It’s ironic how events pry open the door to the truth.
A few days ago Barack Obama said it was a “local matter.”
” Our thoughts and prayers go out to Trayvon Martin’s family, but obviously we’re not going to wade into a local law enforcement matter,” Carney said. “I would refer you to the Justice Department and to local law enforcement at this point.”
Sensing the media tsunami building, Barack Obama decided to hang ten:
“If I had a son he would have looked like Treyvon,” Obama said shortly, addressing the victim’s parents. “I think they are right to expect that all of us as Americans are going to take this with the seriousness that this deserves and that we’re going to get to the bottom of exactly what happened.”
Earlier this month a 13 year old white boy was attacked and set on fire by several black youths.
KANSAS CITY, Mo. — A 13-year-old Kansas City boy is back home after two teenagers poured gasoline on him and lit him on fire.
It happened Tuesday at the teen’s home on Quincy Avenue, just down the street from Kansas City’s East High School. The boy lives less than two blocks away from the school and was walking home when the attack happened.
Melissa Coon said her son turned from the school’s stadium onto Quincy Avenue and noticed two teenagers following him. She said the teens followed her son home and attacked him outside his front door.
“And they rushed him on the porch as he tried to get the door open,” she said. “(One of them) poured the gasoline, then flicked the Bic, and said, ‘This is what you deserve. You get what you deserve, white boy’.”
Barack Obama had nothing to say about that attack.
What happened to Trayvon Martin is a terrible thing and exactly what happened needs to be investigated and justice must follow. But one has to presume that the white boy in Kansas City did not look enough like Barack Obama for the President to weigh in on that atrocity. Or do certain kinds of crimes matter more to Obama than do others? A pattern is emerging. When Henry Gates was arrested Obama declared that the white cop “acted stupidly” without the benefit of any facts. Obama’s Attorney General refers to “my people” instead of “us.” A certain Black Panther voter intimidation conviction is mysteriously dropped. Obama said this incident needs “soul searching” but the Kansas City attack apparently does not.
Someone can explain it to me. I find this disgraceful.
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
@TSgt Ciz:
Sigh…
If you’ve been reading about the case then it should have become clear to you by now that Trayvon, and his father Tracy, were visiting the elder Martin’s fiancee, Brandi[y] Green at her Sanford, FL home. She did indeed live in the Retreat at Twin Lakes neighborhood in a home she had rented for the last four years.
That simple fact has been reported by multiple news sources:
Now, what was that you were saying? I believe it was something about false claims…
Lol, too funny watching you winguts twisting and spinning in the wind over a clear cut racially motivated killing. You make yourselves and your cause look worse and worse to average Americans. KEEP IT UP: OBAMA 2012!
@ Aye – “I really do hope that one day one of you approaches me…and questions my presence on public property…as I walk my dog or undertake some other mundane legal task…like going to or from a convenience store. Yes, I really do hope that one day you confront me, or someone like me, because it seems that a face full of GFY would do both of you some good. ”
Well I tell you what slick, how about I email you my address so’s you can pop up here to walk your dog. I’ll keep and eye out for you. You can go off and say any damn thing you want, but as certain as the sun rise in the morning, you reach out your hand toward me and you’ll never see it again.
Wanna play? Better bring the full game.
I and everyone of my neighbors will stop ANYONE we see that doesn’t live here and find out why they are here. Don’t like, then keep your ragged ass gone.
As for the links saying Tray’s fathers girlfriend live in the complex, thanks for that. Lord knows I asked for it enough times.
And as I said repeatedly before, it doesn’t change anything in the end. What is relevant is one thing and one thing alone. Who initiated the physical contact. That is who the aggressor is and that is who is at fault. Taking an interest in policing your own neighborhood is no crime.
Anyone who thinks it is, deserves the crime laden neighborhood they’ll end up in.
TSgt Ciz
hi,
I was giving a previous comment and lost it for some click I made at the wrong place,
I was asking if I’m not mistaking you with another here,
if your SON is still in AFGHANISTAN, IF HE IS OKAY,
BYE
@ILOVEBEESWARZONE – Not my son. My boy is a prison guard in Iowa.
My nephew was in Iraq, and he’s home now.
??? I provided four of them in @my comment #125, as well as the multiple instances of him being on “patrol”. So it takes at least eight for you to notice? I’ll keep that in mind for the future… LOL
Actually Mata, no, I never saw that post.
It was lost in the stream of posts that came while I was away doing things in the real world.
Imagine that.
So I suppose you expect me to agree that now if you are in a neighborhood legitimately, that give you the right to physically attack and beat someone for daring to observe your activities.
Nope, still not happening. Which is why I’ve said several times, the point is moot. Inflammatory yes, much like your insistence of calling the act of following closely enough to observe someone “aggression” and “pursuit”.
Couldn’t just call it “watching” could you.
I guess that puts you in the Aye camp of going to go off on anyone who dares to observe you or speak to you if they don’t know why you are walking around their neighborhood in the middle of the night. And like Aye, you must think that such temerity would give you the perfect right to beat hell out of them and that they would lose any right to self defense. They should just have to take the beating. Right?
But then…
I finally got it right don’t I.
That’s what you mean.
How could I be so blind?
Why hell, I think I’ll go next door and start pacing up and down my neighbors drive way and if that silly bitch comes out to ask what I’m doing, I’ll just knock her down and… Shoot, according to you two, she doesn’t even have to say anything, all she has to do is walk outside to see who it is. How dare her to pursue me with such aggression!
cause I live here too… right?
That bitch should just stay in the house and hide behind the curtains.
Thanks to you and Aye for setting me straight.
Oh I dunno, TSgt Ciz. I’d consider someone who wasn’t a police officer stalking me – packing to boot- while walking thru a neighborhood where I was staying and doing nothing wrong, aggressive.
TSgt Ciz
oops, sorry I got you mix with another on similar name, who’s son is in AFGHANISTAN, and
when he got there, they had them waiting fo their weapons not ready, he sent a letter to his father to send him a knife while he wait , and his father was here so worry for his son so young starting his new life,
it had grab me , and I REMEMBERED TODAY, BUT I HAVE THE WRONG NAME,IT WILL COME TO ME
HE DOESN’T COME TOO OFTEN,
THAT WAS LAST YEAR
BYE
@liberalchild: You said:
So you think the fact that two families’ lives have been forever altered in the worst way is funny? You find humor in the tragic death of a 17 year old?
That you can look at this and instead of feeling bad for the young man who is dead, or his family that has to deal with the loss, or feel bad for the man who, for reasons that the investigation will discover, felt that he had no choice but to end the life of that youth and all you can do is try to score cheap, political points. And given the fact that your opinion has even less credence that Keith “Countdown to no ratings” Olbermann, then your opportunistic reaction is sickening.
Even if, and this is a BIG IF, this incident turns out to be race based. Why in the world would you desecrate the memory of the dead youth by turning this into a “go-Obama” moment?? Crawl back under the rock you slithered out of.
As I have said, and will continue to say, stick to attacking fatherless infants. That is really all you are capable of.
TSgt Ciz
now , that was very funny ending of your comment. you found a good way to cool
all this story we all took seriously a bit to deep to the core, because
really when we think of it, WE HERE AS A REGULAR ARE FAMILY, AND
WE ARE AT FLOPPING ACES MORE IMPORTANT TO STICK TOGETHER THAN ANY OTHER STORY
OR LIBERALS COMING TO ATTACK, OR ANY DIFFERENT OPINION WE FIND AMONG US
AND IT’S NORMAL BECAUSE WE ARE ALL WITH OUR OWN MIND NOT FOLLOWING ANY OTHER
IDEOLOGIES DESTRUCTIVE LIKE OTHER WE ENCOUNTER,
@Aye:
“kindly cite the law/statute/ordinance that allows you, a private citizen, to confront/question/interrogate another private citizen while on public property during the course of daily life.”
I understand you are relating this to the Martin/Zimmerman issue, but perhaps you can tell me when Zimmerman “confronted/questioned/interrogated” Martin, because I am sure if you are in the possession of that information, the Sanford PD would be really, really interested in having it.
But the bottom line is YOU DON’T KNOW, and everything on your part is supposition. I was not there. YOU WERE NOT THERE, and you know only what you have read, just like everyone else.
But here is the truth of the matter, Aye; if you are roaming around my neighborhood, and you don’t live here, I just may ask you if you are lost, need directions, to find out what you are doing here. You see, I live in a small town, and we look out for each other. There are 24 hours in a day, seven days in a week, and 365 days in a year and we have 8 (EIGHT) police officers. They cannot be everywhere at all times. So neighbors watch out for neighbors, and we don’t get our Hanes all in a wad over it like you seem to.
Little story for you: I have lived in the same house for over 20 years. My property taxes had been raised and I was going to protest them, but in order to do so, I had to have pictures (comps) of other similar properties that were not valued as high. I was driving down alley ways taking pictures of garages when a man got in his car and started following me. I knew he was not one of our police officers so I just went on. I was intercepted by a police car and the guy in the car pulled up behind me. I explained to the officer what I was doing, had my little spread sheet with addresses on it and my camera and showed it to the officer (who I knew).
The police officer explained that the man following me had just moved to our small town, and didn’t know what I was doing. He thought (being from another state) that I was casing houses. It was all settled quite simply. No harm, no foul. Later that week, I went to the guy’s house, knocked on his door and when he answered, gave him my name, address and asked him to join our block watch program and thanked him for being concerned about his neighbor’s properties. You see, instead of giving him a “full face of GFY” I actually made a friend who is now very happy that other people appreciated what he was trying to do; protect others, and didn’t over react.
Now, it may pleasure you to give me a “full face of GFY” but I am sure you anger would only increase when I laughed in yours.
