Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
Pyridium

Trayvon...A lesson for all Americans

164 posts in this topic

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/12/geraldo-rivera-george-zimmerman-jury-trayvon-martin_n_3585911.html

Why is the liberal press profiling George Zimmerman as a racist? Obviously George was found not guilty of a crime. Why does the liberal press not report that Trayvon was committing a crime against George?

Trayvon was suspended from school just days before he was shot. He was caught possessing marijuana at school. His phone contained photos of him smoking pot and videos of street fights he recorded. When you think of Chicago, this is what comes to mind, a culture of criminals, drug dealers, gang members and constant violence.

As Geraldo points out, if you dress like a criminal, act like a criminal, you will be profiled as a criminal. When are the young americans in this country going to get the message?

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.huffingto..._n_3585911.html

Why is the liberal press profiling George Zimmerman as a racist? Obviously George was found not guilty of a crime. Why does the liberal press not report that Trayvon was committing a crime against George?

Trayvon was suspended from school just days before he was shot. He was caught possessing marijuana at school. His phone contained photos of him smoking pot and videos of street fights he recorded. When you think of Chicago, this is what comes to mind, a culture of criminals, drug dealers, gang members and constant violence.

As Geraldo points out, if you dress like a criminal, act like a criminal, you will be profiled as a criminal. When are the young americans in this country going to get the message?

Between victim identity and white guilt we have a country so dysfunctional on race issues that it's a wonder we haven't had a civil war yet.
5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was one suspended from school. I once smoked pot and thought fighting was 'cool'. Are you calling me a criminal? Growing up in any era is a difficult process, we all make mistakes, and some people get involved in the wrong things when they are too young to understand the consequences those things could have.

That being said, the fact is that Trayvon was not doing anything wrong at the time. He had no drugs on him, he was not carrying a weapon.

How would you feel if someone just started following you when you were walking back from the gas station? Trayvon had no right to attack Zimmerman, but Zimmerman also had no reason to follow Trayvon. Millions of young people wear baggy clothes and hoodies and it does not make them criminals, nor does it give any cause to creepily follow them around. There are no winners in this case. A kid is dead, and a man has to live with the fact that he shot a kid who was unarmed, and not only that but got his ass kicked by the kid first after he was told by dispatchers not to follow him. He was profiled based on how he looked, whether it was his clothes, the color of his skin, the way he was walking, or a combination, it was still profiling, and it was profiling conducted by a man who was not a police officer and had no business profiling him in the first place.

A neighborhood watch is just that a watch. You call the police and report suspicious activity, you do not follow people around while carrying a loaded weapon.

So when Trayvon became so angry that he decided he was going to beat Z down, it became Z's responsibility to just allow that? You are correct that Z caused the situation to begin with, imo. He did NOT cause Trayvon to act like anything other than what Trayvon WANTED to act like. He was an angry teen with an attitude against any authority and it got him killed. I'm sure that happens in Chicago DAILY.
8 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

A neighborhood watch is just that a watch. You call the police and report suspicious activity, you do not follow people around while carrying a loaded weapon.

No. But neither do you jump people, break their noses, and bash their head in the pavement. Are you sure that if you were at the receiving end of this and had a gun, you would not use it? OK, I take your word for it... But really, how long do you want to run around this circle?

The only thing that is 100% proven here is that the MEDIA turned this into a race issue with their biased and often outright fabricated reporting.

Edited by Zaphod222
8 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The question I have is...why does the MSM continue to spew rhetoric about "white on black" crime? Zimmerman is not white.

I am sure he is thinking "How ironic is this shiz"...He probably had to endure a certain amount of racism and prejudice throughout his life because he is Hispanic/Latino and now...suddenly...he's a white guy. I can't even imagine how that must feel to him.

Many people are trying to draw something bigger out of this, trying to give it meaning...and I am afraid there is nothing here but tragedy. Tragedy that a young man lost his life and tragedy for the mind and soul of the man that took it. There is nothing here but pain.

Edited by Jeremiah65
6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question?

I havnt been following this case all that closely, but isn't it a crime to stalk someone? To me this seems like its 2 people who where in the wrong place at the wrong time. One trying to get some place and ended up being targeted by a man who mistook him for a trouble maker.

Was race involved? Probably, you have a fenced off community where a hooded young black youth is entering. One of the residents thought that was suspicious and it ended up with a fight where the winner was the one with a gun.

In many regards both sides this was a case of self defence.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.huffingto..._n_3585911.html

Why is the liberal press profiling George Zimmerman as a racist? Obviously George was found not guilty of a crime. Why does the liberal press not report that Trayvon was committing a crime against George?

Trayvon was suspended from school just days before he was shot. He was caught possessing marijuana at school. His phone contained photos of him smoking pot and videos of street fights he recorded. When you think of Chicago, this is what comes to mind, a culture of criminals, drug dealers, gang members and constant violence.

