him and beating him. That’s why he wasn’t initially charged and that’s why he was acquitted at his trial.

I never said that violence should have been used. The self defence excuse is so hilarious, he had to go out of his way to get into the fight with Martin, self defense at that exact moment or not.

Initiating a confrontation with a strange because you think you’re being followed isn’t aomething I would advise anyone to do. Calling the police to report it while proceeding to your destination as quickly as possible is the smart move. Picking a fight with a stranger is always a roll of the dice that you could lose in spectacular fashion.

Prestor Jon wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

Spoiler:

Prestor Jon wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Are you sure that last part came out in the trial there? Are you sure you're not repeating something Rush Limbaugh invented?

Rush Limbaugh and also Drudge, if I can remember my schlock right wing liars correctly. I think in Jeantel's testimony she said Zimmerman might be a rapist which is a problem for any guy who's not in to that, or something like that, because what the Zimmerman trial had lacked up to that point was some casual homophobia.

Rush and co then took that as what Martin himself was thinking and declaring it was 'proof' that Martin confronted Zimmerman and his motivation why, because those guys are liars. And then people who listen to those liars come here and repeat it.

Jenteal states that she suggested to Martin that Zimmerman might be a rapist but Martin dismissed that concern.
http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1306/26/cnr.10.html

Well take rape of the table and we're only left with the options of being mugged, violently mugged, stabbed, shot etc. etc. Again, its evening time and possibly getting dark and a man follows you in bis car and then runs after you, what would you think his intentions are? It wasn't a smart move to follow the guy like that, its why Martin ended up dead. If Zimmerman hadn't pursued, two people would still be alive.

I think the issue was more with the "he attacked him out of homophobia" statement


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Prestor Jon wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:
Are we seriously going to rehash the Zimmerman trial all over again? The initial response from the police upon examining the scene and interviewing Zimmerman was that there wasn’t enough evidence to charge him with a crime. The DA bowed to public pressure and pressed charges anyway and the evidence submitted in court didn’t support the charges and Zimmerman was acquitted. We’ve been over this all before and the facts don’t change.

I don't think we are. The point was that Xenomancers did not include the full story of what occured up to that point. We might never know what exactly happened. But it isn't a stretch to say that Zimmerman acted very threatening on that evening. Put the scenario of a man following you in his car and when you run he starts running after you to anyone and see what their response is. I asked my partner and she said what boils down to "this is how I'm going to get raped/murdered."

Believing that you are being followed doesnt justify the use of force or assaulting somebody. Zimmerman’s injuries, the bullet wound that killed Martin and the trajectory of that shot along with other physical evidence all supports Zimmerman’s account of being assaulted by Martin and shooting in self defense while Martin was on top of him and beating him. That’s why he wasn’t initially charged and that’s why he was acquitted at his trial.

I never said that violence should have been used. The self defence excuse is so hilarious, he had to go out of his way to get into the fight with Martin, self defense at that exact moment or not.

Initiating a confrontation with a strange because you think you’re being followed isn’t aomething I would advise anyone to do. Calling the police to report it while proceeding to your destination as quickly as possible is the smart move. Picking a fight with a stranger is always a roll of the dice that you could lose in spectacular fashion.

Just like Zimmerman was told not to follow him? Martin did not make the smartest decision, but Zimmerman definitely picked the fight. Wannabe Batman survived and somebody else had to pay the price for his fantasies.

Legally there was no case because you only had one witness and not much else. But practically speaking if it wasn't for Batman trolling the streets, Martin would still be alive.

Also "think you're being followed"? We have the transcript of Zimmerman admitting he was following him, there was nothing 'think' about it.

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
[Just like Zimmerman was told not to follow him?t.

Zimmerman was NEVER told not to follow Martin. He asked if he should follow him, and was told it wasn't necessary, but never ordered to not do it.

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
[Just like Zimmerman was told not to follow him?t.

Zimmerman was NEVER told not to follow Martin. He asked if he should follow him, and was told it wasn't necessary, but never ordered to not do it.

He was told he shouldn't.

Dispatcher: Are you following him?
Zimmerman: Yeah.
Dispatcher: Okay, we don't need you to do that.
Zimmerman: Okay.

But whatever absolves Zimmerman of his part in this?

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

Spoiler:

Prestor Jon wrote:

 sebster wrote:

 Ouze wrote:
Are you sure that last part came out in the trial there? Are you sure you're not repeating something Rush Limbaugh invented?

