There werer LOTS of posts since I was last on, so if anyone has anything I missed and want an answer to, please let me know.
Okay, I am seeing a lot of, "Well, they would do this..." and such in regards to how actions would or should have occured, and it got me to thinking about a couple of things.
First, on following or stopping someone, FIRST, and FOREMOST, there is NO LAW that prevents you from following someone. If you do it too much to the wrong person, they can get a restraining order or a protective order, but in the abscence of that, there is no law preventing it. Thus, GZ violated NO law by following TM.
On the confrontation, lets try a little visualization. GZ is sitting in his car, sees a person he doesn't know, walking with his hand in his pants and calls the police.
The person (we now know as TM) approaches his vehicle, stares at him, then takes off running. Yes, we know this because GZ reported it to the dispatcher. Of course, he COULD have been lying...but WHY? Where is the gain in lying at this point? So he follows him, again, COMPLETELY within his rights.
On a side note, I saw it asked WHY the POLICE could have stopped him. Remember, it is a GATED community, so you do NOT have the same rights as you would walking down Main St.
So GZ follows TM and loses sight of him, or doesn't lose sight, whatever you want to believe. The verbal confrontation starts.
Now, I am a gun owner (I own several) and I have a CCL and DO carry. I have a tactical holster that fits up under my arm. So according to THEORIES, GZ reaches inside his jacket for what HE says was a phone, but the TM supports say TM thought was a gun.
Now, if I go for my gun (which I have done), it is a MAXIMUM of 1.5 seconds before I have it out, leveled and am setting the sight picture (lining up what I am going to shoot at). So IF GZ was going for his gun, and got hit BEFORE he could get it out, then OBVIOUSLY TM was advancing on him and was closer than 1.5 seconds worth of travel time. So about 6 feet. Now GZ is on edge. He is watching for the person he was following, what are the odds that he gets within 6 feet of him before GZ NOTICES? TM asks why are you following me. GZ is reaching into his jacket. TM assaults GZ (PLEASE don't try denying this, it HAPPENED, he has the marks). Now if GZ had been reaching for the GUN, as some of you have suggested, how does TM hit him? Assuming TM got ONE good shot into his face, he STILL have a GUN in his hand. TM is, IMO,
slamming his head on the ground. Now if GZ went for the gun, and was HOLDING it, one of two things stop him from shooting earlier. One, it was knocked free, which we know it wasn't, two, he still has it in his hand, and TM gets shot SOONER. So the gun didn't come out until TM was on top of him and slamming his head into the ground.
Sorry, but as a SHOOTER, who CARRIES a gun, the sequence of events simply do not add up to ANYTHING other than TM assaulting GZ, and getting shot for it.
As for TM's actions and Facebook and Tweets, etc, they ARE evidence, as they ARE a picture of how this young man intended to portray himself to the world. His message, regardless of how screwed up is was, is one of being a
. That is a lifestyle choice that comes with ACTIONS< such as violently confronting someone you think is demeaning you. The drug paraphenialia is another thing, if there is evidence that TM was dealing drugs (which I believe there is), THAT could have colored TM's view of what GZ wanted. Perhaps TM thought GZ was a rival drug dealer out to harm him.
Make of it what you will, but the ONLY way you come up with GZ attacking TM is if you question most of the CURRENT evidence, and lay your entire bet on evidence that has not been released.
