Trayvon Martin 911 Call From Neighbors and Zimmerman (Audio)

Tlyons said:

Suspiciously ran away?

Click to expand...

Cheerfully skipped.

JSS2306 said:

Zimmerman wasn't trying to follow him around. According to his father, he was walking to get an address to update police on the whereabouts of the suspicious person who suspiciously ran away so they could follow up. It's that simple. Zimmerman never chased Trayvon down, when he was asked to stop following, he said OK. Remember at this time he had lost sight of Trayvon so he figured he was long gone. The timeline and distances prove this.

Zimmerman had no idea he was going to meet up with Trayvon minutes after he had already ran off.

Click to expand...

Zimmerman's 911 call he said I am going to follow him. The dispatcher said Police are on the way I don't think that is a good idea. Once he (Zimmerman) followed Martin it was no longer a defensive act it was an aggressive act.

Also if we apply the same Stand your Ground statute to Martin that we do to Zimmerman. Then Martin had every right to forcefully defend himself from an unknown assailant with a weapon.

Heres a hypothetical:
You are in your car in the rain. you see a suspicious hoodied 6 foot 2 person wandering around in the rain at night. in a gated community.

in this context is it really THAT inappropriate to say "what are you doing?" is that enough for someone to beat the shit out of you?

BooyaCS said:

Once he (Zimmerman) followed Martin it was no longer a defensive act it was an aggressive act.

Also if we apply the same Stand your Ground statute to Martin that we do to Zimmerman. Then Martin had every right to forcefully defend himself from an unknown assailant with a weapon.

Click to expand...

BUT, what if Zimmerman chooses to walk away and head back to his car? How is that an aggressive act? At that point he is retreating. Now Martin is the aggressor, no?

metalman213 said:

Heres a hypothetical:
You are in your car in the rain. you see a suspicious hoodied 6 foot 2 person wandering around in the rain at night. in a gated community.

in this context is it really THAT inappropriate to say "what are you doing?" is that enough for someone to beat the shit out of you?

Click to expand...

Really it depends on how you say it. Is it a " what you doin in my neighborhood boy?" kinda vibe? Or was it a do you need some help/are you lost kinda vibe?

We don't know.

When I'm 17 and someone is following me in a car and confronts me. I'm fuckin scared or I'm throwing down.

BooyaCS said:

Zimmerman's 911 call he said I am going to follow him. The dispatcher said Police are on the way I don't think that is a good idea. Once he (Zimmerman) followed Martin it was no longer a defensive act it was an aggressive act.

Also if we apply the same Stand your Ground statute to Martin that we do to Zimmerman. Then Martin had every right to forcefully defend himself from an unknown assailant with a weapon.

Click to expand...

Wrong Wrong Wrong.

Maximus said:

BUT, what if Zimmerman chooses to walk away and head back to his car? How is that an aggressive act? At that point he is retreating. Now Martin is the aggressor, no?

Click to expand...

The question comes in did Martin actually attack him? In the police surveillance video there is no signs of Zimmerman being attacked. Not only that what was his intent to follow on foot? He could have just as easily followed in his car.

The main issue is the initial act of following. That is where the problem starts. Sure he is in a gated community and you just called the police. Stay put and let the authorities handle it. I probably would have done the same thing. You approach and depending on how you act depends my next course of action. If you seem threatening I don't know why you are leaving are you going to your car to get a gun?

Also If Martin was on top of him and the only way to get him off would be to shoot where's the blood splatter? One would think that Zimmerman would have blood all over him. Same with a broken nose if you have a broken nose it is all swollen and blood everywhere.

Not everything is adding up.

Btw not passing judgement just saying we don't know enough on both sides to know what is right and what isn't. That is part of the problem.

BooyaCS said:

In the police surveillance video there is no signs of Zimmerman being attacked.

Click to expand...

Before we go any further, what video are you talking about?????

RonG said:

meh I would carry a gun too... as matter of fact i do carry every day.

Click to expand...

I carry a gun everyday too. I also have my concealed carry license. NOT ONCE would I think about following someone carrying that gun. That gun is solely for my protection if I am attacked or in danger. NOT IF I CAUSE MYSELF TO BE IN DANGER. That is the biggest issue of the whole case. Zimmerman by following Trayvon put himself in that danger. So you mean to tell me that Zimmerman followed him into some yard behind a house and gave up before Trayvon attacked him yards away from his car?

Sorry, but the shooting happened FAR away from Zimmerman's vehicle. Fucker needs to be tried with manslaughter at the least. Period.

Neither party is entirely innocent in this. They were both in the wrong at one point or another. They were both well within their rights at other points during this confrontation. This isn't cut and dry; black and white . We all need to understand that...

MattyFos said:

Neither party is entirely innocent in this. They were both in the wrong at one point or another. They were both well within their rights at other points during this confrontation. This isn't cut and dry; black and white . We all need to understand that...

Click to expand...

Both parties don't have to be innocent. That's not how the law works.

What truly matter is when one party made the decision to break the law. And I truly believe Zimmerman did that by TRESPASSING in private yards to follow Trayvon. When you see one person break the law, and you do so afterwards, you are no longer innocent.

This is the biggest point that has literally been missed by everyone here and in the media. Trayvon trespassed into some yards, Zimmerman followed. From that point on, he should have 0 legal defense.

The Man Called X said:

This is the biggest point that has literally been missed by everyone here and in the media. Trayvon trespassed into some yards, Zimmerman followed. From that point on, he should have 0 legal defense.

Click to expand...

That's a really interesting point. From everything I've read, the Stand Your Ground law only applies when the person is in no way breaking the law. But if Zimmerman was trespassing it would seem to mean he isn't protected.

Noonan said:

According to Trayvon's girlfriend, Zimmerman responded to Trayvon asking why he was following him by saying: "What are you doing here?"

You spent quite a few words rationalizing Zimmerman's actions. But here's the thing: Zimmerman, being an adult armed with a gun and having just called the cops, should have said "I'm part of a neighborhood watch group and I don't think you live here. Could you tell me where you are going?" That he didn't identify himself is a huge issue.

Instead, Zimmerman met an aggressive, defensive question from Trayvon with a vague, aggressive question. And a fight broke out that Zimmerman couldn't win without using a gun.

Click to expand...

Except, police don't usually leak every detail of a crime to let the people decide if someone is guilty is or not. In this country we have innocent until proven guilty. We don't know all the fact. We do have a lot of speculation. If this goes to court how do you know they would not find out some people are lying? How do you think you know everything that happened?

Be careful what you say and wish for you. You may be the next person who's guilty by default. Which to me should be a treasonous thing in this country. Never in my life have I seen someone not get the fair shake they are guaranteed by law to get in this country.

This is seriously such dangerous thinking in a potential criminal case. One sounds believable. I hope you're never on the receiving end of a juror or public opinion who feels like you do. Let it play out. Then if it's bullshit, it's bullshit. I'll be the first to stand up and fight it. Right now due process needs to be the rule.

Notorious said:

Be careful what you say and wish for you. You may be the next person who's guilty by default. Which to me should be a treasonous thing in this country. Never in my life have I seen someone not get the fair shake they are guaranteed by law to get in this country.

Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure people who share my view point only want Zimmerman to get his day in court. It's the lack of charges and a seemingly incompetent investigation that has people upset. You're sputtering nonsense about due process when all I'm asking is that Zimmerman face that process.