I don't think they are the same one bit. Richard Jewell was just standing around. This dude actually shot and killed the kid. George was told not to do anything, but he decided to take action himself. He was on a neighborhood WATCH. He was supposed to observe and report. I don't think the cases are similar at all. What proof do you have that the kid was going to burglarize the places? Did George live in that neighborhood?
1. He lived there
2. He was told he did “not have to do that” by a dispatcher, not the police, so it is a stretch to say he was told NOT TO FOLLOW.
3. How does one “watch” if one does not watch when someone moves away?
4. He did report, a few times. When seconds count, the police are minutes away.
5. Yes he did kill the guy and that is far different than the Jewell, however, the result is the same as he is being hounded by the press without there having been even a charge brought as yet, if ever. And remember, a charge means there is reason to believe he did a crime, not that he is guilty of one as that will be decided in court. If he is found not guilty and you have a problem with that, just content yourself with the OJ case.
“George was told not to do anything, but he decided to take action himself”
Obviously you have not lived in an area where crime is rampant. Gated communties are there for a reason and that is to prevent breakins and robberies. I question why Martin was not told to identify himself if he wondered around within the gated community. But fact is we do not know what exactly transpired. We do know that Obama, the media, Al Sharpton et al, Black Panthers are distorting the facts for all it’s worth. Why would the media alter tapes and videos if they were really interested in truth? Why then are they doing it? That is the subject matter. The courts will ferret out the facts.That is what they are there for.
As I understand, George was a neighborhood watch captain, but not actively on watch at the time. He saw someone out of place, and went to investigate.
I see someone who doesn't 'fit' in my neighborhood, I'm going to keep an eye on things, too--and I'll likely be armed, just as a precaution.
I am amazed at how many FReepers are willing to condemn the guy because he was armed, and, when getting his head bounced into the pavement, defended himself.
At that point, all else is irrelevant except who started the actual hostilities. (Who took the first swing?)It really doesn't matter why Trayvon was there, why George was checking him out, or whether Trayvon had actually walked a mile in the rain for a bottle of tea and a bag of candy.
He was apparently beating the crap out of some "white Hispanic" and may have been trying to take the firearm from him--in which case, he may have shot himself by pulling on the muzzle end of the gun.
As for:
Did George initiate contact? I don't know. I can see that going either way, especially with the 'put upon' attitude in some sectors. He may well have broken off and been returning to the vehicle as many say.
Was cute innocent little 12 year old Tray (That's what image Nancy Grace had up on the TV, again, still, for a picture) high on PCP laced weed, which unlike ordinary pot, promotes violent behaviour? Was he high on ecstacy (AKA: "skittles") or both or anything else? Were a container of tea or Skittles (the candy) found at the scene?
I don't pretend to know all the facts (who does?), but I believe in: Innocent until proven guilty, and the case has gone nowhere despite all the pressure to prosecute.
I believe the media are pulling yet another lynching, and by the end of summer huge swathes of the American Population will pay for that if this nonsense keeps up....
And I believe that if the police and DA had a case, they would have charged George 'the 'white hispanic', because no one is more protective of their 'turf' than police forces.
It has been two months, the usual suspects are pushing for a race war, and still there are no charges forthcoming, despite that tremendous pressure?
There is no case against George, and I'm not about to join with the mob crying to crucify him.