Posted on 06/25/2013 7:53:51 AM PDT by kristinn
Two flawed innocent lives intersected one 2012 February night in the town of Sanford, Florida. Afterward one life was ended and another was marked for death.
The debate over the shooting death of Trayvon Martin at the hands of George Zimmerman sixteen months ago has partisans painting each as villains in order to justify their belief in the guilt or innocence of Zimmerman of the charge of second degree murder.
Those who believe Zimmerman is innocent have rejected the Martin family’s attorneys’ portrait of Martin as a cuddly boy who looked about twelve years old. Instead, they point to Martin’s thug-wannabe social media persona and high school suspensions to portray the just turned seventeen-year-old as a hardened Black street thug who was casing the neighborhood where Zimmerman lived.
Those who believe Zimmerman is guilty have cast the part Black, part Hispanic, part White, then-twenty-eight-year-old as a white racist cop-wannabe who stalked Martin that February 26th night with murder in his heart.
But what if neither view is correct. What if the basic stories told by the two key witnesses in the case were pretty much what happened. Zimmerman and the mysterious ‘Witness 8’s tales overlap on key points.
Witness 8 is the alleged girlfriend of Martin who was supposedly speaking to Martin as he walked though Zimmerman’s neighborhood as he made his way to the townhouse home of his father’s then girlfriend where he was staying after being suspended from school in Miami. Her statement (albeit with spin and hyperbole) was relayed by Martin family attorney Benjamin Crump at a news conference March 20, 2012.
Zimmerman and Witness 8 both say that Martin was staying close to buildings. Both say Martin walked near Zimmerman’s parked car to check him out. Both say that Martin and Zimmerman lost sight of each other. Both say they came back in contact. And both agree confrontational words were first exchanged followed quickly by a physical altercation between the two.
Witness 8 says Martin was staying close to the buildings to get out of the rain—an innocent thing to do—and got upset that someone was watching him. Zimmerman, involved in his community’s neighborhood watch, took into account the rash of burglaries in recent months as he observed the stranger lurking near buildings.
Martin wanted to get a closer look at the stranger to him who was eyeballing him. Zimmerman took that as menacing. Martin then got away from Zimmerman. Zimmerman got out of his vehicle to see where the stranger to him was running toward. Losing him and being advised by the dispatcher not to pursue the stranger, Zimmerman says he started to make his way back to his vehicle.
It is not known why Martin did not go straight to his father’s then-girlfriend’s townhouse. He could have gotten disoriented in the evening rain as he tried to get away from the stranger, or he could have decided to confront the stranger who had gotten out of his vehicle in the rain to follow him. He would have been in his rights to do so--as would Zimmerman be in his rights to check out and follow the stranger in his crime-stricken neighborhood even if the police dispatcher advised him not to.
When the two met face to face, neither got violent right away. They both asked each other ‘what are you doing’ type questions. What apparently made the confrontation turn violent is the move by Zimmerman to reach for his cellphone. As he relates in his written statement to Sanford police the night of the incident: “…as I tried to find my phone to dial 911 the suspect punched me in the face. I fell backwards onto my back. The suspect got on top of me…the suspect grabbed my head and slammed it into the concrete sidewalk.”
Martin could very easily have been acting in self-defense if he took Zimmerman fumbling for a cellphone as him reaching for a knife or a gun. The way he reacted, according to Zimmerman, is exactly how a friend into self-defense told me long ago to get the upper hand in such a situation: First punch the nose hard enough to break it, thereby stunning your opponent, and then beat the tar out of them before they can recover.
So Martin would have been in the right acting in self-defense against a strange man who was following him who reached for something as they confronted each other.
Zimmerman also would have been right in trying to defend himself with deadly force as he did not initiate the violence and was quickly facing having his head bashed in.
There are no eyewitnesses to the beginning of the fight between Martin and Zimmerman, save for Zimmerman himself. The description by one eyewitness who saw some of the fight before the gunshot tracked with Zimmerman’s description at that point of the incident—just as Witness 8 largely tracks with Zimmerman’s account.
It is quite likely that the unarmed Trayvon Martin died believing he was fighting for his life from a stranger who stalked him with bad intent and was trying to pull a weapon on him. Zimmerman saying that when they were on the ground Martin saw the gun in his waistband would only have confirmed Martin’s fears.
If Zimmerman were trying to pull his gun out at the onset, rather than fumble for his cellphone, the fight would have right away been a struggle for control of the gun. There’s no evidence that happened.
It is my belief that both Martin and Zimmerman acted within their rights the night of February 26, 2012. Sometimes acting within your rights with flawed judgment can get you killed. Other times it can get you put on trial for murder by a legal lynch mob.
Incorrect implication. They left out the fact Martin sought out and walked *towards* Z, who was walking back towards his car...
No Limit Nigga was at the location of his demise because he had been repeatedly suspended from school for possession of burglary tools, possession of stolen property, possession and sale of pot, and finally assault on a bus driver.
The heat was on Tray, and he fled to his daddy's crib in a ripe community where he was not known.
Now it was easier to shop at the local convenience store exercising his legal right to purchase the fixin's of Purple Drank, the thug culture's current narcotic of choice.
Unfortunately on the way back to the crib, while looking in residential windows, he ran into Zimmerman, the off duty Neighborhood Watch senior officer, in his watch neighborhood.
Who be in the right, again, girl?
It’s pretty clear kristinn, you’ve never spent any time in the senseless murder districts and or around people like Martin.
In addition, you intentionally left out a whole lot of facts.
[[Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman: Both were in the right—-and both were deadly wrong]]
Yep- blindsiding someoen and CRIMINALLY ASSAULTING THEM WITH INTENT TO MURDER (and even announcign the intended murder) is ‘right’ only if you are a yougn black liberal I guess-
Why the censorship?
Trayvon "No Limit Nigga" Martin himself used the term "nigga" self-referentially.
It cannot be offensive, and you cannot be legitimately accused of giving offense by calling the self-so-called @no_limit_nigga a no-limit nigga.
Race hustlers and the perpetually offended be damned!
a person has a right ot follow someone- even gettign an inch away fro m,their face if they so choose to- a person does NOT have a right to assault another person-
How was martin ‘right’ i nwhat he did? He was bashing george’s head agaisnt cement in an attempt to murder him AFTER the intitial CRIMINAL ASSAULT occured when he blindsided george- How does his actiosn be seen as ‘right’?
[[Nope, pounding someones head on the concrete would never be considered legitimate self defense under any circumstances.]]
It is in a stand your ground case where you feel your life is in danger- howeve3r, that is not what happened i nthis case- martin was the agressor- he was the one who initiated an attempted murder-
interesting summary, most likely closest to the truth.
That way, citizens cannot defend themselves when the Gibsmedats come boiling out of the urban kraals. Jesse and Al, as well as the NBPP, have already stated that there WILL be riots, regardless of the verdict.
Back-door Gun Control, legislated from the bench. That’s all there ever is or was to this case.
I'm afraid that you have taken the long view, and that is the foundation of this action. It's all about making the producers helpless and dependent on a governmental police state.
[[that he was anything other than the street fighting druggie gangsta thug that his Facebook, IMs, school records, and all the other evidence shows he is.
You paint the question of why he didn’t go back to his family’s house as something to wonder about. The creep circled around to confront GZ]]
And htat is precisely the point- the kid was nearly home, but mostl ikely htought he was gonna get ‘whitey’ and make a name for hismelf- mostl ikely, the more he thought abotu beign followed, the angrier he became, until he made the fateful descision to try to teach ‘whitey’ a lesson (perhaps even murder him, and later claimign self defense if he could manage to do so- his gansta name woudl then be ‘legendary’ o nthe street forb havign stood up to ‘
whitey’
This is all conjecture of course- but it’s a very likely scenario- I can picture martin steaming with anger as he’s beign followed- seethign with anger until he thinks in his own mind that he can make a name for hismelf if he can murder this dude following him-
This kid was a wanna be gangster- thsi was his opportunity to ‘prove his gangsta-ness’ and he took it- only he foudn out he shouldn’t have the hard way
[[that doesn’t change the fact that GZ was justified in believing that TM meant him death or imminent bodily harm.]]
