Did the PI call 911 and then ignore the instructions to not follow the insurance fraud suspect? That little bit lends more to the vigilante/Zimmerman is the aggressor theory.Quote:
Originally Posted by mhailey
Printable View
Did the PI call 911 and then ignore the instructions to not follow the insurance fraud suspect? That little bit lends more to the vigilante/Zimmerman is the aggressor theory.Quote:
Originally Posted by mhailey
He was not in a position "that could only escalate into violence ... ." There was an endless range of possible outcomes for this scenario. Further there is nothing "negligent" about this manslaughter. Zimmerman purposefully pulled the trigger and shot him. That is not negligent. Your logic would be roughly the same as blaming a rape victim for the rape because she dressed suggestively, went out with someone predisposed to violence, put herself in a position that could only have escalated into rape. Did she make a wise choice? No. Is she responsible for the other person's violent and illegal actions? No.
Did Zimmerman make a wise choice? No. Is he responsible for Martin's escalation of the encounter to physical violence? From the evidence we have seen so far, the answer is no.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theseus
I believe you are factually wrong. The 911 tape, by my review of it, shows Zimmerman complying with the statement from the 911 dispatcher to stop following Martin, and requesting to meet with the police when they arrive. George Zimmerman 911 Call To Stanford Police Department - YouTubeQuote:
Originally Posted by ryanjewell
If you are the aggressor, why are you calling 911, and then requesting to meet with the police?
What caused Martin to attack Zimmerman? I doubt that this was just some random attack. Without intending to do harm, Zimmerman somehow provoked the attack leading to the death of Martin. Even if the provocation was simply the act of following him, it still showed negligance on Zimmermans part, because, as the police report read, Zimmerman could have avoided the situation entirely. In fact, the act of following someone, in and of itself, can be considered a crime, especially if the follower is carrying a weapon, legally or not.Quote:
Originally Posted by mhailey
I might be wrong, but I think "factually" wrong implies that you have all "the facts". I'm pretty sure all of "the facts" are only known by a guy on trial and a dead kid...and that's it. The 911 tape SHOWS nothing but allows you assume he does not follow. This guy (on the other side of the coin) assumes otherwise due to the timeline of the calls: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/0...ll?detail=hideQuote:
Originally Posted by mhailey
Like I said before...I'm waiting to see how this plays out and what kind of information surfaces. And even then I may not feel like I know what happened...but good on ya for seeming to have made up your mind.
I said I was done with this thread, but I changed my mind today.It could be that Martin was a thug. Theseus, I gotta disagree with you that Zimmerman was provoking an attack from Martin, by what we know- he was following a suspicious man around with the objection of securing his community from criminals. That's not negligence on Zimmerman's part,(as you state) that's being a responsible man. As the story keeps unfolding to us, it looks clearer and clearer that the only crime that took place that night, was the one where Martin assualted Zimmerman.Quote:
Originally Posted by Theseus
Does it me a thug if I happen to notice someone following me and I confront them? The problem with this whole situation( and why I usually stay out of these discussions on here) is that, as mentioned above, there are only two people who know what happened and one of them is dead. It wouldn't surprise me to find out I was right about this case, just like it wouldn't surprise me to be wrong. We tend to let personal belief fill in the many blanks that there are and will continue to be in this case and others like it.Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyCakeDC
Why was Martin deemed to be suspicious?
Just put yourself in his place. lets say you are walking down your block and you notice some dude in a truck following you. Then you notice he parks and follows you on foot. he gets closer and closer. Do you become alarmed? Who is this guy? You don't see no badge, he doesn't identify himself. In fact it's the follower ( Zimmerman in that case) who is acting suspicious. So he closes in on you and what are you going to do wait for an attack and be injured or attack first being in fear?
TBS,Very good points
I disagree. People in the neighborhood were being terrorized and robbed, REPEATEDLY. Zimmerman was hired to watch the neighborhood. He had called the police on other occasions and by the time the police showed up the bad guys were gone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Theseus
He was trying to keep the suspect in sight while waiting for the police. I think he was justified.