When "Neighborhood Watch" Gets Out of Hand

[Riot]

Imagine a lanky white teenager was walking in a strange neighborhood at night. He's a good kid—according to one of his teachers "an A and B student who majored in cheerfulness"—although he's not above making the foolish teenaged mistake of getting caught with an empty baggie with marijuana residue inside it. But he has no criminal record. The worst anyone can say about him is that he smokes some pot, which puts him in the company of nearly half of all American high school students, something more than half of all American adults would legalize. But he's a good student and has no criminal record. In other words, he's a pretty typical teenager. A good kid.

Then one night this typical teenager is walking alone in a strange neighborhood, munching on some junk food and talking on his cell phone. And a black man who steps out of an SUV and starts following him. A black man who outweighs the teen by nearly a hundred pounds. A black man who steps out of an SUV, pulls up a hoodie, and starts following the teen.

The kid tells his friend on the cell phone that someone is following him. He tells her because he doesn't understand why someone is following him. He's nervous. He's just walking along, munching on junk food, and someone has started following him.

Finally, he decides to confront the guy. Even though he is nervous, he probably can't imagine that simply walking in a strange neighborhood would lead to someone shooting him dead. He's standing up for himself, but the thought of violence, the thought of gunfire, doesn't even enter his head. But when he confronts the big guy who had been following him, and asks why he has been following him, the big guy pulls a gun. It happens so suddenly, the teen probably barely has time to realize that something serious is now happening. This was just an innocent evening stroll, a big guy had started following him for no reason, and now his life is being threatened. This was just an innocent evening stroll, and now he's looking at a gun. Pointed at him. By a big guy who had been following him for no reason. A big guy who now shoots him dead.

Three witnesses later report having heard the boy's desperate cry for help. The police report (pdf) says he was found face down, with his hands under him. He was carrying no weapon. He was carrying no drugs. He was carrying the type of junk food typical teenagers carry.

In our reversal of races scenario, the story then is that a lanky white teen was walking in a strange neighborhood, snacking on junk food, talking to a friend on his cell phone, when a large black man stepped out of an SUV, started following him, frightened him, and shot him dead. Imagine the reaction.

Now suppose we find out that the teen's killer had a history of race-based paranoia. Suppose we find out that the teen's killer's neighbors had complained of his aggressive behavior. Suppose we find out that the teen's killer had once been arrested for "resisting arrest with violence and battery on an officer." Suppose we find out that the teen's killer that night had ignored a police dispatcher who had told him to stop following the teen.

What would have been the official response?

Would a police officer have tried to coach a witness to change her story? Would the local state attorney and police chief have overruled even the lead homicide investigator, who recommended that the killer be charged with manslaughter? Would the police have neglected even to give the killer a routine drug and alcohol test? Would the police have neglected to contact whomever the kid was talking to on the phone just moments before he was shot, ignored the witnesses who contradicted the killer's story, and later reported that the killer had been bloodied in a confrontation with the dead teen, even though the real time reports suggested no such thing, and even though the police surveillance video shows the killer had no discernible wounds or discomfort, and even though the funeral director who prepared the dead teen's body for burial says there was no evidence he had been in a fight?

If Trayvon Martin had been white and George Zimmerman black, this would not have become a national story. If they had reported it at all, the media would have praised Martin for trying to stand his ground before a dangerous violent thug.

It defies credulity to think they would be dismissing the killer's behavior, making despicable excuses such as blaming the kid's clothing, or if— unthinkable in this reversing-the-races scenario—there had been no criminal charges filed against the killer, dismissing the story altogether. The questions here don't even need answers. The questions answer themselves.

Had Trayvon Martin been white and George Zimmerman black, Zimmerman would be headed for death row. Media would be hailing Martin as a hero. A martyr who had stood his ground against a dangerous predator. They would be saying that it's too bad Martin hadn't somehow fought back against Zimmerman, and that if he had somehow succeeded in fighting a man so much larger than him, it would have been justifiable if he had left Zimmerman dead.

There is no polite way to explain what has happened. There is no polite way to explain the reflexive defensive rationalizations by some of the media and their fans.

This was a racist killing with a racist cover-up and the right wing's reaction has been virulently and viciously racist. To understand the depth of the right wing's racist depravity, all it takes is to consider the very different reaction to this horror had the races of the victim and his killer been reversed.

Welcome to post-racial America.

..

What special relationship did Zimmerman (father and son) have with the Sanford PD? I believe this is going to come out if a thorough investigation is actually done.

Consider:

1. Z is on record as having called 911 dozens of times. I'd think the local cops would have him down on their PIA list, unless he's got special access.

2. The dispatcher SPECIFICALLY STATED "WE DON'T WANT YOU TO DO THAT" (follow TM). I'd think they would be a little pissed at him in the station house, but...

3. His "perp walk" arriving at the police station is a joke. Except for the handcuffs, it almost looks like he's taking a joyride. Check the body language real carefully; it almost looks to me like the cops are somewhat apologetic, with an attitude like "sorry for the inconvenience, bud, this shouldn't take long." He's so badly hurt and shook up that he has no trouble getting out of the back seat unassisted, despite the cuffs.

Sorry, not buying his bs.


Ocala Mike

[GPK]

Just curious, but why is Zimmerman even being called white? He is as white as I am black.

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

..

I'm not going to tear down that essay piece by piece, which would be easy to do. I will just respond to one thing in there. I would simply ask the author the same question that I asked you. My question to the author would be this: Would Zimmerman have followed Trayvon had Trayvon been Latino? If the answer is no, then my question would be, "How do you know that?"

If your answer is either that you think Zimmerman would have followed Trayvon even if Trayvon had been Latino, or if you you don't know whether Zimmerman would have followed a Latino Trayvon, then how can you say Zimmerman was racist?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

I'm not going to tear down that essay piece by piece, which would be easy to do. I will just respond to one thing in there. I would simply ask the author the same question that I asked you. My question to the author would be this: Would Zimmerman have followed Trayvon had Trayvon been Latino? If the answer is no, then my question would be, "How do you know that?"

If your answer is either that you think Zimmerman would have followed Trayvon even if Trayvon had been Latino, or if you you don't know whether Zimmerman would have followed a Latino Trayvon, then how can you say Zimmerman was racist?

Because the only thing Zimmerman knew about Trayvon, when he telephoned the police about the kid being suspicious, was that he was male, and black. He wasn't doing anything. Pick the "suspicious" thing out of those facts. Must have been because a male was walking down the street! Gasp!

[Rupert Pupkin]

Originally Posted by Riot

Because the only thing Zimmerman knew about Trayvon, when he telephoned the police about the kid being suspicious, was that he was male, and black. He wasn't doing anything. Pick the "suspicious" thing out of those facts. Must have been because a male was walking down the street! Gasp!

The truth of the matter is we don't know whether Zimmerman would have called the police if Trayvon was Latino. If you think there is a chance that he would have, then you can't say that he only called because Trayvon was black.

I do agree with you that Trayvon being a male was probably a factor in Zimmerman calling the police. I doubt he would have been following the person or calling the police if it had been a 65 year old woman (of any race). Young and male is obviously going to be perceived by most people to be a bigger threat than old and female. I guess that makes people sexist and ageist. Is there a such word as ageist?

Have you ever seen a person who you thought was up to no good? I would find it extremely hard to believe that in your whole life, you never saw a person that you were either afraid of or thought was up to no good, even though the person wasn't doing anything. I know I have seen people that I thought were up to no good. It had nothing to do with their race. It was simply their body language. They hadn't committed a crime yet but their body language looked like they were waiting to do something. I'm sure I was dead wrong in some of the cases. But in some of the cases I know I was right because a couple of times the police arrested the person a short time later. You could say the person was doing nothing. That is true. I hadn't seen them commit a crime. They were either just standing there or walking down the street but there was something in their body language that made me suspicious. Some of the people were white, some were black, and some were Latino. Race wasn't the issue.

