Home > Critical Thinking, Current Affairs, Musings, Reason, Skepticism > Why George Zimmerman Is Guilty of Murdering Trayvon Martin

Why George Zimmerman Is Guilty of Murdering Trayvon Martin

Inspite of the best efforts of CONservative white morons to forget the Trayvon Martin shooting, express skepticism about bits of evidence or justify his murder- new pieces of information keep on blowing holes in their fabrications. But first let us talk about something that most commentators, on both sides, seem to be ignoring- Overall Context.

Imagine that you had to describe the whole story, as we know it today, to an extra-terrestrial.

It begins with a guy who failed to become a cop, George Zimmerman (GZ), with lots of time on his hands enthusiastically tracking and reporting suspicious people walking in and around the gated community he lived in. But how did GZ know who was “suspicious”? Well.. he profiled people based on their race, since most of his previous 911 calls were about suspicious people are black or dark brown.

On the day that GZ killed Travyon Martin (TM), we can be sure that GZ noticed a tall black young man dressed in a hoodie. His (GZs) first 911 call about the “suspicious intruder” (TM) occurred prior to any contact with TM. However his call clearly mentions that GZ thought that the black guy was ‘upto no good or on drugs’.

“This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.” and “He looks black”

Here is the problem. How did GZ know that TM was black? Let me remind you that this incident occurred on a rainy evening in Florida and TM was wearing a hoodie. I find this hard to explain unless GZ was stalking TM- remember stalking not watching. Furthermore how did he know that TM was ‘upto no good or on drugs’? While we could say that somebody staggering on the street outside a pub is probably drunk or somebody smelling of weed has probably smoked it- it is hard to make that assessment under low light conditions from a distance. In my opinion, there is no doubt that GZ did profile TM based on his clothes and possibly the color of his hands- or even more disturbingly GZ was stalking TM for some time.

This brings us to the next part of the interaction- namely, TM noticing that he was being stalked by a Hispanic guy. Once gain, it is clear from the conversation that TM had with his girlfriend that he was being stalked for more than a few minutes. The question is- Why was GZ stalking TM?

If GZ wanted to ‘prevent crimes’, he could have just walked or driven upto TM and asked him if he was lost and looking for any address. Remember that GZ had a gun, access to a car and cellphone. The mere act of asking TM without stalking him for many minutes would have been far easier to defend if things had gone wrong.

This brings us to the whole issue of GZs behavior and mindset. Why was he so interested in joining law enforcement? Was it the money, job security, status or something else? Since his father was a reasonably well-known judge and GM was gainfully employed, it hard to make the case that he wanted to join law enforcement for money or basic status. It is therefore likely that GZs interest in law enforcement was based on non-monetary consideration such as the power to abuse and kill others. It is also clear that he had a history of overreaction which had cost him a job or two.

Now let us turn to the short encounter between GZ and TM, which led to GZ shooting TM dead. We know from multiple phone calls that the actual encounter lasted less than 2 minutes. So what information can you obtain about someone else in less than a minute before the shouting and wrestling started? Think about it- how much information can you possibly exchange with a guy you have never met within a minute, and would you believe it anyway?

As far as TM was concerned- he was stalked and approached by a Hispanic guy with a poorly hidden gun. No uniform, no ID, no nothing.. just a Hispanic guy with a poorly hidden gun. How would you react if you were in TMs shoes and hoodie and were stalked and then approached, in an unfamiliar neighborhood, by Hispanic man with a poorly hidden gun?

In case you are wondering about why his gun was likely poorly hidden, read the news reports which briefly mention how GZ usually carried his gun- in a holster on his waist wearing an open jacket. In any case, there was a struggle which ended in GZ shooting TM dead. Some white morons talk about how GZ was supposedly badly injured. Apart from the now famous post-arrest video 35-40 minutes after the incident, is it not possible that some of the blood on GZ was not his own?

