Trayvon texts and photos reveal a different Trayvon than you knew

[graceandtruth]

Unfortunately,  no one has all the evidence since TM cannot give his side of the story and we would be intellectually dishonest to assume that Zimmerman and his neighbors would not lie to protect him.

Qwerty this is about a young boy being killed by an adult who should of never had contact with the young boy at all.  The problem is that there seems to be a bit of stereotyping going on that is going unchallenged so I decided to challenge it.  TM was not some monster from the evidence presented in the OP.  A 17 year old using profanity in a text does not make him a threat to society.  A 17 year old having 1 fight or 10 fights does not make him a threat to society.  A 17 year old being suspended from school does not make him a threat to society.  A 17 year old being sent to live with his father by his mother because she feels he needs a male influence she cannot provide does not make him a threat to society.  A 17 year old saying he is gangsta does not make him a threat to society.  A 17 year old being interested in guns does not make him a threat to society.  A 17 year old taking a picture with his middle finger sticking up does not make him a threat to society.  A 17 year old smoking a joint does not make him a threat to society.  A 17 year old wearing a hoodie outside in the cold at night does not make him a threat to society.  If I am wrong then Zimmerman needs to go to all of the High Schools in America and shoot, in self-defense, most of the Junior and Senior student body.  This is the problem and I am quite firm on it.

 

[qwerty]

Unfortunately,  no one has all the evidence since TM cannot give his side of the story and we would be intellectually dishonest to assume that Zimmerman and his neighbors would not lie to protect him.

Qwerty this is about a young boy being killed by an adult who should of never had contact with the young boy at all.  The problem is that there seems to be a bit of stereotyping going on that is going unchallenged so I decided to challenge it.  TM was not some monster from the evidence presented in the OP.  A 17 year old using profanity in a text does not make him a threat to society.  A 17 year old having 1 fight or 10 fights does not make him a threat to society.  A 17 year old being suspended from school does not make him a threat to society.  A 17 year old being sent to live with his father by his mother because she feels he needs a male influence she cannot provide does not make him a threat to society.  A 17 year old saying he is gangsta does not make him a threat to society.  A 17 year old being interested in guns does not make him a threat to society.  A 17 year old taking a picture with his middle finger sticking up does not make him a threat to society.  A 17 year old smoking a joint does not make him a threat to society.  A 17 year old wearing a hoodie outside in the cold at night does not make him a threat to society.  If I am wrong then Zimmerman needs to go to all of the High Schools in America and shoot, in self-defense, most of the Junior and Senior student body.  This is the problem and I am quite firm on it.

So weeding through all the fluff you posted.... you summed it up with "If I am wrong then Zimmerman needs to go to all of the High Schools in America and shoot, in self-defense, most of the Junior and Senior student body." so it looks like you think Zimmerman shot him because of evidence that was not apparent or known to him or to anyone on the night of the incident? Zimmerman knew that he used profanity in a text message?  That he called himself a gangsta? 

So it was about race....but now it is not...

Then it was about their ages...now it is not...

Now it is that Zimmerman had divine foreknowledge into the life of Martin and that is why...and "This is the problem and I am quite firm on it."

 

[rsc2a]

Unfortunately,  no one has all the evidence since TM cannot give his side of the story and we would be intellectually dishonest to assume that Zimmerman and his neighbors would not lie to protect him.

See...this here. That's blatant bias. We have no way of knowing whether or not GZ is telling the truth, and you've rejected the possibility out of hand. You are exhibiting the exact opposite of your screen name because you haven't shown any interest in either truth or grace in this matter so far.

 

[graceandtruth]

Unfortunately,  no one has all the evidence since TM cannot give his side of the story and we would be intellectually dishonest to assume that Zimmerman and his neighbors would not lie to protect him.

See...this here. That's blatant bias. We have no way of knowing whether or not GZ is telling the truth, and you've rejected the possibility out of hand. You are exhibiting the exact opposite of your screen name because you haven't shown any interest in either truth or grace in this matter so far.

Do you really believe that we will arrive at truth when we can only here one side of the story and the side we are listening to is that of a person that stands to spend time in a state penitentiary for 2nd degree murder.

Come on rsc2a .... would you agree that the majority of murders do not confess to their crime?  So why are we to think that GZ is the exception to the rule?

