When "Neighborhood Watch" Gets Out of Hand

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by pointman

Lori, this misses my point. My point is that many are jumping to conclusions without all the facts. I am not taking either side here, but to conduct a witch hunt without knowledge of the true facts and to believe everything the media spouts out as if it is true is just as much a disservice to everyone as letting a guilty man go free. People should allow the justice system time to resolve this without resorting to vigilante justice.

i agree with this.

Though.. if somehow this man is not even arrested, it send a very dangerous message. It almost makes it okay to act like a cop and follow someone for no reason, and then shoot when you feel like you're in danger.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

i agree with this.

Though.. if somehow this man is not even arrested, it send a very dangerous message. It almost makes it okay to act like a cop and follow someone for no reason, and then shoot when you feel like you're in danger.

You keep saying that Zimmerman was following the kid "for no reason". He was following him for a very good reason. Zimmerman is the neighborhood watch captain. He knows the neighborhood and he knows the people who live there. It's a gated community. He sees a person that he has never seen before, walking through the neighborhood. Why wouldn't he follow him? What would be the point of neighborhood watch otherwise? If you were working neighborhood watch and you see a person in your neighborhood that you've never seen before, would you ignore them?

I've never officially been involved in neighborhood watch but I always keep my eyes open. When I do see something suspicious, I call the police. And I always follow the person until the police arrive. If I didn't follow the person, the police would never find the guy. The police usually don't arrive for at least 10 minutes. The person may be 10 blocks away by then.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Some of you have commented that Zimmerman should have already been charged with manslaughter. Whether we are talking about this case or another case, the police are not going to charge a person until they have a strong case. You have to remember that if they charge a person, the preliminary hearing is usually held within a couple of weeks.

At the preliminary hearing, the burden on the prosecution is not as a great as it is at trial. But the prosecution does have to show the judge that there is a strong case against the person. If the prosecution doesn't have some pretty strong evidence of the person's guilt, the judge will throw out the case. It won't even go to trial.

This is why it can often times take a long time for a district attorney to file charges. They want to wait until they feel they have a strong case. They want to wait until they feel they have enough evidence not only to present the judge at the preliminary hearing, but enough evidence to prove that the person is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt at trial. The last thing in the world they want is to have such a weak case that the judge throws it out at the preliminary hearing, before it even gets to trial. That has happened before too.

In this particular case, as of right now you have Zimmerman saying that Trayvon attacked him and was beating the crap out of him. He says he acted in self-defense. The police and prosecutors need to find evidence that contradicts this. If they can find some forensic evidence that contradicts this or if they can find a witness that says Trayvon didn't attack Zimmerman first, then they might be able to build a case against Zimmerman. But at this point, I don't think they have anything that contradicts Zimmerman's story. At this point, I don't think they have much of a case. In Florida, if a person is beating the crap out of you, you have the right to use deadly force.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

You keep saying that Zimmerman was following the kid "for no reason". He was following him for a very good reason. Zimmerman is the neighborhood watch captain. He knows the neighborhood and he knows the people who live there. It's a gated community. He sees a person that he has never seen before, walking through the neighborhood. Why wouldn't he follow him? What would be the point of neighborhood watch otherwise? If you were working neighborhood watch and you see a person in your neighborhood that you've never seen before, would you ignore them?

I've never officially been involved in neighborhood watch but I always keep my eyes open. When I do see something suspicious, I call the police. And I always follow the person until the police arrive. If I didn't follow the person, the police would never find the guy. The police usually don't arrive for at least 10 minutes. The person may be 10 blocks away by then.

Would you continue to persue even when the police dispatcher clearly tells you not to. To me he becomes the aggressor at this point.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by jms62

Would you continue to persue even when the police dispatcher clearly tells you not to. To me he becomes the aggressor at this point.

I would continue to pursue in my car but I would certainly keep my distance. I would stay in my car and I would stay a good 50 to 100 yards away while I followed. You don't know if the person is armed. And even if they're not armed, you don't want to get into a physical confrontation.