Since there are no independent witnesses to the entire 2 minute confrontation, we do not have the answer to some very important questions such as- Did GZ take out his gun before the scuffle with TM began? Was the scuffle primarily over control of the gun? What words were exchanged between GZ and TM before the scuffle began? Since GZ is both the only witness to the entire event and also the accused- his testimony is effectively worthless.

Then there is the troubling issue of why State Attorney Norm Wolfinger got out of his bed, drove to police station to overrule a detective’s recommendation that the shooter, GZ, be charged with manslaughter. Why did the State Attorney take the trouble to do that?

Comments?

  1. AndrewV
    April 2, 2012 at 3:03 pm

    I think you are “reaching” right now. Anyway a couple of things:

    NBC Launches Internal Investigation over Altered Zimmerman Call
    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/03/31/NBC-Fanning-Flames?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

    Also
    http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2012/03/31/MSNBC-Admits-Zimmerman-Head-Injury

    So whatever. Make of it what you will.


    The very idea that GZ did not profile TM is ridiculous. Racism against blacks is an essential component of white identity in the USA. Even non-whites who aspire to be white (GZ) drink that kool aid.

    • AndrewV
      April 4, 2012 at 3:37 pm

      Was GZ really racist? Something that appears to disrupt the narrative:

      Apparently GZ took up the cause of a homeless black man in the past.

      “The beating of the black homeless man Sherman Ware on December 4, 2010 by the son of a Sanford police officer”.

      Apparently, the sister of said homeless black man is one Tonetta Foster:

      “who has been denouncing Zimmerman from megaphones at the hate rallies targeting him”.

      http://nicholasstixuncensored.blogspot.ca/2012/04/relative-of-george-zimmerman-george.html

    • April 5, 2012 at 2:13 pm

      So far, none of the so-called “evidence” against Zimmerman has stood up to scrutiny and Martin has been shown to be a violent, criminal thug.

      It’s not murder.

      The only thing murdered was the truth, thanks to media liberals, who should stand trial for inciting violence.

  2. Rum
    April 2, 2012 at 3:54 pm

    The States AG over-ruled the prosecution because his office would have had to carry it out and then explain in a civil suit why they had done so.
    TM was not cornered in any sense. He had already escaped from GZ by running and GZ was headed back to his vehicle. GZs injuries are not in doubt for those who have read the actual reports from the EMTs and his Doc the next day.
    GZ on the ground had no way to escape and blows to the head are potentially lethal. Details of GZs history by and large could not be presented a jury whereas all of TMs gangster twitter BS and hiistory of fighting would be fair game.
    It is your career,; go for it.

  3. Matt Strictland
    April 2, 2012 at 4:36 pm

    “This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.” and “He looks black”

    You missed the middle part as did NBC apparently

    ZIMMERMAN: This guy looks like he’s up to no good, [begin ellipsis] or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.

    911 DISPATCHER: Okay, is this guy, is he white, black, or Hispanic? [end ellipsis]

    ZIMMERMAN: He looks black.

    That a rather large difference there. As for the question at hand I think a hot headed little wannabe thug ran into a hot tempered wannabe cop, words were exchanged, possibly blows. Trayvon being better in a fight got the drop on George who than shot him.

    Given that killing someone in say a parking lot of super easy even without a weapon (just bash head into pulp on abundant hard stuff ) and the younger kid was bigger and fitter, its entirely possibly it was a legit shoot. Disparity of force and all that.

    It was probably avoidable by both parties, neither person here is exactly cool headed. Who knows, I might be wrong.

    I will say this though, press coverage here is atrocious. Its more dishonest, disingenuous, biased and crappy that even our POS press corp is famed for.

    This isn’t a hate crime, its not White on Black and its not 1968. Its a lot muddier and whatever comes of it, its no a message for White Guilt or Gun Law Reform either. Heck Treyvon is no poster child for martyrdom either.

    This shoot is its own thing and deserves and accurate narrative if we are wasting time with it.

