-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Family of Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch seeks arrest
- Thread starter Dram
- Start date
- Status
"run yo skittles, bitch"
If Zimmerman gets away scot free, there is an important lesson to learn. If you want someone dead, especially if they are black, just fucking follow them in your car, call the police to warn them of a suspicious person, get out and confront said person against police advice, start a fight, then fucking shoot him. Tada.
I never said he was a racist... although liking music from black people doesn't mean you're not a racist. Daniel Carver likes Eddie Murphy movies and he was a grand dragon in the Klan.
Devolution
Member
I can't hang in this thread no mo'. It just keeps getting more stupid.
LaserBuddha
Member
The question is, are you willing to risk convicting an innocent man of murder to go with your best bet?
LMAO
...how? He was just stating that the other person still has the misconception that it was an officer who shot the teen.
And thats the post that you leave for?
The noose would likely constitute a direct threat.
I don't know if he was. Legally it isn't a factor in the issue of him defending himself or not.
Are you asking me in terms of what is legal? Also, where was his gun during this? You say ready as if he had it in his hand. Did he? We don't know, and I imagine if the police suspected this they would have responded differently since it certainly has an impact on the legality of the man's actions.
I didn't say it was clearly anything. Your position is that it is impossible for it to be true, mine is that it is possible. Guess who carries a burden in that scenario? I assure you it isn't the person who isn't making a claim(or...not me, in other words).
I think it is something that should be really addressed as it is something that gets me so mad.
I don't see him as an innocent man. He followed a minor in a car, got out against police advice to confront him and shot him dead. I do not believe it was the minor who started the fight. And if he HAD, I see it as justifiable self-defense. Who the fuck gets out of a car and confronts a person in the middle of the night.
Devolution
Member
You should read my posts. I'm saying the fact that someone actually thinks this guy is an officer now. Just wow. And I'm not talking about Foxy Fox.
He'll give a teary-eyed confession and get off with a slap on the wrist. I'd bet $1000 on it.
I think the black kid realized he was being followed and, understandably, freaked out. I think Zimmerman sincerely believed he was being a community hero, panicked when the guy he was following went aggro, and shot him. I really don't believe he intended on killing the kid. Yeah, his decision to follow the kid was definitely racially motivated, but I don't think he was on some American History X level of racism.
I think the black kid realized he was being followed and, understandably, freaked out. I think Zimmerman sincerely believed he was being a community hero, panicked when the guy he was following went aggro, and shot him. I really don't believe he intended on killing the kid. Yeah, his decision to follow the kid was definitely racially motivated, but I don't think he was on some American History X level of racism.
Professor Beef
Banned
LaserBuddha
Member
It's a serious question. I'm asking him if he just thinks he most likely did it or does he also think he should be convicted of murder, which are two truly separate questions. Did you just not understand it?
and you can bet shit will hit the fan with it too.
Vermillion
Banned
Sorry - I know he's not an officer, but the concept is stuck in my head. My post makes sense in regards to him as a civilian.
And following someone in a car, and getting out to confront when this person has done nothing isn't? I see it as a direct threat. I can easily see how the boy could have seen his life in direct danger. If he had a gun and shot Zimmerman right then and there, I wouldn't be surprised if he got away scot free by arguing he truly felt endangered.
So does this then go to court for a jury of peers to decide?
Whats the next action on this? Is he scott free?
If 12 of us had to put in verdicts. What would they be? GUILTY.
Alligatorjandro
Banned
I still want to kno what he did that was suspicious.
no no no
i understand it perfectly fine
(but if he's innocent of anything... well, he'd have to be arrested before we can even get to that point right? lolololol)
also, the number of innocent minorities that would've been - have been - put under the jailhouse for things much, much foggier than this ordeal.... ooooooooo i drink it up
Devolution
Member
Time to bring that av back.
I cannot imagine any further evidence coming to light which would produce anything other than a guilty verdict for Zimmerman. I don't foresee the 911 audio tape revealing any further details that could possibly incriminate the young man. I could be wrong, I will not be in the jury.
The police released him, meaning they could not pin murder on him. The report details his injuries.
The report is talked about here:
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...illed-sanford-police-20120308,0,1380794.story
I imagine the police are making that the focus of their ongoing investigation. They'll present their findings to the state for prosecution if it's warranted.
He's not even out on bail. He's just chillin. Hangin.
I think I should get an av of a white player next time so I don't look as suspicious while I post
I think I should get an av of a white player next time so I don't look as suspicious while I post
The Incarnation
Member
I was joking. Black myself.
Anyway looking at his Facebook page it's seem clear what this person's mindset is.
Considering my time on a jury, and seeing how most jury members think - ie: like KHarvey. I'd say he'll get away without even a slap on the wrist to show for it. He will get away with murder.
Devolution
Member
Oh shit, good one.
Driving behind someone and then getting out to speak to them or walk over to them doesn't alone constitute a threat. Do you think that would justify you punching someone in the nose for doing that? I don't think you do. Did he approach with his gun out? Did he drive onto the sidewalk and slam on his brakes? Did he get out and scream at him to get on the ground? All of those could potentially be seen as threats that justified some kind of response. But we don't know what happened there.
It didn't start when he left his car.
The kid was walking, while he followed him in his car, which the dispatcher recommended he not do. This is straight from the police.
So the boy was being followed by a strange man in a car, who then left his car and approached. WITH A GUN. Holstered or not, does it matter to the perception of threat?
I'd rather ask if the dead boy acted in self defense.
Who had more logical reason to perceive they were in danger? The man in the car, with the gun, or the young boy being followed?
The kid was walking, while he followed him in his car, which the dispatcher recommended he not do. This is straight from the police.
So the boy was being followed by a strange man in a car, who then left his car and approached. WITH A GUN. Holstered or not, does it matter to the perception of threat?
I'd rather ask if the dead boy acted in self defense.
Who had more logical reason to perceive they were in danger? The man in the car, with the gun, or the young boy being followed?
You presumed guilt during your time as a juror? Interesting.
The fuck?
The circumstances go as follows, he followed a minor from his car on suspicion that is yet to be determined(LAWL), he then engages the individual on said suspicions, he gets into an altercation with that same minor he followed & engaged for undetermined suspicions, he shoots dead said individual....
Lets ignore the whole kid being dead thing...
But there was no merit to his suspicions, the kid was alone,minding his own business and only had a soft drink & candy in his persons, whereas the man had a gun....
This same man ignored police dispatchers and engaged the kid...
Forget manslaughter, this is a case of complete and utter incompetence.
You believe that legally that is a threatening act? Can you cite a law for me?
I just can't figure out why you would willingly go up to someone suspicious to handle the matter. What would you expect? To talk them out of the crime? And correct me if I'm wrong, but the guy tailed the kid after he left a grocery store right? What exactly would you buy in a grocery store that will make you look suspicious afterward. This isn't even factoring the racial motivation (or should I say potential, since we just don't have every nuanced detail). I can't see how you can argue for the guy when the onus is was on him. Had he not gone out, a few of things could have happened:
Kid goes home with skittles.
Kid continues to act suspicious and cops confront him, either imprisoning him, or letting him go.
Kid is suspicious, police arrive late, kid gets away.
Kid is suspicious, neighborhood watch guy continues to stalk him and reports his findings to police.
All of these could have happened had he not got out of the car, which I think is without a doubt the smartest choice. Every action after that is simply hard to defend because it goes back to "why would you willingly go into a potentially dangerous situation without aid from police."?
Tell that to a woman who walks home late at night to be stalked by some creeper. The bold is a textbook indication of a potential threat.
Kid goes home with skittles.
Kid continues to act suspicious and cops confront him, either imprisoning him, or letting him go.
Kid is suspicious, police arrive late, kid gets away.
Kid is suspicious, neighborhood watch guy continues to stalk him and reports his findings to police.
All of these could have happened had he not got out of the car, which I think is without a doubt the smartest choice. Every action after that is simply hard to defend because it goes back to "why would you willingly go into a potentially dangerous situation without aid from police."?
Tell that to a woman who walks home late at night to be stalked by some creeper. The bold is a textbook indication of a potential threat.
I think I'm taking a similar stance. Sure, tailing a person in the middle of the night isn't considered a threat. Walking up to said person isn't a threat. But tailing someone and then walking up to them with a gun (holstered or not)- IS a threat (as long as you're not a cop).
THIS.
Ya this is quite shocking. I know that I would definitely feel threatened by that and demand that the person say what the fuck they are doing and to fuck off.
Is Florida an open carry state? Was he carrying openly?
You could certainly say anything you like to him. A physical response wouldn't legally be justified.
Depends on the person's skin color. If it was a black person following a white man in a car, then getting out of the car to confront him said white person...it would be a huge threat and the white man would get away scott free if he shot the black man.
Big Baybee
Member
Stalking?
Please blow that out your ass.
When someone follows you in a car in the middle of the night, you don't find that threatening? When he gets out of the car, with (best case scenario here) something bulky around his waste or in his jacket, you don't find that threatening?
Cmon man. Believing that its threatening and it being a law have nothing to do with each other. Except that the former can become the latter if enough people fight for it.
Great way to show how completely obtuse you are.
Being stalked and engaged by a total stranger is not threatening now?
I don't know if it's legally a threat, but you better be assured that I would consider it a fucking threat.
LaserBuddha
Member
It is absolutely true that minorities get convicted on shaky evidence much more often, but that wouldn't excuse to any degree the same kind of injustice happening to a non-minority. I simply want him to be convicted or acquitted based on a solid idea of burden of proof.
slidewinder
Banned
So basically you got "what if he's innocent!" to my "what if he's guilty :| and this dude should at least be locked up for rogueing out"
edit: burden of proof? waaaaaaaaat. why do yal keep acting like people DONT get locked up before clear cut cases loaded with evidence, testimonies, and CSI shit are laid out?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked