Neighborhood watch captain kills black teen - doesn't get arrested

[vta]

The reporting on this pretty shoddy and transparent with this kids tragedy being used in a pretty awful way. Even in the articles ridiculously 'updated', nothing new is learned and the same hot-button phrases repeated ad nauseam: that a black kid was shot by a white guy and he was packing skittles and Arizona iced tea.

Look at the microcosm this forum affords to see what the intended effect is.

 

[TheCount]

Fearing for one's life is the most common defense used in police officer and concealed carry related shootings, and it works more often than not. It helps that statistics show that police officers and those with CHL are far less likely to commit felonies across the board, but especially with regards to violent crimes. For better or worse, courts tend to put more faith in the word of people who are responsibly carrying weapons over everybody else.

I can promise you that if he says he was in fear for his life and he has a clean record, character witnesses and witnesses of the event to back him up, there is zero chance he goes to jail for this.

Again, I'm not saying it was justified. I'm saying that I'm smart enough to know that 2 plus 2 doesnt equal 16.

He was neighborhood watch, not a police officer.

The reporting on this pretty shoddy and transparent with this kids tragedy being used in a pretty awful way. Even in the articles ridiculously 'updated', nothing new is learned and the same hot-button phrases repeated ad nauseam: that a black kid was shot by a white guy and he was packing skittles and Arizona iced tea.

Look at the microcosm this forum affords to see what the intended effect is.

Oh really? You're choosing to ignore that the police have confirmed the families story? That's not new information, huh?

 

[The30YardSlant]

Lee said that Zimmerman has a legal permit to carry the weapon used in the shooting, and that he told police that he shot Martin in self-defense.

“He felt the need to defend himself,” Lee said. “ I don’t think it was his intent to go and shoot somebody” that night.

The chief said the police have met with Zimmerman on two to three separate occasions, and that their investigation should be wrapped up this week. He said all of the evidence in the case will be delivered to the Seminole County State Attorney’s Office soon after.

“We’re going to present all the information and if they feel that based on all of the evidence that we’re able to produce that Mr. Zimmerman has satisfied the requirement that he shot in self defense, they may, but if not, he would be charged with some type of homicide or manslaughter,” Lee said.

Oh look, EXACTLY what I said. A confrontation, he claims he feared for his life and has yet to be arrested pending investigation. This was not in the original article posted, or if it was I missed it.

 

[The30YardSlant]

He was neighborhood watch, not a police officer.

I know, he had a CHL.

 

[The30YardSlant]

Why not? He shot a kid, said he was afraid had a permit and has no record. The cops don't HAVE to arrest everyone that fires a gun, and in this case they clearly choose not to while they finished their investigation.

I agree, the problem is the original article mentioned nothing about the kid confronting the shooter. In fact, it made the shooter out to be the only person confronting anybody. It also said nothing about him claiming self-defense or the police investigating self-defense, only that the family "was concerned they would consider it self-defense".

If the article you just posted had been here to read earleir we wouldnt be having this discussion. The original article is a pretty poor piece of reporting, it made this event out to be a cold-blooded hate crime where the poor family was having to deal with their kid's killer walking free.

 

[vta]

=Oh really? You're choosing to ignore that the police have confirmed the families story? That's not new information, huh?

No it's not. The question hasn't been the kid's state of being before he was shot it's why the guy shot him, which mysteriously seems harder to discern than a gordian knot. And your response answers perfectly what my initial point really is: the misuse of this tragedy to stoke tension.

 

[TheCount]

I agree, the problem is the original article mentioned nothing about the kid confronting the shooter. In fact, it made the shooter out to be the only person confronting anybody. It also said nothing about him claiming self-defense or the police investigating self-defense, only that the family "was concerned they would consider it self-defense".

If the article you just posted had been here to read earleir we wouldnt be having this discussion. The original article is a pretty poor piece of reporting, it made this event out to be a cold-blooded hate crime where the poor family was having to deal with their kid's killer walking free.

You are clearly seeing what you want to see. Read the nature of the confrontation again, without the bias. I'm sure you won't see anything new, but maybe it's worth the effort.

No it's not.

Of course it is, don't be silly. Without the police confirmation the conversation would never get beyond that it's a one sided story told by the parents of the victim.

 

[The30YardSlant]

You are clearly seeing what you want to see. Read the nature of the confrontation again, without the bias. I'm sure you won't see anything new, but maybe it's worth the effort.



Of course it is, don't be silly. Without the police confirmation the conversation would never get beyond that it's a one sided story told by the parents of the victim.

Biased or not the fact is that the original article left out several important pieces of information. Their reasns for that are the only thing one could potentially be biased about. The greater bias comes from not acknowledging what they left out.

 

[TheCount]

Biased or not the fact is that the original article left out several important pieces of information. Their reasns for that are the only thing one could potentially be biased about. The greater bias comes from not acknowledging what they left out.

The original "aritcle" is a preliminary report. They didn't "leave out" anything, they reported the information they had at the time, that's the way news works.

 

[DFWJC]

I don't see the purpose of either person's race even being a part of this story, unless the purpose is use the victim as a springboard for those that laready hate to fan those hatred flames ever higher. It's disgraceful.

 

[DOUBLE WING]

Oh look, EXACTLY what I said. A confrontation, he claims he feared for his life and has yet to be arrested pending investigation. This was not in the original article posted, or if it was I missed it.

Of course he's going to claim self-defense. What else could he logically do? That's the only chance this wannabe-cop has to avoid jail.

Now, what could this kid have done to make this grown man fear for his life? Short of jumping into his car and trying to steal the gun out of his pocket, I can't think of much. But we know that didn't happen because the kid was shot right there on the same sidewalk he was walking home on, and the cops CAN'T EVEN CONFIRM THAT THE SHOOTER GOT OUT OF HIS CAR. So it's entirely possible that this kid said something the guy didn't like (probably something like "why the hell are you following me? leave me alone") and the guy shot him right from the drivers seat of his car.

And you know how this all could have been avoided? If this guy simply followed police orders, but no. You give a wannabe tough guy a gun and this is what happens. I KNOW guys exactly like this. My neighborhood has one. They are complete psychopaths who were probably bullied as kids and want to take it out on everyone else.

 

[DOUBLE WING]

I don't see the purpose of either person's race even being a part of this story, unless the purpose is use the victim as a springboard for those that laready hate to fan those hatred flames ever higher. It's disgraceful.

The police report doesn't list any information as to why the man felt this kid was "suspicious". They can only speculate that he may have been "walking" in a way that the guy found suspicious.

Really?

It's perfectly logical to assume that race played a part here. That this kid was only "suspicious" because he's black.

 

[Longboysfan]

Now, what could this kid have done to make this grown man fear for his life? Short of jumping into his car and trying to steal the gun out of his pocket, I can't think of much. But we know that didn't happen because the kid was shot right there on the same sidewalk he was walking home on, and the cops CAN'T EVEN CONFIRM THAT THE SHOOTER GOT OUT OF HIS CAR. So it's entirely possible that this kid said something the guy didn't like (probably something like "why the hell are you following me? leave me alone") and the guy shot him right from the drivers seat of his car.

The police can prove if he shot from the car with the same test they use to check if there is residue on a person.

 

[The30YardSlant]

Of course he's going to claim self-defense. What else could he logically do? That's the only chance this wannabe-cop has to avoid jail.

Well, we could consider the possibility that an upstanding citizen with no criminal history isnt a cold-blooded killer and actually was afraid.

Now, what could this kid have done to make this grown man fear for his life?

You make it sound as if no "kid" has ever posed any threat to an adult male. Hell, depending on the person 17 is a grown arse man.

Short of jumping into his car and trying to steal the gun out of his pocket, I can't think of much. But we know that didn't happen because the kid was shot right there on the same sidewalk he was walking home on, and the cops CAN'T EVEN CONFIRM THAT THE SHOOTER GOT OUT OF HIS CAR. So it's entirely possible that this kid said something the guy didn't like (probably something like "why the hell are you following me? leave me alone") and the guy shot him right from the drivers seat of his car.

The second article posted claims there was an actual physical altercation, and it would be easy to rule out this theory by simply testing the driver's side for residue. Besides, if there was ANY evidence it went down like this he'd be in jail regardless of claiming self-defense or not.

And you know how this all could have been avoided? If this guy simply followed police orders, but no. You give a wannabe tough guy a gun and this is what happens. I KNOW guys exactly like this. My neighborhood has one. They are complete psychopaths who were probably bullied as kids and want to take it out on everyone else.

No argument about following the police orders, but sociopaths don't typically get to this guys age with a clean criminal record and a stellar reputation. That only happens on Law and Order.

 

[The30YardSlant]

The police report doesn't list any information as to why the man felt this kid was "suspicious". They can only speculate that he may have been "walking" in a way that the guy found suspicious.

Really?

It's perfectly logical to assume that race played a part here. That this kid was only "suspicious" because he's black.

It's no less logical, in your scenario anyway, that he thought it was a "kid" up to no good. I'm sure there was some bias but it's only more logical that the bias was race-related without knowing any more than we do if you have an axe to grind on the matter.

Not every black male who gets shot/stabbed/etc. was the victim of racism. In fact statistically the majority of interracial murders involve hispanics and blacks killing each other and killing whites, but when a black guy shoots a white guy nobody cries racism. In the state of Texas a black male has never been convicted of a hate crime. Ever.

*Edit* Meant a black has never been convicted of a hate crime against a white in Texas. Several have been convicted for cimes against hispanics and homosexuals/transgenered individuals.

 

[DOUBLE WING]

Well, we could consider the possibility that an upstanding citizen with no criminal history isnt a cold-blooded killer and actually was afraid.