  4. soren
    April 2, 2012 at 6:04 pm

    This is the 2nd time this blog has royally fucked up the narrative…

    “””
    “This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.” and “He looks black”
    ‘””

    WTF is this shit? He was specifically asked to identify the guy’s race.

  5. Matt Strictland
    April 2, 2012 at 7:19 pm

    The reason that Blacks and Hispanics are profiled is less racism but the fact that they commit most of the street crime in this country. Its common sense.

    It would also make little sense to look for a poor Black or Hispanic for mass fraud either. It happens but its a lot less likely than it being a better off White guy.

    I’ll also note that there are even times in which White are racially profiled too though these are rarer , go into an area where drugs are sold and you will get pulled over and your merde jacked up even if you were there to say visit a friend

    • Nestorius (A. Hourani)
      April 3, 2012 at 10:10 am

      What is the history of racial profiling?

  6. G.Bush
    April 3, 2012 at 5:44 am

    Reasonable doubt after reasonable doubt. You should be the DA for the defense attorney. The young buck was heading for the slab or a FLA prison cell one way or another.

  7. John
    April 3, 2012 at 9:08 am

    I just can’t read your tripe anymore after this post. Go join the race hustlers.

  8. April 3, 2012 at 12:31 pm

    you’re a little late to the game AD. perhaps you should have refrained from commenting.

    Do you think that I care about your beliefs? Seriously?

    My level of contempt for institutional racism, and people who try to justify it, is higher than people whose ancestors were slaves.

    • April 3, 2012 at 6:53 pm

      i don’t doubt that you don’t care about my beliefs. nobody else cares about your beliefs either, but you continue to write. what’s your point?

  9. Nick
    April 3, 2012 at 1:26 pm

    Of course Hispanics aspire to be white – what would you expect? Whites have created everything of value in this country and most of the world. Do you want them to emulate blacks in Africa?

  10. Matt Strictland
    April 3, 2012 at 5:38 pm

    Nestorius (A. Hourani) :
    What is the history of racial profiling?

    I don’t understand the relevance of the question.

    And to what AD said about institutional racism, I think he has a point. The inferiority of XYZ group may be true, may not be true in some objective sense but it doesn’t matter and people would be happier if they would just admit that in anything much larger than a small tribe power is truth and the strong (this can mean smart here) serve the weak. There is no need for moral justification at all, just do it and be done with it. Just liek the joker our host is fond of quoting

    I know why we don’t (fear of blowback and the need for markets for commerce mostly) and probably shouldn’t choose this path but its the smart or at least the honest one.

    • Nestorius (A. Hourani)
      April 3, 2012 at 10:27 pm

      When did racial profiling start?
      Is it a continuous phenomenon?

      • Matt Strictland
        April 4, 2012 at 12:43 am

        I have no idea. I suspect it started with policing any kind of city with a mixed ethnic population probably on an informal basis. This includes say a city where certain crimes are associated with certain groups, Irish do X Italians do Y all that. If x happened usually you can assume it was an Irish guy and so on.

        Its really common sense though , despite no one wanting to admit it, in the current US young Black and Hispanic males commit almost all the serious crime save quasi legal fraud.

        FBI stats back me up on this one …

      • Nestorius (A. Hourani)
        April 4, 2012 at 6:17 am

        “I have no idea.”

        Well then, I have to repeat the question: When did racial profiling start?

  11. AndrewV
    April 3, 2012 at 7:25 pm

    “The very idea that GZ did not profile TM is ridiculous. Racism against blacks is an essential component of white identity in the USA. Even non-whites who aspire to be white (GZ) drink that kool aid.”

    Having never lived in the USA for any appreciable amount of time I will take your word for it.

    However, based on my experience (twenty years in a couple of 3rd world countries), my conclusion is that with very few exceptions, everyone is a racist to some degree.

    And on the gripping hand, I am pretty sure I saw a hurt look on the face of one of the blacks youths that surrounded me one night in Washington DC over 30 years ago.

    As it turns out, they only wanted to look at what I was looking at, but made the mistake of crowding in on all sides of me. Did I overreact? As it turns out I did, as apparently they meant me no harm.

    How were they to know, that every incident I have ever had of people trying, and rather enthusiastically I might add, to kill me were all black?

  12. P Ray
    April 4, 2012 at 6:48 am

    Why is someone who is a failed policeman …
    thinks he can enforce the law by firearms, AND not let law enforcement do their job?
    A taser could have done the job. Or a shotgun with beanbag slugs.
    He was out for blood, he usurped police authority and CHOSE to enter/escalate a dangerous situation(against the advice of a police dispatcher) AND killed a man.
    Throw the book at him.

  13. w
    April 4, 2012 at 7:37 am

    i wonder what the racist mouth-breathers would say if an overzealous black “neighborhood watchman” got a young white boy killed over nothing.

    • Ted
      April 10, 2012 at 6:31 pm

      We already know what would happen. A couple of years ago on Long Island, a black homeowner shot into a crowd of young white teens that were on his lawn, yelling for his son to come out. There was a fight in school earlier that day, and these guys thought they would teach him a lesson. The black father, while standing on his own property, shot and killed one the kids. A jury found him guilty of murder. He was later pardoned by the NY governor.

  14. Matt Strictland
    April 4, 2012 at 10:39 am

    Nestorius (A. Hourani) :
    “I have no idea.”
    Well then, I have to repeat the question: When did racial profiling start?

    Use the Google and decide for yourself ….

  15. Matt Strictland
    April 4, 2012 at 10:54 am

    P Ray :
    Why is someone who is a failed policeman …
    thinks he can enforce the law by firearms, AND not let law enforcement do their job?
    A taser could have done the job. Or a shotgun with beanbag slugs.
    He was out for blood, he usurped police authority and CHOSE to enter/escalate a dangerous situation(against the advice of a police dispatcher) AND killed a man.
    Throw the book at him.

    When seconds counts the police are minutes away.

    Anyway so you understand the culture here, individuals in the US not only have a right but an obligation to help enforce the law. Its a long standing part of US jurisprudence dating from the founding of the country. Its not always good and granted we have a more professional police force than existed in those days but we have not changed that much since than nor should we. This is an important part of how the country operates and should not be changed.

    Thats why we still allow bounty hunters, armed security guards, and other forms of private armed defense including armed watch guys like Zimmerman

    As for other options, a taser might have been a better choice. They can be unpredictable as they often don’t work on young and aggressive people but granted it would be less lethal. I think folks ought to consider them where legal (they may not be legal or plausible to carry in Florida) A shotgun even with less lethal loads is not feasible.

    However legitimacy of the shoot aside, we aren’t talking about some decent kid mowed down by a thug but a the opposite. This was a bad kid, a violent illegal drug using thief and wannabe gangster. Someone who calls himself No Limit N*GG*R is making a statement and its not a good one.

    And yes he was young and maybe would have turned out OK but kid was on the slide down and doing the math (2/3 of Black kids end up in jail or prison) odds are he’d have been a bigger problem later

    The kid really was no loss to humanity as so far as I can tell.

    Now whether the shoot was legitimate or not, I have no idea, thats an entirely seperate question

    However the questions.

    #1 Legal ? I don’t know

    #2 Moral ? I don’t know

    #3 Avoidable? I don’t know.

    #4 Tough for the Kids Family ? Yes

    #5 #3 Good for the Community? Yes.

  16. MaMu1977
    April 6, 2012 at 5:30 pm

    I’ll say this one thing: everyone has the right to self-defense. *Everyone*. Even Cain, the first murderer was given license to defend himself. And I *love* the fact that a bunch of “race realists” are suddenly implying that they’d willingly submit to the imposition of a strange Hispanic man upon their personal space.

  17. jhbowden
    April 10, 2012 at 10:16 am

    “Why George Zimmerman Is Guilty of Murdering Trayvon Martin”

    Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter. A murder conviction would be tough to prove, since murder requires premeditation.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 97 other followers

%d bloggers like this: