Should Zimmerman be convicted to avoid race riots?

[Jim]

 
"If you hate blacks, then you will side with GZ," ??
 
Right..... Evidence and truth has nothing to do with this.   "If you hate blacks, then you will side with GZ, ".   What a totally ignorant and Racist thing to say.   Why don't you just wait until the evidence is presented and choose your side then?  Or is that too fair for you?   Or perhaps it doesn't favor Trayvon enough for you because of your White Guilt?
 
Me?  I'll wait for all the evidence.  I'll try to remain American about this. You know, "Innocent until proven guilty."  Not the other way around that far too many of you have become too accustomed to.
 
 
On another note: Kinda weird that this topic has received 1,417 views so far..  Thats likely from all the "guests" following their Google searches and ending up here.
 

[1965hawks]

 

After the dispatcher said, "we don't need you to do that", Zimmerman replied, "OK", then told the dispatcher that Martin got away and discussed for some time with the dispatcher where he would meet police.  Later when interviewed, Zimmerman told investigators he was returning to his vehicle when Martin approached him from his left rear and decked him.

http://www.motherjones.com/documents/326700-full-transcript-zimmerman

Why would Zimmerman be returning to his vehicle in the first place if the police dispatcher had specifically told him, "We (the police) don't need you to do that (follow Martin)?" By arguing that Martin was returning to his vehicle, you're admitting that Zimmerman disregarded the advice of the dispatcher and began following Martin, even leaving his vehicle to stalked Martin on foot for a considerable distance and time before the shooting occurred. And why should we accept what Zimmerman said without question? He knows he can say anything, because Martin is dead. Remember?

And, yes, Zimmerman spoke at length with the dispatcher. But at no time did he tell Zimmerman to follow Martin. In fact, when the dispatcher advised Zimmerman that it wasn't necessary for him to follow Martin, Zimmerman's response was, "OK," indicating that Zimmerman clearly understood the dispatcher. Isn't that right, chuckles?

http://www.motherjones.com/documents/326700-full-transcript-zimmerman

[1965hawks]

So?

For all you know Zimmerman was following at a distance and Treyvon laid in wait to ambush him!

DUMB2DOOFAS,

Why would Zimmerman be following Martin in the first place (even a distance) after the dispatcher specifically told him, "We (meaning the police) don't need you to do that?" And, in addition to that, after the dispatcher specifically told Zimmerman that it wasn't necessary for him to follow Martin, Zimmerman's response was, "OK," indicating that he clearly understood the dispatcher's advise. Right?

[JigSaw]

(( On another note: Kinda weird that this topic has received 1,417 views so far..   ))
 
 
What weird Jim is you don't know your own board very well.  This thread is three months old.  Free willy found this thread and posted on it.  Those who use the last post feature saw it at the top of the current page an then stared posting to it.
 
 
 
No body is saying GZ is guilty.  We are just having a debate/discussion on if/and/why. There are doubts as always is in any case such as this one. 
 
So Jim, don't get your shorts in a twist.  It's just a discussion that will have NO EFFECT on the trial...

[JigSaw]

Correction >>
 
This thread is one year and three months old.  Started >> 3-26-2012
 
 

[Jim]

 
 
"We don't need you to do that"   was not an order, it was information. 
 
At no time did the dispatcher say "Do Not Leave your vehicle."   Zimmerman should have stayed in his car, however, unless his Neighborhood Watch had rules or codes that had to be followed, then he was under no legal obligation to remain in his car.   He was stupid for getting out, but stupidity is not on trial.

[Jim]

What weird Jim is you don't know your own board very well.
 
Actually, I know this board very well.  Down to the coding of each module.   When I saw the view count I in turn checked the original posting date.  How else could so many guests have viewed the topic?   Something like that would take a while.  All at once, or even over the course of one day would cause serious lag for the rest of us.  However, its not the top viewed topic. Internetto, from 2010 has over 6,000 views.
 
You can sort by Views too, ya know....
 
 
 
 

[1965hawks]

"We don't need you to do that"   was not an order, it was information. 

At no time did the dispatcher say "Do Not Leave your vehicle."

Jivin' Jim,

Please cut the crap: The dispatcher told Zimmerman specifically that he did not need to follow Zimmerman. That was not "information," it was an implied order, and Zimmerman understood it clearly.

Dispatcher: Are you following him?

Zimmerman: Yeah.

Dispatcher: OK, need don't need you to do that.

Zimmerman: OK.
http://www.motherjones.com/documents/326700-full-transcript-zimmerman

And since the dispatcher had already told Zimmerman that it wasn't necessary for him to follow Martin in the first place, it's pointless to argue that the dispatcher didn't tell Martin not to leave his vehicle.

[chuck_curtis]

Why would Zimmerman be returning to his vehicle in the first place if the police dispatcher had specifically told him, "We (the police) don't need you to do that (follow Martin)?"

Erm, because he was already following Martin when the dispatcher said that?

[JigSaw]

(( However, its not the top viewed topic. Internetto, from 2010 has over 6,000 views. ))


That's interesting Jim.  If Internetto has over 6,000 views, then why is it, anchoragedan with only 1,479 views so "kinda weird"??


FYI ~ I too know the coding for this web site...

[D2D]

The moment Trayvon had Zimmerman on the ground and helpless while continuing the attack Zimmerman became justified in using deadly force no matter what preceded it!

[Jim]

Please cut the crap: The dispatcher told Zimmerman specifically that he did not need to follow Zimmerman. That was not "information," it was an implied order, and Zimmerman understood it clearly.

 
Cops, or dispatchers never give "implied" orders.  They are specific so that there is no doubt what they want you to do.  I worked with police for a year.  So don't sit there and try to tell me how they act.  They are specific.   
 
I was on neighborhood watch in the 80s. We worked with the police. We had our own Base Radio operator who stayed in contact with us as well as the Police.  When we saw something suspicious, like teens out at 3am dodging the alleys, we called it in.  We never got out of the car.  In our case the police ordered us to stay in our cars because we were under their control.   Zimmerman should never have left his car either.  But he was not obligated to.  He was not working through the department.
 
When the dispatcher said "we don't need you to leave your car" she was saying that neither she, nor the department, would be responsible if you do.   She was saying 'we cannot guarantee your safety.'  She was saying 'if you take matters into your own hands then you suffer the consequences', She was saying 'you could make matters worse.'
 
But she was not ordering him to stay in his car.   She can't do that.