Neighborhood Watch guy chases down a kid, shoots him, charged with 2nd-degree murder

**pGekko** · 03-31-2012, 04:51 PM

Originally Posted by The_Real_Right_Way

If a stranger is following you and you don't know his motives, indeed if an altercation ensues you should be fighting for your life.

I teach my self defense students all the time when you engage, you engage with the understanding you are fighting for your life. I would tell my son and daughters to do the same if they are followed by a stranger particularly in an area without witnesses.

lol

**The_Real_Right_Way** · 03-31-2012, 04:56 PM

Originally Posted by General283

Thanks investigator. Obviously this is fact because you said so.

Bullsh!t. We dont know if Trayvon ever felt threatened. But glad you know, you were there.

See above

For someone who doesn't have anything say and wants to reserve their comments, you sure are lippin' off.

Clearly you have not heard his girlfriends comments who was on the phone with TM right before. So your Bull**** comment is void on fact.

**psycaz** · 03-31-2012, 07:13 PM

Originally Posted by The_Real_Right_Way

If a stranger is following you and you don't know his motives, indeed if an altercation ensues you should be fighting for your life.

I teach my self defense students all the time when you engage, you engage with the understanding you are fighting for your life. I would tell my son and daughters to do the same if they are followed by a stranger particularly in an area without witnesses.

If this were the case, wouldn't it be possible to infer that TM was fighting for his life, at least from his point of view?
If so, I believe it would be fair to believe he was fighting with everything he has.

Now if GZ is fighting with TM who is doing everything he possibly can while fighting, kill or be killed going by your thoughts as to how he should look at the situation, wouldn't GZ realize at some point fairly quickly during said
altercation that TM looking to do severe harm to GZ, Aka trying to severely arm or kill him.

At that point, what is GZ supposed to do there TRRW?

He is involved in a fight with someone who is fighting for their life in their mind.

**The_Real_Right_Way** · 03-31-2012, 07:47 PM

Originally Posted by psycaz

If this were the case, wouldn't it be possible to infer that TM was fighting for his life, at least from his point of view?
If so, I believe it would be fair to believe he was fighting with everything he has.

Now if GZ is fighting with TM who is doing everything he possibly can while fighting, kill or be killed going by your thoughts as to how he should look at the situation, wouldn't GZ realize at some point fairly quickly during said
altercation that TM looking to do severe harm to GZ, Aka trying to severely arm or kill him.

At that point, what is GZ supposed to do there TRRW?

He is involved in a fight with someone who is fighting for their life in their mind.

From my perspective, GM has engaged TM by unwarrantedly following and confronting him. Other than GZ's story, we will never know who attacked who, but it is reasonable to consider three points in my opinion:

1. GZ being the initiator and carrier of the weapon has a decision point at some point to meet force with force. I think that meeting the force of a confrontation with an unarmed person is like force, hand to hand combat. Pull a weapon because you are losing a fight you initiated is not justifiable and does not warrant using deadly force.

2. More importantly, GZ as the initiator and carrier of a weapon has full control over the situation by not crossing the line and following and ultimately confronting TM who had a right to be where he was, had not committed a felony, was not engaged in bringing harm to anyone else.

3. Lets assume TM attacked GZ when he was head back to his car. I then keep going back to point #1. GZ had full control but compromised that by following at minimum and worse if he engaged him.

It may not be the law, but I have a hard time understanding how someone can take the law in their own hands and kill an innocent person because of their own lack of judgement, negligence and or stupidity and not be charged with at least manslaughter.

Just my opinion, it will be interesting to see how these aspects of this situation plays out.

**auburntigerdude** · 03-31-2012, 09:05 PM

1. No one here knows what happened unless someone has a video of the entire incident unedited from stem to stern.

2. Zimmerman is Latino not a "WASP" as the media incorrectly report

3. I hope the real facts come out soon . .

**mtdman** · 03-31-2012, 09:17 PM

Why is this thread still going on? Aren't you people tired of arguing over it yet?

**pGekko** · 03-31-2012, 09:21 PM

Sometimes it's fun to have civil discussion.

**psycaz** · 03-31-2012, 09:27 PM

TRRW,

1. First, there is no evidence that the weapon was at all brandished before being used. Secondly, if one is in a fight and starts fearing for their well-being, don't they have the right to defend themselves with any means necessary? You yourself said you teach your students to treat situations like this as a matter of life and death.

2. You seem to making the inference that GZ initiated the confrontation with violence. There is no evidence to that is there? The phone conversation between TM and his girlfriend indicates he was being followed and afraid/concerned about it. There is no evidence as to what happened when first GZ and TM meet. Again, there is no evidence that the weapon was brandished before being used. Also, we do not know the events that lead up to the confrontation. We do not know yet if GZ was truly walking back to his vehicle, confronted and attacked TM or any number of scenarios.

3. If TM attacked GZ once GZ turned and left TM alone, then what was GZ supposed to do? GZ would not be the aggressor. TM would be. You seem to be placing all the blame on GZ, even if he did walk away. How else could he have gotten out of the situation? He followed TM. If he confronts him, talks to him to see why he is there, and decides that he made a mistake about TM and decides to leave without attacking TM, how is what ensues GZ sole responsibility? Under that scenario, GZ realized his mistake and did what he could to correct it - walk away.

Do you have any idea how many folks in Detroit patrol neighborhoods on Devil's Night to try to prevent fires from being set? So any of those folks who may end up being followed that night have the right to attack the neighborhood patrols solely based upon being followed?

**The_Real_Right_Way** · 03-31-2012, 09:57 PM

Originally Posted by auburntigerdude

1. No one here knows what happened unless someone has a video of the entire incident unedited from stem to stern.

2. Zimmerman is Latino not a "WASP" as the media incorrectly report

3. I hope the real facts come out soon . .

The police report said he was white, the media ultimately corrected that error.

**The_Real_Right_Way** · 03-31-2012, 10:11 PM

Originally Posted by psycaz

TRRW,

1. First, there is no evidence that the weapon was at all brandished before being used. Secondly, if one is in a fight and starts fearing for their well-being, don't they have the right to defend themselves with any means necessary? You yourself said you teach your students to treat situations like this as a matter of life and death.

Indeed and I am not suggesting or not whether he brandished the weapon before killing Trayvon. What I am saying is that you meet force with equal force. George initiated this incident, therefore he should have met the situation with equal force, not deadly force.

Originally Posted by psycaz

2. You seem to making the inference that GZ initiated the confrontation with violence. There is no evidence to that is there? The phone conversation between TM and his girlfriend indicates he was being followed and afraid/concerned about it. There is no evidence as to what happened when first GZ and TM meet. Again, there is no evidence that the weapon was brandished before being used. Also, we do not know the events that lead up to the confrontation. We do not know yet if GZ was truly walking back to his vehicle, confronted and attacked TM or any number of scenarios.

I did not say he initiated with violence he initiated by following and confronting. That action was well outside of his bounds and as such he needs to take responsibility for his actions.

Originally Posted by psycaz

3. If TM attacked GZ once GZ turned and left TM alone, then what was GZ supposed to do? GZ would not be the aggressor. TM would be. You seem to be placing all the blame on GZ, even if he did walk away. How else could he have gotten out of the situation? He followed TM. If he confronts him, talks to him to see why he is there, and decides that he made a mistake about TM and decides to leave without attacking TM, how is what ensues GZ sole responsibility? Under that scenario, GZ realized his mistake and did what he could to correct it - walk away.

Indeed GZ is responsible as he initiated any contact that took place by following and confronting him.

Originally Posted by psycaz

Do you have any idea how many folks in Detroit patrol neighborhoods on Devil's Night to try to prevent fires from being set? So any of those folks who may end up being followed that night have the right to attack the neighborhood patrols solely based upon being followed?

I suspect like most official block watch people they are told to contact the authorities if they see suspicious be activity, not take the law into their own hands. GZ wasn't even official as I understand it, he was "self appointed". He crossed the line and should suffer the consequences of his actions since it resulted in the death of an innocent teenager. This should not be oh its just too bad it happened, bury the kid ...case closed.

GZ's poor judgement and stupidity caused the death and he should suffer the consequences.

**The_Real_Right_Way** · 03-31-2012, 10:18 PM

Trayvon Martin shooting: It's not George Zimmerman crying for help on 911 recording, 2 experts say
Trayvon Martin's family says unarmed teen begged for his life. Experts say it's not George Zimmerman's voice.

By Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel

4:38 p.m. CDT, March 31, 2012

As the Trayvon Martin controversy splinters into a debate about self-defense, a central question remains: Who was heard crying for help on a 911 call in the moments before the teen was shot?

A leading expert in the field of forensic voice identification sought to answer that question by analyzing the recordings for the Orlando Sentinel.

His result: It was not George Zimmerman who called for help.

Tom Owen, forensic consultant for Owen Forensic Services LLC and chair emeritus for the American Board of Recorded Evidence, used voice identification software to rule out Zimmerman. Another expert contacted by the Sentinel, utilizing different techniques, came to the same conclusion.

Zimmerman claims self-defense in the shooting and told police he was the one screaming for help. But these experts say the evidence tells a different story.

'Scientific certainty'

On a rainy night in late February, a woman called 911 to report someone crying out for help in her gated Sanford community, Retreat at Twin Lakes.

Though several of her neighbors eventually called authorities, she phoned early enough for dispatchers to hear the panicked cries and the gunshot that took Trayvon Martin's life.

George Zimmerman, a Neighborhood Watch volunteer, shot Trayvon, an unarmed 17-year-old, during a one-on-one confrontation Feb. 26.

Before the shot, one of them can be heard screaming for help.
Full Story

If Trayvon was there begging for his life before GZ shot him this is truly sad.