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.

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
Forgive me for misinterpreting your " its because he' Black" comment.

You didn't. When you say 2% this and wealthy neighbourhood that, it does come across as he was suspicious because as a black young man he didn't belong there. That was my point.

 cuda1179 wrote:
Believe it or not, I was young once too. The quickest route from the local basketball court was through a neighbor's yard. This was some I knew personally, heck I mowed their yard. A couple time during a late night return I sparked a 911 call. Innocent mistake, but I understand the concern.

Zimmerman calling the cops I have no problem with. After that things get hazy. If Zimmerman approached martin and assaulted him, yes I would agree it was his fault. However, if Zimmerman was in fact walking back to his truck when Martin assaulted him, then at least a majority of the blame was on Martin. None of us really know what happened.

Exactly, we will never know. But fact of the matter is people lie to avoid prison. The legal system did what it could with the information it had and that is how it works, but a man who had done nothing wrong up until that point died. We're not going to hold another trial, but I'm also not going to believe a word batman says without some extra evidence.

People also tell the truth to avoid prison. You seem to state Martin had "done nothing wrong" as some kind of fact. Getting on top of someone and beating them is definitely wrong.

Which is exactly why I said up until that point

Non blacks are scared to even say the word black because even mentioning black these days can get you called a racist. Not saying that's what happened here but it is a legitimate concern for any non black person. I think it's odd you expect him to want to bring up race immediately. He also said he "looks black" - not sure if he ment it that way - but when I say something "looks like" I'm not exactly sure what I am seeing. If I said somebody "looks black" it wouldn't surprise me to later find out there were just a really tan white guy - esp at night. Not defending Zimmerman here - I am pretty sure he knew the kid was black. He probably just didn't want to say it because he didn't want to sound "racist".

What has he done again to earn his imortal place in Dakka Bingo?

 jhe90 wrote:
What has he done again to earn his imortal place in Dakka Bingo?

Sent some threatening text messages.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:
What has he done again to earn his imortal place in Dakka Bingo?

Sent some threatening text messages.

You are underselling it a bit there. He sent an alarming numbers of text messages, calls, voicemail messages and email in a very short span of time to a PI working for a documentary crew all of this during Christmas time.

He also likes to feed aligators.

 d-usa wrote:
He also likes to feed aligators.

They are endangered. It is noble. .

Endangered? I thought they were doing pretty well?

epronovost wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 jhe90 wrote:
What has he done again to earn his imortal place in Dakka Bingo?

Sent some threatening text messages.

You are underselling it a bit there. He sent an alarming numbers of text messages, calls, voicemail messages and email in a very short span of time to a PI working for a documentary crew all of this during Christmas time.

Ok. He made so many issues the news forgot him gettugf in trouble is news!

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
[
Which is exactly why I said up until that point

Sorry, I misread what you posted as "a man who had done nothing wrong up until the point he died"


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I'd still like to know how many times the PI called Zimmerman, showed up at his door, talked to his relatives, and generally acted like a nuisance.

If it was one call, then Zimmerman is a total jerk in this case.

If there was a constant barrage of asking, even after being turned down, well, Zimmerman is still a jerk. But at least it's somewhat understandable. One of those "I don't condone it, but I understand why you did it" situations.

A crime is a crime.

Z can make a complaint same as the PI if he was harassed.

It seems like the guy was also bugging Zimmerman’s family

They should have just blocked him I guess?

The PI made contact with Z's family, beyond that we dont know, but unless the PI was doing something illegal that would get his license revoked, there doesn't appear to be anything that would warrant 55 phone calls, 67 text messages, 36 voicemails and 27 emails of an angry and threatening nature, especially after being told to stop.

In most situations I would be giving the person in Zimmerman's situation the benefit of the doubt, but Zimmerman, even outside the Martin event, has a long and established history of escalating things far beyond necessary and going out of his way to generatr drama, to say nothing of his naked profiting from the death of a teenager and the bulk load of ugly cringe that was involved in him selling that weapon.

 Vaktathi wrote:
The PI made contact with Z's family, beyond that we dont know, but unless the PI was doing something illegal that would get his license revoked, there doesn't appear to be anything that would warrant 55 phone calls, 67 text messages, 36 voicemails and 27 emails of an angry and threatening nature, especially after being told to stop.

In most situations I would be giving the person in Zimmerman's situation the benefit of the doubt, but Zimmerman, even outside the Martin event, has a long and established history of escalating things far beyond necessary and going out of his way to generatr drama, to say nothing of his naked profiting from the death of a teenager and the bulk load of ugly cringe that was involved in him selling that weapon.

The guy has to eat man, and the gun was his to sell. He's virtually unemployable now. Wasn't he living like a hermit in a camper for a while?

 cuda1179 wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:
The PI made contact with Z's family, beyond that we dont know, but unless the PI was doing something illegal that would get his license revoked, there doesn't appear to be anything that would warrant 55 phone calls, 67 text messages, 36 voicemails and 27 emails of an angry and threatening nature, especially after being told to stop.

