• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Family of Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch seeks arrest

Status
Not open for further replies.
Foxy Fox 39 said:
This is actually the response I expected and I typed it up...But deleted it instead for that short paging post. I understood what you were trying to argue. But sometimes playing the fence (or in your words being "unbiased") means that you're being willfully ignorant about the situation.

For instance this hyperbolic statement: "Well, I wasn't alive during WWII so I really don't know what happened. Something else totally could have happened and Hitler could have been the (edit) good guy. Personally, I don't really know."

Yeah that statement is fine I guess (Rene Descartes) ...but its being ignorant of all information (or lack thereof) given.

You have extremely suspect circumstances. The cops obviously weren't doing due diligence. The guy randomly tailed and confronted an innocent (i.e. not up to mischief) minor after dispatch told him not to. The guy has a record for assaulting an officer. A 17 year old is dead. All he had on him was some snacks.

You put that info (and much more) and can come to a likely conclusion that the guy murdered a teenager in cold blood. Do we know for certain? No. Of course not, but its extremely likely due to the suspects past, the information given, the information withheld, and the actions of the police department.

To play the fence so haphazardly as you did is extremely disingenuous.
Click to expand...

You're suggesting we know the facts of this case as well as we do the facts surrounding WWII, and I'm the one being disingenuous. You can come to any premature, emotional conclusion you like. Feel free. I'll wait for the investigation to conclude and for the DA to make their own determination in whether to proceed or not. A trial is the only way we could potentially know for sure. Without one, we can't. To say otherwise is either a lie or simple ignorance.

The problem is my position is objectively correct. I'm not making claims about his guilt or innocence that require support, no trial or investigation will prove me wrong and I won't make a mistake. You and others like to judge this as fence sitting or disingenuous. It's a small minded criticism.
 
I know people like this. They may or may not be racist but they are definitely obsessed with control. They have territories which they consider to be their patrol area and they will make sure that everyone living in it has to answer to them. You cannot talk back or question them or they will go hyper on you.

KHarvey16 said:
You're suggesting we know the facts of this case as well as we do the facts surrounding WWII, and I'm the one being disingenuous. You can come to any premature, emotional conclusion you like. Feel free. I'll wait for the investigation to conclude and for the DA to make their own determination in whether to proceed or not. A trial is the only way we could potentially know for sure. Without one, we can't. To say otherwise is either a lie or simple ignorance.

The problem is my position is objectively correct. I'm not making claims about his guilt or innocence that require support, no trial or investigation will prove me wrong and I won't make a mistake. You and others like to judge this as fence sitting or disingenuous. It's a small minded criticism.
Click to expand...

a1ZES.gif


The least you could do is stop posting if you feel like everyone in this thread is out to get you. I think most people got the gist of what you are trying to say.
 
KHarvey16 said:
You're suggesting we know the facts of this case as well as we do the facts surrounding WWII, and I'm the one being disingenuous. You can come to any premature, emotional conclusion you like. Feel free. I'll wait for the investigation to conclude and for the DA to make their own determination in whether to proceed or not. A trial is the only way we could potentially know for sure. Without one, we can't. To say otherwise is either a lie or simple ignorance.

The problem is my position is objectively correct. I'm not making claims about his guilt or innocence that require support, no trial or investigation will prove me wrong and I won't make a mistake. You and others like to judge this as fence sitting or disingenuous. It's a small minded criticism.
Click to expand...

After everything that has come out about this guy, and the events surrounding the investigation, you are still making this claim. :-/
 
KHarvey16 said:
You're suggesting we know the facts of this case as well as we do the facts surrounding WWII, and I'm the one being disingenuous. You can come to any premature, emotional conclusion you like. Feel free. I'll wait for the investigation to conclude and for the DA to make their own determination in whether to proceed or not. A trial is the only way we could potentially know for sure. Without one, we can't. To say otherwise is either a lie or simple ignorance.
Click to expand...


no need to think about it, OJ was innocent...
 
marathonfool said:
Sanford Police Chief Billy Lee said there is no evidence to dispute self-appointed neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman's assertion that he shot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin out of self-defense.

"Until we can establish probable cause to dispute that, we don't have the grounds to arrest him," Lee said.
Click to expand...