Zimmerman obviously made a huge mistake. He got way too close. He should have never gotten out of his car.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I would continue to pursue in my car but I would certainly keep my distance. I would stay in my car and I would stay a good 50 to 100 yards away while I followed. You don't know if the person is armed. And even if they're not armed, you don't want to get into a physical confrontation.

Zimmerman obviously made a huge mistake. He got way too close. He should have never gotten out of his car.

Exactly what should have been done. Zimmerman was looking for a conforntation and this is why the Fla law is so ****ed up. You can provoke someone and then kill them and with no witness easily get away with it. Zimmermans past arrest speaks alot to his character to me. He appears to be a tough guy looking for a fight.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by jms62

Exactly what should have been done. Zimmerman was looking for a conforntation and this is why the Fla law is so ****ed up. You can provoke someone and then kill them and with no witness easily get away with it. Zimmermans past arrest speaks alot to his character to me. He appears to be a tough guy looking for a fight.

I think that is a serious problem with that law. As you said, I think you could conceivably provoke someone and then kill them and get away with it, if there were no witnesses. That could happen.

I don't think that is really what happened in this case, at least not intentionally. I don't think Zimmerman planned on killing the guy. I think he just wanted to be able to tell the police where the suspect was when they arrived.

I was reading about a case down there several years ago where a guy and his neighbor got into a dispute over garbage cans. The neighbor ended up shooting this guy twice. The guy survived even though he got shot twice in the stomach. The neighbor was an ex-cop and he was never charged. To me that case was much worse (worse in terms of arguing self-defense) than the Zimmerman case because there was no physical altercation. The guy was approaching his neighbor, but I think he was still a good 15 feet away when he got shot. I think the neighbor (the ex-cop) knew the law and basically provoked the guy on purpose.

And if you're going down that path then the real problem is neighborhood watches and homeowners associations. These jokes were formed because scared motherf.uckers wanted extra protection. So little Hitlers take the jobs of HOA presidents and neighborhood watch security.

It was only a matter of time before something like this happened.

Personally I wish both of them would have died. I have no use for retarded tween thugs that still think no limit records is relevant. And I definitely have no use for a retarded 20-something control freak who looks like a volunteer fireman.

This country doesn't need to riot over two pieces of s.hit. And there is no debate that these two humans were scum.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

You keep saying that Zimmerman was following the kid "for no reason". He was following him for a very good reason. Zimmerman is the neighborhood watch captain. He knows the neighborhood and he knows the people who live there. It's a gated community. He sees a person that he has never seen before, walking through the neighborhood. Why wouldn't he follow him? What would be the point of neighborhood watch otherwise? If you were working neighborhood watch and you see a person in your neighborhood that you've never seen before, would you ignore them?

I've never officially been involved in neighborhood watch but I always keep my eyes open. When I do see something suspicious, I call the police. And I always follow the person until the police arrive. If I didn't follow the person, the police would never find the guy. The police usually don't arrive for at least 10 minutes. The person may be 10 blocks away by then.

i read he wasn't even a member of neighborhood watch. then there's the 911 operator telling him not to follow martin. and it's certainly not nw rules to carry a gun, or confront a person. other than all that, you're right.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Danzig

i read he wasn't even a member of neighborhood watch. then there's the 911 operator telling him not to follow martin. and it's certainly not nw rules to carry a gun, or confront a person. other than all that, you're right.

A lot of people carry guns in Florida. It is very easy to get a permit to carry a concealed weapon in Florida. It was totally legal for Zimmerman to be carrying that gun. If you have a concealed weapons' permit and you do neighborhood watch, I don't think it would make much sense to leave your gun at home.

I guess Zimmerman got out of his car and started following Trayvon on foot after Trayvon cut down a grass path that went between houses. Zimmerman obviously couldn't drive on the grass path. Most people would have probably given up the chase at this point but Zimmerman was obviously a little overzealous.

