He absolutely was 'stalking' him and its funny how you want to rely on rules, laws etc when they are CONVENIENT but a police dispatcher isnt REALLY a police officer. OK...how about "as self appointed newighborhoodwatchguy, dickhead should have known A-not to carry a firearm while doing your 'duties' and B-report and let the 'real' police do their job". He killed a kid because he was stupid. He is and should be found criminally liable. Get over it? Well...thats EASY for us, now...isnt it. Maybe not so much for the parents of a dead 17 year old...but easy for us.
I wonder...your daughter calls you on your cell phone...says someone she doesnt know is following her in a car and then got out of his car to follow her on foot. Real world scenario...what do you do? how do you respond? How do you act? Lets say its YOU...same scenario...walking down the sidewalk and being stalked by some unknown asshole in a car and then on foot (and thank GOODNESS you didnt know he had already called you a '****ing coon')...how would you feel? How would you respond?
Is there a reason why you're taking Zimmerman's story that Martin picked a fight with him as fact?
Their child is dead because some neighborhoodwatchwannabe decided to arm himself and break every rule of any responsible neighborhood watch. Funny...for a neighborhood watch 'captain' he apparently didnt know very much about his duties or responsibilities, now did he, and that got a kid killed. Funny hopw quickly you blame a 17 year old kid who knew one thing...he was being stalked by an unknown stalker for no known reason. Its idiotic to put the blame for the confrontation on a 17 year old kid that was being stalked and not your very mature and responsible Super Neighborhood Watch Captain Man. Hey...George...next time...we REALLY REALLY dont need to follow the ****ing coons, OK?
Actually, it doesn't, but whatever. Moreover, even if it did, talking about his story as if it is fact is still irrational given how much we don't know.
Really? Do you have a source that says, "If a person eludes another person, then the latter can't initiate contact with them"?
Only the top three and the last one in bold are confirmed facts verified by Zimmerman's 911 call and Martin's gunshot wound. The two in red are probable given witness testimony and police reports although whether or not Zimmerman or Martin hit first is disputed.
Sure enough...I will fault him for being a stupid 17 year old. In his position...how would you have handled being stalked by some unknown asshole in a car and then by foot?Why don't we start with calling the cops ? No one connected with Martin, to include Martin, did that.
Further, when you look at a map of the place, Martin could have easily eluded Z. He did. The map shows that there could have only been a confrontation where there was had M allowed it to happen, as his cutting through buildings meant Z could not maintain contact in his truck.
Simple logistics are that M had to be willingly "caught". As in his confronting Z. And M was so worried neither he, or his gf, called the cops ?
Your argument wreaks of a lack of logic, and disregard of the current evidence. Got that liberal racist motivation going good though
I move that...he wasn't 'stalking' him...he was just 'following' him. You know...in a car. And then on foot. But...not like...you know...stalking.
I don't deny that, but if the issue is whether Zimmerman should be convicted, I am doing exactly what the jury would do. Based on all the facts I have been presented with (and I'm sure there are more facts that I am unaware of), I would find Zimmerman guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of involuntary manslaughter. Nobody's opinion in here is worth more than anyone else's, and I'm just sharing mine.
You can read my updated post if you like. Nothing you have posted, including the "third fact," is inconsistent with my impression of what occurred.
Okay, thank you for explaining. As I'm sure you suspect, I disagree. I disagree for two reasons: