It's Watch!... Neighborhood Watch. Not shoot.

Your sensitivity chip must be broken.

 

Drip, he has to have a sensitivity chip in the first place to have it broken.

 

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2012/03/25/451314/gun-owners-defends-zimmerman/?mobile=nc

Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America claims Martin became the aggressor.

Right, an unarmed kid weighing 100 pounds less than Zimmerman, could have killed Zimmerman with his bare hands if Zimmerman didn't shoot him first?

 

The Mystery Witness!

 

You can't be real, you have to be a sock puppet. At least I hope you are

 

Odd how the mystery witness wasn't cited by the cops in the initial investigation and that he didn't come forward until the story was national news.

Also, it's odd that hyper-vigilant neighborhood watchman would turn his back on somebody he considered as suspicious person. That seems out of character for somebody who called 911 about a pothole and about an open garage door.

 

So far the Mystery Witness exists only on conservative news outlets, and has yet to materialize elsewhere.

 

Really sad that the guy (Zimmerman) to this day remains free and the Sanford PD actually does not know his whereabouts.

As a lawyer, with the abundance of information out there, it does not seem that you need anything further to conclude that there is "probable cause" that a crime has been committed and that Zimmerman should be charged with a crime.

To those of you in Florida, I ask, how does following an unarmed minor = stand your ground? Really. I can understand in your locked house, even on your property. But on public property? Unacceptable.

 

I'm not interested in defending this guy -- at all -- but has he or his lawyer cited the "Stand Your Ground" law as a defense?

Sounds to me like they're making a standard self defense claim.

 

He stated this today.

As for self-defense, it would take a lot to go from stalking someone, after being told to back off and let the police handle it, to then having to defend yourself? More importantly, that's a decision for a jury at the very minimum, not the police.

 

And here.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-26/news/os-trayvon-martin-zimmerman-account-20120326_1_arizona-iced-tea-suv-unarmed-black-teenager

 

I missed that. I thought commentators were just seizing on the "Stand Your Ground" law, without his defense raising it.

And, again, not defending this guy, or this case. He sounds like a pain in the ass who was itching for trouble.

But, I suppose I could see in theory how the tables could turn, and someone could go from an observer to someone who felt he needed to defend himself, and or felt he had the right to "stand his ground". And, yes, I understand this guy did more than "observe".

But, I do also disagree with folks who say that because the 911 operator told him not to follow this guy, that it automatically puts him in the wrong. (I do think he is in the wrong, but not for this reason.)

A 911 operator would always tell you this, regardless of the circumstances. They are trying to lessen the chances of a confrontation.

But, I've twice caught criminals. Once caught a kid who had stolen a guy's wallet. (He was chasing him.) Once caught a guy who had just stolen my laptop out of my apartment. He practically bumped into me on the street with it under his arm. I grabbed him and held him, while a passerby eventually called 911. He was a career criminal who is now doing 7 years as a result.

I'm sure that if I had called 911 instead of just responding, I would have been told to back off. But, I do have a right to intercede.

The difference in this case, of course, is that no crime was being committed.