Rush Limbaugh and also Drudge, if I can remember my schlock right wing liars correctly. I think in Jeantel's testimony she said Zimmerman might be a rapist which is a problem for any guy who's not in to that, or something like that, because what the Zimmerman trial had lacked up to that point was some casual homophobia.

Rush and co then took that as what Martin himself was thinking and declaring it was 'proof' that Martin confronted Zimmerman and his motivation why, because those guys are liars. And then people who listen to those liars come here and repeat it.

Jenteal states that she suggested to Martin that Zimmerman might be a rapist but Martin dismissed that concern.
http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1306/26/cnr.10.html

Well take rape of the table and we're only left with the options of being mugged, violently mugged, stabbed, shot etc. etc. Again, its evening time and possibly getting dark and a man follows you in bis car and then runs after you, what would you think his intentions are? It wasn't a smart move to follow the guy like that, its why Martin ended up dead. If Zimmerman hadn't pursued, two people would still be alive.

I think the issue was more with the "he attacked him out of homophobia" statement


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Prestor Jon wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:
Are we seriously going to rehash the Zimmerman trial all over again? The initial response from the police upon examining the scene and interviewing Zimmerman was that there wasn’t enough evidence to charge him with a crime. The DA bowed to public pressure and pressed charges anyway and the evidence submitted in court didn’t support the charges and Zimmerman was acquitted. We’ve been over this all before and the facts don’t change.

I don't think we are. The point was that Xenomancers did not include the full story of what occured up to that point. We might never know what exactly happened. But it isn't a stretch to say that Zimmerman acted very threatening on that evening. Put the scenario of a man following you in his car and when you run he starts running after you to anyone and see what their response is. I asked my partner and she said what boils down to "this is how I'm going to get raped/murdered."

Believing that you are being followed doesnt justify the use of force or assaulting somebody. Zimmerman’s injuries, the bullet wound that killed Martin and the trajectory of that shot along with other physical evidence all supports Zimmerman’s account of being assaulted by Martin and shooting in self defense while Martin was on top of him and beating him. That’s why he wasn’t initially charged and that’s why he was acquitted at his trial.

I never said that violence should have been used. The self defence excuse is so hilarious, he had to go out of his way to get into the fight with Martin, self defense at that exact moment or not.

Initiating a confrontation with a strange because you think you’re being followed isn’t aomething I would advise anyone to do. Calling the police to report it while proceeding to your destination as quickly as possible is the smart move. Picking a fight with a stranger is always a roll of the dice that you could lose in spectacular fashion.

Just like Zimmerman was told not to follow him? Martin did not make the smartest decision, but Zimmerman definitely picked the fight. Wannabe Batman survived and somebody else had to pay the price for his fantasies.

Legally there was no case because you only had one witness and not much else. But practically speaking if it wasn't for Batman trolling the streets, Martin would still be alive.

Also "think you're being followed"? We have the transcript of Zimmerman admitting he was following him, there was nothing 'think' about it.

From Martins perspective and generally for anyone being followed they think they’re being followed but can’t know for sure unless they interact with the person they think is following them.

Legally there was no case because the facts and physical evidence supported Zimmerman’s self defense justification.

It’s not illegal to follow somebody, it’s not a course of action that I would recommend or condone but people are free to do it. Likewise following the directions of 911 dispatchers is a good idea but the dispatchers don’t have any authority to command you to do anything.

There is no evidence of Zimmerman doing anything illegal and the evidence supports his claim of being assaulted by Martin. If Martin doesn’t create the confrontation he doesn’t get shot.

And so the circular talk on this is again engaged.

It doesn't need to, because there is no point. Lets just say we disagree on the amount of responsibility Zimmerman carries in causing the confrontation. The whole outcome and trial left aside.

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
[Just like Zimmerman was told not to follow him?t.

Zimmerman was NEVER told not to follow Martin. He asked if he should follow him, and was told it wasn't necessary, but never ordered to not do it.

Hey, are you going to cop to that "Zimmerman was the attempted victim of a gay bashing" bs balloon you tried to float earlier in this thread, or are we expected to pretend you didn't trial that?

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
It doesn't need to, because there is no point. Lets just say we disagree on the amount of responsibility Zimmerman carries in causing the confrontation. The whole outcome and trial left aside.

It definitely takes two to tango and Zimmerman didn’t exercise the best judgement. I don’t think Zimmerman wanted a confrontation and I think Martin wanted to confront whomever was following him and teach him a lesson. Zimmerman initiated the chain of events and Martin escalated it to violence.

Prestor Jon wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
It doesn't need to, because there is no point. Lets just say we disagree on the amount of responsibility Zimmerman carries in causing the confrontation. The whole outcome and trial left aside.

It definitely takes two to tango and Zimmerman didn’t exercise the best judgement. I don’t think Zimmerman wanted a confrontation and I think Martin wanted to confront whomever was following him and teach him a lesson. Zimmerman initiated the chain of events and Martin escalated it to violence.

And so the circular talk is solved by a mutual understanding

Zimmerman obviously wanted a confrontation. Then like the coward he is, he pulled a gun once he started losing.

 Ouze wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
[Just like Zimmerman was told not to follow him?t.

Zimmerman was NEVER told not to follow Martin. He asked if he should follow him, and was told it wasn't necessary, but never ordered to not do it.

Hey, are you going to cop to that "Zimmerman was the attempted victim of a gay bashing" bs balloon you tried to float earlier in this thread, or are we expected to pretend you didn't trial that?

I'll admit I misremembered the facts of a 6 year old case and partially got it wrong. Martin's friend did admit to bringing up the "gay rapist" narrative though.

Just wondering if you are going to be calling out anyone else in this thread for not being totally accurate?



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
[Just like Zimmerman was told not to follow him?t.

Zimmerman was NEVER told not to follow Martin. He asked if he should follow him, and was told it wasn't necessary, but never ordered to not do it.

He was told he shouldn't.

Dispatcher: Are you following him?
Zimmerman: Yeah.
Dispatcher: Okay, we don't need you to do that.
Zimmerman: Okay.

But whatever absolves Zimmerman of his part in this?

I'm not trying to say Zimmerman isn't somewhat to blame for this incident. He does carry some of the blame. Personally, I feel this was a situation where bad circumstances (Martin was an unknown person acting weird in a gated community and fit the description of burglars hitting the area), forced two donkey caves with chips on their shoulders together. One had a gun.

 cuda1179 wrote:

I'm not trying to say Zimmerman isn't somewhat to blame for this incident. He does carry some of the blame. Personally, I feel this was a situation where bad circumstances (Martin was an unknown person acting weird in a gated community and fit the description of burglars hitting the area), forced two donkey caves with chips on their shoulders together. One had a gun.

What description, young man in hoodie? How many people would fit such descriptions. A few years ago half of the friends I had could fit the hoodie description. How did Zimmerman know he didn't live there etc etc. Zimmerman playing wannabe batman is the donkey cave for going out with a gun looking for trouble in the first place. He could have waited for the police. Its a wonder his personality hasn't led him to even more trouble by now.

 cuda1179 wrote:
Just wondering if you are going to be calling out anyone else in this thread for not being totally accurate?

No, just the really egregious examples of historical revisionism.

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:

I'm not trying to say Zimmerman isn't somewhat to blame for this incident. He does carry some of the blame. Personally, I feel this was a situation where bad circumstances (Martin was an unknown person acting weird in a gated community and fit the description of burglars hitting the area), forced two donkey caves with chips on their shoulders together. One had a gun.

What description, young man in hoodie? How many people would fit such descriptions. A few years ago half of the friends I had could fit the hoodie description. How did Zimmerman know he didn't live there etc etc. Zimmerman playing wannabe batman is the donkey cave for going out with a gun looking for trouble in the first place. He could have waited for the police. Its a wonder his personality hasn't led him to even more trouble by now.

Short of needing to save somebody being victimized by a crime in progress it's always better to let the police handle things. The liability you take on for inserting yourself in a situation you don't need to be involved in isn't worth it. Zimmerman has brought a lot of trouble on himself because of doing this which is highlighted by this most recent example. If you feel you are being harassed by a PI or anyone, you should document the harassment and call the police and inform them of the harassment. Making threats and trying to take matters into your own hands is never a good idea it just makes things more difficult for yourself.

I've spoken about this with my wife often because every spring/summer we tend to get suspicious people coming through our neighborhood looking to get hired to do yardwork, frequently they don't have business cards or equipment and a penchant for walking around a house and looking in the windows to see if anyone is home instead of ringing the doorbell. I tell me wife to please call the police if anyone makes her suspicious and to never confront anyone herself. If you confront somebody who is up to no good you put yourself in a very vulnerable situation and if you confront somebody who isn't dangerous there's still no benefit to yourself. The risk isn't worth it.