George Zimmerman and Don West Speak on the Trayvon Martin incident. — 38 Comments

  1. Lots that never hit the airwaves or papers.That’s not surprising, it’s the norm. Back a couple years a cop in Milwaukee was fired for killing an Unarmed mentally challenged individual who was sleeping in the park. Anyway that’s how the media played it. I never understood why the union fought for him, why he never went to jail. Two weeks ago I talked to a friend who is friends with the MPD LEOs and learned the truth, a much different story. Off his meds and harassing several groups he was warned to leave several times. After the last warning as the officer turned to leave the “victim” jumped him, tried to get his gun, finally got the baton and beat the officer badly. Then got shot. None of the ever made it out of the newsrooms. Don’t you just love the left stream media?

  2. Even faced with undisputed facts (a rare thing these days), some still cannot add 2 + 2 and get 4.

  3. I’m glad Mr. Zimmerman prevailed and was found innocent, but that doesn’t mean he acted wisely. Wisdom would have been to avoid the situation that led to him having to use his handgun which he had plenty of opportunity (and advice from a 911 operator) to do. Then afterwards, he went and freely spoke with the police without the presence of an attorney. Mas, I don’t know why you would invite this guy to one of your classes except to be an example of everything I understand you teach us not to do.

  4. Marc-Wi,

    Many folks are just awakening to the truth of how they have been misled by our liberal media. It’s not so much what they tell the public in their reporting, rather the info they know to be true, that they conceal from the public.

    Trayvon Martin/Zimmerman incident is one. The Ferguson, Mo. incident another. Baltimore seven comes to mind. We could go on and on.

    Last week, the media attempted to persecute an off-duty LAPD officer who fired two shots during what they called an “argument with a group of teenagers for walking across his lawn”. They showed a video of the officer standing up as if confronting the teenagers and firing his weapon. The narrative collapsed after Fox News showed a longer version of the video showing the officer being knock to the ground by a full speed tackle that would have made an NFL linebacker proud, prior to regaining his feet and firing the shots as a warning to the still advancing crowd. Two extra seconds of the video (that all the news outlets had) made all the difference in the perception of what had transpired. What was the intent of the outlets that edited out what led up to the officers actions?

    The same can be said for how the reporting is done when the Dept. of Justice conducts a “Civil Rights” investigation of a police department such as the one conducted last year in Ferguson, Mo. Most folks don’t know why these cities never appeal the findings of these investigations. First, it costs money to appeal in court. Second, all cities depend on, to one degree or another, federal law enforcement grants. Third, by agreeing to the findings of the DOJ and the remedies they demand, the federal government will pay for the implementation of all recommended remedies. More training and equipment at no cost to the city. Why fight it?

    The politicians then can claim a victory against the mean old racist police (even though they could not find any guilt at all to assign to the officer involved in the incident that brought them to town) , against an adversary that had nothing to gain by fighting back (the city of Ferguson). And, of course the media knows this also, but would never inform the public that this too, is a sham.

    This is called indoctrination when its done in other countries.

  5. I’d love to read a transcript, but listening to a podcast just won’t work with bad hearing and a semi-invalid to watch over. How about the written version, Mas?

  6. I pray daily for our besieged police-and in my town I bought them all lunch at the local pizza store-we have a small police department so I could afford it! It is so important to show support on a local level-I can not imagine the emotions they go through during this anti-police time! Thank you for the podcast Mass-appreciated!

  7. Will no one ever mention that Trayvon was high on sizurp, a combination of cough syrup and Skittles, which makes one mean and violent. Trayvon talked about it on his website/facepage

  8. Had I found myself being beaten by Travon Martin, and I had a gun like Zimmerman, they would have found my weapon with the slide locked back over an empty magazine.

    However, no incident ever takes place in a vacuum. There are always multiple actions that take place that lead up to the ultimate event. Take away or modify any one of those events and the final result either does not happen or happens differently.

    Zimmerman didn’t have to take the path that led to shooting Martin.

    I’ve encountered (I see one particular guy almost every week) the occasional private security guard type that desperately wanted to be a police officer but for some reason, shortcoming or deficiency could not make the grade. Zimmerman strikes me as one of those types.

  9. Many people, including a few here, might just change their minds about George Zimmerman if they took a couple of hours to click the link here, and hear his side of it “from the horse’s mouth.”

  10. Listened to it all and I agree with Mas here.

    Not sure if it was brought up before, but I came across this and found it relevant:

    Jonathan Keith Molina
    El Paso Police Department, Texas

    End of Watch: Friday, October 5, 2012

    Patrolman Jonathan Molina succumbed to injuries sustained 10 days earlier when he was beaten by a juvenile on Trowbridge Drive, near Route 54.

    Patrolman Molina was off duty when he observed three juveniles vandalize his car. He confronted the three and identified himself as a police officer. As he spoke to them one of the juveniles punched him, knocking him to the ground. The teen continued to to beat him even after knocking him unconscious. Patrolman Molina suffered a fractured skull, internal head injuries, and facial fractures.

    All three juveniles fled the scene but were apprehended. The subject who had beaten him was originally charged with assaulting a public servant but was later charged with capital murder of a peace officer following Patrolman Molina’s death. He was subsequently sentenced to 50 years in prison.”

  11. Mas,
    Your point about changing minds about George Z. was right on target.

    It also refreshed my memory of the instruction provided at your Mag 40 Class regarding the aftermath of a shooting. George Z. certainly appears to have lived through that HELL you described in your class.

    If you have the opportunity, please let George Z. and his attorney know how much I appreciated the sharing of his story. And, thank you for making it available.

  12. I see that the meme that George Zimmerman “might not be the murderer portrayed by the mainstream media but still showed very poor judgment” is alive and well. Some people, apparently without even bothering to listen to the podcast, have referenced it here.

    Perhaps so. However, this meme fails to allow for the fact that any “poor judgment” or “mistakes” made by Zimmerman are only apparent with the benefit of hindsight. Given what Zimmerman knew, at the time the events are occurring, it is clear that he thought that he was taking reasonable actions to be a good citizen and help law enforcement.

    This meme largely assumes that Zimmerman got out of his vehicle and ran Martin down and confronted him. There is no (Zero) physical evidence that this actually occurred. Rather, the physical evidence indicates that Martin (no doubt feeling “disrespected” by the surveillance of Zimmerman) doubled back and confronted Zimmerman. The evidence also points to Martin as being the aggressor in initiating the fight.

    I, for one, have difficulty assigning a lot of blame to Zimmerman given that his actions (while being – perhaps – tactically questionable) were (nevertheless) taken in good faith.

  13. ….but….but….but, ….TN_MAN, you’re passing on an opportunity to feel morally superior to someone who actually made an attempt to stand up and try and help ameliorate the rise in crime in his neighborhood??? How dare you refuse to tear down those who try to help those innocent neighbors around them?

    You must not be one of those bench sitters, who never gets in the game, who doesn’t pass on a chance to criticize the play of those who did.

    I applaud you.

  14. Mas,
    Thanks for this. I forwarded the link of this Podarms broadcast to folks at work.

    Truth works wonders. The trick is getting it out to people…..

  15. I am frequently bemused that there are (apparently) millions of people who still believe in the “Mainstream Media Narrative” of the Zimmerman-Martin shooting.
    As everyone knows, there were two (2) narratives put forward as follows:

    1) Media Narrative – Innocent Trayvon Martin was walking home minding his own business when evil, racist George Zimmerman spots him and decides that this is his chance to “carve a notch” onto the handle of his deadly assault pistol. The evil Zimmerman calls the police mainly to establish an alibi. The police dispatcher warns Zimmerman not to pursue the suspect but Zimmerman ignores this. Zimmerman takes off after Martin the second he ends the call to the police. Martin desperately tries to evade the racist madman on his track but Zimmerman is too fast and runs the little boy down. Martin, in fear of his life, tries to defend himself with the only weapons he has (his fists) but it is of no avail because Zimmerman has his deadly pistol ready. Zimmerman coldly shoots down the unarmed boy and then shows a few minor bruises to the police. He knows that Florida’s outrageous “Stand-Your-Ground” laws are his ticket to getting away with the murder. The heartbroken family and the courageous truth-tellers of the national media try their best to get “Justice for Trayvon”. However, in the end, Zimmerman’s evil plan bears fruit and, in a despicable perversion of justice, he is acquitted of all charges.

    2) The Zimmerman Narrative – George Zimmerman is on his way to the store when he spots a guy walking around looking at the houses. It is dark and raining so this strikes Zimmerman as suspicious behavior especially since several break-ins have occurred in the area. He calls the police to make a report. He describes the suspect to the police and, at first, tries to keep him in sight. However, upon being told that this was not necessary, he stops and loses sight of the suspect. He ends the call and stands around waiting for the police to arrive. Martin, upset at being under observation, approaches Zimmerman. After a quick, angry exchange of words, he sucker-punches Zimmerman, pins him down, and tries to pound his head into the pavement. In self-defense, Zimmerman is forced to shoot him. Zimmerman then goes on to fully cooperate with the police and is (ultimately) cleared of wrong-doing by a jury of his peers.

    I know that many people have a mathematical “blind spot” but let us consider the math of the media narrative. Martin is an athletic 17-year-old male who has played a fair amount of football. He was 5’-11” tall and weighed 158 lbs. at the time of death (autopsy report). This computes to a Body Mass Index (BMI) of 22 which is in the normal, healthy range.

    Zimmerman is listed as 5’-8” and 200 lbs. at the time by the police. This gives a BMI of just over 30 (Borderline Obese). Zimmerman was 28 years old at the time.

    Zimmerman’s call to the police was recorded. The timeline can be found here:

    From the time that Zimmerman reports that the suspect is “running” until the time he ends the call is just over 2 minutes. While the exact time of the first blow is unknown, it must have been just over 2 minutes after Zimmerman ended the call.

    So, if the media narrative is correct, Zimmerman gave Martin a “head start” of just over 2 minutes. Nevertheless, he was able to “run the suspect down” and “start the confrontation” within about 2 minutes more. This means that this borderline-obese, 28-year-old male must have been just about twice as fast as the athletic, 17-year old teenager (with the ideal BMI).

    The fastest humans can run at about 15 mph. (this gives a 4-Minute mile). Martin would not have been this fast but, given his youth and condition, he could probably do a 6-Minute mile which would be 10 mph. Therefore, for the media narrative to be true, George Zimmerman must be the fastest human on the planet. He must be a man capable of doing at least 20 mph on foot because that is what it would take to run down Trayvon Martin within about 2-minutes and assuming a 2-minute head-start and assuming that Martin was really trying to get away.

    Wow! If GZ can do 20 mph when overweight, just imagine what he could do if he got into shape! We need to have GZ on the USA Track and Field Team ASAP!

    So, let me ask this question: Given the mathematics required for the MSM narrative to be true, how can ANYONE believe it? At least, anyone with more than a handful of braincells that are operating!

  16. TN_MAN,

    You’re math appears to be indisputable, but your thinking is flawed. The unknown factor has been ignored.

    Has there ever been a definitive study conducted on the physical prowess of white Hispanics? Could it be that the combination of minority/majority DNA in this instance resulted in superhuman physical abilities in much the same manner as the much touted superhuman mental capabilities of Barack Obama, who eulogized Trayvon Martin as the son he never had?

  17. re; my previous post,

    Some will see this as a bigoted observation of mixed race people. I am just drawing attention to how the liberal media seemed to never acknowledge the 50% white European heritage of their kindred spirit Barack Obama, yet obsessed on that part of George Zimmerman’s background (early reporting would have him 100% white European). In their minds, being white was equated with automatic bigotry in his actions, especially being in the south. When revealed that George was half Hispanic, the term white Hispanic was coined (translated, his bigoted half must have been a factor).

    Who’s the bigot?

  18. Mas,

    I have a question that I did not hear addressed during the podcast.

    As I have pointed out above, Martin had some real advantages vis-à-vis any kind of foot race against Zimmerman.

    1) He was younger (age 17 versus age 28 for Zimmerman)
    2) He was fitter (BMI of 22 versus 30+ for Zimmerman)
    3) He was taller (5’-11” versus 5’-8” for Zimmerman – which translates to longer legs and a longer stride)

    Plus, according to the time-line data, Martin would have had more than a 2 minute head-start in the race. This means that it would have been effectively impossible for Zimmerman to run down Martin if he truly wanted to get away.

    Yet, the prosecution’s case is entirely predicated on Zimmerman being the aggressor and having run down Martin and threatened him thereby initiating the conflict.

    It seems to me that the defense team could have brought out this point. They could have called experts to the stand (say, experts in the track and field sports, sports medicine, etc.) who could have explained all this to the jury.

    This would show the jury that Martin had the power to avoid the conflict (if he wished) by simply running away. It therefore follows that Martin must have been a willing participant in the conflict that did occur.

    This would have established very strong reasonable doubt about Zimmerman being the aggressor. It would have undercut both the 2nd Degree Murder and manslaughter charges. Finally, it would have gone a long way toward bolstering Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense.

    I did not follow the entire trial. So, I don’t know if this approach was taken (in some fashion) or not. However, given the lack of comment on this point, I rather think that it was not taken.

    Can you tell me, did the defense team ever consider taking this approach to undercut the prosecution’s case?

  19. Very informative presentation, thank you. However, if George got into verbal argument, during his first encounter with Apperson, I have to question George’s judgment. This assumes the argument was of some duration and George could not simply leave.

    I realize in his second encounter with Apperson, George was not aware of who was following him, but was rightly concerned. But making a U turn to get to officer he had seen earlier seems like bad move. Last thing I would want is to be along side of car of person intending to do me harm. But more importantly making a U turn could appear I was seeking confrontation not trying to avoid confrontation. Some turns around the block and on to seeking police would have been a better move and might have denied Apperson a shot at George.

  20. Here is a Copy of our email to our Congressman, as to why the “Son of ObamaCare” put froward by the RINO Republicans in the House, would be as just bad as the first ObamaCare, if not even Worse!

    Don’t Let the “ObamaCare Fix” Threaten OUR Second Amendment Gun Rights!

    We are contacting YOU, OUR Elected Federal Congressional Legislator, because we have some grave concerns with the “Son of ObamaCare” legislation that is being considered on Capitol Hill right now.

    Specifically, from a Second Amendment perspective, Gun Owners of America has three chief problems with the Ryan draft, which is currently unnumbered.

    FIRST: The Ryan bill must be amended to prohibit the ATF or any government agency from sending millions of names to NICS — because they have PTSD, ADHD, Alzheimer’s, “anxiety,” or because a guardian processes their payments.

    This is exactly what happened with Social Security Disability Insurance recipients under the Obama administration.

    And, because of the Veterans Disarmament Act of 2007, there is no reason why, under “Son of ObamaCare,” the ATF could not troll the federal health database, or the expanded Medicaid rolls, or the lists of recipients of new entitlement funds, and send millions of names to the NICS gun ban list.

    Given that “Son of ObamaCare” mandates that Americans maintain “continuous” insurance — or suffer a 30% government-mandated penalty — it is doubly important that these lists not be used to take our guns away.

    SECOND: Under a Harry Reid amendment [42 U.S.C. 300gg-17(c)(4)] — inserted as a result of GOA’s urging — an insurance company under ObamaCare is prohibited from denying insurance to gun owners and is prohibited from charging higher rates for gun owners.

    Had they been allowed to do this, “gun insurance” could have quickly become so prohibitively expensive that the Second Amendment would have been “insured” out of existence.

    But (c)(4) is only applicable to plans “issued pursuant to or in accordance with (ObamaCare).” Most of the insurance plans purchased under the “Son of ObamaCare” bill will not fall within that category.

    So now that “Son of ObamaCare” repeals many of the restrictions on insurance companies, it is critical that those companies continue to be prohibited from discriminating against gun owners, and that prohibition needs to be unequivocal.

    Just as an insurance company cannot discriminate on the basis of race, it needs to be made clear that it cannot discriminate against Americans exercising their constitutionally-protected rights to keep and bear arms.

    THIRD: Under a Harry Reid amendment — [42 U.S.C. 300gg-17(c)(1), (2), (3), and (5)] — inserted as a result of GOA’s urging — doctors cannot be required to ask their patients about gun ownership and enter that information into a federal health database.

    Obviously, such a requirement would amount to a de facto national gun registry. But the language prohibits the creation of federal gun registries.

    Under “Son of ObamaCare,” it is certainly theoretically possible for an administration to require queries concerning gun ownership as a condition, for example, of being eligible for tax credits.

    Anyone who thinks this is far-fetched should consider that one of Barack Obama’s 23 anti-gun executive actions was specifically aimed at trying to pressure doctors to ask about gun ownership and to enter this information into an ATF-accessible federal health database.

    It needs to be made clear that doctors cannot be forced, or perhaps even allowed, to demand gun information and create such a registry.

    The bottom line is that many conservatives have serious problems with “Son of ObamaCare” because it keeps virtually all of the essential elements of the original: the mandate (now a 30% lapsed-insurance penalty), the subsidies (now a “refundable” tax credit that sends out checks to people with no tax liability), and the entitlements (now a “grandfathered” Medicaid expansion).

    Paul Edwards

  21. Uh… not all of us who believe GZ was foolish believe that he left his truck intending to run down and confront TM. Or, indeed, that he did confront TM. Or that his use of deadly self-defense was unjustified.

    As I’ve said before, I believe that GZ did not intend to confront TM and that it is highly likely that TM started the confrontation and struck the first blow. Once that occurred, I believe that the evidence available to us shows that GZ’s use of deadly self-defense was unjustified. (And before anyone brings it up, I also do not believe that there is any evidence that GZ acted out of overt racism.) I also believe that GZ had the _legal_right_ to watch TM and, indeed, to get out of his truck and go in the direction that TM went to continue watching.

    Nonetheless, I believe that he was foolish and that if he really believed that the police dispatcher’s question about the direction that TM went was justification to get out of his truck and go looking for him — not for confrontation, but surveillance — that I have a bridge I’d like to sell to him. The idea that he was some kind of hero defending other peoples’ property might make more sense if he had seen TM do anything illegal before leaving his truck. But he hadn’t.

    That does not justify TM’s assault of GZ, there’s no two ways about that, but neither does it mean that GZ wasn’t foolish or that his foolishness did not set up the sad circumstances under which this happened.

  22. Typo: My sentence, “I believe that the evidence available to us shows that GZ’s use of deadly self-defense was unjustified.” should have read “I believe that the evidence available to us shows that GZ’s use of deadly self-defense was justified.” Sorry about that, 2 letters make a lot of difference.

  23. Dennis,

    I’m thankful for what you said. Most of the readers of this blog know why there is such antipathy for European Americans on the Left. I just want to briefly touch on the subject here in case some readers haven’t been informed yet.

    Yes, it’s true that in the 1600s Mighty Whitey sailed over here from Europe and began to conquer the natives and enslave some Africans. This kind of conquering is not unique to whites, but has been going on since the beginning. It is unfortunate that those white people were greedy, but some white people actually ended slavery, and built a fine country where all kinds of people enjoy America’s blessings today.

    The reason the Left keeps on saying how racist whites are is because they are practicing the ancient tactic of DIVIDE AND CONQUER. Karl Marx taught that in order to have a revolution, and overthrow the rich, the poor must be made to hate the rich. That worked in Russia in 1917. Pitting the poor against the rich in America doesn’t work so well, because there really aren’t any poor people in America, and those who are low-income believe they can someday at least make it into the middle class. So, the Left wants to divide the races, the sexes, the generations, the have-a-lots and the have-somes, and they want as many of us as possible dependent on the government. They do not want us to depend on our families, our friends, our civic organizations. They want an all-powerful government telling us what to do, and making life sweet for the ruling class. In order to bring this about, everything except the government must me made weak.

    So, remember, the Left says Mighty Whitey is bad because of the DIVIDE AND CONQUER tactic, not because light brown-skinned people are any more evil than medium brown or dark brown-skinned people. Hey, look at that! We are all the same color. We are all brown, just different shades.

    Don’t fall for the Left’s propaganda. If the people who are called “minorities” in America really felt as though they were being badly treated here, they would move to another country. The fact that so many people want to live here shows it’s not that bad. In fact, while our living standards are slowly declining, life is still very good here.

  24. I agree Dennis, not to mention Obama’s mother’s family were slave owners. That being the case, if he were a conservative running for office, his mothers family would of kept him from becoming president.

  25. TN_Man, if I recall correctly the defense did make the points you brought up. Since you didn’t follow the trial, it shows you were damn sharp to have thought of them on your own. Well done.

  26. @ Liberal Dave:

    No problem about the typo. We can just chalk it down to a “Freudian Slip”! 🙂

  27. The forgotten casualty in this whole nightmare of race based lynching is Bill Lee (anybody remember him?). Most folks don’t.

    Bill Lee was a man who had reached the pinnacle of his profession in his chosen community. Through years of hard work, continuing education,experience, and dedication, he reached the top of his chosen profession in the city he chose to work.

    All the success he achieved through this perseverance was suddenly snatched from him for making a decision based on his experience, education, and knowledge of his chosen profession. A decision that was later vindicated, proven to be correct, only after he had already been lynched. Hung in the tree of hate by those crusaders for race based prosecution, liberal progressives.

    Yes, a man who had done nothing wrong other than making a fact based, unbiased decision, a decision proven to be correct, was punished severely. Sacrificed on the altar of political correctness, thrown onto the pile of other casualties, with no regrets at all from those in the “progressive” lynch mob.

    After all, he was a white male. He has to be guilty of something of being destroyed.

  28. Liberal Dave,

    “Nonetheless, I believe that he was foolish and that if he really believed that the police dispatcher’s question about the direction that TM went was justification to get out of his truck and go looking for him — not for confrontation, but surveillance — that I have a bridge I’d like to sell to him.”

    If his motivation was not surveillance but was, rather, confrontation as you seem to imply, why did he call the police to report what he perceived as the suspicious behavior of Martin? If a personal confrontation was what he desired, why involve the police before the fact? Was this a cold, calculated move on his part to provided cover for the confrontation he already had planned?

    What mental processes do you attribute to Zimmerman that would make you assume that the dispatcher’s question as to Martin’s “present location” was translated in George’s mind to “Goody, goody, now I have permission to hunt him down and have a one on one confrontation with him!!!”? In order to believe this supposition, one would have to search for another motivation on Zimmerman’s part. Of course, from a liberal mindset, this motivation would be his race based bigotry (he would never have done this if Trayvon had been white).

    Is it not bigotry to automatically expect a certain behavior of another, based on one’s personal biases?

    I’m reminded of the old saying, ” The one why complains the loudest about the smell of a fart, is usually the guilty party.”

    Still friends.

    P.S.- I need a bridge to cross one my creeks. What ya got? Do you deliver?

  29. A great many people like to focus on the motivations, actions and errors of George Zimmerman.

    However, few seem willing to focus on the motivations, actions and errors made by Trayvon Martin.

    Clearly, Martin’s first instinct was to run and avoid trouble. It was to adopt the advice given by the Wizard of Oz (and I quote):

    The Great and Powerful Wizard of Oz (Speaking to the Cowardly Lion):

    “As for you, my fine friend — you’re a victim of disorganized thinking. You are under the unfortunate delusion that simply because you run away from danger, you have no courage. You’re confusing courage with wisdom.”

    If Martin had continued with his first instinct, if he had followed the above words of wisdom, then he would likely be alive today.

    Instead, Martin chose confrontation instead of retreat. Why did he do that? In thinking back to when I was a 17-year old, I think that the reason was “Pride”. The pride of a young man.

    Remember, that Martin was on the phone, himself, with a girl that he knew. He (foolishly) discussed what was going on with her. Then he got to thinking about it and realized that, if the girl knows that he ran, then pretty soon all of his friends would know that he ran. It is hard for a young man to step into the role of the “Cowardly Lion”. A young man wants to be a “Brave Lion” instead.

    Martin probably got to thinking how much better it would be if he could tell the girl (and all his other friends) that he did not run away. It would sound a whole lot better if he could tell them that he faced down the “Cracker” that dared to follow him and gave him a beating. Ah, how much more “macho” that sounds to a 17-year old male!

    So, pride caused him to turn around and confront George Zimmerman. Pride caused him to launch an attack, knock Zimmerman to the ground and then proceed to mount him “MMA Style” and start pounding away.

    However, the cost of his pride was a 9mm bullet to the heart and a controversy that split a Nation.

    It reminds me of another quote. This one from the Bible:

    “Proverbs 16:18 – Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.”

    This whole case was driven by emotion rather than reason. The emotion of pride caused the tragedy in the first place. Then more emotion and racism caused it to balloon into a media and legal feeding frenzy.

    Maybe one day, the human race will start using their heads for something other than a hat rack!

  30. Dennis, you completely misread what I said. Re-read. I do not believe (or imply) that GZ intended to confront TM.

  31. Mas,

    I am very disappointed at you for this. Your are promoting a stalker who gunned down a unarmed minor? Hmmm makes me wonder….

  32. Liberal Dave,

    I read, and reread your post several times. Yes, you spent many words to carry the reader in the direction that you believe that George Zimmerman’s actions were legal and justified as they played out, yet you question his thinking when he decided to get out of the truck and determine the direction Martin was going, after the dispatcher asked that question.

    “…..if he really believed that the police dispatcher’s question about the direction that TM went was justification to get out of his truck and go looking for him — not for confrontation, but surveillance — that I have a bridge I’d like to sell to him.”

    Were you implying that he was stupid? Foolish, as you stated? Had a more sinister motive, as many of his critics have implied?

    Going with “foolish” as you stated, then from whose perspective? From that of someone reading a report of an incident, long after the dust has settled? Or, from the perspective of a neighborhood watch “Captain” who has been taught they are “the eyes and ears” of the police, for their community, who has spotted someone they see as suspicious? As “the eyes and ears of the police”, his response to the question from the police dispatcher (who he had called) as to Martin’s direction of travel, getting out of his vehicle and attempting to determine the answer to that question, would not be deemed inappropriate.

    Lest we forget, it was Martin’s paranoia and subsequent confrontation and attack on George Zimmerman that led to him (Zimmerman) having to use deadly force to defend his life.

    Was your post intended to lead the reader to believe that Zimmerman’s thought processes were, at best, “foolish”, to the point you could get him to fall for a non-existent “bridge” for sale, or rather, that he had a more sinister reason for leaving the safety of his truck?

  33. One small detail mostly left out of the narratives: seems a few days before this incident, the “esteemed” thugpunk had been apprehended… and found to have on his person a few “items” that were identified as having been stolen from some of the houses in that same neighbourhood over the weeks prior. Further, after his well deserved demise, it seems such housebreakings in that neighbourhood…. suddenly ceased. Coincidence? Not hardly.

    Seems there had been some reports hinting at a rough description of the housebreaker operating in that area. Also seems the now departed thugpunk fit those descriptions uncannily well. I also vaguely recall having read something said by that Neighbourhood Watch captain that indicated his familiarity with the previous reports…. perhaps THAT information may have caused his sighting of the relevant thugpunk to pique GZ’s interest or concern… thus prompting him to take some action. I did not read the entire trial transcript, but I don’t recall much of this information being included.

    Something else left out of the narrative here: seems the handgun holstered in GZ’s waistband was not brought into the scuffle until the thugpunk discovered it, as he sat astride his victim as he happily pounded said victim’s head into the concrete. As the assailant realised just what he had discovered, he shifted his focus onto gaining control of that handgun. It was that fight, between the two for control of the handgun, that led proximally to its dicsharge. I DO well remember the forensic evidence presented at trial indicating the gun was discharged within a very few inches of the assailant’s chest, and that the muzzle was in contact with the assailant’s shirt. Further, I seem to recall powder residue being found on the hand of the assailant, an indicator he had that hand in VERY close proximity to the muzzle… the most likely explaination being that hand, of the assailant, was grasping the gun near the muzzle. This is NOT what one would expect to find had the victim, lying beneath the assailant, simply pulled the gun and fired to rid him of his obnoxious burden. The forensic evidence presented at trial matched perfectly GZ’s narrative given LE multiple times in the period following this incident.

    A few details left out of the story by the mass media, bent upon manufactureing a race war out of nothing of the sort.

    Bottom line: Trayvon Martin is dead because his pappy failed to teach him to respect other people and their stuff.

  34. Keith Mercer,

    Not sure if you’re serious or pulling Mas’ leg. In case you are serious, Trayvon was shot while brutally attacking a man. A man who simply contributed to his neighborhood as the elected Neighborhood Watch. I’m not here to discuss the incident nor trial. I am a friend of George’s and wish to make it known he is no stalker. He’s a good man raised in a good family. God help the next good guy that the anti gun establishment and race baiter’s decide to make their next poster boy. They are some truly hateful people. Willing to destroy and manipulate anything to forward their cause. Please don’t be so quick to accept the narrative they control as truth.

  35. Sorry for the late reply. We’ve been moving across town and I’ve not had much time to keep up.

    @Dennis: You said, “Was your post intended to lead the reader to believe that Zimmerman’s thought processes were, at best, “foolish”, to the point you could get him to fall for a non-existent “bridge” for sale, or rather, that he had a more sinister reason for leaving the safety of his truck?”

    I don’t know how may ways I can say it: I do not believe, or mean to imply, that GZ had any intention whatsoever to confront TM or, as you put it, had any other sinister reason for getting out of his truck and looking for TM. I do believe that he unnecessarily put himself at risk for such a confrontation and was, thus, foolish.

  36. I must admit that I didn’t follow the media coverage during the trial. I do remember the President’s comments and felt they were absurd. In the podcast Don and George talked about the media coverage and how outrageous it was. To get a sense of what I had missed I looked up what I could find of Nancy Grace’s coverage on YouTube. UNBELIEVABLE!!! She really despised Mr. Taaffe. I can’t believe her unbridled condescending personality! I know it was an emotional trial but thank God the jury stuck to the facts. Also the the defense team that had such great discipline.