I live in Los Angeles and there are a lot of homeless people here. Some of them are really nice. Most of them are harmless. But some of them are paranoid schizophrenics and they can lash out at you at any time. You need to be somewhat careful and you need to keep your eyes open. You need to watch their body language and rely on your instincts. Even if you have great instincts, you're not going to be right every time. You could get attacked by a person who looks harmless. By the same token, a person who looks menacing may turn out to be no threat.

In a big city there is a lot of crime and you need to keep your eyes open or you are going to end up being a crime victim. The main thing I look at is body language. I will obviously also consider age and gender. I obviously usually don't get too worried if I see a 65 year old woman coming towards me or if I see a 70 year old man walking his dog.

As neighborhood watch captain, I'm sure Zimmerman watched people's body language. I think we all do.

By the way, not a single black person has come forward and said that they had a bad experience with Zimmerman. If he was such a racist, I would think there would be some history of racist behavior on his part. Instead we have seen the opposite. Several black people have come forward and said what a nice guy Zimmerman was and that he showed no signs of being prejudice.

[jms62]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Fair enough. I can appreciate your point of view. But let me ask you one question. This is just a hypothetical question. If you were on the jury and there was clear evidence that Trayvon and Zimmerman had some words such as the things we have read: Trayvon: "Why are you following me?" Zimmerman: What are you doing here?" Then the conversation was over. Zimmerman walks away and is heading back to his car. Trayvon attacks him from behind and knocks him to the ground.

If you believed that is what happened, how would you vote if you were on the jury? I'm only giving a hypothetical. I'm not saying that this was how the incident went down. I'm just asking you hypothetically if you knew for sure that this was what happened, how would you vote if you were on the jury?

I would vote the same because again the fact that he continued after being told not to shows that he was the agressor. Knowing he had a gun and knowing the stand your ground law in my mind he was trying to provoke an altercation.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by jms62

I would vote the same because again the fact that he continued after being told not to shows that he was the agressor. Knowing he had a gun and knowing the stand your ground law in my mind he was trying to provoke an altercation.

That's really the key point because the "stand your ground" law means exactly that - you don't have to flee an aggressor. But if you become the aggressor, the law no longer applies. In fact, if Mr. Martin was armed, he'd be protected by the stand your ground law if Zimmerman was first to take hostile action.

"Stand your ground" is an improvement over gun control that is too restrictive, but does NOT protect an aggressor. Zimmerman will lose his case if he thinks that the law will protect his actions. The 911 call documents that fact.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by GPK

Just curious, but why is Zimmerman even being called white? He is as white as I am black.

Because it fits the narrative. The narrative, and not the facts, is what it important.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Here is the police report right here. Trayvon is listed as 6"0 tall and 160 pounds. Zimmerman is listed as 5"9 but it does not tell his weight. I think we can make a pretty good educated guess as to what his weight is from the video. I would guess 175 pounds. What is the most he could possibly weigh? You have seen the video. Could he weigh 210 pounds? I would say there is no way, but even if he does, that would only make him 50 pounds heavier. It just shows you how many completely erroneous reports there are out there. Some in the media have claimed he weighed 100 pounds more.

http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news...e-reports.html

Umm... so what? This is not a heavyweight bout. There is no expectation of "fair" matchup. The aggressor wanted to cause harm to the victim - whichever way that washes out pending the facts and trial.

Take it to the extremes. If a 300 lb defensive lineman for the NFL was attacked by a 100 lb. soaking wet crazy person, the lineman would still be in his rights to shoot the other guy. He does not have to "accept" physical damage just because he is bigger and stronger. He need not be hurt at all at the other person's whim.

Originally Posted by GPK

Just curious, but why is Zimmerman even being called white? He is as white as I am black.

His father is white, and his mother is white, Peruvian by nationality. The broad class known as "Hispanic" is not a racial classification.


Ocala Mike

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Ocala Mike

His father is white, and his mother is white, Peruvian by nationality. The broad class known as "Hispanic" is not a racial classification.


Ocala Mike

Oh yes it is - it is treated that way. I remember forms I had to fill out while attending public school where they had an acronym "N.O.I.S.E" for racial classification.

