[quote][b]hjfedrick[/b] - The main question to be asked here is that would Zimmerman had approached Martin if he did not have a weapon on his person.[/quote]

I think the main question is who physically attacked first. If it happened as Martin claims, then it all went wrong when Trayvon attacked instead of calling 911 or just talking to the guy.

I am also on the side of self defense, not to mention innocent until proven guilty...yeah, all we have is Martin's account...and the evidence so far lines up with his account.

Last time I checked, without evidence to dispute his account, the man is telling the truth in the eyes of the law, is he not?

[quote]The ringleader and the victim were both there. The ringleader is now a mother, and a family therapist who undoubtedly has aided many families as they coped with heartbreaking bullying situations. With tears in her eyes, the ringleader asked for, and received, the victim’s forgiveness. We all recalled vividly that long-ago day, the terrifying chase, and our regrets that we had not intervened. None of us has forgotten any of it. [/quote]

This is what we call the "human condition". It's a part of our behavior and social norms, and it is part of development.

Just think, if the progressives keep pushing, this could happen a couple of years from now...only the "ringleader" will never have a chance to grow up to become a "mother and family therapist", because she will be treated like a violent sexual predator is treated now.

You can't stop people from being bullies and acting out, nor can you stop everyone from having bad thoughts and prejudices. You can fight for "awareness" all you want, but you will never cure humans from being humans.

Best bet is to prepare your kids for the realities of the world, deal with this sort of thing when it comes, and teach them how to move on.

Either that, or make a federal case every time someone bullies or uses a "slur". That's working our real well for the kids who aren't taught how to deal with it.

[quote][b]sweept[/b] - actually, from the initial interview with martin, he said he didnt follow trayvon after talking with the 911 operator.[/quote]

I realize that...was giving the benefit of the doubt for the sake of the "yeah, but he kept following anyway!!" crowd.

Even if he did, it's still not illegal.

@hjfedrick:

Being a watch Captain doesn't grant "authority" legally, but he was well within legal rights to follow and even approach Trayvon. You can legally follow and approach someone in public.

Test for all playing along...considering (so far) the evidence supports Martin's version of events...where does the illegal activity begin?

- Martin spots Trayvon, calls police dispatch (legal) - Martin follows Travon to help guide police to him (legal) - Dispatch advises Martin they didn't need him to do that (n/a - not actual Police order) - Either following said advice, or shortly thereafter, Martin loses Trayvon, heads back to vehicle (legal) - Trayvon confronts Martin to ask what his problem is and why he is following him. (still legal) - Trayvon punches Martin in the face, knocks him down, and bangs his head on the ground (and here's where it goes off the rails - Assault) - Martin defends himself, draws weapon and fires. (self-defense)

Like it or not, unless some new evidence comes to light, the facts support Martin's version. And like it or not, Martin broke no laws by following Trayvon. And like it or not, there is no law saying you must "man up" and beat off an attacker...you are allowed to defend yourself in this case.

Had Trayvon responded with a call to 911, or simply talked it out with Martin, this would have been a non event.

[quote][b]ppensyl[/b] - No, it doesn't. I would argue that this family clearly has a history that the handling of the situation may have warranted it being handled differently than the average citizen. Most families don't have a history of killing , or attempting to kill, police officers.[/quote]

I agree...but would argue this also means they simply should have brought in the big guns to defend themselves appropriately. You know they are dangerous, so be prepared. Bring enough guns to ensure he dies immediately if he so much as twitches the wrong way.

Good to know if you are dangerous and aggressive enough, the cops will just go away and let you be if you confront them and curse them. That should do wonders for bringing the criminal element in town into line...

[quote][b]ppensyl[/b] - I trust the officers to handle theses situations in the safest possible manner. I'd rather see him get off on a DUI charge than have another officer's funeral. With enough rope these types of people will eventually hang themselves and officers are well trained in how to handle most things like this with safety being the #1 Priority.[/quote]

I also want our officers to be safe. This means SWAT assault suits and take the man down. Assume he is armed, assume he meant to kill, and prepare accordingly.

Allowing him to carry on as he did, and leaving him be out of fear of escalation only reinforces the "I am above the law, and they are scared of me" mentality that has emboldened this man (and his offspring) to become extremely dangerous.

Do you think for one second that this man, all his kids, and all their thug friends didn't say "yeah, you see that? The police are scared of us!". They are laughing it up, and are now even more emboldened and more dangerous than before.

