7/17/2013

White Robert Zimmerman acquitted of slaying black Trayvon Martin

This case has dragged on for more than a year. Trayvon Martin, a 17 year old black boy living in the same neighborhood as the burly 29 year old white man Zimmerman. On a night out to buy some food, he was racially profiled as a bad guy by Zimmerman. Martin was unarmed, Zimmerman armed with a gun. Zimmerman set upon Martin and in the struggle, neighbours heard the voice of the young black boy calling for help. But he was shot dead by Zimmerman claiming self defence. A jury of 5 white females and a black female found Zimmerman not guilty.
 

The blacks and Martin’s family are crying foul. Rioting has started in the district and several American cities in protest against the not guilty verdict.
 

In the past, many blacks were found guilty when innocent and hanged or lynched by white mobs and white courst. In the past, many white murderers and nigger killers were set free even with unquestionable evidence of guilt.
 

Now we are in the 21st Century and such racial and hate crimes against the blacks are still happening, and the white men who did the killing are acquitted. And the black leaders are calling for calm and peaceful demonstration like they used to do in the past when they became victims of such racial injustice.
 

Zimmerman may be free but admitted that he would have to look over his shoulder for the rest of his life. Some day, some guy may just pull the trigger on him to settle the score. Of course the guy will surely be found guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment or death in some states.
 

How many think that Zimmerman is not guilty? How many believe that Zimmerman killed the boy in self defence? How many think this is not a racial profiling hate crime? How many believe the Martin family had the fair share of the law on their side or was it just another kangaroo court? How many think that racism is a thing of the past in the USA?

21 comments:

theonion said...

RB

Have you looked at the actual case and data.
The discrepancies in size and the photos and evidences.
For this, you are not interested in facts, you are interested in affirmation as per most of your posts.

Chua Chin Leng蔡镇龍 aka redbean said...

I think you are right. An unarmed boy of 17 pleading for help and killed by an armed vigilante is the guilty one, because he is black ya?

Anonymous said...

Maybe he was not supposed to be out at night....If only he had stay indoors..

Anonymous said...

It is unfortunate for such incident to happen. And it could have been a colour problem rather than a racial one.
As shown in news video, those protesting against the Verdict have as many Whites as the Darker Colours. That goes to show that the Americans of all Colours are all reasonable and conscious of justice.
There is a Chinese Saying that humans are innately reasonable and conscientious(公道自在人心).
The Americans are no different regardless of their Race.

Anonymous said...

Agree, only Zimmerman and his likes are different.

oldhorse42 said...

How could this sort of thing happened in a country which has a black man as president for the last few years?

Anonymous said...

Obama must be careful or he might get a bullet as well.

theonion said...

RB

The unarmed boy was 1 head taller and much bigger in size,
further, the so called white male is actually hispanic which means minority.

2ndly,Zimmerman had head and neck injuries from being bashed to the ground.

Let me ask you, if you were being beaten up as such on the ground, what would you do especially if you carried a gun for self defence and you were jumped.

Anyway, you are welcome to your conclusions and rancour if applicable

Chua Chin Leng蔡镇龍 aka redbean said...

Your biased and exaggeration are making your comments unreliable.

The stats. boy was 5' 11" and 158 lb. Man was 5' 7" and 185 lb.

What one head taller? 4 inch is not even half a head. Overall bulk and size and age would put the man on the advantage. Further the man pounced on the teenager who would be more afraid than anything else at 17.

Please lah, get your facts right ok.

Anonymous said...

RB, try to live in one of those places full of black people in usa and you will know why those people are paranoid. It is just like living in one of those hdb building full of third world foreigners. Every minute is tense and challenging.

Anonymous said...

Since discrimination of black people in usa is nothing new, I will suggest those youth (especially blacks) to stay indoors at night. This is to avoid all sorts of confusion.

Chua Chin Leng蔡镇龍 aka redbean said...

What would you do if you were a 185pounder vigilante with a gun in your pocket and you see someone behaving suspiciously?

Would you pounce on him, attack him or hold out your gun like the policeman and ask him to freeze, hands up and turn around?

The fact that Zimmarman was confident enough to attack Trayvon alone spoke for itself. He was confident to take on Trayvon. If not he would have called for assistance. But he struck first.

Anonymous said...

I think he did not know he is 17. Black people can easily look ten years old in the dark. Of cos he is wrong to shoot someone but given the problematic security/drug/gun issues in usa, it is not difficult to understand why he did that.

Anonymous said...

In the US, it is so easy and acceptable to shoot at blacks on the ground of suspicion.

theonion said...

RB

To quote the neutral medical evidence

"Noted Forensic Pathologist Says Zimmerman Story "Consistent" with Evidence, As Defense Case Nears End

...

Injuries to Zimmerman's Head Were Potentially Life Threatening

Further testimony from Dr. Di Maio emphasized the life-threatening danger of blows to the head. He noted that intracranial bleeding is hidden, and often does not cause death until some hours after the injury that caused it. He also noted that axonal injury can occur even besides bleeding, causing brain damage. This undermines the State's arguments that the blows to Zimmermans' head were inconsequential and could not have represented the reasonable threat of death or grave bodily harm necessary to justify Zimmerman's use of deadly force in self-defense.

You just assume he is guilty of murder.
Manslaughther arguably maybe could be argued but there is no intent.

Further, does this not undermine your own premise which you like to expound innocent until proven guilty

Chua Chin Leng蔡镇龍 aka redbean said...

I have not pronounced anyone guilty yet. I only stated some facts. Who started this fight? The injury on the head could be due to a fall while struggling and fighting. A head down fall for a 185 pounder is going to be very heavy.

This could be a case of robbers shouting robbery.

JayF said...

