Skip to comments.Scarborough Brands Shooter Of Trayvon Martin A 'Murderer'
Posted on 03/21/2012 6:55:13 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
It's not easy to make Al Sharpton appear relatively restrained in a racially-charged case such as the one involving the death of Trayvon Martin. But Joe Scarborough has managed to pull off the dubious feat. On today's Morning Joe, Scarborough flatly branded the reported shooter, George Zimmerman, a "murderer." It was no slip of the tongue. A couple minutes later, Scarborough declared that Zimmerman had "murdered" Martin.
Sharpton himself never used such language, generally describing Zimmerman as the "shooter," and even imagining, without endorsing, a scenario in which Zimmerman might have been acting in self defense.
View the video here.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
Hispanics can be white.
Martin was on top of Zimmerman, beating him in the head.
That’s why no charges were filed.
You need to read up on the case a little more. Zimmerman appears to have stalked this kid and shot him for no reason other than thinking he was in the wrong neighborhood. They have the kid's last phone call up to the moment of the attack that pretty much nails Zimmerman as a killer. How the neighborhood let that loser on the Watch is beyond me.
Something that I haven’t seen discussed is that what apparently made the kid look “suspicious” is that he was on foot, aside of course from being black.
I walk when I can rather than drive simply because I think we drive too much. Exercise, energy usage, etc. In an amazingly large percentage of the country it is almost impossible to walk safely, simply because of the way the roads are built.
Now we’re going to start shooting pedestrians for being “suspicious” characters?
obviously NBC never learned from the 1996 olympics.
It appears to be a little more complicated than that. Trayvon Martin's 911 Calls: New Tapes Trace Teen's Final Moments
From what I have read, I think the shooter crossed the line and was essentially stalking the guy and most likely escalated it. The victim may have thought the shooter was going to mug him and made a preemtive attack. I wouldn’t blame the kid for that.
This eyewitness report has been left out of every news story. This shows that the confrontation escalated into a full blown fight. It wasn’t just a vigilante walking up and shooting the kid.
Witness who called 911...
The guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, Help! Help! and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911, said the witness, who asked to be identified only by his first name, John.
John said he locked his patio door, ran upstairs and heard at least one gun shot.
And then, when I got upstairs and looked down, the guy who was on the top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point.
I was doing a little walking in my neighborhood, doing some walking-laps on a side street, and some busybody has the temerity to stick his fool head out the door and yell, “Everything okay?”, but in a suspicious tone, not a helpful one.
I responded poorly. Instead of the “Just getting some exercise” answer, I should have yelled, “NO! The damned VOICES won’t shut UP, and I’ve already killed three of the babies! HEY! HEY YOU! COME HERE!!!!”
Of course the reason he was on top of him beating him in the head MAY have been that he feared for his life when approached at night by an armed man.
Had the kid shot Zimmerman in fear for his life, he might have had a decent defense under Stand Your Ground. It doesn’t seem reasonable that he should be presumed at fault because he wasn’t packing.
If the two grappled over the gun and Zimmerman got shot, the kid would have a very good case for self-defense, probably. It doesn’t seem a good idea to have laws in place that allow a killing to be judged self-defense regardless of which party survives.
I realize we have no-fault divorce now, but no-fault shooting probably isn’t a good idea.
TY. It does raise the issue whether you can cause an unjustified fight, then find yourself on the bottom of the pile, and be justified to shoot your victim turned assailant.
I’m thinking that IF the shooter started the fight, shooting the victim because he gets the upper hand would be a continuation of the initial assault.
It’s much less clear if you merely confront the victim, he proceeds to whomp your butt, and in the middle of that fight you use your gun.
No matter what the appropriate charge, it certainly seems the shooter brought on a tragedy by being overly aggressive and ignoring police instructions.
According to the tapes, Zimmerman called the police to come to the neighborhood because he spotted Martin who was acting suspiciously. Zimmerman mentioned that Martin was wearing a hoodie and had his hands in his waistband. Zimmerman opined that Martin had something he was hiding. The implication was that it could be a weapon. The police advised Zimmerman not to follow Martin and that they would meet with Zimmerman when they got there. Zimmerman agreed to meet with them and asked them to call him on his cell phone when they arrived.
It appears from the various tapes that there was some sort of altercation with both men wrestling on the ground. From reports that I have seen, Zimmerman is clearly the bigger man weighing 250 pounds to Martin's 140 pounds. It is clear from the tapes that someone is calling for help.
Based on this information, it is hard to see this as a premeditated murder. Zimmerman clearly acted out of bounds and should have followed the advice of the police and not confronted Martin. Until we know the details of what prompted the altercation, it is difficult to form any conclusive judgment on exactly how and why lethal force was used. It is a tragedy, but it is hard to classify it as a hate crime.
My brother and I used to walk down to the neighborhood 7-11 when we were kids without batting an eye. It was the nearest place to get candy and Slurpees without needing mom to drive us.
Keep in mind that this shooting occurred in the Orlando metro area, a cesspool if there ever was one. Aside from the Disney resort and properties, much of the Orange and Seminole county rural and suburban areas are dicey, at best. I don’t blame Zimmerman for carrying, esp. considering the sort of violence and gang garbage going on in that part of the Florida.
I don't think it was premeditated either. But it does appear to be an unnecessary death. I walk armed any time I walk, and frankly, when I see yutes in hoodies I stay extra vigilant. However, not all hoodie wearers are gangbangers.
I just think conservatives rallying around Zimmerman makes us look like the "Free Mumia" libtards.
I don’t blame him for carrying. I blame him for confronting a guy without just cause. That’s probably what led to the fight and thus to the shooting.
CC is not a license to confront people on the street who you think are “suspicioius.” A good many around here think LEOs shouldn’t have that power, but certainly not everybody with a CC.
There’s really nothing more here than some mall ninja without the will or physical acumen to run down a black kid who he deems suspicious. There was no weapon on his person according to all accounts, and Zimmerman used racial epithets to describe the kid/situation on the phone with the police, regardless of whether or not he wanted those epithets to be recorded.
Here’s what I don’t quite get. Apparently the shooter has not been charged with anything. Is this because the DA completed their inquiry and concluded that no crime had been committed, or is it because the inquiry is still ongoing?
If the former, then all I can say is “what were they thinking?” Meaning I can’t say for sure what happened, but I can’t say for sure that no crime has been committed. I’d let a jury make that determination.
If the latter, then I’d say “let the process run its course”. Meaning all this sound and fury is way premature.
Why the anti-white hysteria?