New Details in the Zimmerman-Martin Controversy

[poetsheart]

<p>

@kluge

And yet he did, didn’t he? All of the explanations about how Zimmerman’s conduct was not the conduct of a criminal sort of ignore the fact that this is a guy who shot and killed an unarmed 17 year old boy. I get that he felt he was the guy in the white hat all along - that’s really, really clear. But to me that’s all the more reason to throw the book at him.

</p>

<p>[Prosecutors:</a> Zimmerman did not use racial slur during 911 call about Trayvon Martin - The Washington Post](<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/affidavit-police-say-zimmerman-did-not-use-racial-slur-on-911-call-about-trayvon-martin/2012/04/13/gIQAt9rEFT_story.html?tid=pm_national_pop]Prosecutors:”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/affidavit-police-say-zimmerman-did-not-use-racial-slur-on-911-call-about-trayvon-martin/2012/04/13/gIQAt9rEFT_story.html?tid=pm_national_pop) Same Washington Post link as above.</p>

<p>

Nevertheless, Florida defense attorney Randy McClean said Zimmerman’s use of the word “punks” and his profanity in describing Martin may help Florida prosecutors make the case that Zimmerman was the aggressor.</p>

<p>“It begs the question of who was the most likely aggressor,” McClean said. “A teenager walking home … or the person who believes the teenager he is observing is a ‘f------ punk,’ an ‘ass----,’ and getting away with something.”

</p>

<p>Exactly the point I was trying to make in post #1051 when I wrote:

it strains credibility that someone who had already judged another a likely criminal, who had gone after that person with a loaded gun based on that assessment, who had confronted that person, and ultimately shot him dead, can then claimed he acted in self-defense. The self-described “victim,” the only one who was actually armed during the encounter, wants everyone to believe that he was justified in killing the person upon whom he’d all along been acting as judge and jury. It’s abundantly clear from his own words that Zimmerman had decided Travon Martin was guilty of being “up to no good,” of being “on drugs or something,” of being a “real suspicious guy”, and of being one of the “a$$holes” that “always get away.” Certainly, the fact that Trayvon decided to run, only seemed to reinforce GZ’s determination that this one not get away. After all, why would the boy be running away from the only man who clearly had his number, the only man who, in the immediate, had the power to make sure this one didn’t “get away”?

</p>

<p>The fact that Trayvon expressed fear while speaking with his girlfriend concerning the stranger who was following him; the fact that he ultimately did follow her advice to “run” (as George Zimmerman himself did note to police), seems to point to a young man who was not feeling confrontational that night. At one point during the audio of Zimmerman’s call to 911, he can be heard to be breathing rather heavily, and then admitting that he was following the teen. So, I’d guess it might be logical to surmise that he was at that point running after the fleeing Trayvon Martin. Running with a loaded gun after a fleeing teenaged boy. </p>

<p>The spot at which Trayvon was shot is reported to be very close to the Condo owned by his Father’s girlfriend—Trayvon’s apparent destination upon leaving the convenience store. Why would a boy fleeing in fear of the strange man who was pursuing him, a boy who was only a few yards away from safety, suddenly decide to turn and attack this stranger? This question has puzzled me for weeks. </p>

<p>I think the defense will need to credibly answer this question, and then they will still have to justify the boy’s killing, especially in light of all the evidence prosecution will bring to bear that contradicts their client’s accounting of his actions that night. And I have no doubt in my mind that the prosecution has contradicting evidence.</p>

<p>But, of course, lawyers who have actually practiced criminal law (Calmom and Kluge, for instance) would know better than I the points that are likely to be posed by the prosecution.</p>