This is the problem with Florida's dumb "make my day" law. Normally police have to have probable cause to arrest, but they don't have to have probable cause that the defendant's defense is untrue.

I don't see why him patrolling around, ignoring instructions, etc., isn't enough to give probable cause it's not true.
 
apana said:
I know people like this. They may or may not be racist but they are definitely obsessed with control. They have territories which they consider to be their patrol area and they will make sure that everyone living in it has to answer to them. You cannot talk back or question them or they will go hyper on you.
Click to expand...
This isn't me trying to be an Internet tough guy, but I would really like to encounter people like this in real life. Imagine me working my ass of to get a nice place and some arsehole trying to tell me where I can and can't go. The whole worlds gone mad/soft
 
I haven't been following Kharvey's posts, but if he wants to wait for a trial to determine guilt or innocence of murder, then that's perfectly fine and the correct stance.

It's a fact that he killed an unarmed 17 year old though. It's been presented that way from the start, with no dispute from anyone. We can certainly have an opinion on him based on that, and he sure as hell should have been arrested based on that.
 
DY_nasty said:
That's a pretty big generalization.

Either way, that whole department should be turned inside out.
Click to expand...

Every department should be. This is how police everywhere operate.

KHarvey16 said:
You're suggesting we know the facts of this case as well as we do the facts surrounding WWII, and I'm the one being disingenuous. You can come to any premature, emotional conclusion you like. Feel free. I'll wait for the investigation to conclude and for the DA to make their own determination in whether to proceed or not. A trial is the only way we could potentially know for sure. Without one, we can't. To say otherwise is either a lie or simple ignorance.
Click to expand...

Even though I have been critical of it (and will be here again), I am generally more in agreement with your wait-and-see approach than not. But one thing you have to keep in mind--and this is true of any criminal case--is that by the time the case reaches a district attorney, that person is not looking at objective information ("facts"). That attorney is looking at police advocacy of one sort or another (not infrequently including false or coerced confessions). In other words, there is already distortion present. So the wait-and-see approach is not necessarily the best approach for identifying empirical truths.
 
Big Baybee said:
After everything that has come out about this guy, and the events surrounding the investigation, you are still making this claim. :-/
Click to expand...

His posts are headache inducing. It's just pseudo intellectual drivel 'hidden' under the guise of objectivity.

You can tell who on GAF really has real world experience, and who lives every step in over-analysis.
 
Foxy Fox 39 said:
This is actually the response I expected and I typed it up...But deleted it instead for that short paging post. I understood what you were trying to argue. But sometimes playing the fence (or in your words being "unbiased") means that you're being willfully ignorant about the situation.

For instance this hyperbolic statement: "Well, I wasn't alive during WWII so I really don't know what happened. Something else totally could have happened and Hitler could have been the (edit) good guy. Personally, I don't really know."

Yeah that statement is fine I guess (Rene Descartes) ...but its being ignorant of all information (or lack thereof) given.

You have extremely suspect circumstances. The cops obviously weren't doing due diligence. The guy randomly tailed and confronted an innocent (i.e. not up to mischief) minor after dispatch told him not to. The guy has a record for assaulting an officer. A 17 year old is dead. All he had on him was some snacks.

You put that info (and much more) and can come to a likely conclusion that the guy murdered a teenager in cold blood. Do we know for certain? No. Of course not, but its extremely likely due to the suspects past, the information given, the information withheld, and the actions of the police department.

To play the fence so haphazardly as you did is extremely disingenuous.
Click to expand...

Don't forget the fact that the guy is about 100 lbs heavier than the kid, which Should play a part in the whole self defense claim.
 
Foxy Fox 39 said:
For instance this hyperbolic statement:
Click to expand...

KHarvey16 said:
You're suggesting we know the facts of this case as well as we do the facts surrounding WWII, and I'm the one being disingenuous.
Click to expand...

KHarvey16 said:
You can come to any premature, emotional conclusion you like. Feel free. I'll wait for the investigation to conclude and for the DA to make their own determination in whether to proceed or not. A trial is the only way we could potentially know for sure. Without one, we can't. To say otherwise is either a lie or simple ignorance.
Click to expand...

Foxy Fox 39 said:
Do we know for certain? No. Of course not, but its extremely likely due to the suspects past, the information given, the information withheld, and the actions of the police department.
Click to expand...

KHarvey16 said:
The problem is my position is objectively correct. I'm not making claims about his guilt or innocence that require support, no trial or investigation will prove me wrong and I won't make a mistake. You and others like to judge this as fence sitting or disingenuous. It's a small minded criticism.
Click to expand...

ಠ_ಠ

I think we both know at this point you just like debating.
 
Foxy Fox 39 said:
ಠ_ಠ

I think we both know at this point you just like debating.
Click to expand...

Than what relevance does the analogy have? I don't question the validity of the history of WWII as understood by historians, and no opinion or position I've shared contradicts that. Much like the hilarious post containing news articles you came up with earlier, you're reaching and missing. What is the point? I'm sorry my threshold for making a decision of this type is different than yours. I lose nothing by witholding that judgment and at worst have to put up with inane, ignorant, fallacious and logically inconsistent arguments from people far too willing to allow their emotions to run their thought processes.
 
Is it safe to say that if Zimmerman never approached Trayzon, Trayzon would have lived that night?

Are we certain that Zimmerman called the police and was told not to approach Trayzon?
 
KHarvey16 said:
Than what relevance does the analogy have? I don't question the validity of the history of WWII as understood by historians, and no opinion or position I've shared contradicts that. Much like the hilarious post containing news articles you came up with earlier, you're reaching and missing. What is the point? I'm sorry my threshold for making a decision of this type is different than yours. I lose nothing by witholding that judgment and at worst have to put up with inane, ignorant, fallacious and logically inconsistent arguments from people far too willing to allow their emotions to run their thought processes.
Click to expand...

I know right?!

The nerve of these biochemical machines to deviate from cold hard logic. UGH

I say a representative from neogaf should've been present at the shooting before anyone could reasonably display disgust at the unfolding story. Even then, how could we trust them when we know the brain interpolated part of what he/she saw?!
 
Big Baybee said:
Yes, police chief confirmed that.
Click to expand...

And Chief Lee had this to say:

In this case Mr. Zimmerman has made the statement of self defense. Until we can establish probable cause to dispute that, we don’t have the grounds to arrest him.
Click to expand...

Could Zimmerman be guilty of at least manslaughter? Because it sounds like the only way Trayzon was dying that night was because of actions set in motion by Zimmerman in direct opposition to what the police told him.
 
soundahfekz said:
I know right?!

The nerve of these biochemical machines to deviate from cold hard logic. UGH

I say a representative from neogaf should've been present at the shooting before anyone could reasonably display disgust at the unfolding story. Even then, how could we trust them when we know the brain interpolated part of what he/she saw?!
Click to expand...

LOL. Exactly.

KHarvey acts like he's on Law and Order or some shit. Oh he better withhold judgement or else this innocent guy might hang.
 
lol, not surprised KHarvey is in this thread. Dude likes to defend cops.

How can you claim self defense when you approach a stranger and then start fist fighting them? Fucking coward. How did this dude even get a license to carry a gun after being charged with battering an officer?
 
demigod said:
lol, not surprised KHarvey is in this thread. Dude likes to defend cops.

How can you claim self defense when you approach a stranger and then start fist fighting them? Fucking coward. How did this dude even get a license to carry a gun after being charged with battering an officer?
Click to expand...

"stranger" is in contention too. Shooter was the self-appointed neighborhood watchman of the vicitim's housing community. I'd be pretty surprised if he had never seen or heard of him before.
 
Aeonin said:
"stranger" is in contention too. Shooter was the self-appointed neighborhood watchman of the vicitim's housing community. I'd be pretty surprised if he had never seen or heard of him before.
Click to expand...

He was visiting relatives. It wouldn't be surprising.

I don't think this guy is as nefarious as some of you seem to imply, I just think he was an idiot, and probably juiced up at the idea of being some hero.
 
Kinitari said:
He was visiting relatives. It wouldn't be surprising.

I don't think this guy is as nefarious as some of you seem to imply, I just think he was an idiot, and probably juiced up at the idea of being some hero.
Click to expand...

How juiced up do you have to be to follow a kid down the block in the rain AFTER calling the police, hop out of your car, and engage in a physical confrontation which results in the kid being shot in the head? Based on what's been disclosed, I think you may be giving this guy too much credit.

His rage had precedence, he's attacked officers before and had complaints from other watch members about his aggression.
 
Yeah, that cop is full of shit. You don't need anything more than they have to have probable cause. You have probably cause for involuntary manslaughter if nothing else.

Self defense is just that, a legal defense. It is still a crime to murder somebody. An arrestable crime.

Also, you can't start a fight and then shoot somebody. You can start a fight, they pull out a gun, and then you shoot them. But you can't bring a gun, start a fight, lose that fight, and then shoot them.

I would charge him for murder 1. I bet I get a conviction, too.
 
SerArthurDayne said:
Yeah, that cop is full of shit. You don't need anything more than they have to have probable cause. You have probably cause for involuntary manslaughter if nothing else.

Self defense is just that, a legal defense. It is still a crime to murder somebody. An arrestable crime.

Also, you can't start a fight and then shoot somebody. You can start a fight, they pull out a gun, and then you shoot them. But you can't bring a gun, start a fight, lose that fight, and then shoot them.

I would charge him for murder 1. I bet I get a conviction, too.
Click to expand...

Florida law was changed so that if someone says self defense they have to have probable cause to believe it's not true in order to arrest.
 
CrazyDogg77 said:
Yeah he would have lived. And yes he did call the police and was told not to approach.
Click to expand...


He might have spilled the skittles, slipped on them, and crack his head open!

:(


You know, his brother probably feels so awful about this. I'm willing to bet he blames himself for asking him to get some skittles for him that night.
 
It sounds to me like a hateful racist with a gun noticed that there were no witnesses around and that he had a clear shot. He took it.
 
Dude Abides said:
Florida law was changed so that if someone says self defense they have to have probable cause to believe it's not true in order to arrest.
Click to expand...


That is the stupidest thing I have ever heard.

Regardless, it may be self defense to murder, I don't see how self defense is important to manslaughter. Obviously I'm not up on Florida law.

My other point stands. He brought the gun, he used the gun. That is not self defense. Probable cause problem solved.
 
SerArthurDayne said:
Yeah, that cop is full of shit. You don't need anything more than they have to have probable cause. You have probably cause for involuntary manslaughter if nothing else.

Self defense is just that, a legal defense. It is still a crime to murder somebody. An arrestable crime.

Also, you can't start a fight and then shoot somebody. You can start a fight, they pull out a gun, and then you shoot them. But you can't bring a gun, start a fight, lose that fight, and then shoot them.

I would charge him for murder 1. I bet I get a conviction, too.
Click to expand...

Even if they pull a gun you cant shoot if you started it
 
Kinitari said:
He was visiting relatives. It wouldn't be surprising.

I don't think this guy is as nefarious as some of you seem to imply, I just think he was an idiot, and probably juiced up at the idea of being some hero.
Click to expand...


I don't know. His expunged record shows a history of violence (against a police officer). His facebook profile was littered with images of police beating people down, other homeowners have accused him of being too aggressive, and then you have this incident.

Thinking about the police's statement, and how his record was "squeaky clean." It's obvious they had made up their mind before the 'investigation.' Since when does your record matter when being charged with a crime? Plenty of murderers have clean records.
 
quadriplegicjon said:
I don't know. His expunged record shows a history of violence (against a police officer). His facebook profile was littered with images of police beating people down, other homeowners have accused him of being too aggressive, and then you have this incident.

Thinking about the police's statement, and how his record was "squeaky clean." It's obvious they had made up their mind before the 'investigation.' Since when does your record matter when being charged with a crime? Plenty of murderers have clean records.
Click to expand...

That all falls in line with what I am assuming about him. He's going to school for criminology or something, he is head of neighborhood watch, he obviously is juiced up at the idea of being a cop and having the power associated with that. He saw an opportunity to be cop-like, some neighborhood savior saving it from nefarious criminal, and when he started getting his ass beat the fuck down - he decided that his gun would keep him from getting hurt anymore.
 
quadriplegicjon said:
I don't know. His expunged record shows a history of violence (against a police officer). His facebook profile was littered with images of police beating people down, other homeowners have accused him of being too aggressive, and then you have this incident.

Thinking about the police's statement, and how his record was "squeaky clean." It's obvious they had made up their mind before the 'investigation.' Since when does your record matter when being charged with a crime? Plenty of murderers have clean records.
Click to expand...

+1

Kinitari said:
That all falls in line with what I am assuming about him. He's going to school for criminology or something, he is head of neighborhood watch, he obviously is juiced up at the idea of being a cop and having the power associated with that. He saw an opportunity to be cop-like, some neighborhood savior saving it from nefarious criminal, and when he started getting his ass beat the fuck down - he decided that his gun would keep him from getting hurt anymore.
Click to expand...

clear-cut murder 2 or voluntary homicide.

don't fuck this up, Florida.
 
Entire story sounds like a racially fueled cluster fuck. Personally, I feel the need to unfairly judge and criticize Mr. Zimmerman without due process.

Is there a photo of the murderer available?
 
Kinitari said:
He was visiting relatives. It wouldn't be surprising.

I don't think this guy is as nefarious as some of you seem to imply, I just think he was an idiot, and probably juiced up at the idea of being some hero.
Click to expand...

He wasn't visiting relatives he was home in his fathers neighborhood. No matter how many Weekends you spend at your dad's a month your fathers home is still home.
 
hwalker84 said:
He wasn't visiting relatives he was home in his fathers neighborhood. No matter how many Weekends you spend at your dad's a month your fathers home is still home.
Click to expand...

Really? The original article had the father talking about him 'coming to visit to get away from the stress of his life' - that doesn't sound like someone who is at home. Regardless, the original point was whether or not the killer saw this kid around, he probably hadn't before now.
 
Updated Facts:

Victim
  • Black
  • Age: 17
  • Weight: 140 lbs
  • 11th grade high school student
  • Previous Record: No arrest record or disciplinary action for violence
  • Carrying: Ice tea, Skittles
  • What he was doing prior to altercation: Getting candy for younger brother; minding his own business
  • What he did during altercation: Got shot and died
  • Status: Dead


Shooter
  • White
  • Age: 26
  • Weight: ~240 lbs
  • College student, self-appointed captain of The Retreat at Twin Lakes neighborhood watch, studying criminal justice in college
  • Previous Record: Battery against on officer and resisting arrest in 2005, charges dropped
  • Carrying: Kel Tek 9mm semi-automatic gun
  • What he was doing prior to altercation: Stalked someone he found suspicious in his car, called the police, told by police not to follow guy he is trailing, follows him anyway, gets out of car to engage him
  • What he did during altercation: Shot and killed someone
  • What he did after altercation: Claimed self defense
  • Status: Not arrested


Florida Police
  • A narcotics detective and not a homicide detective first approached Zimmerman. The detective peppered Zimmerman with questions rather than allow Zimmerman to tell his story.
  • Another officer corrected a witness after she told him that she heard the teen cry for help. The officer told the witness, a long-time teacher, it was Zimmerman who cried for help, said the witness. ABC News has spoken to the teacher and she confirmed that the officer corrected her when she said she heard the teenager shout for help.
  • Police Chief Billy Lee publicly admitted that officers accepted Zimmerman's word at the scene that he had no police record. An officer told the father that Zimmerman's record was "squeaky clean." Yet public records showed that Zimmerman was charged with battery against on officer and resisting arrest in 2005, a charge which was later expunged.
  • Won't release 911 tape due to investigation
 
quadriplegicjon said:
You know, his brother probably feels so awful about this. I'm willing to bet he blames himself for asking him to get some skittles for him that night.
Click to expand...

Yeah man, I feel so bad for him. His brother is dead, and he has the guilt on his shoulders for his whole life. Of course it's not his fault, but in the mind of a 13 year old boy, you know that's what he's thinking of.

This whole story is so heart breaking.
 
Awful story :(

Since Trayvon, a high school junior who wanted to be a pilot, was black and Zimmerman is white, Crump said race is "the 600 pound elephant in the room
Click to expand...

A 600 pound elephant isn't that big... a baby...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Family activities central East florida
16
702
Esca replied
How to Make a Killing | Official Trailer | A24 | Glen Powell Plots Family Carnage
8
225
DKehoe replied
[Variety] Disney’s Boy Trouble: Studio Seeks Original IP to Win Back Gen-Z Men Amid Marvel, Lucasfilm Struggles
2
97
2K
jason10mm replied
British Police Arrest Cosplayer
2
85
2K
calico replied
AI Killed My Job - stories from real people
44
465
StreetsofBeige replied
Top Bottom