As Geraldo points out, if you dress like a criminal, act like a criminal, you will be profiled as a criminal. When are the young americans in this country going to get the message?

Geraldo also said Z would dodge a murder conviction because the nearly all white jury would probably have killed M too. What a racist comment to make by the conservative press.
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a question?

I havnt been following this case all that closely, but isn't it a crime to stalk someone? To me this seems like its 2 people who where in the wrong place at the wrong time. One trying to get some place and ended up being targeted by a man who mistook him for a trouble maker.

Was race involved? Probably, you have a fenced off community where a hooded young black youth is entering. One of the residents thought that was suspicious and it ended up with a fight where the winner was the one with a gun.

In many regards both sides this was a case of self defence.

Stalking is against the law. However in Florida stalking is defined as: "Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person commits the offense of stalking"

Tthe question is did Z's actions quailify as stalking? Was it willful? I believe it was. Was it malicious? I don't know, I mean how do you follow someone maliciously? Did he do it repeatedly? I don't think so, at least I haven't seen or heard any references to a previous occurance. I'm of the opinion that Z was not guilty of stalking according to Florida law, but then I'm not a lawyer.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just can't take Geraldo seriously.. This is the guy that did Capones vault and was one of the originators of trash TV.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm of the opinion that Z was not guilty of stalking according to Florida law, but then I'm not a lawyer.

Neither am I but I sure find it funny how most of my Facebook friends suddenly got Harvard degrees overnight. :w00t:

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stalking...no. Z never got out of his car until the dispatcher asked him what Trayvon was doing. Z walked down the sidewalk when the dispatcher asked if Z was following Trayvon. Z said YES. Dispatcher said you do not need to do that. Z said ok and started walking back to his car. Zimmerman did nothing wrong, he was doing the neighbor watch.

On the other hand, Trayvon had 4 minutes to walk 30 yards and enter the house he was staying at. Trayvon decided to circle back and confront Zimmerman. There was no need for Trayvon to punch Z. Trayvon assaulted Z and that was a crime.

As the defense lawyer said in closing argument...following anyone just to keep an eye on them is NOT against the law.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stalking...no. Z never got out of his car until the dispatcher asked him what Trayvon was doing. Z walked down the sidewalk when the dispatcher asked if Z was following Trayvon. Z said YES. Dispatcher said you do not need to do that. Z said ok and started walking back to his car. Zimmerman did nothing wrong, he was doing the neighbor watch.

On the other hand, Trayvon had 4 minutes to walk 30 yards and enter the house he was staying at. Trayvon decided to circle back and confront Zimmerman. There was no need for Trayvon to punch Z. Trayvon assaulted Z and that was a crime.

As the defense lawyer said in closing argument...following anyone just to keep an eye on them is NOT against the law.

That's the part I can't understand.

When I first heard about this story, way back when it happened, I was upset that Zimmerman was not arrested or charged.

But, as the facts have come out, and largely been corraborated, his story seems to be the real version. It seems to me, any rational person would acquit Zimmerman of the charges. And the 12 jurors that were selected by both the Prosecution and Defense did.

Are the people who are angry not paying attention?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stalking...no. Z never got out of his car until the dispatcher asked him what Trayvon was doing. Z walked down the sidewalk when the dispatcher asked if Z was following Trayvon. Z said YES. Dispatcher said you do not need to do that. Z said ok and started walking back to his car. Zimmerman did nothing wrong, he was doing the neighbor watch.

On the other hand, Trayvon had 4 minutes to walk 30 yards and enter the house he was staying at. Trayvon decided to circle back and confront Zimmerman. There was no need for Trayvon to punch Z. Trayvon assaulted Z and that was a crime.

As the defense lawyer said in closing argument...following anyone just to keep an eye on them is NOT against the law.

Yes there was a reason for him to punch him. He was Fn following him. Why would you run inside your home so the stalker knows where you live. Different cultures different ways of looking at things.

If you see a while guy at night following you hes either a rapist or a serial killer. Why do you think if someones eaten or a kid is kidnapped the profile is always a white guy.

White people see black people at night as thugs, well we see white people as serial killers or pedophiles. Next time I see a white guy around some kids im going to follow him and if he confronts me im shooting him.... lol ya right they would arrest my @55 right there instead of waiting months till the media makes a big stink about it before its investigated.

Everyone always talks about Martin and his violent nature and his drug habits. Yet I see no one every brings up Z's drug usage and his many troubles with violence. But its okay his dad was a judge. And yet cause of all the bs racial politics in this case no one ever bother to look at the facts.

I realy wish it didnt turn into a white on black bs. If they were the same color I think it would have been handled differently.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the part I can't understand.