The next rampage, cop killing, or other act could well be sparked from the confidence they have gained by this whole ordeal. When you show fear to an aggressive animal, they only become more aggressive.

@BAGGS: On the profiling thing...

If I were in an area with a problem of Outlaw Biker gangs running drugs and weapons, and I were dressed like a biker and walking around outside some industrial buildings as night, I wouldn't be surprised and shocked were someone to think I looked suspicious. (describing the target area for said criminal activities - analogous to break-ins by thugs in housing areas)

When you live in a area with high crime, and the description of a good number of the perps is "black male, medium build, 6' tall, dark hoodie and baggy jeans", you may want to consider how that style of dress may make you look.

By all means, wear what you want...just be aware that a certain criminal element has taken a favor to that particular look...and don't be surprised if you are viewed differently for it.

[quote][b]BAGGS[/b] - l think we need to take a step back from the emotional flap on both sides and take a look at the greater problem. Our rights are being attacked by both senarios of this case. [/quote]

I concur.

The thing that bother me the most so far is the blatant spin by the media to portray it as I described above. Did Zimmerman think Trayvon looked suspicious due to the hoodie? Yep. And you know what, I would have looked twice myself, especially were I in a high crime area where that was the typical look of the perps.

Some bad decisions made this happen...I believe on both sides. But the end result isn't that Trayvon was shot for wearing a hoodie, he was shot in the struggle of a physical fight.

If (and I do stress if) Zimmerman's account is true, then the decision and action of Trayvon to confront Zimmerman on his way back to his vehicle and take things physical cannot be taken out of the context...yet it has been by the media.

Not the smartest move to decide to beat down a guy because you think he's following you, but everyone decides to ignore this aspect of the issue...

And I agree, Bubba would have jumped on him as well...and had there been a large number of "Bubba's" committing crime in the area, I suspect Zimmerman would have thought Bubba was suspicious walking around in a hoodie too.

[quote][b]BAGGS[/b] - But with any good investigation you should question everything.[/quote]

Of course you must...and I am sure both sides will to exhaustion.

And you are right...there's no law that says you as a private citizen can't decide the man is lying even though his statement makes sense and there is no evidence to refute it. I was more arguing from the legal standpoint.

It also makes a huge difference if the statement is plausible. Had Zimmerman claimed aliens came down and did it, then that's not so plausible.

To me it all comes down to intent and motivation...with past actions combined with his actions we know of that night, I believe Zimmerman was simply trying to direct police to Trayvon, and was only trying to keep an eye on him to do so. I do not believe he intended to get into a confrontation with him. I have no reason to believe he did not turn to go back to his vehicle when requested to do so.

The the thing went south when Trayvon came back to confront Zimmerman. Maybe he figured he could take him (looks like he was right there...to a point), Had Trayvon kept it verbal or even called the police himself, it would have been over.

All of what I just said makes sense when you take the whole night into account. It also matches Zimmerman's account of how it went down, and so far there is no real evidence to say otherwise.

But so many folks have decided Zimmerman stalked and cornered Trayvon at gunpoint and killed him because he was just itching to shoot someone. They have nothing to back it up of course, but the media has certainly helped place that image there.

You have seen where that big, scary guy in prison orange chased down and gunned down that poor, sweet, smiling little 10 year old just because he was wearing a hoodie, right?

I mean, forget the facts, statements, or evidence...that's how it REALLY went down, right? With the poor kid just standing there with his candy begging the mean scary man not to shoot him...and he did it anyway. That's exactly how the media is portraying it, and you get this nation-wide:

[quote][b]BAGGS[/b] - People have two hands RWE, we are assuming nothing was in the other hand. Did the operator ask this question?[/quote]

No, but Zimmerman has stated he did not have his weapon drawn, and was reaching for his phone when attacked.

Again, innocent until proven guilty...do you know of any proof to say he is lying?

[quote][b]BAGGS[/b] - Drawing from my experience, the point being, I would not have put myself into that situation.[/quote]

As you said, hind sight is indeed 20-20...in fact Zimmerman did find himself in this position, and obviously didn't have your hand to hand expertise.

[quote][b]BAGGS[/b] - a good question is just where was the weapon? in a hostler on the side?[/quote]

According to Zimmerman, it was not visible, and Trayvon saw it and went for it after he had Zimmerman pinned and beating on him, which led to Zimmerman having to use it.

[quote][b]BAGGS[/b] - could this be why Martin began screaming if he saw that [/quote]

So far, the an eyewitness is saying it was not Trayvon screaming, but Zimmerman, as Zimmerman claims.

[quote][b]BAGGS[/b] - as I said before the soul searching after I found out who the person really was would lead me to assume the consequences of my actions.[/quote]

Possibly why he was reportedly distraught, called the prosecutor, and even sobbing in jail...

[quote][b]BAGGS[/b] - At this point I would drop into a relaxed dragon stance and identify myself as community watch member and ask if I may help the stranger.[/quote]

While I commend you on the sincere effort to place yourself in his shoes, I would remind you not everyone is trained in martial arts.

Zimmerman may well have simply hoped to be able to keep Trayvon in sight to guide Police, and was unprepared for a physical confrontation. When bested, he made a split second decision to defend himself.

You still didn't answer my question...all things being equal...if you found yourself on your back in a confrontation with someone you believe to be a bad guy, bested, with the thought of "this guy has me, I am going to black out", would you simply hope for the best, or fire?

@Mr Charlie Told Me So:

I would call that a commons area and walkway in between the houses, not a "dark alleyway"

For the record, I don't doubt he felt he was being pursued at first...I just think the real turning point in all this was when Trayvon decided the best thing for him to do was attack Zimmerman physically in retaliation.

Evidence may play out out differently though...will have to wait and see.

I really, truly wish Trayvon had either said "I am supposed to be here...why are you following me?", or just called the cops...this would have been a non-event in either case. It would have been a case of "over zealous watchman profiles local teen", and not what we have now...and Trayvon would be at home.

[quote][b]harrumph[/b] - How much crack did your mother smoke while pregnant with you? [/quote]

I am editing this out, as I refuse to sink to your level.

[quote][b]ned[/b] - Yeah, they could have called Zimmerman and told him he didn't need to follow Martin.[/quote]

Seems they already told Zimmerman that, and he complied...

It just burns you the hell up that Trayvon decided to be a badass and jump on the guy to prove how big and bad he was, instead of just talking with Zimmerman or even calling the cops...

A simple "I have every right to be here...what's it to you?", or a simple call to the police to say "someone is following me" would have ended this whole thing with Trayvon at home.

Instead, he thought it best to make it physical and attack Zimmerman...how did that work out for him?

[quote][b]harrumph[/b] - Yeah, really. It's his fault if he got killed.[/quote]

If he chose to attack Zimmerman (as seems to be the case so far), then yeah, it is exactly that.

I know you hate to admit someone could be responsible for their own actions, as it goes against your Liberal philosophy...but yeah, if you choose to make a simple issue into a physical attack and lose, it's kinda your fault.

[quote][b]avenger[/b] -

Well at least they're clean after the party.

[/quote]

I don't care who you are...that was funny right there!

[quote][b]FREEDOM MATTERS[/b] - to the supporters of Zimmerman: open your front door and I promise you will see someone today on your street who looks like they "don't belong". does this person's presence in your neighborhood give you the right to follow him while armed with a loaded weapon or would it be better to call the police and let them do their jobs?! [/quote]

Please illustrate how it is illegal to follow a person in your neighborhood (assuming no restraining order)...the fact that he was armed is completely irrelevant. He had a permit, and it is 100% LEGAL to walk around armed as such. You may want to brush up on the 2nd Amendment.

If someone is following you, then YOU CALL THE POLICE to say "hey, someone's following me"! Had Trayvon done so, he would be alive today.

And in case you missed it, Zimmerman DID call the police, and was only following to help guide police to the person. When advised (NOTE - not ordered) that "we don't need you to do that", he said "OK", and went back to his vehicle.

The affidavit filed is all the hopes and dreams of what prosecutors hope to be able to prove...so far, they have not shown any evidence to back up their claims.

You remind me of the commentator on CNN last night, who said "these stand you ground laws...do we really need citizens walking around with loaded weapons?????".

@annacat:

My wife has been both a working mother, and a stay at home mom...

Both are equally as hard, for different reasons.

Saw one of Mitt's sons last night on Piers Morgan's show...he said the only "help" they had around the house was the lady who came once a week for 2 hours to help clean, and then the place was a mess later that day...5 boys, all rowdy, all keeping her busy.

I must say, this whole thing has made me look twice at the Romney's...I would have assumed they had a small army of help.

[quote][b]What[/b] - Here's how I see the situation. A man is dead for no good reason. Other than overzealous neighborhood protection! [/quote]

How about "a man is dead because he decided to physically attack the man who was following him, instead of calling the police with the cell phone that was in his hand"?

[quote][b]raleturn[/b] -

@BAGGS: Or HEROS like Zimmerman when punk A$$ kids bites off more than he can chew and winds up DEAD due to his GANGSTA mentality.

[/quote]

Bit too far the other way for my tastes...

While Trayvon's actions and screen name didn't do much to help his image (he certainly looked like he wanted to be taken as thuggish)...I will not speak to his intentions.

I suspect it's a lot like Trayvon's mother said yesterday (before her lawyers told her "shut up...you can't say that!!!")...a terrible accident of circumstances.

Unfortunate heat of the moment thing for both...had Trayvon simply said "none of your business what I am doing here...leave me alone, I'm calling the cops" it would have all ended differently.

[quote][b]BAGGS[/b] - It means something in this world to take a life. Cowards like Zimmerman make all gun owners look bad. [/quote]

Go read Zimmerman's account of how it all went down, and put yourself in his shoes...remember, to discount his accounting you must have proof.

Take it in for a moment, and think about it...if you are walking back to your vehicle, and a 6'+ guy (some say 6', some 6'3") gets the jump on you while you are reaching for your phone, and manages to get you on the ground...pounds your head into the concrete...he has you, you know it...

What are you going to do? Lay there, black out, and hope for the best? Or will you defend yourself by any means necessary?

Coward is an easy word to throw around when you haven't been in the shoes...

[quote][b]What[/b] - Let's not forget that Trevon was stalked and attacked..[/quote]

Attacked? Really? Prove it...real simple.

So far, the evidence (which, remember, includes the statement of Zimmerman as well) shows the only one "attacked" was Zimmerman...can you point to any evidence to the contrary?

[quote][b]What[/b] - What would have happened if he EXERCISED HIS RIGHT and killed Zimmermann

IMMEDIATE FIRST DEGREE MURDER CHARGES BEFORE THE GRAND JURY!!!![/quote]

Next time you think you are being followed, feel free to approach and attack the person...hope you have bail money though, cause you would be in the wrong legally. Good luck with that.

[quote][b]BAGGS[/b] -

You know this how?

[/quote]

Quite simple, Mr BAGGS...because that's what the man's statement said, and unless we moved to China last night, he has to actually be proven to be lying by evidence to prove otherwise.

[quote]He was on his way to the store to do some errands when he spotted Trayvon Martin walking through his neighborhood. He followed Martin, but lost track of him. He was returning to his SUV when Martin approached him from the left rear and confronted him. Martin asked him, "Do you have a problem?"[120] He replied "No", and Martin then said, "Well, you do now" or something similar,[120] while Zimmerman reached for his cell phone. Martin then punched him in the face, knocking him down, and began beating his head against the ground. Zimmerman called out for help, while being beaten, before shooting Martin once in the chest at close range, in self-defense.[/quote]

[quote][b]What[/b] - Are there any sane minds out there??????

YOU CAN STAND YOUR GROUND IN YOUR HOME...

BUT, ON THE STREET YOU HAVE AN OBLIGATION TO RETREAT.

WE DO NOT LIVE IN THE MIDDLE AGES!!!!!!![/quote]

Um...you may want to read up on that...

[quote]A stand-your-ground law states that a person may use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of a threat, without an obligation to retreat first. In some cases, a person may use deadly force in public areas without a duty to retreat.[/quote]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-your-ground_law

[quote][b]Mr Charlie Told Me So[/b] - It's moot if Zimmerman was the aggressor.

I actually already posted on this: "If you're the aggressor, you're not protected by this law," said Carey Haughwout, public defender in Palm Beach County.[/quote]

No doubt, this will be central to the case (from both sides)...

Who is the aggressor here? The person who asks "what are you doing here?", or the person who physically attacks the one asking said question?

Barring evidence to prove the contrary, Zimmerman's version of the story stands as the truth:

[quote]He was on his way to the store to do some errands when he spotted Trayvon Martin walking through his neighborhood. He followed Martin, but lost track of him. He was returning to his SUV when Martin approached him from the left rear and confronted him. Martin asked him, "Do you have a problem?"[119] He replied "No", and Martin then said, "Well, you do now" or something similar,[119] while Zimmerman reached for his cell phone. Martin then punched him in the face, knocking him down, and began beating his head against the ground. Zimmerman called out for help, while being beaten, before shooting Martin once in the chest at close range, in self-defense.[/quote]

Btw - where did you get that "Trayvon was followed into a dark back alley by a stranger for (from trayvon's point of view) no reason."

Have not read about him being followed into a dark back alley anywhere?