Skip to comments.Allen West Calls Trayvon Martin Shooting an ‘Outrage’ and Endorses Federal Investigation
Posted on 03/22/2012 9:03:25 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
Ever since his CPAC Keynote Address in 2010, Rep. Allen West (R-FL) has been one of the gold standards of modern American political conservatism. He has also been widely hailed as a political model for conservative African American politicians. And now, following recent revelations surrounding the highly suspicious shooting of Trayvon Martin, Rep. West has joined a growing bipartisan consensus calling for the case to be reopened, possibly even with Federal assistance. Wests statement, put out today by Talking Points Memo, resonates with controlled fury (emphasis added):
itself in Sanford, Florida involving the shooting of 17-year-old Treyvon Martin. First of all, if all that has been reported is accurate, the Sanford Police Chief should be relieved of his duties due to what appears to be a mishandling of this shooting in its early stages. The US Navy SEALS identified Osama Bin Laden within hours, while this young man laid on a morgue slab for three days. The shooter, Mr Zimmerman, should have been held in custody and certainly should not be walking free, still having a concealed weapons carry permit. From my reading, it seems this young man was pursued and there was no probable cause to engage him, certainly not pursue and shoot him
.against the direction of the 911 responder. Lets all be appalled at this instance not because of race, but because a young American man has lost his life, seemingly, for no reason. I have signed a letter supporting a DOJ investigation. I am not heading to Sanford to shout and scream, because we need the responsible entities and agencies to handle this situation from this point without media bias or undue political influences. This is an outrage.
(Excerpt) Read more at theblaze.com ...
Bingo. Race = federal jurisdiction. I call BS on anyone calling on Holder to be involved in this local matter.
SoldierDad where is the additional evidence going to come from? There is none. So the kind of investigation you are seeking will be nothing but political circus (to further the agenda of crooks and race-baiters)
It will not bring the dead boy back, nor likely to put the man that shot him in jail. Elongating this situation tho is sure to cause trouble as I see it is here on this thread.
Best that it be laid to rest.
I’ve read, seen, nor heard any information (read, facts) which definitively identifies what initiated the confrontation, and who the initial aggressor was. Is there any reason why it is inappropriate to ask questions? Are you suggesting that there is no way there could be a poor job of investigating done by police in this case? So, FR has gone from thread after thread after thread of bashing Law Enforcement and the actions of police to unquestionably accepting the story police are telling in this case! Why is that???
I read the report. I’ve also seen the media coverage, the social media firestorm.
The statement that Congressman West issued appears to me to be carefully crafted to curry favor without making a firm stand. “If all that is reported is accurate...” is an interesting statement from a man who has been put through the liberal media wringer.
“It seems...seemingly, with no reason”.
A careful reading of Congressman West’s statement shows that he’s saying that if Martin was shot for no reason, it’s an outrage. I think anybody would agree with that. He neglects to say that if Martin assaulted Zimmerman before the shooting, it’s a different story. In the same breath he calls for an investigation without undue political influence (like speculative declarations from Congressmen?) and without media bias. He says this, speaking to the media that has hardly been impartial or level headed so far.
That’s the sort of stuff I’d expect from a politician.
Of course, like everybody else posting here, I wasn’t there...but neither was Congressman West.
My own opinion is that Mr. Zimmerman showed poor judgement at best...his life is ruined, even if he was acting in good faith and with pure heart, and I’m at all certain that he was.
A guy may be legally entitled to walk dangerous streets after dark, flashing cash and whistling “I’m In The Money”, and then cry “Self Defense!” after the predictable happens, but that doesn’t make it smart or right.
This is sad all the way around.
So, you’re all for dropping this even if the man who killed this 17 year old did so without justification? Wow!!!! I hope that you never have a similar incident occur in your neighborhood. Personally, were I to have a neighbor who was responsble for killing someone, I’d want a full and complete investigation. And, if the local law enforcement failed in that, I’d want someone from the state to also investigate. Would you feel comfortable with a neighbor who might have gone off half-cocked and killed an innocent person?
Again (sigh) you present NO evidence which supports the justification of using deadly force as used in this incident.
There were witnesses who can corroborate the testimony of Mr. Zimmerman. They were interviewed by the cops. If the witnesses statements had not jibed with Mr. Zimmerman’s I am sure Mr. Zimmerman would be currently detained in jail.
Police make mistakes, but what I am saying is look past all of the lies, distortion, and name calling by the racebaiters and Leftist media and look at what the facts are at this point and compare it to what the electronic lynchmobbers are saying.
All the while the Leftist media quietly suppresses all of the racist attacks on Whites by Blacks. Now why is that?
SoliderDad read all the posts - I have learned more about this incident on this thread than I had on others.
The State is investigating
The police did investigate all the evidence - unless Zimmerman changes his statement there is nothing left to consider. Read his father’s statement as well.
That boy made a poor choice to attack an armed man - sadly he is dead. But its time to move on.
I concur with your comments. I don’t believe Zimmerman was out “hunting”, but made an error in judgement. It may also be the case that the 17 year old also made a bad judgement, but as yet there isn’t any facts which point to just who initiated the physical confrontation. I was a neighborhood watch captain years ago. We started the NW program in our neighborhood because there was a huge problem with drug trafficing on our street. We worked very closely with our Law Enforcement liason and the other residents who were tired of the thefts, and day and night traffic on dead-end street because of those living in the area who were dealing drugs. At no time did anyone participating with the NW attempt any kind of contact with those we were trying to clean out. We kept records, and called police. It took quite a few months, but eventually we had put so much pressure on the miscreants there that those who lived there moved out, leaving no reason for those looking to buy to be there.
Based on the physical evidence and statements, the police concluded initially that it was a case of self-defense. Zimmerman claims he was the one who was attacked. He was returning home from an errand when he noticed this guy acting strangely. He reported it to the police and waited for them to arrive.
We do know that Zimmerman had a bloody nose and and blood on the back of the head and that his back was covered in grass stains. We don't know what injuries other than one bullet wound were suffered by Martin. The fact that there was a physical scuffle indicates to me at least that Zimmerman did not shoot Martin immediately, but only after he was engaged in a fight with him. And Martin's father has confirmed that it was not his son who was calling for help during the struggle, it was Zimmerman.
You seem to doubt Zimmerman's story. Why? Shouldn't he be presumed innocent until proven guilty? We now have Al Sharpton and his minnions making this into a cause celebre for political reasons. It is being used by the Dems and Obama to rally and energize their base in the runup to the election. It has been done before.
Zimmerman is now getting a thorough vetting by the press, but very little is being said about Martin and whether he has had some prior run ins with the law or school authorities. Zimmerman has already been convicted by the MSM and the Left similar to what happened to William Jewel.
I’ve read enough to know that there is nowhere near enough facts to make a determination of who was responsible. And, there is sufficient reason to have an independent investigation. There are investigative techniques that can be utilized to look for a better understanding of what took place. Not investigating because the shooter has claimed self-defense is a horrible reason to drop this matter.
I will put it in a nutshell. But if you don't believe my interpretation, I recommend you actually LISTEN to the words spoken rather than selectively hear what you want to believe.
Mr. Zimmerman places the call to the SFD telling them of recent criminal activity in the neighborhood and that he sees a suspicious character there. The police officer asks for his location and a description of the suspected character (asks if he's white, black, etc.) Zimmerman describes Martin saying something's not right about him, that he has his hand in his waistband and Martin is looking at him.
Zimmerman is giving directions to his location and gives the officer his phone number when asked. In the middle of giving directions Zimmerman comments that the suspect is now running. The officer asks where he is running to and it's obvious Zimmerman is out of breath so the officer asks if he is pursuing suspect. Zimmerman says yes and officer says "we don't need you to do that" and Zimmerman says OKAY. It is then apparent that Zimmerman has stopped pursuing because his voice becomes more in control.