We know that at some point Zimmerman and Trayvon came face to face and they had some words. Trayvon supposedly asked Zimmerman why he was following him. Zimmerman supposedly asked Trayvon what he was doing there. We don't know what else, if anything was said after that.

According to Zimmerman, at some point he walked away and was heading back to his car. If that is the case, then the confrontation was over at that point. If Trayvon attacked him while he is walking back to his car, after the verbal confrontation is over, then I think Trayvon was the aggressor. Some of you have argued that Zimmerman was the aggressor, which he may have been at the beginning. But after he walks away and is heading back to his car, neither man is a threat to the other. Trayvon has no justification to attack him at this point and I think Zimmemran is totally justified in defending himself.

If this in fact is how things went down, I don't think prosecutors have much of a case. Prosecutors will need to come up with some evidence that shows that things did not go down like this.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I guess Zimmerman got out of his car and started following Trayvon on foot after Trayvon cut down a grass path that went between houses. Zimmerman obviously couldn't drive on the grass path. Most people would have probably given up the chase at this point but Zimmerman was obviously a little overzealous.

It's not effing against the law to be walking while black. It's not against the law to walk down a grass path between houses. Wearing a hoodie and being black doesn't make you "acting suspicious" or "on drugs" or "hand in his waistband, I don't know what his deal is".

There was NOTHING the kid did to cause Zimmerman to "follow him" other than his color and daring to exist. What the hell was Zimmerman "chasing"?

Then Zimmerman killed an innocent kid. He was a predator. He pursued the kid. Video of Zimmerman at the police station shows no dirt on his clothes, no grass stains, no blood stains, no injuries. He's a ****ing liar, and he needs to be brought to justice. You want history? Zimmerman following and harassing other people who live in that subdivision. Zimmerman carrying a gun. Zimmerman calling police over 40 times for "stuff". Zimmerman fired from a security job for his temper. Zimmerman with RO from ex fiance. He looks like a regular dangerous, stupid police wannabe and his ego and sheer stupidity killed a 17-year-old kid.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

It's not effing against the law to be walking while black. It's not against the law to walk down a grass path between houses. Wearing a hoodie and being black doesn't make you "acting suspicious" or "on drugs" or "hand in his waistband, I don't know what his deal is".

There was NOTHING the kid did to cause Zimmerman to "follow him" other than his color and daring to exist. What the hell was Zimmerman "chasing"?

Then Zimmerman killed an innocent kid. He was a predator. He pursued the kid. Video of Zimmerman at the police station shows no dirt on his clothes, no grass stains, no blood stains, no injuries. He's a ****ing liar, and he needs to be brought to justice.

There is no evidence that Trayvon's race had anything to do with it. Could his race have had something to do with it? It is possible but there is no evidence of it. To prove a case, you need evidence. You can't just say I have a strong feeling that he followed him because of his race. You need evidence.

I can see how you could suspect that race could have been an issue. But I have no idea how you can "conclude" that race was an issue. Let's pretend that Trayvon was Latino. Are you saying that Zimmerman would not have followed him? If that is what you are saying, what evidence do you have to support that? My guess is that Zimmerman would have followed any young man that was a stranger in the neighborhood.

On the video, I think you could clearly see that Zimmerman had a gash on the back of his head. There are several witnesses that said he had a bloody nose. Do you think all those people were lying? Zimmerman was treated for his injuries at the scene. The fact that you couldn't see blood on him in the video, after he had been cleaned up at the scene, is hardly proof that there was no altercation.

I'm not quite sure what you are saying? Are you saying that you don't think there was a physical altercation? Assuming there was a physical altercation, I don't think there is anyone who said it was a 20 minute fight. The fight probably lasted 10 seconds. I wouldn't expect someone who got punched for a few seconds to look like someone who went 10 rounds in a boxing match.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

There is no evidence that Trayvon's race had anything to do with it.

Actually yeah, there is: the only thing Zimmerman knew about this kid, reported to the police, was that he was black and he "didn't know what his deal was". Zimmerman called in a kid walking alone a street simply because he was black. The kid was doing nothing but walking.

On the video, I think you could clearly see that Zimmerman had a gash on the back of his head.

No. Not at all. There is zero evidence of any "gash" on his head. There is zero evidence of blood on the back of the shirt (head "gash") or the front of the shirt ("broken nose"), along with zero dirt or grass stains. Witnesses said he was wearing this shirt during his fight with Treyvon.

Even tiny head lacerations bleed like crazy, especially when you are fighting, and your adrenaline and blood pressure are sky high. Impossible for him to have anything other than a bruise and a completely minor skin abrasion with no blood - and virtually impossible to have any scalp skin break at all, ignored during a fight, without some blood. Let alone zero blood from a "broken nose".

There are several witnesses that said he had a bloody nose. Do you think all those people were lying?

There are witnesses the police ignored that said the opposite. Right now on the video there is zero visible evidence of swelling, injury, blood on his face, blood on the back of his clothes, blood on his sleeve. Amazing, if his nose was broken in the front, and his head "gashed" in the back. The immaculate broken nose?

Zimmerman was treated for his injuries at the scene. The fact that you couldn't see blood on him in the video, after he had been cleaned up at the scene, is hardly proof that there was no altercation.

He was not treated by ambulance personnel, according to the police he was "treated in the back of the squad car". Really? We're supposed to believe that? That no help was called for this crime "victim's" gash and broken nose? Sorry. He didn't change clothes. There is no blood on his clothes. And as a former paramedic, I'll tell you that we don't wash people off. And in a murder, the police wouldn't let us eliminate any blood evidence anyway.

I'm not quite sure what you are saying? Are you saying that you don't think there was a physical altercation?

I'm saying that the facts leaked by the police don't match with the dog and pony show Zimmerman's brother is putting out to the press. The tapes make it clear there were nearly a minute of a person screaming for help, stilled by a gunshot. This police department has a history of racial incompetence and problems in the community. The current police chief was brought in to fix it. Now he's on leave, too.

The problem isn't whether Zimmerman was justified in murdering this child. The problem is this appalling police department of incompetents (yes, they have a record of racial/community problems). The problem is that a murdered kid was allowed to sit in the morgue for three days as a "John Doe", when they had a cell phone and neighborhood they could have canvassed. Took them three days to get that warrant to unlock a locked cell phone? That was dropped in a scuffle and possibly broken? The lead investigator wants an arrest, but he's told not to?

Nothing happened with this case for WEEKS, until the family of the murdered kid went to their Congresswoman. Just another dead black kid, no charges, nothing to see here.

The fight probably lasted 10 seconds.

According to the various 9-11 calls released by the PD, that have the fight and the murder (the shots) in the background, the "fight" lasted at least 45 seconds before a gunshot stills the cries for help.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

A lot of people carry guns in Florida. It is very easy to get a permit to carry a concealed weapon in Florida. It was totally legal for Zimmerman to be carrying that gun. If you have a concealed weapons' permit and you do neighborhood watch, I don't think it would make much sense to leave your gun at home.

I guess Zimmerman got out of his car and started following Trayvon on foot after Trayvon cut down a grass path that went between houses. Zimmerman obviously couldn't drive on the grass path. Most people would have probably given up the chase at this point but Zimmerman was obviously a little overzealous.

We know that at some point Zimmerman and Trayvon came face to face and they had some words. Trayvon supposedly asked Zimmerman why he was following him. Zimmerman supposedly asked Trayvon what he was doing there. We don't know what else, if anything was said after that.

According to Zimmerman, at some point he walked away and was heading back to his car. If that is the case, then the confrontation was over at that point. If Trayvon attacked him while he is walking back to his car, after the verbal confrontation is over, then I think Trayvon was the aggressor. Some of you have argued that Zimmerman was the aggressor, which he may have been at the beginning. But after he walks away and is heading back to his car, neither man is a threat to the other. Trayvon has no justification to attack him at this point and I think Zimmemran is totally justified in defending himself.

