TRAYVON MARTIN NOT RACE RELATED MURDER

TSG ^ | July 31, 2013 | Brian Woodward

[thewoodwardreport.com]

Trayvon Martin should not be dead, but the reason that he is, does not have to do with the color of his skin. Other than pure speculation, there is no evidence to suggest that this incident had anything to do with race... This shooting was framed by the media as one of racial hatred. The verdict was viewed by the talking heads as appalling. However, if there is anyone to blame for the complete acquittal of Zimmerman that would be the district attorney’s office. They charged Zimmerman with 2nd degree murder, a charge almost all legal experts predicted would not stick. At the conclusion of the case, knowing they (the prosecution) had not been able to prove murder they asked the judge to instruct the jury to consider manslaughter. Thomas Sowell, an African-American economist, intellectual, and nationally syndicated columnist had this to say:

“They had no hard evidence that would back up a murder charge or even a manslaughter charge.You don't send people to prison on the basis of what other people imagine, or on the basis of media sound bites like ‘shooting an unarmed child,’ when that ‘child’ was beating him bloody. Once the issue boiled down to hard, provable facts, the prosecutors' loud histrionic assertions and sweeping innuendos were just not going to cut it.”

[xzins]

1. Zimmerman was not told to stay in his truck. Actuality, somewhat to the contrary, the didpatcher asked Zimmerman if he could tell the location of Martin after Martin began to run. Zimmerman THEN got out of the truck to ascertain Martin’s location

2. Martin wasn’t told “do not follow “. After getting out of the truck to ascertain location, at the apparent invitation of the dispatcher, the dispatcher asks, “are you following him?” Zimmerman says “yes”. The dispatcher then says “we don’t need you to do that.” Zimmerman stops trying to do that. On the return to the truck The confrontation happens.

3. Martin’s house was about 70 yards from where Zimmerman lost him, a mere 20 seconds away. Martin was running toward that house. However, 4 minutes later he has not gone home, but has backtracked to Zimmerman’s location. Why did Martin reject the safety of home and backtrack to a confrontation? Given that the witness saw him winning the confrontation, we can reasonably assume he wanted the confrontation

[honestabe010]

I am fully capable of reading what you wanted me to do, but I have no reason to follow your “orders” as you call them. I will go with what the suspect himself (who you are defending) said and how he viewed the incident, if we are to be looking at his side of the story I find it best to view his testimony. 3 Jurors initially found Zimmerman guilty of manslaughter on very little evidence, so you can act as if you are the only one who knows how to do research or that every article should cover every point in complete detail totaling into the tens of thousands of words so that no misunderstanding may be made. Zimmerman became threatened by pursuing an unarmed suspect, once he put himself in that situation yes from that point on it was all on Trayvon.

And that is the point under the circumstances Zimm was acting in self defense, but had he acted like most people (and no one gives a shit if you are neighborhood watch just like no cares if you are mall security, we can dig into the past of Zimm and see he was asked to leave school a credit shy of an associates degree in criminal justice or something of the sort) he would not have ever pursued Trayvon and would have acted only when he was threatened, well eventually he did get threatened and he acted, but he put himself in that position, not to say he was not correct to act, but there was no reason to approach the suspect your title of neighborhood watch means nothing. your taking a very narrow and secluded part of the article and criticizing an article that is asserting that this had nothing to do with race and Zimm was properly acquitted, so maybe I should “order” you to read the other paragraphs as as well, do you need me to send you cute links that read “Let me google that for you”? Great usage of the hyper-text-mark-up-language

[honestabe010]

a sentence later “They charged Zimmerman with 2nd degree murder, a charge almost all legal experts predicted would not stick” — I mean read the whole thing and use your brain.

Talking heads are like Piers Morgan, Nancy Grace, Chuck Todd, Maddow, Matthews etc. — legal experts are niche characters that are not considered talking heads an as I clarify only one sentence later “almost all legal experts predicted would not stick”

[justlurking]

I am fully capable of reading what you wanted me to do, but I have no reason to follow your “orders” as you call them.

Wow, you really do have a chip on your shoulder.

I didn't think it was necessary to spell it out to you, but I'll do so:

Pay attention to the order of the statements of Zimmerman and the dispatcher.

Many people haven't done that, including you. Every time I see the meme of "Zimmerman was ordered to stay in his truck", I point out they don't know what was really said, and in what order. If you read the actual transcript, it's obvious that's not what happened.

If you still aren't sure, you can listen to the recording -- you can hear when Zimmerman gets out of his truck, effectively at the behest of the dispatcher who is asking him what Martin is doing. It's only when the dispatcher realizes that Martin has left his truck that he says anything. And even the dispatcher admits under oath that the best he can do is suggest an action.

I didn't bother to read the rest of the article after that statement, and I didn't bother to read the rest of your rant, either. When you start with an erroneous premise, the rest is crap.