Exactly- WHENEVER soemoen smashes your head into a hard object- even just once- you can safely and rightfully assume that htey are tryign to murder you as hard objects agaisnt hte head brign about death tiem and time again as proven out by facts- You do NOT need to wonder whether they are tryign to murder you- your answer is YES- they ARE tryign to murder you- it is NEVER right to smash someone’s head agaisnt ANYTHING- NEVER
Hopefully omarra makes htis point VERY cleasr to the jury-
[[It is quite likely that the unarmed Trayvon Martin died believing he was fighting for his life ]]
BS- unarmed? He was using a qweapon agaisnt george- the sidewalk- And, so the hell what if he died thinking he was in afight he might die in? He STARTED the fight- anb HE was theo ne tryign to murder george- too freakin bad if he died ‘thinking he might die’- Boo fricken hoo
Well, based on your title, since one is dead, it only makes sense to punish the one left alive.
Nice try Kristinn but no, everything is not everything. And no, we can’t all just get along!
I don't agree with that.
I was aggressively approached by a pan-handler once. He was obviously aiming himself directly at me while I was standing between two parked cars. I had to either start backing up or prepare for confrontation.
This guy would have been punched long before he came within an inch of me. Fortunately my body language made clear just how unacceptable his approach was. He halted his approach, insulted me and left the way he came.
Why don't you wait until we see what comes out in court, Kristinn??? So far only one view has been shown to be correct -- the other has been caught in lie and after lie.
[[This guy would have been punched long before he came within an inch of me.]]
you can punch him- and I’m not advocating not to if you feel threatened- but you’ll then have to prove you felt threatened because you threw the first punch- whuiekl the aggression IS enough to support a defe3nse that you felt threatened, it can only really be proved if there were witnesses, or video or soemthing- but hwen cops show up to a cscene, they look for marks- theo ne with hte marks is the victim regardless of how it went down in actuality IF there were no witnesses- the cop’s only concern is who threw the first punch- they are not itnerested in WHY the punch was thrown
The bottom line is that there has to be compelling evidence to support the need for a first punch- toehrwise it will be called an assault, possibly even criminal assault- two peopel screamign at each other, doesn’t give oen person a right to hit hte other (although I supposed it oculd be aergtued that if the one person who hit wass spit on i nthe verbal exchange, that that could be cosntrued as assault- especially in today’s age with all the diseases around)
I’tsw a fien line- and it’;s why you often see two peopel screaming at each other, pointign violently, even gettign right in the other’;s face, but not actually touchign hte other person- lots of posturing goign on, lots of barking but no actual biting-
Martin crossed the line by committing criminal assault on ?George them oment he laid a hand on him- and he definately crossed thel ien when he bagan beatign george’s head into the sidewalk- George was fully within his rights to follow trayvon- following someoen is NOT a crime- Assaultign someoen without a very good reason to IS a crime- Being followed is NOT a reason to assautl someone- it sucks to be sure, but had trasyvon called that dispathcer, I bet if he said he was goign to assault George, the dispatcher woudl have said “We don’t need yuo to do that’ ANDF woudl have been right to suggest that- the dispatcher was NOT right to state that same thing to george because George was NOT doign anyhtign wrong- infat, he was doign his duty-
This is not a 50/50 self defense case
Trayvon Martin assaulted George Zimmerman. Martin was straddling GZ....grabbed his head.....and slammed it into the sidewalk. This is definitely excessive force used by Martin...and no longer self defense. In fact....in most legitimate cases....Martin would be charged w assault and battery IAW Florida law
Also...I do not think the state will put Witness 8 on the stand....she is disaster for the state.....and she may not even be the same DeeDee that was first interviewed
Ummmm... One who has been suspended from school, kicked out of his family home, is doing drugs, is a gangsta wannabe, and is living in his father's girlfriend's condo and IF the police are called on him, would likely be kicked out of that domicile.
>>>ONE MORE INCIDENT, and his father would likely had to have thrown him out. Where would Trayvon go then ? He might have to get a job and pay for his own living quarters. His solution? Violence. <<<
Good point, but you lost me at “get a job”. Trayvon the Thug would simply have escalated his already promising criminal career.
To ‘stay out of the rain’, one would have to be standing flat against the house.
The best way to ‘stay out of the rain’, is not to go out in the rain. Of course, if you have to meet your drug dealers at the 7-11, and you have no car, then I guess you go ‘walkin in the rain’.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.