17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #35

[LolaMoon08]

I was a bad kid. I was suspended from school, smoked weed, talked like an idiot sometimes, did a bit of under-aged drinking, mouthed off to my parents sometimes, and I was kicked out of a Catholic school at 17, for being pregnant.

I guess I deserve to be shot and killed. Where's GZ? Send him my way. Let's see if he's got it in him.

I was a bad kid that never got caught. :floorlaugh: I swear I was the smartest kid ever! Anytime they did try to put me in any kind of I/S, I told them I was claustrophobic and couldn't be in a room with all those people so they would let me work in the Deans Office -- I won't even get into how great of a job that was!

 

[ynotdivein]

It's been posted several times, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-He-suspended-times-caught-burglary-tool.html

Suspensions
Marijuana baggie and pot pipe
Vandalism
Tardiness

Since we are talking about social media sites, TM supposedly took a swing at his bus driver, according to his cousin. That seems violent, but maybe that's just me. (link at site above)

Sorry for any misunderstanding but we are NOT "talking about social media sites" here.

There is a thread in this forum for discussion of social media as it relates to this case and the larger implications for criminal prosecutions moving forward. All the usual WS TOS and Rules apply in that thread.

 

[francie]

The marks on GZ. Now present YOUR evidence that GZ struck first.

What marks on GZ? An unauthenticated photo doesn't really mean anything... no photographer verification of time, date, subject, that it's non-photoshopped, etc.

:moo:

 

[LolaMoon08]

I think, if it is looked at, at all, it will be the zero tolerance policy the school had in place. Like the vandalism, it's not about what he wrote, but not following rules. It wouldn't go towards why he is dead - it would probably go towards why he might have looked suspicious to GZ as he did to the school security officer. Saying GZ didn't know about these things at 7:12 that night doesn't matter or change the fact that he could have looked or could have been doing something suspicious. IMO

I have no problem with him being suspended for it as he deserved to be. But those records are supposed to be private and I'm not sure they will be able to use them? I don't even think George's prior arrests will be brought up? Maybe his calls to 911 all those years. But I doubt his arrest for assault or even the domestic violence will be brought in.

There is a lot that we will be able to discuss that a jury will never get to hear or see.

 

[Velouria]

In what world do you protect yourself from a guy with a gun by running AT them? TM was free and clear. He had lost GZ, and was SEVENTY FEET from his door. Bolt for the door? Call the police? Stay hiding till GZ leaves? Nope, lets CONFRONT the guy. Sorry, NOT the actions of a "terrified teenager".

I agree. A terrified teenager would not stop to confront the guy who'd been stalking him. Which is precisely why it didn't happen that way, and you have nothing besides the words of the shooter that say otherwise.

 

[jaded cat]

I think, if it is looked at, at all, it will be the zero tolerance policy the school had in place. Like the vandalism, it's not about what he wrote, but not following rules. It wouldn't go towards why he is dead - it would probably go towards why he might have looked suspicious to GZ as he did to the school security officer. Saying GZ didn't know about these things at 7:12 that night doesn't matter or change the fact that he could have looked or could have been doing something suspicious. IMO

GZ never identified exactly what TM was doing that's suspicious. Walking and looking around isn't suspicious behaviour on the part of the one doing it, it's in the eye of the beholder. Saying TM looked like he was on drugs on something is ridiculous unless GZ was close enough to smell marijuana on TM, which I highly doubt.

We can't live in a free society if any dufus can call 911 and claim some other dufus is acting suspiciously. I won't even address the fact the SPD was on their way and could have determined if TM was suspicious.

 

[IzzyBlanche]

I think, if it is looked at, at all, it will be the zero tolerance policy the school had in place. Like the vandalism, it's not about what he wrote, but not following rules. It wouldn't go towards why he is dead - it would probably go towards why he might have looked suspicious to GZ as he did to the school security officer. Saying GZ didn't know about these things at 7:12 that night doesn't matter or change the fact that he could have looked or could have been doing something suspicious. IMO

For the life of me I can't understand your point. NO ONE except GZ who is a proven liar* has said TM was looking or doing anything suspicious.

But what if he was? What is the relevance? Did that give GZ the right to chase him down and shoot him?

*(paraphrased) call to police: He's in his late teens. Bond hearing: I didn't know how young he was.

 

[katydid23]

Link? Seriously, you keep saying this over and over and have yet to provide a link. This is not in the transcript and it is not in the video - so please provide proof that O'Mara exposed the g/f in court. TIA

And I googled the heck out of it, trying to find ANY MENTION of O'Mara, anywhere, exposing her identity in court. NOWHERE does anyone say anything of the sort. The only mention of it is HERE in WS. Our own members THOUGHT they heard it, and it grew legs. It mushroomed into fact. IMO

Does anyone believe that Crump wouldn't be objecting on the airwaves if O'Mara had actually uttered her name out loud on live TV?

 

[badme102]

Seriously great sleuthing, how did you find it?

By accident. I explained exactly how I found it to the reporter, and she verified my info, and then wrote the story

 

[Gwen]

For the life of me I can't understand your point. NO ONE except GZ who is a proven liar* has said TM was looking or doing anything suspicious.

But what if he was? What is the relevance? Did that give GZ the right to chase him down and shoot him?
*(paraphrased) call to police: He's in his late teens. Bond hearing: I didn't know how young he was.

Bolded by me.

This is the point. What right did GZ have to stalk, follow, detain, harrass, follow, or confront this child walking home in his neighborhood. Yes, it was 'his neighborhood' as much as his mother's neighborhood is. He was on a public street. This is what bothers me about this case. Where in our constitution or the laws of any state does it say GZ can do these things?

 

[elementary]

Why are people assuming O'Mara took this case for the money? Saying he took it for the fame would make more sense to me, though we don't really know even that.

Trying a major, high-profile murder case means a year or more of 16 to 24-hour days--and I suspect only some of those hours will be billable if GZ is declared indigent. I could be wrong, but I doubt the State of Florida will pay MO'M $400/hour to go on Nancy Grace, though he may consider such appearances necessary to keep GZ's story before the jury pool. I'm not even sure the State will pay MO'M his usual rate; some states have "standard hourly rates" they pay for indigent defendants, depending on the lawyer's experience.

O'Mara could be using the same hours trying much easier DUI and divorce cases with rich clients who can afford to pay his full fee.

Where is the proof he will end up richer by defending GZ?

On the other hand, O'Mara will almost certainly establish himself as an expert on SYG cases and may be a central player if the law is revisited, appealed and/or reinterpreted. And he may find that very fulfilling, particularly compared to arguing about breathalyzer results.

Lawyers are people, too. They want to be challenged at work. It isn't always about the money, particularly not if they are already successful enough to charge $400/hour. That's quite a lot for a lawyer who doesn't work for a huge, corporate firm. (By comparison, senior partners at large, international law firms where I've worked billed at about $500/hour.)

I agree. I think he's doing it for the challenge and perhaps to test the boundaries. However, perhaps he is also making sure that for all the time he is being stimulated and challenged, he gets paid as close to his going rate as he can. He wants to have his cake and eat it too, perhaps. Furthermore, the more cash he rakes in now, the further away the chance that he will have to finally declare GZ indigent, and be forced to get paid the bare minimum by the state, in crumbs, not cake, I'm thinking. Hence, the delaying of discovery while setting up a site for donations.

 

[vlpate]

No one has a right to chase someone down, grab them, and kill them after they fight back which is what Zimmerman did IMO.

I realize this is your opinion, and I respect that, but if you believe the g/f, and what she said was going on at the time, how can you believe this is what happened? TM didn't say he was being "chased", he allegedly said, "followed". He didn't tell her he saw a gun, and the altercation happened after TM allegedly asked GZ why he was following him. Then GZ says, "I'm not", or "what are you doing here", and then he reaches for his phone while trying to hold onto someone 7"'s taller, who is an athlete? I don't buy it.

He had every opportunity when Trayvon came up to his vehicle to see why he was following him to roll down his window and say, "I'm with neighborhood watch. Do you live here?" or (and this is how I have done it with a stranger on my neighbor's property when she was away) "May I help you?" But as we hear on his call to the non-emergency line, he did not do that.

I missed this, he came up to his vehicle? GZ said he was coming toward him, staring at him, and then within a second, was running -- was GZ supposed to roll the window down and yell at him at a distance? He didn't come up to his vehicle. JMO

I don't believe he stopped following Trayvon and went back to his car as he contends. He had plenty of time to do that before he ever even hung up. I think he went after him and again refused to identify himself and grabbed Trayvon. Trayvon had every right to stand his ground. I believe he was initially anxious about Zimmerman following him but his anxiety turned to fear when he realized he hadn't lost him.

All he had to do was go 70 yards home. He had two minutes, it would have taken him less than a minute, IMO.

I don't believe that Trayvon could have beaten Zimmerman to death and frankly, I think Zimmerman was a wimp to shoot him because he thought he was losing the fight after a whole minute.

I agree with you here. Who knows how this would have ended if he hadn't had his gun. I believe though, that GZ was yelling for someone to help - that was his first choice and he yelled for over 45 seconds of that minute. IMO

This is a guy who wants to be a police officer and he can't defend himself against a 140 pound skinny teen without using a gun? And I would think that even more if it was Zimmerman yelling like that as he contends (I don't believe him). I think it is far more likely that that terrified screaming came from Trayvon who saw the gun and feared for his life, correctly.

I don't believe he only weighed 140lbs, but we will have to wait for the autopsy to know for sure.

I am not worried about judgment because I would not take a gun to patrol my neighborhood. If I see something suspicious I call 911, I don't take matters into my own hands.

Amen to that.

 

[CathyinTexas]

He is part....Latino I guess....or Hispanic. Makes no sense to me

Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2

He is part Peruvian, not Mexican.

 

[IzzyBlanche]

In response to Nova's post re: "blind hatred" of defense attorneys.

In my case I don't think I have a blind hatred of them, but I will admit to a prejudice against them due to the IMO disgusting antics I've seen come out of some of them:

Steven Feldman trying to throw David Westerfield's teenage son under the bus with the insinuation that it was the son's child *advertiser censored*, not DW's

Mark Geragos's little stunt with the rowboat and the weighted dummy in it down the street from the trial

Jose Baez: too many to count

I posted somewhere before on these forums, I absolutely believe in a defendant's right to a fair trial in which his/her Constitutional rights are protected, and the right to a vigorous defense.

What disgusts me is that apparently a "vigorous defense" can include theatrics, outright lies, and casting aspersions on the innocent with no evidence to support them.

JMO.

 

[m00c0w]

Bolded by me.

This is the point. What right did GZ have to stalk, follow, detain, harrass, follow, or confront this child walking home in his neighborhood. Yes, it was 'his neighborhood' as much as his mother's neighborhood is. He was on a public street. This is what bothers me about this case. Where in our constitution or the laws of any state does it say GZ can do these things?

Where in the laws or constitution does it say that you can walk down the street? Dance in your front yard? Breathe?

Laws restrict activities for the most part. The constitution restricts the government. If there are no laws prohibiting him from doing something (following an individual, for instance), then it's not unlawful and he has every right to carry out those actions.

 

[highflyer]

Link? Seriously, you keep saying this over and over and have yet to provide a link. This is not in the transcript and it is not in the video - so please provide proof that O'Mara exposed the g/f in court. TIA

I saw this and heard part of a name. How in the world can it not be in the video?

 

[m00c0w]

I saw this and heard part of a name. How in the world can it not be in the video?

It's not. We had a big discussion about it earlier. It's clearly not there and doesn't look like it happened.

 

[Neige]

Andy Rooney once said, "People will generally accept facts as truth only if the facts agree with what they already believe."

This is not directed to any one person in particular. I love the passion of the members here and am excited I finally decided to join in on the conversation. I think it is possible to feel one way and still see the facts objectively.

It is wonderful and refreshing to see individuals engaging with one another in a civil and respectful way online.

 

[Gwen]

Where in the laws or constitution does it say that you can walk down the street? Dance in your front yard? Breathe?

Laws restrict activities for the most part. The constitution restricts the government. If there are no laws prohibiting him from doing something (following an individual, for instance), then it's not unlawful and he has every right to carry out those actions.

He had no autority to confront that child. He was not permitted under any law to detain, follow (after being told it wasn't necessary), or hinder the progress of his walk on public property. JMO

 

[HiHater]

She was not exposed in court by MOM and I am going to repost my theory as to where he was going with respect to this line of questioning.

I have a theory with respect to why MOM was pursuing this particular line of questioning and I believe it has to do with the fact that the attorney representing TM's parents interviewed a witness who could potentially have some very critical information.

Not only did he question her he as well had ABC news there.

Instead of passing this information to the people that should of been doing the interviewing of the GF he has opened up the potential credibility of this witness testimony.

I expect that MOM will at some point try if he can to have this particular witness testimony limited.

Thus I must ask why this is not being scrutinized more than what MOM did at a bail hearing....

ABC exclusive

"ABC News was there exclusively as the 16-year-old girl told Crump about the last moments of the teenager's life. Martin had been talking to his girlfriend all the way to the store where he bought Skittles and a tea. The phone was in his pocket and the earphone in his ear, Crump said."

http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-mar...ry?id=15959017

Her statement was recorded. If her testimony differs, she impeaches herself basically. What's the problem with this, I don't see where you're going? They didn't secretly question her, they recorded her statement with ABC News present.