MATA
THAT WAS FUNNY TOO,
I just can visualize you being stalk by a stranger, he would have pick the wrong one to follow,
I was followed once and it was an evening coming out of my sister place where I decided
this time to get the bus on the next road just a short walk, that was against my habit ,
because I usual took taxi , and this time i hear steps behind, I walk faster, the steps are faster too,
I say oh my GOD make it so I cross that next ally before , as I turn to look a tall guy coming,
I tell you I don’t hear my feet going, and I cross over the alley and I am in the middle of the busy road stopping a car by standing right in front of his light coming, and asking for help, to get me home not far from there, the last time I took the bus in evening darkness,
bye
retire05
good story , I do that for my neighbors too, I move just a few months ago myself,
and from what I know of MATA and AYE, they are doing the same concern about neighbors
why because you are all CONSERVATIVES CARING AND PROTECTING OTHER,
COMPARE TO LIBERALS SELFISH ABOUT THEIR OWN POOR SELF CORNER
LET THE REST TAKE CARE OF THEMSELVES, WHO CARE THEY SAY WE DECIDE FOR
THEM WHAT THEY SHOULD DO.
bye
@mata – Whut? You have xray vision and can tell they are carrying!?!
Well damn gurl, you need to go get a job at the TSA and save the world.
Exactly how is someone walking the same path as you at the same time of day aggressive?
Do you typically require that no one else be out walking the same time that you do? Isn’t that a bit of a strain on the neighborhood to have to keep tabs on when they can use the same sidewalk as you?
Oh wait, I see my mistake. Only police officers are allowed to walk at the same time as you.
Definitely no chubby asthmatic Latinos talking on a cell phone though.
Not unless their looking for an ass whipping from you and Aye. <–I bet he has a snappy police officer uniform just so’s he can walk on your sidewalk.
You’ve got a serious attitude going here, TSgt Ciz, and frankly, this is likely to be the last time I address you at all because of the caustic personal comments.
Yes, I would consider someone stalking me, especially when I was not doing anything wrong, nor in a place where I had every right to be, aggressive. And considering that the two obviously had an up front and close encounter, at that point I might also have spotted an outline in the waistband of a weapon… which wouldn’t have made me feel any less threatened.
I have to love how you now characterize this as just “walking the same path” when the 911 call indicates that Martin was aware of Zimmerman’s scrutiny, and obviously felt threatened enough to want to move away from him. Zimmerman, by his own account, then followed him. All of this is a mark of aggression.. not two people out for an evening’s walk and traveling the same path. It’s also a fact that Zimmerman had his car, and was stalking Zimmerman on foot, which blows your theory of merely “walking the same path” out of the water. If someone is in their car, eyes me, then gets out of their car to “walk the same path”, you bet your booty I consider that aggressive and threatening.
And considering that Zimmerman had already called the police on Martin – who was doing nothing wrong – Martin’s gut feelings about Zimmerman being threatening were correct.
That’s all we know for sure – that Zimmerman was stalking Martin outside of his car, and on foot, and that somehow the two ended up in a fight between homes and no where near the road. You have no evidence that Martin attacked Zimmerman that is any more credible than the cell phone call from Martin’s girlfriend that states she heard Zimmerman approach Martin.
While we could be distracted endlessly by a slow-moving case so easily, in less than 12 hours the serious-as-a-heart-attack-ObamaCare case begins to be heard by the US Supreme Court.
Audio only on C-SPAN-3 which is on-line and available here.
http://www.c-span.org/Live-Video/C-SPAN3/
Around 1pm EASTERN they will present the same-day audio recordings of the argument.
Hope to hear about THAT tomorrow instead of more of the above.
Waiting for the facts to come out is hard enough.
Hopefully, before they do come out, there will be no rioting, no race-baiting, no, wait…..too late.
Here are some very good links as related to this story:
Trayvon Martin: Two Stories – One Independent Witness: Trayvon Martin: Black Panthers Bounty $10000 to Capture George Zimmerman
Protests over Trayvon Martin’s death sweep across America as anonymous witness claims teen attacked his killer George Zimmerman before fatal shooting
As Media Reports Conflict, Why Was Trayvon Martin Photo Altered?
Anticsrocks, I’ll add something else for consideration.
The cell phone call between Trayvon and his girlfriend, which supposedly documents the time the two may have come into contact. It’s also reported here at the Tampa Bay news site.
The records show that Zimmerman’s phone call to 911 was at 7:11pm. Martin’s phone records show her incoming call was four minutes long, and came in at 7:12pm.
So the question that should be asked is, did the Sanford PD contact her in their initial investigation, and if not… why? Certainly with her testimony saying that Zimmerman approached Martin, that indicates that Zimmerman did not heed the dispatcher and also muddies any Stand Your Ground self defense claim… which is exactly the reason the Sanford PD said they did not press charges.
This link to the witness is the same as the other witnesses… many saw the fight. They did not see how the fight started. But one fact remains… Zimmerman was going after Martin, not the other way around, via his own 911 call.
There seems to be enough questions about what happened that this shouldn’t have been casually dismissed as SYG self defense. And because that wasn’t dealt with properly in the beginning, for whatever reason, it’s now political fodder for scumbags like Jackson, Sharpton and the Black Panthers.
anticsrocks
thank you for the links
they are coming now by the bushels, some dangerous hate inciting direct
from GOVERNMENT ELECT MEMBERS
@ilovebeeswarzone: Any time M’lady. Always glad to lend a hand, especially when the liberal, brain dead, flat earth, no growth Marxists try to talk smack about you.
I got yer back, Beezy.
@retire05:
And on yet another occasion you would be wrong. 100% wrong.
And yet another attempt to move on when you’ve found yourself slowly twisting in the wind.
You and Tsgt Ciz have been flapping your jaws endlessly on this thread about your right to approach and challenge the presence of a private citizen on public property when they are engaged in nothing more than the daily activities of life.
Repeatedly I have asked you to cite the specific law/ordinance/statute which allows you to do so.
Hell, Tsgt Ciz says he cannot think of “anyplace in the world” where a person has the right to be in a neighborhood they don’t live in and not be challenged. Yeah, he really did say that.
Yet, for all the lip flapping, and all the time that has elapsed, neither one of you seems able to present a single citation which allows you to do what you’re claiming.
I wonder why that is.
It couldn’t possibly be that both of you are full of shit. Nah…it couldn’t be that. Not at all.
anticsrocks
that is why I feel so bless to have friends so intelligent as you are,
it make me so proud to be among THE CONSERVATIVES BORN PROTECTOR OF
THEIR BELOVED AMERICA
thank you
Both Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman are victims in this. But the law itself in question is not to blame. Nor is the race of the two people to blame. Nor is an article of clothing. Nor is the gun.
And Sharpton, Obama, and the rest of the race-baiting crowd, backed up by a “white guilt” ridden media have started, and continue to fan the flames, of the fire that never should have been.
Is it tragic that a young man died? Sure. It is also tragic that another young man, who will have to live with his actions that night, is being treated like a blood thirsty racist by Sharpton, the NBPP, and some in the media.
Sharpton, the NBPP, some in the media, and even Obama himself, are acting exactly like they claim Zimmerman acted the night in question. That is, resorting to judging on the basis of skin color, without the facts involved, and leveling sentencing down on Zimmerman before they even know what really happened.
Zimmerman, by some accounts, is extremely regretful of that night, and will no doubt be haunted by questions of “what if?” for the rest of his life.
Sharpton, the NBPP, media, and Obama, will never be regretful, nor haunted, for any part of their lives if something untoward happens to Mr. Zimmerman as a result of this. Instead, they will use and milk the occasion for all it’s worth in order to promote their own agendas.
johngalt
super, I’m wondering if the teachers of those schools will continue to incite the pupils against the white minority after this, and I doubt it will stop, because they where not call on their faults and it resulted in what the see as a minor attack on a boy being followed and sprayed with gas, he will carry the wound in his face
for life, not counting other white kids having been terrorize and mentally wounded for life,
but those scars don’t show, so they are not there, and those many who where breaking in and rob,
is there the new mentality of taking from the RICH from OBAMA, but rich is the poor who
own more than his poor neighbor must be rob too.
it seem to have sink in the mind of young teens as we notice in that community, and surely is not unique
bye
@Aye – Do you have to have the stupid applied to yourself with a spatula?
Where is the a law/ordinance/statute” to prevent people from doing exactly as we’ve said.
Are you really such an idiot that you don’t know that laws are not made to permit, but to prohibit actions.
Do you need a specific law/ordinance/statute which allows you to do everything in your life?
Where is your specific law/ordinance/statute which allows you to be on the internet running that sore you call a mouth?
@Aye:
Since our laws are based on negatives, perhaps you would like to give an example of laws/statutes/ordinances that clearly states that a private citizen does NOT have the right to approach a stranger in their neighborhood, on public property/public access property and inquire as to why that person is there? You also seem to want to lump confrontation/interrogation in with simple questioning. There ARE legal differences. If I have no legal authority to ask a person, in a non-confrontational way, what they are doing in my neighborhood, then I also have no right to ask if that person needs help, is lost, are looking for a particular residence/business and in fact, according to your mindset, would have no right to speak to them for any purposes.
Neighborhood watchers do what you claim cannot be done all the time. It is part of patrolling an area, being the eyes and ears of the police departments. Instead, you are trying to build a strawman.
So, let’s assume that you are walking around in my neighborhood at night, you are not known to the neighborhood watch member, they ask you if you are lost, or need help finding a house/business, exactly what law do you think that neighborhood watch voluntee has broken? Because laws are clear; they tell us what we can NOT do, not what we can do. If you want to deal with specifics (questioning a unknown person on public property in a particular neighborhood) then there is no specific law that gives me the right to drive to the airport. There is a law that says how fast I can drive to the airport.
Our system is one where actions are permissible, unless prohibited by specific law. What specific law prohibits the inquiry as to why someone would be in an unfamiliar area at night when they don’t live there?
So again, I ask, what proof do you have that Zimmerman confronted/questioned/interrogated Martin? And if you are in possession of that information, have you submitted it to the Sanford PD?
What you are contending is that private citizens do not have the authority to do a specific act unless that act is specifically permissible by law/statute/ordinance. You have it exactly backwards.
@johngalt: #201
I agree with everything you said. The only thing I will add is that you and I will wait until the investigation is finished before we come to any conclusions. You and I would be good jury members.
@TSgt Ciz: #203
A spatula is made to REMOVE or turn things, not APPLY them. When you call someone stupid, you shouldn’t show yours at the same time, unless you actually use a spatula to APPLY things.
You mean I didn’t have to get a concealed carry PERMIT if I want to carry a concealed gun? Try driving any vehicle without a driver’s license (permit) in most states and see what happens. Illegals are the only ones allowed to.
If Obama gets his way you will.
Nothing reported on the crime sensitivity relative to that neighborhood. If, in fact, there had been a rash of property breakins, stolen cars, or roving drug dealers using the 7-11 back area or darken streets to do deals. What was the prevailing attitude of youths roving its underprotected streets. Sanford has gone from a sleepy spolt east of Orlando into a moving town (AmTrac terminus) with a growing population and due to property tax restraints certain lower class neigs might get less police coverage. A smarter kid would had stopped, spun, raised his hands and explained his purpose. The “hoodsie” thing is a lot of smoke comming from the mainstream propaganda machine.
Bullshit. The questioner and the question were hand-picked and Obama’s answer prepared in advance. Obama is a racist piece of shit. Black Liberation Theology, anyone? I repeat, Barack Obama is a racist piece of shit, and anyone who supports him after this is a racist piece of shit as well.
This “hoodsie” thing is just a matador’s cape covering the real story; that being, the Birth Certificate Forgery exposed by sheriff joe arpaio and his cold case posse.
@Smorgasbord
Yes actually, you only need permits to carry concealed or to drive a vehicle in those jurisdictions where there are specific laws requiring you to do so. Those same laws prohibit unlicensed concealed carry, and unlicense driving. If they didn’t, you couldn’t be charged with anything.
@Smorgasbord:
Never applied icing on a cake with a spatula? Or applied joint cement to dry wall with a spatula? How about applying wood filler? Never did that with a spatula? I would warrant that more things are applied, than removed, with spatulas.
Need a permit to carry concealed? Yes. Need a permit in my state to carry a non-concealed firearm? Nope. I can drive around town all day long with a long barrel propped up against my dash as long as it is visable. The carrying of a fire arm is only limited when the act of concealing that firearm is involved. Carrying, and concealing, are two different actions, one legal, one not allowable without a permit.
Driving: I can legally drive without a license. It is only when I commit the action of leaving my own property, and utilizing public throughfares that I am required to gain a permit to do so. Again, the laws/statutes/ordinances don’t tell me what I can do (drive), only where I am required to have a permit to do that driving. If I drive from my property, to an adjoining property without utilizing public roads, highways, throughfares, I do not have to have a licence to simply put that vehicle in motion. I drive a tractor. I do not require a license to do so, unless I am on public roads. By your rationale, every kid that every learned to drive in their parent’s back 40 were breaking the law.
If I am on the Washington Mall, a public common area, and someone asks me why I am there, what law have they broken?
THE SOOTHSAYER
HI, yes the high number of break in was reported by MR ZIMMERMAN ON HIS CALL TO
SAY HE WAS OBSERVING A PERSON AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WENT ON TO SAY
THERE WAS AN ACCELERATION OF BREAKIN IN THAT AREA,
leading ME to understand why he was ask to become a community watcher delegate,
as we know not everyone want this job which is perilous to the brave citizen who agree,
and by the way should have a weapon to protect his life, which by the mere fact he accept the task make this person more valued
than any punk who would try to attack him, that is a logical answer to any aftermath doubt by any one is looking for the right answer conclusion
bye
@Mata – You are clearly one making assertions based on fact not in evidence.
There is a report that Martin called and said someone was following him. So he’s nervous. Gee what would anyone do in the dark if being followed near the place they are staying. I don’t know, how about GO HOME, CALL 911, hey he’s fat solets just run -after all Tray was a foot ball star!
You simply can not put Martin into a situation where Zimmerman presence is a threat, unless Martin was doing something to put him in a defensive mood, and even then, evasion is the far more likely act of an innocent.
(Hold on a second – someone is looking at me right now while I’m typing this – I need to call my girlfriend – Oh crap, the guy who has been looking at me is talking on a cell phone and watching me… I better go beat his ass… BRB)
Cause Tray, just like you, had super powers and knew what was in Z’s mind despite the fact that the 911 cal clearly demonstrates Z’s motives were purely protection of his neighbors.
Now I have said repeatidly that thus far, none of us knows what caused this to become phisical, and *THAT* is the only important element in this whole affair. Neither party could know up until that point what was in the others mind -friend or foe- what to do what to do…
So game play it out for us, They end up coming to within speaking distance of each other and one or the other says something akin to “Whats up?”
Z askes what are you doing back here?
Tray says, I’m here with my father visiting his girlfriend… or what?
You seriously think Z wouldn’t be satisfied with Tray’s answer, or was Tray like Aye and decided he’d just go all mideval on Z for daring to ask such an impertinate question.
How do you cross the threashold into the violence from what was nothing more than a grown up game of hide and peek?
Trayvon’s girlfriend called him… phone records say incoming at 7:12pm. The call was about four minutes long when the altercation started.
Also at the Tampa Bay news.
Zimmerman’s call to 911 at 7:11pm was at least 4:12 long according to the linked unedited call above in my comment circa #125 above. The Sanford PD had Martin’s cell phone. If we listen to the PD spokesperson above, are we to assume that they never looked at the cell call logs, and discovered a live call during the moments prior to the death? One that casts questions on just who confronted whom? After all, it’s Zimmerman’s contention that he was on his way back to the SUV when he was attacked by Martin.
Again, there were too many questions for this to be casually dismissed. And if the police did not check the cell records, or attempt to contact the person who was speaking with Martin at that moment, I can’t say as I have a lot of faith in their investigative abilities. And citizens are allowed to challenge investigative reports and appeal to higher authorities for oversight.
Unfortunately, by not doing a thorough job at the beginning, it’s given the scumbags like Sharpton, Jackson and the Black Panthers an open forum.
@TSgt Ciz: #210
I was just saying there are situations where a law is needed to PERMIT a person to do something that is against the law otherwise.
MATA
you make a lot of sense on that last comment , you bring up the side of the BOTH ATTACKER AND VICTIM OF HIS OWN ATTACK. BUT DOES IT INCRIMINATE THE COMMUNITY WATCH DELEGATE FOR DOING HIS JOB? IF HE TALK TO THE MAN HE WOULD NORMALLY SAY WHO HE REPRESENT WHY IS HE THERE FOR,
maybe he was not given the chance to do it,
now WHO will weight in on who is wrong, the one with blood on his head and face just for following the other or the one who beat him up to the point where the other feared for his life and shot him,
ON A FURTHER NOTE, if he would HAVE BEEN TRIGGER HAPPY, HE WOULD HAVE SHOT HIM BEFORE BEING THROWN ON THE FLOOR
BYE
@Smorgasbord – true, there are times when there are permits for certain actions, but as you say, only where the action is otherwise prohibited.
@ Mata – there you go using that word “aggressive” again when I truly don’t think it means what you think it means. The substitution of “stalking” doesn’t make it better.
I find it interesting that you are so sure that the phone call to Tray’s GF would exonerate him instead of the other way around. Lord knows she would have no reason to conceal Tray saying something that might indicate he was about to whoop this fat guy.
Because we are all smart enough to know that if a friend called because they were worried about an person who was following them in the dark, we wouldn’t bather calling them back to see if they were OK, or even keeping them on the phone until we knew they were safe, or even telling them to hang up and call 911. If it were a friend of mine, the police wouldn’t have had to find me to ask about the call. They would have only had to answer the ringing phone, because I would be calling my friend to check on them.
But none of that happened.
I suppose it is entirely impossible that Tray called to tell his GF that he thought he might have been seen with drugs or stealing something, and he was going to stash the contraband and confront the guy following him. That just isn’t possible huh. Because that would make George 100% right. So it is inconceivable to you.
And there ends your intellectual curiosity. Because you’ve already measured George for a rope for daring to be within sight of Tray while on the phone with the police.
The true test of your silly ass argument is in the changing of the supposed unimportant facts. What if it was George who got shot, and not Tray. Still George’s fault? What if George never called the police and just was curious if Tray was a friend of his from work? Still Georges fault? What if Tray were a rapist/murderer who was leaving his last victims home? What if the find in the blood work that Tray was in fact on drugs just as George said he appeared to be, and the suspension from school was because of being strung out and violent, or maybe because he was attacking Hispanic kids.
all these things might sway ones opinion of who might or might not of initiated the violence, but none of them change the real guilt. The real guilt is in whoever laid hands on the other first. The great unknown and the only point.
What does the physical, not the hysterical, evidence tell us? One party and one party alone has injuries from being punched and hit on the back of the head. One party and one party alone called for help. For you, that would be the guilty party. Because that is what aggressors do…
PS, you can ignore me and I’m fine with that. I used to be quite fond of you and Aye for your sound and reasoned approach to issues. But clearly a lot has changed here with you two. If I’ve seemed to be disrespectful I can only assure you it is because I can find nothing in your positions worthy of anything but contempt.
We do not know how these two came to blows. And that is the only part that matters. It doesn’t matter who went to the store, or if they were wearing tube socks or sandals, or if they lived there or were going to a party or they were just lost. Someone put hands to the other first, and they are the guilty party. Who ever that was.
Everything before that is back story that doesn’t make this anything but a tragedy.
@retire05: #211
I have never applied any of the above with anything. In all fairness though, I have used many tools in ways they weren’t meant to be used, only my tools, not someone else’s.
The rest of my comment was just to say that in some situations there has to be a law to PERMIT a person from doing some things that are otherwise against the law. I do see your point though.
Everyone has the right to ask anybody almost anything wherever they are. The one asked has the right to answer or not answer.
I have no idea what was said by anyone except what was on the police recording. There isn’t enough there for me to form any opinion for or against either guy. I am waiting for the results for the investigation.
MATA
another point you gave, made me realize something very important;
that is I and other get so deeply involve trying to find where the guilt should apply
and we try to sell it to the one opposing it, some push the envelope with adjectives
to weight in the point given and refuse, and all guns are pull out of the belt
in the CYBER CONFRONTATION, I AM JUST NOW, NOTICING THAT IS THE CUE FOR AYE TO COME IN AND GET BETWEEN THE GUNS, TO BREAK THE ADJECTIVES SHOOTERS APART ,
NOW I know he did that before in many POSTS, but I never figure his choice of time to do it,
AYE I JUST UNCOVER YOU , BARE WITH YOUR PANTS DOWN, UNABLE TO ARGUE ON THAT
BYE
Trayvon Martin was suspended from school because he was caught with an empty plastic bag with traces of marijuana in it, the boy’s family attorney has confirmed.
A community watch volunteer [Zimmerman] who thought he looked drugged out and suspicious called police and later wound up in a fight with him.
Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/26/2714778/thousands-expected-at-trayvon.html#storylink=cpy
Wonder why the family allowed a LIE to continue for weeks?
They KNEW he was not suspended 10 days for ”tardiness.”
This is looking more like how that creep of an iman added in those 3 fake cartoons to get Muslims angry about the innocuous Danish Mohammad cartoons.
How many died over that lie?
http://www.zombietime.com/mohammed_image_archive/jyllands-posten_cartoons/
@ Smorgasbord – You are right
It is a shame others who are suppoed to be the calmer voices here don’t have your good sense.
Smorgasbord
how wise of you,
you just returned us to the top POST OF DrJohn;
It seems that OBAMA cares only on those who look like him.
bye
@TSgt Ciz:
Mata wants to use the call to the GF as proof positive that Zimmerman was the agressor, and consequently in the wrong. She [seems to want to] claim that the Sanford PD did NOT investigate the call log on Martin’s phone, or at least questions the PDs compentency regarding the cell phone records. I see no indication that is true. Yesterday, Mata linked to an article that said ABC had obtained the cell phone records that show the call to the girl friend. Another thing about phone records: the father has claimed that he tried to contact Treyvon a number of times that night but there was no answer. Even missed incoming calls will be recorded on cell phone records, as will calls the father might have made from a land line phone. It will eventually be revealed when, and if, the father tried to contact his son that night at all, and when. If I try to call your cell phone from my land line, your phone records will record that missed call. And my land line records will record a call not answered. If I try to call you from my cell, and you don’t answer, both cell phone records will record that call.
Now, a few things are clear: there was a cell phone call to the GF. That call has been revealed and the GF has lawyered up, but only recently, not immediately after the shooting. It is not clear who initiated the cell phone records; ABC, the GF’s lawyer, the Sanford PD, or all three. I don’t see that ABC would have legal jurisdiction to request private cell phone records. It stands to reason that if the Sanford PD contacted the GF, her lawyer would request copies of those cell phone records even if the PD already had them.
Also, the conversation between Martin and the GF is relayed by the GF thru her attorney. Can it be proven, withoout a shadow of doubt, that the conversation between Martin and the GF was as the GF described without an actual audio of the conversation? No. Mata calls what the girl said her “testimony”. There has been no “testimony” given and the only thing the GF would have given, at this point, is a statement. If this case does go to court, the GF will be deposed, and that deposition, along with her court testimony and her statement to the Sanford PD, will then be part of the record of the legal procedings. And we know there have been changing stories on this incident, as the father’s girl friend, Brandy Green told a Fox Orlando reporter “He [Treyvon] was sitting on the porch and this man [Zimmerman] killed him.” the day after the shooting. We now know that Trayvon Martin was NOT sitting on any porch when shot.
Also, Mata uses the fact that the GF could not get Martin on the cell phone again as proof that Zimmerman was the agressor. How do we know that? Is it possible that Martin dropped his cell phone in the act of attacking Zimmerman? We just don’t know.
My guess is that this will go before a grand jury, and there will be enough questions about the case that will warrant a trial. It will be then that everyone’s statements, including Brandy Green’s that Treyvon was “sitting on the porch” that will be fodder for the defense lawyers.
Mata also says that Zimmerman was “going after” Martin, per Zimmerman’s 911 call. “Going after” indicates using physical force. That is supposition on Mata’s part. Following is not “going after.”
AYE
you should make a movie called; the WARRIOR OF THE CYBER WEB,
BYE
@MataHarley:
Mata, just how exactly does phone records, showing incoming, and out going numbers, substantiate the story of the girl friend without having actual audio of the phone conversations? All the phone records will show is: incoming call phone numbers, outgoing call phone numbers, date, time and length of calls. That’s it. No audio to substantiate the actual conversation.
So the girl friend is “connecting the dots” and that is evidence? Give me a freaking break. How far do you intend to stretch credulity?
And the lawyer, Crump, is thwarting a Sanford PD investigation by refusing to hand over the records to the PD? What’s up with that? This is NOT a federal issue, it is a state issue, and the lawyer should be held in contempt for refusal to provide local authorities with pertinent information in this case.
Ya know, if I needed a translator/spokesperson to misrepresent my words and commentary, I certainly wouldn’t choose some one who didn’t even have the intelligence to find a nearby 7-11… Or who couldn’t tell that text contained within blockquotes are those of others, and not mine.
I use the word “aggressor” or “aggression” because it is the language used in the SYG law, which was the one the PD used to exonerate Zimmerman. Perhaps some may be upset there isn’t some kinder, gentler and unassuming word to describe Zimmerman’s following, stalking (look up the definition), chasing, or tracking of Martin’s movements. There is no doubt that Zimmerman – who was calling 911 about a kid not engaged in any illegal activity, but that he was profiling – wasn’t out to give Martin friendly directions or for an evening chit chat. There is no denying the fact that it was only Zimmerman who was pushing for a personal face to face confrontation. And there is definitely no question that he shot and killed an unarmed opponent.
But under the legal intents of the SYG law, if Zimmerman initiated the aggression by unjustifiably following/chasing/stalking… whatever floats your boat… then the SYG law doesn’t apply – i.e. deliberately inserting himself into a situational confrontation. And he did so despite warnings to the contrary.
And this isn’t in question… even admittedly by Zimmerman’s own attorney. Apparently, even he recognizes that Zimmerman’s approach of Martin, who was doing nothing wrong, placed him in the position of inflaming the situation.
Therefore under standard self defense laws, the investigation would need to determine if the force was disproportionate to the threat. But that is not what the PD did, and therein lies the beef of justice not being properly served.
Secondly, I’ve stated it before but apparently most of you…in your bizarre passion to pronounce Zimmerman unquestionably innocent… seem determined to ignore my position. I am neither rooting for Zimmerman’s innocence or conviction. I am rooting for the process.
There is enough evidence – with cell records and witnesses that were not properly interviewed, and conflicting reports – that Zimmerman’s claim of being attacked by Martin can be justifiably questioned, and it should have been more thoroughly investigated.
I agree that the race baiter, professional civil rights muckrakers are an extreme and offensive voice in this. I’ll lend no support to those. On the other hand, I also find those that do not wish to see this event more closely scrutinized just as extreme and offensive. It’s amazing that so many of you resist oversight on this case.
I used to think that conservatives applaud our judicial process and oversight system. It’s seems I’ve been giving too many an undeserved benefit of the doubt.
The more I hear the more I think Zimmerman should, and will be charged. The SYG law does not protect aggressor’s/instigators.
1) He followed the kid when being told not to
2) He got out of his vehicle to confront Trayvon.
Even tho he may not have meant to initiate an incident, he did. My understanding of the SYG law means it doesn’t protect Zimmerman.
Something else I’d like to mention, is that you also need to look at it from the kid’s perspective. Somone is following you and there is no question about it. Finally they get out of the car and approach you. You can be darned certain I’m going to be concerned and prepared to fight.
MATA
YOUR COMMENTS REFLECT THE TRUE LAWYER IN YOU, NOT MORE,
NOT LESS, YOU DON’T LET YOURSELF BE CONFUSE BY ANY OTHER EMOTIONS, ONLY WHAT YOU READ OF , ACCORDING TO THE LAWS, YOU HAVE PROVEN TO KNOW MORE THAN ANYONE ELSE,
AS OPPOSE TO TAKE LIKE ME, BEING IMPRESS AND LEAN ON ONE SIDE, BY OTHER NEWS TRAGIC AS MUCH AS THE KID BURNED BY BLACK STUDENTS INCITED BY THEIR SCHOOL TEACHER TO HATE THE WHITES CHILDREN IN THE CLASS AS A MINORITY, AND THE FEELING OF ALL THE PEOPLE HAVING BEEN ROB BY YOUNG BLACKS IN THEIR COMMUNITY, AS MR ZIMMERMAN SEEM TO HAVE BEEN THINKING OF PROTECTING THE PEOPLE OF THAT COMMUNITY FOR PREVENTING IT SHOWING HIS CARE FOR THE PEOPLE WHO WHERE TARGET.
THERE IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE 2 POSITION S YOU’RES AND THE OTHER,
THE LAW AGAINST THE FEELING OF THE NON LAW KNOWLEDGE, OF THE OTHER,
AND IT CAN BE DEBATE BUT NOT WINN BY MY SIDE, BECAUSE I CONCENTRATE ON OTHER FACTS AROUND IT WHICH APPAWL ME, WHILE YOU SEE THE APPLICABLE SIDE OF THE LAW ONLY ON THAT EVENT, AND THAT IS THE ONE WHICH WILL PREVAIL BECAUSE THIS IS AMERICA,
NOT ISLAM LAWS, NOT ANY HATE LYNCHING WISHFUL INTENT TO TAKE ON THEMSELVES TO PUNISH WHO THEIR MIND DICTATE IS GUILTY, THEN THEY WOULD ALL BE GUILTY BY WISHING IT
AND PUBLICLY INCITING RIOTS AND HATEFUL REACTION WHICH RENDER THE PERSON CRIMINALS BY ASSOCIATION.
@Hard Right:
1) He followed the kid when being told not to
I think the audio suggests he did not
http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/crime/2012/03/21/bts-zimmerman-911-debate.sanford-police-dept-wkmg#/video/crime/2012/03/21/bts-zimmerman-911-debate.sanford-police-dept-wkmg
2) He got out of his vehicle to confront Trayvon.
I think he was already out of the vehicle when he was speaking to the dispatcher.