The letters corresponded to (these are NOT my terms, so if they are not in vogue now - this is a time capsule)

N - Negroid
O - Oriental
I - Indian
S - Spanish descent (corresponding to Hispanic or South American)
E - Eurasian

The real answer is it's just more convenient to now refer to Mr. Zimmerman as white. Who's going to riot otherwise?

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

Have you ever seen a person who you thought was up to no good? I would find it extremely hard to believe that in your whole life, you never saw a person that you were either afraid of or thought was up to no good, even though the person wasn't doing anything. I know I have seen people that I thought were up to no good.

Deep stuff.

The main difference, naturally, is that the rest of us don't go around killing people because they look suspicious.

We call the police, if we're so inclined, and let them do their job. We don't stalk them, continue to do so against the urging of a 911 dispatcher, follow them between houses, and shoot them dead for reacting to our stalking while carrying lethal candy and iced tea.

But hey, he looked suspicious, so it probably worked out for the best. Minor details.

Originally Posted by joeydb

this is a time capsule

We've come a long way, baby. Those designations are, indeed, archaic.
The 2010 US Census instructions clearly state that "Hispanic" is not a racial designation today.

I do agree that the racial aspects of this case are murky and are being exploited by the usual suspects. More concerning is the vigilante behavior and stereotyping, in general.


Ocala Mike

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Ocala Mike

We've come a long way, baby. Those designations are, indeed, archaic.
The 2010 US Census instructions clearly state that "Hispanic" is not a racial designation today.

I do agree that the racial aspects of this case are murky and are being exploited by the usual suspects. More concerning is the vigilante behavior and stereotyping, in general.


Ocala Mike

I'm glad things changed. That N.O.I.S.E acronym was ridiculous. They didn't even let you not fill it out. If you left it blank, they filled it out "for" you.

If it wasn't in acronym form, I probably wouldn't have remembered it.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

Deep stuff.

The main difference, naturally, is that the rest of us don't go around killing people because they look suspicious.

We call the police, if we're so inclined, and let them do their job. We don't stalk them, continue to do so against the urging of a 911 dispatcher, follow them between houses, and shoot them dead for reacting to our stalking while carrying lethal candy and iced tea.

But hey, he looked suspicious, so it probably worked out for the best. Minor details.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

That's really the key point because the "stand your ground" law means exactly that - you don't have to flee an aggressor.

Unfortunately for Trayvon, his aggressor carried a Glock 9mm with the safety off and a round in the chamber, and shot him dead.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rupert Pupkin

The truth of the matter is we don't know whether Zimmerman would have called the police if Trayvon was Latino. If you think there is a chance that he would have, then you can't say that he only called because Trayvon was black.

Why? Would Zimmerman have called if the kid was white? Asian? Irish? That proves nothing.

The point is Zimmerman saw a black kid walking, and called in to the police that the kid was suspicious, "on drugs", "I don't know what his deal is", "he has has hand in his waistband", etc.

All Zimmerman knew about the kid was that he was black and male. Period. There was no suspicious activity.

Again, walking while black - no longer a crime in the US, with the elimination of sunset laws.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this one, Rupert. We won't change each other's mind about the possible racial aspects of the murderer or the police department until the investigation is complete and we have all the information.

MSNBC reporting (from their website) FBI federal hate crime law investigation begins:

SANFORD, Fla. -- FBI agents on Monday were questioning potential witnesses in the Trayvon Martin shooting, confirming to NBC News that the agency had begun a "parallel investigation" that focuses on whether the teen's civil rights were violated.

Agents are seeking information on George Zimmerman's background and whether he was racially motivated when he pursued Martin after calling a 911 police dispatcher about his presence in the community, an FBI official told NBC.

The agents were at the Retreat at Twin Lakes, where Martin was shot dead by Zimmerman, the gated community's neighborhood watch captain.

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Riot

Unfortunately for Trayvon, his aggressor carried a Glock 9mm with the safety off and a round in the chamber, and shot him dead.

That might very well be how the case is decided once all the evidence is in. And he should be sentenced accordingly if he is guilty.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by joeydb

That might very well be how the case is decided once all the evidence is in. And he should be sentenced accordingly if he is guilty.

That's what I tried to explain to her 10 pages ago - good luck