Oh lawdy! Chinese supremacist Chua Chin Leng calling the American court system racist. Just how black is your kettle when it called out the pot?

Here are some of the established facts that have been proven beyond dispute.

1)Zimmerman certainly didn't "pounce"on Martin. The only wounds found on TM's cadaver were some bruises on his left knuckle, consistent with punching and the singular shot to the heart which was fatal. Witness accounts testified that during the struggle, one was on top of the other and was "ground and pound". If Zimmerman was the one doing the attacking, where are the wounds and why does Zimmerman's own wounds consistent with someone who got sucker punched and was taking a beating on the floor?

2) TM was not a boy and his ten pound difference meant little when you considered that TM was a American football player, physically an adult (people stop growing after you hit 16) and was also going to his dad's home because he got suspended from school for fighting. Toxicology reports also reveal that TM had traces of marijuana in his blood, meaning at the very least he was coming down from a drug fueled high. If he had been pulled over in Singapore, he'd be facing jail time and a stint in the DRC. Zimmerman on the other hand was a middle aged man who had just started on a fitness program and according to his instructor, his fighting prowess was 0.5/10.

3) He was no vigilante. Zimmerman was a neighbourhood watch captain who saw his neighbours homes broken into and some suffering from the trauma of a home invasion. He had also called the police when he first spotted TM and was on the phone throughout most of the encounter. Most importantly, despite what some will tell you he ceased following TM and was looking at street signs to give to the police dispatcher when TM confronted him.

JayF said...

4) At no time before he shot TM did Zimmerman brandish his pistol. If he had, he'd be facing jail time instead of walking free. There were some retards on the internet saying he should have flashed his gun or fired a warning shot. Either of this two actions for a civi like Zimmerman would have gotten him decades in jail. Brandishing a weapon is treated the same as threatening with a lethal weapon. Firing a warning shot is reckless endangerment because the bullets will go somewhere, usually someone uninvolved with the whole thing. Those who doubt TM will double back and confront Zimmerman because Zimmerman had a gun failed to remember Zimmerman's gun was holstered in his jacket. Witness accounts that the shot rang out long after the fight was underway supported Zimmerman's testimony. IF he had a gun in hand or was even prepared to draw when the fight started, he won't have ended up being wailed upon on the floor.

5) TM's own girlfriend and the last who spoke with him on the phone had said that TM had said a creepy ass cracka was following him. In case you didn't know, cracka is a racist term for white people. Zimmerman on the other hand only mentioned the race of TM when prompted by the police dispatcher and even then Zimmerman was sure TM was black. NBC and MSNBC had doctored the voice recording which made him sound that he had volunteered TM's race and are now rightfully getting sued.

6) The whole trial was a kangaroo court, but the kangaroos were looking to hang Zimmerman. Both the police and the District Attorney upon reviewing the case had decided there was no case or evidence. The Florida governer had to appoint a Special Prosercutor and remove the previous police chief to charge a man with minimal evidence. Two judges had to be replaced before the trial because they had openly made statements prejudical to the trial and the current Judge Nelson openly tried to badger witnesses to the favour of the prosecution. Thankfully, the jury instructions were clear enough and professional. The only things they were to consider if Zimmerman had reason to feel legitimate fear for his life.

For someone who so distruts the Western media, you sure bought into the media crafted narrative fully. Guess they're reliable when it fits your skwered views.

Anonymous said...

How could this NOT be voluntary manslaughter? I don’t understand. There is a difference between being truly invoking menace and threat (both mental and physical) to others, and simply being perceived as such: It’s the difference between having someone ELSE’S fears projected upon you, and actually actively doing something provocative to actively incite fear in others: I can’t believe a jury would not understand the difference.

Zimmerman had the power- not just because he had the power to quit the situation at any time (AND a loaded gun with him). But remember – the rationale/justification for using violence was the fear- Zimmerman’s fear for his life and limb (to what extent Martin was afraid and justified to act to protect himself, we’ll never know from his own lips)

Zimmerman was the one who had control there – he was the one who was PROJECTING his fear onto Martin; in that situation, it was beyond Martin’s reasonable expectation and responsibility to control & assuage Zimmerman’s fear.

When fear is unreasonably or arbitrarily projected, the power lies with the person who is projecting their fear, NOT (I would argue) the person who is having someone else’s fears projected ONTO them.

If Zimmerman had the fear and thus, the origin of control, he also had the power (and responsibility) to deal with his fear less destructively: he didn’t do that- he did everything he could to ESCALATE rather than deescalate the situation as well as his fear- and so to, his rationale for using force.

How does that work? – ‘I was so afraid, I kept putting myself deeper & deeper into jeopardy’? It contradicts the whole idea of reasonable & responsible criteria for self-defense & the justification for using the deadliest option.

I don’t think the jury understood the difference in power between projecting one’s own fear ONTO somebody, between that and actually being provocatively, actively life-threateningly inciting fear in others.

Whatever it was, it could not be self-defence justifying acquittal, because Zimmerman had the power & discretion available of how to manage that fear;

Taken from
http://goodmenproject.com/ethics-values/i-could-get-away-with-murder/

I might add, It was raining that day ..if Zimmerman had managed his fear and instead of confronting the fearful young man and said ...

"Are you lost ? do you need a ride home from this rain ?"

Compassion instead of Fear ..It would have turn out so different

Anonymous said...

American kangaroo court?

Chua Chin Leng蔡镇龍 aka redbean said...

Hi Jayf, nice to have you back. You need to spend more time on the Korean unification and free S Korea from being a colony of the Americans.

Maybe you think that is something to be proud of while practically every colonised country has already got their independence except for Japan and S Korea.

Tell us of your gratitude and obedience to the Empire and how good it feels to be a colonised people.