So now we know, through evidence released by prosecutors this past week, that George Zimmerman, the 28-year-old superhero-wannabe who shot and killed unarmed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Fla,, on February 26th, had wounds on his head and a broken nose. And as expected, ignorant racists nationwide rushed forward with disingenuous cries of "See!?... that proves the kid had attacked him!" But Zimmerman's wounds suggest one thing: that Trayvon fought like an animal to save his life.
Ever since this story hit the press I've been mortified about how Trayvon has been vilified as the aggressor when all evidence points to him being the one who desperately needed to exercise his state's Draconian 'Stand Your Ground' law. For the life of me I don't understand why the media has not explored this angle more than it has. The simple fact remains here: that a grown man with a gun, safe in his locked car, against the implicit instruction of a 911 police operator, left that car to pursue, confront and kill a child (yes, racists, under the age of eighteen one is legally considered a child) who was holding nothing more than a bag of Skittles and an iced tea.
What exactly does 'stand your ground' mean if not to fight like an animal to save your life when you believe it's being threatened with deadly force? Why does the fact that Zimmerman suffered wounds serve as evidence that Trayvon initiated the scuffle? To the contrary, Zimmerman's wounds reinforce that the kid bravely came at his attacker with everything he had. That after screaming for help seventeen times in a desolate area he fought furiously to save himself from being shot dead...something he unfortunately failed to do. Why is no one talking about how it was Trayvon who 'stood his ground?' Why does it seem that this law is only being discussed as it applies to Zimmerman?
As for Zimmerman's claim of self-defense? Bullshit. That defense went out the window the second he stepped from his locked car with a loaded semi-automatic weapon.
Follow Andy Ostroy on Twitter: www.twitter.com/AndyOstroy
Succinct summation, give it to the prosecutor.
he will need about 4 million for his defense...so pony up
Two different scenarios at the link. One is from talkleft.
The other is a video with good visuals and commentary.
Looks like even the liberals are saying the evidence supports George's account. You can link to other sites at talkleft.
Here is a good review of the evidence except for the iced tea. I think it was actually watermelon juice cocktail.
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2012/5/27/41053/5361
We do not know if there will be a trial yet. This is an eye opener about ours SGY law. Remember that it was passed by 100 percent of the Democrats in our Senate.
http://www.southfloridacriminallawyersblog.com/2012/04/why-trayvon-martins-case-may-not-go-to-a-jury.html
only racists would make this comment...please contribute to george...but please stop this inflammatory rhetoric...a child is dead...a grown man, if he felt this kid was dangerous, deliberately put himself in harm's way...we do know there will be a trial...unless you think making someone post 1 mil bail is just an exercise in seeing if the state of florida has good bookkeeping practices...
your using the south florida criminal lawyers' blog is not a good argument...you are comparing someone who actually committed a crime being killed by someone who used the stand your group...as far as i know it, walking home with a hoodie, candy and ice tea is not a crime in the u.s.
you keep saying that dems are in favor of this or that...do you think we live in a country where a jury is made up of political figures???? the jury should consist of a wide diverse group of people...and let's see how many agree that had their child left their home to purchase some junk food, wore a hoodie because it was raining, deserved to be gun downed by an adult who can't managed to actually become a police officer so he pretends he is one...
If he threw teh first punch he was not defending himself.
Being followed is NoT illegal. Having a gun is not illegal.
Defending your self form legal actions that are not harming your. IF he attacked first then Z was defending himself and not Martin.
A 17 year old "child" can be violent and can kill. Esecially one that might have been banging Z head into the ground.
banging z head into the ground...another eyewitness account....
you're going to be busy testifying at the trial...hopefully you will be the first called...'cause george will need you...witness 9 appears to be contradicting your statements...
To me,it was murder. HE CALLED THE AUTHORITIES.His job was done.
False. Read the law.
"His criminal behavior begins when he decides to disobey the directive of the dispatcher."
False. First, there was no directive from the dispatcher. There was an advisement. Second, the dispatcher is not a law enforcement officer, and has no authority to issue directives. Third, there is no evidence to support the notion that Zimmerman did not heed the dispatcher's advisement.
"All of this but for one man and his asinine decisions COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED."
Speculation.
I dont know and,cant understand how folks can condone the killing of an unarmed child,by a supposed adult who has a concealed carry license.
Not saying you condone the murdering of children by armed men.
But you seem to be laying all of this at the feet of the child who was murdered in cold blood !
KARMA,will take care of the partys involved in this tragedy.He could walk away totally free and,clear. But,some how,some way things will be made right.That is just universal law.
I would hope that as he was hollering for help and,fighting for his life,that the child did get in a blow or two against his assassin.
I am curious as to what difference you think it makes. Hitting someone over the head with a Maglite can kill you too. It killed Malice Green.
So it would have beens self-defense either way. Anything that hits your head hard enough to make it bleed can kill you.
But it doesn't matter anyway, because it was the sidewalk. You might as well just admit it now.
please get your facts correct
tell them he was taking this medication? They probably would have made him go to the hospital to be
drug tested that's why. I see they listed paresthesia on the report. Paresthesia is a side effect of
amphetamine abuse.
Ampetamine is a component of Adderall. It is used to treat people with tramatic brain injuries which would coincide with Shaken Baby Syndrome. Has there been something wrong with Zimmerman since he was a baby? Was this disclosed in his information to apply for a Concealed Carry Permit? Is this a reason why his father has alway's come to his defense when he has gotten in trouble with the law?
What father wouldn't come to his son's defense, especially when in need? You obviously need a hobby.