Could we also consider the possibility that a 17-year-old kid on vacation, with no apparent history of any kind of criminal or behavioral issues, who is walking home from buying his brother some snacks at a store, probably isn't going to do anything to warrant being murdered on a sidewalk in front of his family's home?

You make it sound as if no "kid" has ever posed any threat to an adult male. Hell, depending on the person 17 is a grown arse man.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/08/2684419/shooting-mystery-miami-dade-teen.html

Look at the kid. He's 140 pounds soaking wet. Armed with a bag of skittles. The man with the gun has all the power in this scenario. I find it hard to believe that after following the kid when he was specifically ordered not to, that he's not the one to blame for whatever escalated after that. Without knowing all the details, it SOUNDS to me right now like he was looking for trouble.

No argument about following the police orders, but sociopaths don't typically get to this guys age with a clean criminal record and a stellar reputation. That only happens on Law and Order.

That's not true at all. You can open a newspaper today or turn on the news tonight and I bet you'll see a story about someone who committed a horrible crime, and I bet that person's loved ones will all say they never saw it coming from such a nice, friendly, caring person.

 

[DOUBLE WING]

The second article posted claims there was an actual physical altercation, and it would be easy to rule out this theory by simply testing the driver's side for residue. Besides, if there was ANY evidence it went down like this he'd be in jail regardless of claiming self-defense or not.

I don't mean any disrespect by this, but I think you're being a little naive about the world we live in. Racism still exists and people with friends in high places still get shortcuts others don't.

 

[The30YardSlant]

Could we also consider the possibility that a 17-year-old kid on vacation, with no apparent history of any kind of criminal or behavioral issues, who is walking home from buying his brother some snacks at a store, probably isn't going to do anything to warrant being murdered on a sidewalk in front of his family's home?

Yes, I have been considering that throughout this thread. I've said many times I don't know what happened and the kid may have been completely innocent. The only people speaking in absolutes are you and Count. All I've said was there had to be SOMETING more for the guy to not get arrested, and it turns out I was right. Whether his story is true or not there WAS more to the story.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/08/2684419/shooting-mystery-miami-dade-teen.html

Look at the kid. He's 140 pounds soaking wet. Armed with a bag of skittles. The man with the gun has all the power in this scenario. I find it hard to believe that after following the kid when he was specifically ordered not to, that he's not the one to blame for whatever escalated after that. Without knowing all the details, it SOUNDS to me right now like he was looking for trouble.

This is all beside the point. You're basing all this on the assumption that a small 17 year old has no ability whatsoever to harm an adult. All that matters is that someone believe they COULD be carrying a gun or they COULD be presenting some sort of danger. How many cops, hell how many people have been shot or stabbed by teenagers in America? It numbers in the hundreds of thousands over the years. I'm not saying this kid was, but all that is relevant to my point here is that someone believe they could. How did the guy know he didnt have a gun? How did he know he didnt have anything at all?

And I agree he should have let it go, but once he didnt I have my doubts that he was there to shoot somebody.

That's not true at all. You can open a newspaper today or turn on the news tonight and I bet you'll see a story about someone who committed a horrible crime, and I bet that person's loved ones will all say they never saw it coming from such a nice, friendly, caring person.

Of course they will, but this is assuming that all murderers are sociopaths and all family members are objective. It's also assuming that the vast, vast majority of convicted murderers have no criminal history, which is simply incorrect. I can call someone loving and caring all I want, but if they have three felonies on their record that would speak against my claim.

 

[The30YardSlant]

I don't mean any disrespect by this, but I think you're being a little naive about the world we live in. Racism still exists and people with friends in high places still get shortcuts others don't.

Of course racism still exists, but there's a big difference between 1920s "Let's go lynch us a ******" racism and modern day racism. Killing a minority and getting away with it was once a given, now we often come down on you even harder for a "hate crime". Getting off for a cold-blooded murder just because you're white is simply not as common anymore as "the man is keeping us down" crowd would have you believe.

And this is a little off topic but from my experience, especially in inner cities, the vast majority of racism comes from blacks and is directed towards whites and ESPECIALLY hispanics.

 

[TheCount]

Well, we could consider the possibility that an upstanding citizen with no criminal history isnt a cold-blooded killer and actually was afraid.

lol, if he's afraid why is he disobeying 911 telling him to not get involved and following a 17 year old kid around with a gun in his pocket?

If I'm scared of snakes and I see one, I don't chase after it to find out if it's poisonous or not. And that's the reason his "self defense" claim won't fly. He'll be arrested soon enough.

I don't see the purpose of either person's race even being a part of this story, unless the purpose is use the victim as a springboard for those that laready hate to fan those hatred flames ever higher. It's disgraceful.

Are we really going to pretend that the fact that he was a young, black male out in a gated community after dark couldn't have played any part what led to the confrontation?

The fact that the shooter is white or black may not mean anything, but the victim being black certainly could have played a part.