If this in fact is how things went down, I don't think prosecutors have much of a case. Prosecutors will need to come up with some evidence that shows that things did not go down like this.

rupe, i appreciate your detailed assessment but all of the above is not something new to me. however, it seems you completely ignored the part where i said 'he was NOT a member of neighborhood watch. had he been, perhaps he'd have known they don't want their members carrying guns. i guess you also ignored the part where the 911 operator told zimmerman not to confront trayvon.
i've also seen where there is no indication of there having been a scuffle, which belies your post.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Danzig

rupe, i appreciate your detailed assessment but all of the above is not something new to me. however, it seems you completely ignored the part where i said 'he was NOT a member of neighborhood watch. had he been, perhaps he'd have known they don't want their members carrying guns. i guess you also ignored the part where the 911 operator told zimmerman not to confront trayvon.
i've also seen where there is no indication of there having been a scuffle, which belies your post.

There are 2 or 3 published 9-11 tapes of callers reporting a man down on the ground, screaming for help, and then a shot that stills the screams The scuffle (if it lasted during the screaming) is at least 45 (correction, 41) seconds long, not including the time it was happening before people telephoned it in as it was happening. ABC News must have a source, as they have the most information available from the PD (the tapes, etc)

Here's the tape of the 41 seconds of screaming for help, with the gunshot stilling the screams. Warning if you have triggers or PTSD. It's graphic. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hj4RHJ0taoc

Here's the MSMBC color video of Zimmerman at the police station in handcuffs. You can clearly see, in a couple places, as Zimmerman has very close hair, there is no 2-inch skull laceration on the top of his head as alleged by Daily Caller. And these clothes have zero blood or grass on them (either front of shirt or back) and they are the clothes described by witnesses that Zimmerman was wearing at the time

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...artin-shooting

You know what I think happened? Zimmerman grabbed the kid, and was trying to restrain him for the police (hence the screaming for help by Trayvon, as a stranger grabbed him), he took out his gun from his waist holster to threaten the kid, and it accidentally went off and shot the kid dead on in the chest (yeah, they say it was a front entry wound).

Mortitian also says zero evidence of fight or wounds on Trayvon's body.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

There are 2 or 3 published 9-11 tapes of callers reporting a man down on the ground, screaming for help, and then a shot that stills the screams The scuffle (if it lasted during the screaming) is at least 45 (correction, 41) seconds long, not including the time it was happening before people telephoned it in as it was happening. ABC News must have a source, as they have the most information available from the PD (the tapes, etc)

Here's the tape of the 41 seconds of screaming for help, with the gunshot stilling the screams. Warning if you have triggers or PTSD. It's graphic. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hj4RHJ0taoc

Here's the MSMBC color video of Zimmerman at the police station in handcuffs. You can clearly see, in a couple places, as Zimmerman has very close hair, there is no 2-inch skull laceration on the top of his head as alleged by Daily Caller. And these clothes have zero blood or grass on them (either front of shirt or back) and they are the clothes described by witnesses that Zimmerman was wearing at the time

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...artin-shooting

You know what I think happened? Zimmerman grabbed the kid, and was trying to restrain him for the police (hence the screaming for help by Trayvon, as a stranger grabbed him), he took out his gun from his waist holster to threaten the kid, and it accidentally went off and shot the kid dead on in the chest (yeah, they say it was a front entry wound).

Mortitian also says zero evidence of fight or wounds on Trayvon's body.

I disagree with you about the video. I think right at :41 seconds on the video, you can see the mark on the back of his head. Before I even read the dailycaller article and saw the still picture, I saw it on the video.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Danzig

rupe, i appreciate your detailed assessment but all of the above is not something new to me. however, it seems you completely ignored the part where i said 'he was NOT a member of neighborhood watch. had he been, perhaps he'd have known they don't want their members carrying guns. i guess you also ignored the part where the 911 operator told zimmerman not to confront trayvon.
i've also seen where there is no indication of there having been a scuffle, which belies your post.

Anyone can keep a close eye on their neighborhood and act as a neighborhood watch. Some neighborhoods have official neighborhood watches that are very well organized and people actually work shifts. In other neighborhoods, it may be less organized where people just do it when they have time.

I have no idea what the arrangement was in this case. It seems that Zimmerman had been doing it for a while. I think they said he had called police around 45 times over the last year. I would assume that he did the informal neighborhood watch with the blessing of his neighbors. We will see if any evidence comes out that his neighbors didn't want him doing this and they saw him as being overzealous and/or harassing people.

I would agree with you that neighborhood watch programs do not encourage vigilantism. They want people to call the police. They don't want people carrying guns and chasing people.

But all that being said, if the verbal altercation was over and Zimmerman was attacked as he was walking back to his car, I don't think there is much of a case against him.

You are the first person that I've heard say that there was no indication of a scuffle. If that is what the evidence shows (that there was no scuffle), then they should have a good case against Zimmerman.

[Riot]

We will see if any evidence comes out that his neighbors didn't want him doing this and they saw him as being overzealous and/or harassing people.

It already has, Rupert - see below. There are also plenty of neighbor stories that say Zimmerman was helpful and concerned about security and safety of the neighborhood.

George Zimmerman Neighbors Complained About Aggressive Tactics Before Trayvon Martin Killing

A volunteer community watch captain who shot an unarmed Florida teenager to death last month had been the subject of complaints by neighbors in his gated community for aggressive tactics, a homeowner said.

George Zimmerman has not been charged in the Feb. 26 shooting of Trayvon Martin, 17, who was walking home from a convenience store in Sanford, Fla., near Orlando. Zimmerman, who patrolled the Retreat at Twin Lakes development in his own car, had been called aggressive in earlier complaints to the local police and the homeowner's association, according to a homeowner who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

At an emergency homeowner’s association meeting on March 1, “one man was escorted out because he openly expressed his frustration because he had previously contacted the Sanford Police Department about Zimmerman approaching him and even coming to his home,” the resident wrote in an email to HuffPost. “It was also made known that there had been several complaints about George Zimmerman and his tactics" in his neighborhood watch captain role.

The meeting was attended by Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee, the detective assigned to the investigation and an unnamed member of the city council, according to the homeowner’s association newsletter. The chief couldn't immediately be reached for comment about the complaints. A member of the homeowner’s association board, who asked not to be quoted by name, said she “hadn’t heard about any complaints” about Zimmerman. Zimmerman's phone number is disconnected and efforts to reach him have been unsuccessful.

Con't

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1340358.html

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Anyone can keep a close eye on their neighborhood and act as a neighborhood watch. Some neighborhoods have official neighborhood watches that are very well organized and people actually work shifts. In other neighborhoods, it may be less organized where people just do it when they have time.

I have no idea what the arrangement was in this case. It seems that Zimmerman had been doing it for a while. I think they said he had called police around 45 times over the last year. I would assume that he did the informal neighborhood watch with the blessing of his neighbors. We will see if any evidence comes out that his neighbors didn't want him doing this and they saw him as being overzealous and/or harassing people.

I would agree with you that neighborhood watch programs do not encourage vigilantism. They want people to call the police. They don't want people carrying guns and chasing people.

But all that being said, if the verbal altercation was over and Zimmerman was attacked as he was walking back to his car, I don't think there is much of a case against him.

You are the first person that I've heard say that there was no indication of a scuffle. If that is what the evidence shows (that there was no scuffle), then they should have a good case against Zimmerman.

the funeral director said there was no sign on martins body to indicate a fight of any kind.

and i've also heard the claim that zimmerman used the word 'coon' as a racial epithet on the 911 call. one of his friends went on t.v. and tried to say no, he said 'goon'. yeah, ok. i'd imagine it's based on that comment that many are saying it was racially motivated.