The officer states they are dispatching to the location and asks if Zimmerman wants to meet the police there. The officer asks where he wants to meet them and there's discussion about where to meet. The officer asks Zimmerman for his address and after starting to give the address, Zimmerman hesitates because he doesn't know where the suspect is so he asks to have the police call him when they get there.
So first of all, unless you think he was lying to the police when he said he didn't know where Martin was, how is it possible that he was pursuing him? He was waiting for the police to come and planned on meeting them, and had already agreed not to pursue Martin (again unless you think he was lying to the police).
I don't have any clue where you got the notion that Zimmerman was actively chasing after Martin and/or confronting him, but the recorded tapes totally debunk that scenario.
Remember that Zimmerman had already had contact with the police, so while the officers on the scene might have been unaware at first of Zimmerman's original call, you can be certain they subsequently connected the incidents, which is why Zimmerman's version was more believable and he was not charged.
The arresting officer also made this statement in his report: "Zimmerman was placed in the rear of my police vehicle and was given first aid by the SFD. While the SFD was attending to Zimmerman, I over heard him state 'I was yelling for someone to help me, but no one would help me.' At no point did I question Zimmerman about the incident that had taken place."
Again, unless you assume that Zimmerman knew that several witnesses would claim they heard someone screaming for help and therefore lied about yelling for help, I don't think it's a stretch to deduce that it was indeed Mr. Zimmerman who was being attacked, and with the other recorded evidence with the SFD, that he did not pursue or provoke Martin.
I'm not sure if you have an agenda or if you're just prone to emotion-driven propaganda. I can tell you that I was totally out of the loop at the start of this fiasco, so I come into it unaffected by the original conventional wisdom, and feel I can read and listen to all the FACTUAL evidence without prejudice. At this point, I tend to find Zimmerman's story makes the most sense.
Unless there was an eye-witness who can say otherwise to Zimmerman’s statement he was jumped from behind - no one will ever prove who threw the first punch.
But if it goes to trial sleazy lawyers know all the tricks in the book to sway a jury - is that what some of you prefer, along with a media feeding frenzy shouting RACISM in an election year?
Im done time for bed.
witnesses have been talking to reporters. Not everything pertinent to an incident is in a police report. I know, because my sister assaulted me, falsely accused me of the crime, and a police report resulted that did not include pertinent facts because a witness lied!
If Mr.Zimmerman is charged with a crime, I have no doubt he will be found innocent. Then he can sue the bejesus out of the Police Department. Now, won’t that make the taxpayers angry?
The Castle Doctrine very much applies here. It doesn’t matter whether Trayvon was 6’ or 7’ tall; beating someone in the face and about the head with fists can kill them. And now there are witnesses.
It doesn’t make you happy, I can tell.
Trayvon Martin was suspended from school for 5-days. Why, I really don’t care. But it is possible he was really ticked off about it, and Zimmerman was an irritant that set Trayvon off.
“Martin was with his father visiting his fathers girlfriend who lived in the neighborhood, thus he had a legal right to be there.”
So why didn’t he stop and tell Zimmerman that fact.
“Martin had no responsibility to stop for an unidenfiable individual who was trying to detain him.”
When I have the right of way at an intersection I don’t have to stop - but it isn’t worth dying for, either.
You state that Trayvon had a reason to be there, so why not stop and tell that to Zimmerman? This is really a shame, because Zimmerman probably knew the name of Trayvon’s dad’s girlfriend. All Trayvon had to do was be civil, stop and chat with Zimmerman.
If he had, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.
The physical evidence you put so much stock into is what exactly? The witness statements explain what exactly? NO ONE saw the initiation of the confrontation. The physical evidence that Zimmerman had a bloody nose does NOT preclude the possibility that Zimmerman initiated the confrontation with the 17 year old. It amazes me that the FACT the 17 year old was not doing anything wrong; had NOT been involved in the burglaries; that Zimmerman had been essentially stalking the 17 year old due to an unfounded suspicion isn’t being taken into consideration. Why is it not appropriate to even consider that Zimmerman used poor judgement? Are you suggesting that you would not, if being followed by someone, take steps to get that person to end their actions against you? Sorry, but I’m not willing to take Zimmerman’s word simply because the person he shot is unable to tell his side of the story. And, neither should anyone else.
Sir, where we part ways is that I feel no need for federal involvement at this point. I think the local legal system should be given a chance to do what it has to do, without a bunch of pressure and opportunistic statements from politicians, and certainly without pressure from known race-baiters like Sharpton and company.
I confess to having a knee-jerk reflex of sympathy towards Mr. Zimmerman when I see the cast of characters using to further their own agenda, and it may well be that he did murder and the physical evidence just happens to point towards self defense. It’s up to the local authorities to decide if it makes sense to put him in front of a jury who’ll have to try to read what was in his heart when he pulled the trigger.
It pains me to see conservatives call for the feds to come in to satisfy what really amounts to an emotional reaction. Let the locals handle it, and let’s see how it goes.
So, if there was a recent incident of criminal activity on my street, and then I saw someone who was unknown to me, I can first follow that individual, with his knowledge that I am doing so, and, perhaps, initiate some type of contact with that individual, regardless of whether he is actually doing anything of a criminal nature, and then, if he becomes upset and/or violent with me, despite the fact that I initiated the contact, I can shoot and kill the individual? Okay, got it. Committed to memory. It is okay to commit a homicide just so long as I am somewhere on my street and following someone who is unknown to me and I THINK they might be up to no good because SOMEONE ELSE committed criminal activity in the past. That is good to know. I hope you don't mind that I don't actually engage in such stupid behavior.
“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.”
Guys I was a cop for 20 years. I worked in DC. What’s happening in this case is LIB 101.
One of our white officers would respond to a “shots fired” call. They arrive, see black guy with gun, order black guy to drop gun, black guy raises gun, white cop shoots.
Next day, front page of the Washington Post:
“17 Year Old Aspiring Poet Gunned Down by Police”
— “Was star player on HS Football Team”
— “Was trying to turn life around”
— “Wanted to be a good father to his new baby”
— “Mom says he was a ‘good boy’ who had a ‘contagious smile’
— “White officer had been disciplined before”
This is exactly what’s happening here, but with more widespread success. The libmedia has found itself a White Devil to persecute, and it’s gone viral.
People shoot people every day. Blacks shoot whites. Blacks shoot blacks. Whites shoot blacks. Adults shoot kids. Kids shoot adults. Sounds like Dr. Seuss.
EVERYTHING THE MEDIA SAYS IN THIS CASE should be examined with a microscope. Every word choice, every weasel phrase, every omitted detail.
I’ve seen it dozens of times.
You know he was taken in for questioning by detectives right from the scene? You know forensics came to the scene and processed it for fingerprints, took photos and collected evidence? You know they took his firearm and put it into evidence?
I’m not sure why people think an investigation was “not done”.
I never called for federal involvement. In fact, that would be totally inappropriate. And independent investigation does not necessary need to be federal.
Oh I'm sure why....the results didn't fit with their agenda.
Who isn't even white.
The basis for your statement please.
Zimmerman's statement to police hotline operator. "Oh crap, he's running" Zimmerman gets out of his truck to follow.
Police operator (translated from cop speak) "Don't do that"
Zimmaerman (frustrated) "These a***holes always get away" "Have the cops call me to find out where i am when they arrive"
It's simply a preliminary report, covering very basic information. Such as basic descriptions, the players etc. It also noted Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose and back of his head.
It also noted Zimmerman while being medically treated on scene stated, "I was yelling for someone to help, but no one would help me".
That is not an investigation report, but basically a response report, very preliminary. You'll note in the preliminary report, it stated the responding officers turned Zimmerman over to "Investigations" for an interview.
Reports I’ve heard indicated that the firearm was NOT taken and processed. If true, there’s a problem. If not true, then that needs to be dispelled. There is conflicting information. I see no reason to not have clarification and/or an independent investigation (that doesn’t mean federal). I’ve read on FR thread after thread bashing law enforcement over the course of the past several years. Now everyone wants to jump on the bandwagon of this particular police department in this particular incident and claim there is not reason to consider that the police didn’t do a complete investigation.
You’re so right. Ah, the irony.
That’s the wisest post on the thread, IMHO.
Oh, you were there? Great! We can expect your first-hand report on FR.
You heard BS.
Try reading page 4 of 4.
It clearly stated the weapon was "Collected and placed into evidence".
Ah. Sarcasm. The arguement of a weak mind. Thanks for that illuminating comment.
Sarcasm isn’t an argument. For weak mindedness I’ll go back to post #2.
“””Reports Ive heard indicated that the firearm was NOT taken and processed.”””
See page 4 of 4.
It clearly stated the weapon was “Collected and placed into evidence”.
Hate to jump into a good argument and all, but there is another key point to all this that is being roundly ignored.
If you are part of a neighborhood watch, you must have some knowledge of what you can, can’t, should, and shouldn’t do when you actually exercise your “duties” as a member of such.
This is doubly true if you happen to have a CCW or are otherwise armed. With carrying a weapon comes GREAT responsibility.
I don’t know what happened, exactly, in this case. I don’t know who took the first swing, who started what, etc. I frankly don’t care. What matters is this situation escalated way beyond what it should have because Zimmerman apparently got cocky due to the presence of a sidearm on his person.
Before anyone jumps me for attacking Zimmerman or claiming he should be arrested and strung-up from the highest tree, forget it. That’s not at all what I’m saying.
You can’t don that weapon and don a new personality a la Bronson’s character Paul Kersey in the “Death Wish” films or a Dirty Harry. Inexperienced, insecure people can find it way too easy to slip into such a mindset when armed....and that is a recipe for disaster, as it was here.
Zimmerman may very well have been within his rights to shoot the kid. I don’t know. All I do know is he never should have put himself and the kid in such a volatile and highly dangerous situation in the first place.
A weapon is a last resort tool. You pull it....you use it, period. No warning shots. You pull, you shoot, you aim to kill.
Unless you’re prepared to do that, one should never deliberately allow a situation to escalate (WHEN you can possibly avoid such) to the point where you have, in this case, a dead teenager, a probably decent man whose life is now in tatters, and a**hole black racists screaming for whitey’s blood all over the country.
It could have been handled better, it should have been handled better. I hope we all learn one hell of a valuable lesson from this.
Pardon the length of my rant, guys; I just feel very strongly about this.
As I stated, there’s conflicting information. What is accurate and what is not needs to be determined. What people state on this thread isn’t evidence. The “evidence” some want to use to suggest that the facts are all in is hardly sufficient. I’ve not found any credible “facts” which have definitively shown who initiated the confrontation between the two persons invovled. If I initiate a confrontation with another person, who begins to beat me, do I not bear responsibility at any level for what happens?
You’ve presented a reasoned position IMHO.
Sounds a lot different than...
Local authorities did a lousy job of investigating the incident, and there needs to be a thorough and unbiased investigation.
180 degrees different.
I hate to school you (not really), but sarcasm can be, has been, and often is used as an argument. Considering the fact you are seemingly unaware of this, I’d say you should refer to your own history of posting for evidence of that weak mind. Now bug off and stop trolling.
It appears likely he never pulled the weapon out until he was being beaten about the head by Martin, while Zimmerman was on his back.
The preliminary report also noted Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose and back of his head and stated Zimmerman while being medically treated on scene stated, "I was yelling for someone to help, but no one would help me".
Read the last page of the police report. The handgun was taken as evidence.
Depends on what you mean by “initiate a confrontation”. If I walk up to you and say “hey buddy! I don’t much care for the way you dress yourself!” and you physically attack me, knock me to the ground and beat me about the head and face, am I not justified in using force to stop your attack? Did I “have it coming”?
Is that what happened in this case? Would it not be prudent to keep the discussion to the issue instead of contriving an apple to compare to an orange?