In most situations I would be giving the person in Zimmerman's situation the benefit of the doubt, but Zimmerman, even outside the Martin event, has a long and established history of escalating things far beyond necessary and going out of his way to generatr drama, to say nothing of his naked profiting from the death of a teenager and the bulk load of ugly cringe that was involved in him selling that weapon.

The guy has to eat man, and the gun was his to sell. He's virtually unemployable now. Wasn't he living like a hermit in a camper for a while?

No clue, he may be living in a camper, I dunno.

Yes, the gun was his to sell, I make no attempt to deny him that right.

However, the manner in which he did so, the attention it attracted, the group of people who were interested in it, and the rhetoric used in its sale was...well, lets just say it reflected well on nobody involved, putting it politely. Profiting off the death of a teenager in a nakedly crass manner impresses few people.

As is, given how the dude seems to find himself in new trouble like clockwork, and goes out of his way to revel in the drama in an aggressive and bellugerent manner, and uses his killing of a teenager as some sort of badge of honor/toughness display routinely, I wouldn't employ him either.

 jhe90 wrote:
What has he done again to earn his imortal place in Dakka Bingo?

The truth is I really have no idea why Zimmerman has so much staying power. It's not like there is a shortage of men who have killed young black men under questionable circumstances, and yet a few years after those shootings no one seems to remember their names.

If I were to guess, it would be because it's the closest you can get to putting a face on Florida Man ©.

I think it was just a mix of a big media trial, his ability to constantly show back up in the media for something stupid, and (as evidenced here) the ability for people to relitigate his trial over and over again.

 cuda1179 wrote:

 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.

There was more to the description than "guy in a hoodie". Young black male, not of the neighborhood, occurring at night. Add to that that Zimmerman saw him jump a security fence to gain access to the neighborhood, saw him ducking between houses, and thought he was looking in windows. Yeah, that would make me suspicious too.

And to answer your question, young, black, and male in and of itself all ready puts things into the 2% of the population. Factoring in that this was a fairly high end neighborhood, it likely drops well below that.

I'll grant you all that.

The fact remains that Zimmerman was not a cop, and not a member of a certified neighborhood watch, and even if he had been he was in violation of at least FOUR rules that every certified neighborhood watch is REQUIRED to abide by to get and remain certified by the police.

1) In a certified neighborhood watch, you NEVER patrol alone.

2) In a certified neighborhood watch, you NEVER carry a gun, even if you have a C&C permit.

3) In a certified neighborhood watch, you NEVER leave the car. Not even if someone's life is on the line.

4) In a certified neighborhood watch, you ALWAYS do what the dispatcher tell you when calling in a report.

Violate any of those four rules and your certification is revoked on the spot. And yet, there Zimmerman was, patrolling alone, with his gun, leaving the car, and disobeying the dispatcher. Even if he had been certified he would have lost that certification that night. Those rules exist for a reason: to protect the person on patrol. It keeps them out of trouble and gives them a witness in case something DOES happen. In short, those rules prevent the very thing that DID occur that night from occurring.

Sorry, but Zimmerman went looking for trouble and found it, in spades. Given Martin's known gang affiliations, Zimmerman is QUITE lucky Martin didn't shoot HIM.

 d-usa wrote:
and (as evidenced here) the ability for people to relitigate his trial over and over again.

Also to spice their recollections with things they've made up, apparently.

 Ouze wrote:

 d-usa wrote:
and (as evidenced here) the ability for people to relitigate his trial over and over again.

Also to spice their recollections with things they've made up, apparently.

True on both sides, apparently.

Aw, don't be salty. I was referring to this:

 Vulcan wrote:
Sorry, but Zimmerman went looking for trouble and found it, in spades. Given Martin's known gang affiliations, Zimmerman is QUITE lucky Martin didn't shoot HIM.

not salty, I was referring to myself.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. If I was on the jury I'd have acquitted Zimmerman reluctantly. However, if things had played out differently, and Zimmerman had died (shot by own gun, head beaten on concrete, whatever) I'd probably have acquitted Martin on any charges too.

 cuda1179 wrote:
not salty, I was referring to myself.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. If I was on the jury I'd have acquitted Zimmerman reluctantly. However, if things had played out differently, and Zimmerman had died (shot by own gun, head beaten on concrete, whatever) I'd probably have acquitted Martin on any charges too.

I think you are looking at it the wrong way. Initiation of physical violence is a serious offense. It should be punished. And no - following someone is not initiation of physical violence. Heck - Zimmerman could have been walking down the street screaming the N word and it wouldn't a dang difference. Physical violence trumps all.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
not salty, I was referring to myself.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. If I was on the jury I'd have acquitted Zimmerman reluctantly. However, if things had played out differently, and Zimmerman had died (shot by own gun, head beaten on concrete, whatever) I'd probably have acquitted Martin on any charges too.

I think you are looking at it the wrong way. Initiation of physical violence is a serious offense. It should be punished. And no - following someone is not initiation of physical violence. Heck - Zimmerman could have been walking down the street screaming the N word and it wouldn't a dang difference. Physical violence trumps all.

And when one person is dead but the other isn't, it's a very difficult case to prove that the dead person didn't initiate physical violence. Forensics only works to a certain point.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
not salty, I was referring to myself.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. If I was on the jury I'd have acquitted Zimmerman reluctantly. However, if things had played out differently, and Zimmerman had died (shot by own gun, head beaten on concrete, whatever) I'd probably have acquitted Martin on any charges too.

I think you are looking at it the wrong way. Initiation of physical violence is a serious offense. It should be punished. And no - following someone is not initiation of physical violence. Heck - Zimmerman could have been walking down the street screaming the N word and it wouldn't a dang difference. Physical violence trumps all.

And when one person is dead but the other isn't, it's a very difficult case to prove that the dead person didn't initiate physical violence. Forensics only works to a certain point.

Well - that's true. If the situation was reversed and Martin bashed in Zmanns skull. He could have just said he pulled the gun on him and then he attacked him - if nobody saw. It would be very difficult to prove otherwise. Then you just have to go with what evidence you have. In that case Martin would and should go free - because there is enough reasonable doubt.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

 Xenomancers wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
not salty, I was referring to myself.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. If I was on the jury I'd have acquitted Zimmerman reluctantly. However, if things had played out differently, and Zimmerman had died (shot by own gun, head beaten on concrete, whatever) I'd probably have acquitted Martin on any charges too.

I think you are looking at it the wrong way. Initiation of physical violence is a serious offense. It should be punished. And no - following someone is not initiation of physical violence. Heck - Zimmerman could have been walking down the street screaming the N word and it wouldn't a dang difference. Physical violence trumps all.

And when one person is dead but the other isn't, it's a very difficult case to prove that the dead person didn't initiate physical violence. Forensics only works to a certain point.

Well - that's true. If the situation was reversed and Martin bashed in Zmanns skull. He could have just said he pulled the gun on him and then he attacked him - if nobody saw. It would be very difficult to prove otherwise. Then you just have to go with what evidence you have. In that case Martin would and should go free - because there is enough reasonable doubt.

Yeah, that's what I was getting at. I don't think many people believe Zimmeran isn't a prick, he is. Just that there wasn't enough evidence to know what happened exactly, thus no conviction.

Someone following you is enough reason to stand your ground and use lethal force if the situation escalates. But that is also a reality in today’s society and justice system.

Someone using lethal force via gun is easily held up as someone protecting themselves. Someone using fists or a knife is often pained as an aggressor.

Part of that is the reality that guns are just easy to use at a distance, and other forms of self defense require you close in with the person you are defending yourself from. We don’t like laws that require us to run away if able rather than using lethal force, but we judge people for not running away if they use something other than a gun. Even with a gun, chasing the bad guy and shooting him (usually) negates any self defense claim. You stand there and you shoot, and if you close the distance yourself you probably really weren’t scared enough to use lethal force or you would have stayed away from them. But knifes and fists require you to make the move to close the distance, preferably on your terms or else the person you are defending yourself from will have the advantage. I dabbled in BJJ a tiny bit, and the same mindset is used there as well. You are either far enough away at all times so they can’t attack you, or you close the distance and get in tight to negate any advantage they have. But that charge to get in tight could be seen as me “starting the physical fight” rather than me setting myself up to protect myself from his attacks. Physical sneak attacks are needed for self defense for the same reason we carry concealed, we want the advantage of surprise during our defense.

But standing there and shooting a guy and saying “I was scared” is a well accepted defense.

But winning a physical lethal fight and saying “I was scared” usually results in “if you were scared of him, why did you charge him and fight him. If you thought he could hurt you, why get into a physical fight with him!” Even without any potential racial biases, it’s a much harder defense.

This is not to retrial Z vs M, just a general observation.

 Xenomancers wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
not salty, I was referring to myself.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. If I was on the jury I'd have acquitted Zimmerman reluctantly. However, if things had played out differently, and Zimmerman had died (shot by own gun, head beaten on concrete, whatever) I'd probably have acquitted Martin on any charges too.

I think you are looking at it the wrong way. Initiation of physical violence is a serious offense. It should be punished. And no - following someone is not initiation of physical violence. Heck - Zimmerman could have been walking down the street screaming the N word and it wouldn't a dang difference. Physical violence trumps all.

Unless you're in a state that has a 'fighting words' law...

I think the fact that the dude was hired by Jay-Z and the Weinstein Company is a significant factor that people seem to be overlooking. You have a PI being backed by a very powerful and wealthy individual who has an established history with the BLM movement including a 1.5M dollar donation. Jay-Z is also a longtime friend of the Martin family ever since the Treyvon's death. This is enough to question if the documentary was heavily biased and inconsiderate to Zimmerman's privacy. Then you add in the Weinstein Company's well established history of predatory use of PI's to control and harass people. Don't get me wrong Zman is an idiot to make death threats especially against public figures, but something here doesn't add up. It could be as simple as a publicity stunt to get the documentary coverage, Zimmerman being an idiot, or an actual frame job. It could even be a combination of any number of things. We do not have enough information at this point.