When I first heard about this story, way back when it happened, I was upset that Zimmerman was not arrested or charged.

But, as the facts have come out, and largely been corraborated, his story seems to be the real version. It seems to me, any rational person would acquit Zimmerman of the charges. And the 12 jurors that were selected by both the Prosecution and Defense did.

Are the people who are angry not paying attention?

I was the same way when it first happened but the more I found out my opinion changed. The press causes a lot of this in their lust for headlines.
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes there was a reason for him to punch him. He was Fn following him. Why would you run inside your home so the stalker knows where you live. Different cultures different ways of looking at things.

If you see a while guy at night following you hes either a rapist or a serial killer. Why do you think if someones eaten or a kid is kidnapped the profile is always a white guy.

White people see black people at night as thugs, well we see white people as serial killers or pedophiles.

You got problems bro.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes there was a reason for him to punch him. He was Fn following him. Why would you run inside your home so the stalker knows where you live. Different cultures different ways of looking at things.

If you see a while guy at night following you hes either a rapist or a serial killer. Why do you think if someones eaten or a kid is kidnapped the profile is always a white guy.

White people see black people at night as thugs, well we see white people as serial killers or pedophiles. Next time I see a white guy around some kids im going to follow him and if he confronts me im shooting him.... lol ya right they would arrest my @55 right there instead of waiting months till the media makes a big stink about it before its investigated.

Everyone always talks about Martin and his violent nature and his drug habits. Yet I see no one every brings up Z's drug usage and his many troubles with violence. But its okay his dad was a judge. And yet cause of all the bs racial politics in this case no one ever bother to look at the facts.

I realy wish it didnt turn into a white on black bs. If they were the same color I think it would have been handled differently.

If they had been the same color I don't think there would of been an arrest to begin with. Now even after a trial there are those that want the juries verdict looked into which is stupid.
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Stalking is against the law. However in Florida stalking is defined as: "Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person commits the offense of stalking"

Tthe question is did Z's actions quailify as stalking? Was it willful? I believe it was. Was it malicious? I don't know, I mean how do you follow someone maliciously? Did he do it repeatedly? I don't think so, at least I haven't seen or heard any references to a previous occurance. I'm of the opinion that Z was not guilty of stalking according to Florida law, but then I'm not a lawyer.

Perhaps no stalking but harassment of Trayon by Zimmeran can be found in the same Chapter 784 statute:

(a) “Harass” means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person which causes substantial emotional distress to that person and serves no legitimate purpose.

(B)“Course of conduct” means a pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time, however short, which evidences a continuity of purpose. The term does not include constitutionally protected activity such as picketing or other organized protests.

[c] “Credible threat” means a verbal or nonverbal threat, or a combination of the two, including threats delivered by electronic communication or implied by a pattern of conduct, which places the person who is the target of the threat in reasonable fear for his or her safety or the safety of his or her family members or individuals closely associated with the person, and which is made with the apparent ability to carry out the threat to cause such harm. It is not necessary to prove that the person making the threat had the intent to actually carry out the threat. The present incarceration of the person making the threat is not a bar to prosecution under this section.

http://www.leg.state...s/0784.048.html

Edited by The world needs you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not even the whole of the law was allowed to be heard by the jury. They were never told that stand your ground does not apply if the defendant is the one who was the "initial aggressor" and from the looks of it a case could have been made against Zimmerman for harassment.

Even Florida's broad self-defense statutory scheme follows traditional self-defense limitations by prohibiting "initial aggressors" from using force provoked by their own conduct. A defendant in Florida cannot claim self-defense if he "initially provokes the use of force" against himself, unless he either withdraws from the conflict and conveys the withdrawal to the other party (the legal equivalent of "saying 'uncle'") or uses reasonable escape options to avoid death or great bodily harm (in other words, the initial aggressor has no right to stand his ground; he must retreat).

*snip*

The state attempted to rebut the defense's argument by noting the defense's request for a separate instruction regarding the legality of following a person. Judge Nelson responded, "We're not there yet," then quickly ruled without elaboration: "The defense does not want to give [the initial aggressor exception]; the state does. The court is not going to give it."

The court is not going to give it.

That may have been the moment when Zimmerman got acquitted. The end result was that jurors were told only about the parts of Florida self-defense law that benefited the defendant, without knowing anything about the most relevant potential limitation.

*snip*

A properly instructed jury should have heard the complete law of self-defense in Florida, not just the portions that helped Zimmerman. Had the jury been instructed about the initial aggressor exception, it might have concluded that Zimmerman's following of Martin, though itself not criminal, was reasonably apprehended by Martin as a "threat of force." Put another way, the jury might have concluded that Martin was the one acting in self-defense during the physical confrontation that preceded the gunshot, making Zimmerman the aggressor.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alafair-burke/george-zimmerman-jury-instructions_b_3596685.html

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps no stalking but harassment of Trayon by Zimmeran can be found in the same Chapter 784 statute:

http://www.leg.state...s/0784.048.html

“Harass” means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person which causes substantial emotional distress to that person and serves no legitimate purpose"

And this is where you are wrong, there was legitimate purpose because he was a Neighbourhood Watch officer, he had been beaten by this youth, so had every reason to believe that he was up to no good. White / Black doesnt even come into it. An angry 17 yr old old is as dangerous as anyone.

Another question: why are all the photographs of Trayvon from when he was 12 yrs old? Sympathy would be my guess!!

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes there was a reason for him to punch him. He was Fn following him. Why would you run inside your home so the stalker knows where you live. Different cultures different ways of looking at things.

If you see a while guy at night following you hes either a rapist or a serial killer. Why do you think if someones eaten or a kid is kidnapped the profile is always a white guy.

White people see black people at night as thugs, well we see white people as serial killers or pedophiles. Next time I see a white guy around some kids im going to follow him and if he confronts me im shooting him.... lol ya right they would arrest my @55 right there instead of waiting months till the media makes a big stink about it before its investigated.

Everyone always talks about Martin and his violent nature and his drug habits. Yet I see no one every brings up Z's drug usage and his many troubles with violence. But its okay his dad was a judge. And yet cause of all the bs racial politics in this case no one ever bother to look at the facts.

I realy wish it didnt turn into a white on black bs. If they were the same color I think it would have been handled differently.

You do know Zimmerman isn't white right?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Harass” means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person which causes substantial emotional distress to that person and serves no legitimate purpose"

And this is where you are wrong, there was legitimate purpose because he was a Neighbourhood Watch officer, he had been beaten by this youth, so had every reason to believe that he was up to no good. White / Black doesnt even come into it. An angry 17 yr old old is as dangerous as anyone.

Another question: why are all the photographs of Trayvon from when he was 12 yrs old? Sympathy would be my guess!!

A misunderstanding is occurring here.

As the law could have been applied: If Trayvon was the one being harassed by Zimmerman following him, if Trayvon felt fear for his safety over it, and if Zimmerman had no legitimate reason to follow Trayvon, then it was Trayvon who was being harassed and if he had in fact punched Zimmerman over all that, it could have been Trayvon who was defending himself.

"No legitimate reason" in this instance applies to Zimmerman not having a legitimate reason to follow Trayvon. Trayvon would have been within his right to defend himself and Zimmerman's accusation that he was punched first would have had no grounds as allowing Zimmerman to defend himself as he initiated the situation.

It is this last part in bold, when separated, regardless of what happened (punches or anything else) that should have stripped Zimmerman from claiming stand your ground. The jury was not allowed to hear about that section of the law.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do know Zimmerman isn't white right?

He is still part of white culture.

According to his "cousin" who claims that Zimmerman sexually abused her, she also claimed that Zimmerman's immediate family hated black people, always talked bad about them, and only liked them if they "acted white".

She stepped forward to offer evidence to the state prosecutor's office because she felt Zimmerman did in fact do this over ethnicity, that he killed someone for that. This was not allowed in court but it was still part of the case and she is considered a witness in the case but not a witness in the trial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Harass” means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person which causes substantial emotional distress to that person and serves no legitimate purpose"

And this is where you are wrong, there was legitimate purpose because he was a Neighbourhood Watch officer, he had been beaten by this youth, so had every reason to believe that he was up to no good. White / Black doesnt even come into it. An angry 17 yr old old is as dangerous as anyone.

Another question: why are all the photographs of Trayvon from when he was 12 yrs old? Sympathy would be my guess!!

So he had a purpose to follow him because in the future he was beaten by him?????? Uhhhh okay.

And 4 punches and two scrapes on the back of the head isnt a beating.

And Neighborhood watch doesnt make you any different than any other citizen. Actualy if anything should be learned from this is how not to act as a neighboorhood watch.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not even the whole of the law was allowed to be heard by the jury. They were never told that stand your ground does not apply if the defendant is the one who was the "initial aggressor" and from the looks of it a case could have been made against Zimmerman for harassment.

http://www.huffingto..._b_3596685.html

So just asking a couple of questions is now considered to be an "initial provocation of force"? You are so full of it, that would read that if Trayvon was initially physically attacked by Z then the defense falls? That I would agree with. The truth is that It was Trayvon that physically attacked Z, not the other way around....This was accorded to in the trial.

In accordance with Florida State Laws then there is no way Z could be culpable, but certainly Trayvon was culpable in his own death. The only travesty now would be if Z was tried in a Civil Court and found guilty, that would be the greatest travesty of all...IMO

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.