Qwerty you are not attempting to deny that ethnicity plays a part in criminal cases.  What I am saying is that I have a problem with someone determining who can and cannot walk on a public street because they think they are suspicious looking.  I also have a problem with an adult killing an unarmed child and people calling it self-defense.  The child could be a Klingon and the adult a smurf and it wouldn't make any difference. 

I know a gentleman who did 18 months in prison and 5 years probation for hitting a 17 year old with a board after the 17 year old hit him in the head with the board.  Witnesses abounded that said the 17 year old hit him first in the head.  Yet he was sentenced to 7 years and he had to go to the hospital but the 17 year old didn't and you ask me to okay GZ killing an unarmed 17 year old.  I don't think so. 

Unfortunately, to understand what I am saying you would have to listen to what I am saying with the same level of respect that you listen to those who defend GZ.

 

[rsc2a]

Unfortunately,  no one has all the evidence since TM cannot give his side of the story and we would be intellectually dishonest to assume that Zimmerman and his neighbors would not lie to protect him.

See...this here. That's blatant bias. We have no way of knowing whether or not GZ is telling the truth, and you've rejected the possibility out of hand. You are exhibiting the exact opposite of your screen name because you haven't shown any interest in either truth or grace in this matter so far.

Do you really believe that we will arrive at truth when we can only here one side of the story and the side we are listening to is that of a person that stands to spend time in a state penitentiary for 2nd degree murder.

Sure...happens all the time in our legal system.

[quote author=graceandtruth]Come on rsc2a .... would you agree that the majority of murders do not confess to their crime?  So why are we to think that GZ is the exception to the rule?[/quote]

Because the idea of a system where "guilty until proven innocent" is a horrible one.

 

[graceandtruth]

Well enough on this matter until someone starts the next demonize TM thread.  I pray that GZ does face justice but my hope is not in a badly skewed "justice" system but in a truly just God.

 

[Castor Muscular]

Well enough on this matter until someone starts the next demonize TM thread.  I pray that GZ does face justice but my hope is not in a badly skewed "justice" system but in a truly just God.

You can't go.  You aint breed nuff 4 me, bae. 

Sorry.... couldn't resist.

 

[graceandtruth]

Well enough on this matter until someone starts the next demonize TM thread.  I pray that GZ does face justice but my hope is not in a badly skewed "justice" system but in a truly just God.

You can't go.  You aint breed nuff 4 me, bae. 

Sorry.... couldn't resist.

LOL.....no problem.

 

[kaba]

In my eyes it is not about the color of the skin from either party. It is about a man defending himself because he was attacked by someone wanting to hurt him.


I have two teenage boys, I taught them to be respectful of authority, to dress neat, clean and to make sure their underwear is covered up! They dont need to show vulgar gestures to be "bad". They need to be respectful of their fellow peers and have no cause to fight (except to defend), they are taught a good education will get you far, working hard is a good thing, my boys like to shoot guns-no problem with that. They have a curfew and walking the streets at night only leads to trouble. If you were to see my boys on the street you would have no doubt that they are not out looking for trouble. And sure you will find SOME teenagers in high school with the same kind of characteristics that you described Trayvon, but it will not be the majority. 99.9 percent of my oldest boys friends have parents that have taught them the same way I taught my son.    This case has been about race, but it shouldnt be....a man was attacked and was just trying to defend himself.

 

[graceandtruth]

In my eyes it is not about the color of the skin from either party. It is about a man defending himself because he was attacked by someone wanting to hurt him.


I have two teenage boys, I taught them to be respectful of authority, to dress neat, clean and to make sure their underwear is covered up! They dont need to show vulgar gestures to be "bad". They need to be respectful of their fellow peers and have no cause to fight (except to defend), they are taught a good education will get you far, working hard is a good thing, my boys like to shoot guns-no problem with that. They have a curfew and walking the streets at night only leads to trouble. If you were to see my boys on the street you would have no doubt that they are not out looking for trouble. And sure you will find SOME teenagers in high school with the same kind of characteristics that you described Trayvon, but it will not be the majority. 99.9 percent of my oldest boys friends have parents that have taught them the same way I taught my son.    This case has been about race, but it shouldnt be....a man was attacked and was just trying to defend himself.

Come on Kaba..........If GZ had minded his own business and left TM alone none of this would have happened.  Period.  GZ is not a police officer so he does not have the right to police or profile people walking on public streets.

 

[kaba]

HOA nazis (not a big fan of!) and neighborhood watches are very common in Florida. They are there to keep their eyes and ears open to things that should not be happening in their neighborhood.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=graceandtruth]Come on Kaba..........If GZ had minded his own business and left TM alone none of this would have happened.  Period.[/quote]

This is likely true. One could also argue (based on one side of the story) that if TM hadn't attacked GZ, then nothing would have happened. I'm not willing to completely right off any possibility of either individual being the instigator. As it stands, you're still presuming guilt instead of innocence in the case of GZ.

[quote author=graceandtruth]GZ is not a police officer so he does not have the right to police or profile people walking on public streets.[/quote]

And, no, absolutely not. People have the right (and possibly the expectation) to police their own neighborhoods (within reason).

 

[graceandtruth]

[quote author=graceandtruth]Come on Kaba..........If GZ had minded his own business and left TM alone none of this would have happened.  Period.

This is likely true. One could also argue (based on one side of the story) that if TM hadn't attacked GZ, then nothing would have happened. I'm not willing to completely right off any possibility of either individual being the instigator. As it stands, you're still presuming guilt instead of innocence in the case of GZ.

[quote author=graceandtruth]GZ is not a police officer so he does not have the right to police or profile people walking on public streets.[/quote]

And, no, absolutely not. People have the right (and possibly the expectation) to police their own neighborhoods (within reason).
[/quote]

Actually I am presuming innocence in the case of TM which no one else here seems to be willing to do.

I have to disagree with you rsc2a.  If someone deems someone's behavior to be abnormal on a public street they should report it to the police who have the responsibility to handle such situations and not approach the individual themselves.  I would laugh at a person in a neighborhood watch who tried to question me about being on a public street but I definitely would not allow them to detain me or answer any questions they might have.  If I were in their yard yes but on the public street or sidewalk absolutely not.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=graceandtruth]Come on Kaba..........If GZ had minded his own business and left TM alone none of this would have happened.  Period.

This is likely true. One could also argue (based on one side of the story) that if TM hadn't attacked GZ, then nothing would have happened. I'm not willing to completely right off any possibility of either individual being the instigator. As it stands, you're still presuming guilt instead of innocence in the case of GZ.

[quote author=graceandtruth]GZ is not a police officer so he does not have the right to police or profile people walking on public streets.

And, no, absolutely not. People have the right (and possibly the expectation) to police their own neighborhoods (within reason).
[/quote]

Actually I am presuming innocence in the case of TM which no one else here seems to be willing to do.[/quote]

...by presuming the guilt of GZ. I'm presuming both of them to be innocent and letting the courts decide which one (if any) is the guilty party.

[quote author=graceandtruth]I have to disagree with you rsc2a.  If someone deems someone's behavior to be abnormal on a public street they should report it to the police who have the responsibility to handle such situations and not approach the individual themselves.  I would laugh at a person in a neighborhood watch who tried to question me about being on a public street but I definitely would not allow them to detain me or answer any questions they might have.  If I were in their yard yes but on the public street or sidewalk absolutely not.[/quote]

"Yes, neighbor Jim...I did see someone crawling through your window then coming out with your laptop, a bunch of your power tools, and your wife's jewelry box. But, you see, I don't really have an obligation to do anything if it's not taking place in my own yard, so I called the police and told them what I saw when they got there 30 minutes later. Hope you get you stuff back, buddy!"

 

[graceandtruth]

[
"Yes, neighbor Jim...I did see someone crawling through your window then coming out with your laptop, a bunch of your power tools, and your wife's jewelry box. But, you see, I don't really have an obligation to do anything if it's not taking place in my own yard, so I called the police and told them what I saw when they got there 30 minutes later. Hope you get you stuff back, buddy!"

Come on rsc2a ........ I know you are better than that.  You are talking about someone actively robbing a home.  We are talking about a boy that was shot coming back from the store with skittles and ice tea that he paid for walking on a public street.

 

[rsc2a]

"Yes, neighbor Jim...I did see someone crawling through your window then coming out with your laptop, a bunch of your power tools, and your wife's jewelry box. But, you see, I don't really have an obligation to do anything if it's not taking place in my own yard, so I called the police and told them what I saw when they got there 30 minutes later. Hope you get you stuff back, buddy!"

Come on rsc2a ........ I know you are better than that.  You are talking about someone actively robbing a home.  We are talking about a boy that was shot coming back from the store with skittles and ice tea that he paid for walking on a public street.

I'm basing my example on your own words. To parlay it into the case in question, the neighborhood had been subject to a number of burglaries (8! according to one report) and home invasions in the recent past, all allegedly committed by a certain demographic that one of the parties happened to belong to...

...so you too are talking about a neighborhood that was being regularly burgled by a small group of the population that had certain characteristics which TM happened to fit. The example seems to be a pretty clear parallel.

 

[graceandtruth]

"Yes, neighbor Jim...I did see someone crawling through your window then coming out with your laptop, a bunch of your power tools, and your wife's jewelry box. But, you see, I don't really have an obligation to do anything if it's not taking place in my own yard, so I called the police and told them what I saw when they got there 30 minutes later. Hope you get you stuff back, buddy!"

Come on rsc2a ........ I know you are better than that.  You are talking about someone actively robbing a home.  We are talking about a boy that was shot coming back from the store with skittles and ice tea that he paid for walking on a public street.

I'm basing my example on your own words. To parlay it into the case in question, the neighborhood had been subject to a number of burglaries (8! according to one report) and home invasions in the recent past, all allegedly committed by a certain demographic that one of the parties happened to belong to...

...so you too are talking about a neighborhood that was being regularly burgled by a small group of the population that had certain characteristics which TM happened to fit. The example seems to be a pretty clear parallel.

Come on rsc2a.........If TM was breaking into someone's home this might be explainable.  He was walking back from the store on a public street that is totally different breaking into someone's home.

I thought you took umbrage yesterday at the fact that I was broad brushing a whole group of people.  That last statement seems like a little broad brushing to me.  You are saying that GZ was justified in being suspicious of every African-American male that walked on the public street in his neighborhood because 8 may have burglarized a home in the neighborhood.  So now 33,000,000 people are suspect because of the actions of 8 and it is open season on the 33,000,000.  Come on rsc2a.........

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=graceandtruth]Come on rsc2a.........If TM was breaking into someone's home this might be explainable.  He was walking back from the store on a public street that is totally different breaking into someone's home.

I thought you took umbrage yesterday at the fact that I was broad brushing a whole group of people.  [/quote]

Yes.

[quote author=graceandtruth]That last statement seems like a little broad brushing to me.[/quote]

And no.

[quote author=graceandtruth]You are saying that GZ was justified in being suspicious of every African-American male that walked on the public street in his neighborhood because 8 may have burglarized a home in the neighborhood.  So now 33,000,000 people are suspect because of the actions of 8 and it is open season on the 33,000,000.  Come on rsc2a.........[/quote]

And, no...

Sanford has a population of 53,570. 7.8% are both male and fall into the ages of 15-24. Blacks account for 30.5% of the population and only 20% of the population for the gated community in question. So, you are talking about approximately 836-1,275 people who would be suspect.

And, yes, I have no problem at all with profiling when there are legitimate statistical support for the profiling and a reasonable reason to suspect a threat. When you have an individual walking through a neighborhood plagued by burglaries (and dozens of accounts of attempted burglaries) late at night and he fits the demographic profile of the prior suspects, a profile that only 1.6-2.4% of the population fits, then you have both the statistical support and the reason to suspect a threat. Couple that with the fact that GZ had been appointed as coordinator for the local neighborhood watch group...

So, yes, GZ was justified in his suspicion. Whether he acted correctly regarding that suspicion is still in question...except in your mind because you've already made up your mind concerning him. You're as guilty of judging GZ as others are of judging TM, yet you are okay with the former while decrying the latter.

 

[Castor Muscular]

So, yes, GZ was justified in his suspicion. Whether he acted correctly regarding that suspicion is still in question...except in your mind because you've already made up your mind concerning him. You're as guilty of judging GZ as others are of judging TM, yet you are okay with the former while decrying the latter.

I agree.  Who started the confrontation and how are the unresolved issues.  Up to that point, both parties were innocent of any wrongdoing. 

Incidentally, a Zimmerman prosecutor was just put on leave for withholding evidence. 

http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/05/29/3422519/lawyer-zimmerman-prosecutor-withheld.html

 

[graceandtruth]

So one is justified at looking at every African-American suspiciously because of what one did...........Come on rsc2a.

I will maintain that TM is innocent until someone can show me that walking down the street with skittles and ice tea is a crime or suspicious behavior for someone else besides young African-American males.

Now adults who shoot unarmed children.........that's another matter.