StrangeSox

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 09:21 AM) Yes, legally I believe it would be unreasonable. I could keep walking without answering, explain that I'm going to my dad's friend's house, explain and walk, etc. If someone walks up and is literally inches from your face (a hypothetical, not an assumption of what happened here), I believe or at least hope you'd have the right to defend your immediate personal space. Trayvon had no duty or reason to explain himself to some creepy dude stalking him around the neighborhood.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 09:20 AM) You don't know that. You can't know that...unless you get a time machine, go back and keep the situation quiet...and see what was to happen. Did the national attention speed things up? Sure...but that doesn't mean the additional investigations wouldn't have happened anyway...and there is no possible way for you or anyone else to know that...since it happened. Actually we do know that since nothing happened for several weeks after his shooting and the police considered the thing closed until it got national attention.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 09:16 AM) It's an archetype...at least, in my opinion. I think the type of personality that organizes such a thing, and takes charge of such a thing, is the exact type of person that would follow a suspicious person around...where as you or I would simply call the cops and go inside. But we're seeing his neighborhood watch viceroy status being used as a reason that he'd act in some logical, non-confrontational way. But his past history of pestering 911 with a bunch of petty bulls*** seems to point to a wanna-be cop with authoritarian dreams.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 09:14 AM) So why can't we all just hope the truth comes out and let it be? without national attention, there would have been zero additional investigation into this case.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 09:13 AM) But you know darn well that eyewitness testimony and memories, especially in a panicked circumstance, are completely unreliable. She probably thought she heard one thing on the phone and I'll guarantee you if you had a videotape, what she thought she heard would not exactly match the actual statements, and what Zimmerman thought he experienced would not match the actual events. That is how eyewitness accounts go. They are always completely one-sided, and their accuracy is hugely suspect. I agree that eyewitness testimony is, more often than not, useless or actually harmful to the truth and have said as much. But there's no real way to square those two stories. Either Zimmerman was returning to his truck or he approached Martin. There's not really a grey area there.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 09:11 AM) This I can agree with. It does appear that Zimmerman escalated the situation...but it's possible that the kid then took it further and a confrontation took place. I just find it hard to believe that a neighborhood watch guy, who actually started by following protocol and calling the police, was looking for a physical confrontation. It appears from the events leading up to the situation, that Zimmerman was legit wondering what this kid was doing and why. Just seems reasonable to me that if Zimmerman was looking for a confrontation, he never calls 911. Why are we lending any real weight to his status as a neighborhood watch captain? It's not something that comes with any real training, responsibility or authority.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 09:10 AM) And let's note...neither of them may be lying. It's a classic case of multiple eyewitnesses each with their own version of the story, and overwhelming evidence shows that every one of them will probably believe their statements and the truth is somewhere in-between. Both of them were probably in something of a panicked state at the time, and that's plenty of reason to expect their stories to come out muddled. The one big difference here is that the other eye-witness is dead. No, Zimmerman's story and the girl's story are contradictory. Zimmerman claims he was returning to his truck and was attacked from behind. The girl claims that, through what Martin was saying, that Zimmerman approached Martin and Martin yelled at him. There's no "truth is in the middle" for those two stories.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 09:04 AM) From what we know, this isn't a bad assumption. But, it ignores the fact that Zimmerman actually has the right to check out what this kid was up too...should he have? That's not up to us to determine...but that doesn't mean he doesn't have the right. I heard some stuff a few weeks back down my alley, some kids were messing around...and I went down there to check it out. Call it curiosity...of course, I didn't shoot any of them...but that doesn't mean much...the fact that I have every right to make sure nothing bad is happening isn't something I need permission to check on, not from you, and not from some 911 operator. He doesn't actually have the authority to check out what he was doing. he has the right to approach the kid and ask questions, but the kid has every right to tell him to go f*** himself.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 09:04 AM) Complete assumption. He simply could have been asking him questions. Simply asking questions after following him for a while, though, and approaching him where he had every right to be. If someone had followed you for blocks in an unfamiliar neighborhood and then got in your face, questioning who you are and why you were there, what would your reaction be? Would it be unreasonable to tell them to f*** off and shove them out of your face?

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 08:59 AM) Like I said, use a modern bluetooth headset, such as a jawbone. You will hear NOTHING but the person you're talking too. Great, let's say that she didn't actually hear Zimmerman completely clearly but her brain put together what he was saying. Her statement still makes it clear that Zimmerman was not actually returning to his truck and jumped from behind.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 09:01 AM) My problem is...by his own admission...he is at fault. He created this circumstance. Without his actions and his decisions, none of this happens, and the kid gets to where he's walking to alive. He refused to allow the normal path of calling 911 on a suspicious person play itself out, and a kid wound up dead. Whatever happened in-between, he made the initial decision to escalate things, and a kid wound up dead. Right, regardless of who made the first physical contact, the situation is entirely the creation of Zimmerman. There's no one disputing that. Even if Zimmerman didn't violate any Florida laws, either because Florida laws are f***ed or because he really was jumped from behind while returning to his car, it still feels like an injustice. Even assuming the worst, this kid didn't do a single thing wrong until Zimmerman started stalking him.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 09:00 AM) You're the ones differentiating between "black" kid and kid "I know doesn't live here". Is he more likely to call in and confront some white kid he doesn't know or a black kid? What about society in general, which is more likely to draw suspicion and attention?

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 08:56 AM) I don't care who you are, everyone has a slight tendency towards racism unless they grew up in a completely mixed home and neighborhood. You can argue it all you want, but I truly believe it to be the case. I'm not saying that we see a minority and automatically wish death on them. I agree with this 100%. Racism is implicit in our inner assumptions and biases way more than it is overt, KKK-style stuff these days.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 08:54 AM) It's very possible noise cancellation has nothing to do with this...but it's a technical limitation I posed, and it's real. Now, if it was a wired ear piece, she would, in fact, be able to hear quite clearly. BUT, let's say it was a bluetooth device...such as a jawbone. If it's a jawbone...there is NO way she heard a damn thing Zimmerman said. So, like I said, it is actually important to know this... Noise cancellation, at least anything I've ever seen, is fantastic at cutting out constant background noise. Engines running on a plane, traffic drone, air conditioners, lawn mowers, etc. What they struggle to adapt to are unpredictable noise patterns, such as someone starting to talk to you right next to you.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 08:50 AM) Link Sounds like a Bluetooth device to me? Or a corded headphone with an in-line mic, maybe?

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 08:49 AM) I didn't, I asked, quite a while back what kind of phone he was using, because it would be an important piece of evidence. He's claiming noise cancellation doesn't exist. http://www.google.com/search?q=smarphones+...271&bih=931 Google begs to differ. I don't know what kind of phone he was on...but I asked...and if he was on a modern cell phone, especially and iPhone, it matters a lot. Because in that case, there IS a technical real world challenge, despite the fact that he wishes it didn't exist. I didn't claim noise cancellation doesn't exist. I'm claiming that I very seriously doubt it works nearly in the manner that you claim and nearly as effectively based on my personal experiences. If you and me are facing each other a few feet away talking while you're on the phone, the phone isn't going to be able to block out what I say.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 08:47 AM) How did you determine Martin has a phone with this technology? How do we determine that this technology can't pick up someone near Trayvon talking directly to Trayvon and very likely not in a soft-spoken manner? We're not talking about incidental background conversations 20 feet away here.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 08:44 AM) IMO, her story IS unreliable for many reasons, including the technical challenges I posed. But those technical challenges aren't really real. edit: The problem is that, no matter what transpired between the end of the 911 call and the shooting, Trayvon Martin was completely innocent of any crime and had no reason to draw suspicion other than being an unfamiliar young black male wearing a hoodie. If Zimmerman wasn't an obsessive wanna-be cop who carried a gun and decided to pursue someone doing nothing but walking down the sidewalk, there never would have been any confrontation.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 08:37 AM) But there is no proof of it. The proof seems to suggest more that Zimmerman was caught off guard by Martin. That was already discussed. I suppose it's who you want to believe at this point, but certainly not enough to convict Zimmerman. There is no evidence that Zimmerman was caught off-guard except for Zimmerman's own statements. Zimmerman's story contradicts the story of the girl that Trayvon was on the phone with up until the start of the altercation. She claims that she heard Zimmerman yelling at Martin, and Martin shouting "why are you following me?!" Then she heard someone getting pushed or shoved and the call was dropped. What she can't know is if Zimmerman was walking up to Trayvon and Trayvon shoved him first. I'm honestly not sure how that would impact the self-defense claim.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 08:36 AM) I simply asked the question that everyone's ignoring. Fact is, the technology exists, and it's real...you present anecdotal evidence that just because you were able to hear background conversations, and apparently you can recite them back in detail, that so can this kids girlfriend? How presumptuous of you. I can do that, too. I've had many conversations on my phone, and I CAN'T hear the conversions in the background...and I've also used speakerphones where there was a lot of background noise, and in order for the person to hear me, or for me to hear them, we had to yell. But hearing anything the background in detail? No. Here's the problem: you made an assertive claim. You said her story is unreliable because phones have noise-cancelling technology and you can't hear other people near the phone user. The burden to uphold that claim is on you, and I presented some evidence (yes, anecdotal) that rebutted your claim. There are no "technical facts" getting in the way of her claim unless you assume that Trayvon had a very recent phone (newer than a Droid Bionic) that is able to cancel out someone a few feet away talking to Trayvon picked up via a headphone mic.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 08:33 AM) If Zimmerman was a racist, he probably wouldn't choose to live in a gated community with black people. It is possible? Yes. It is unlikely...I'm afraid so. I don't know many racists that choose to live -- next door -- to the race they hate. My point was that people are saying the only reason this kid was follow was because he's black. This is not logical when you consider the realities of that community. Other black people lived there. Zimmerman's neighbors are black. So my point remains: seeing a black kid wandering around probably isn't out of the ordinary. There's more to racism then openly believing blacks are inferior and hating all blacks.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 08:29 AM) Sorry, but, this is just a huge leap to make. First, your "FACT" that Zimmerman is hispanic is irrelevant, or possibly even makes it MORE likely. This is a sad fact in Chicago, and I am sure elsewhere, that Hispanic and Black communities often do not get along. Look at the way neighborhoods are here. So the fact that he is Hispanic does nothing to reduce the chance this was racially motivated, and may even increase it. Yeah, a big part of gang and prison violence is black and Hispanic gangs fighting each other. If it can be determined conclusively that Zimmerman actually did use a racist slur and said "f***ing coons," then, yeah, we can conclude that he actually is a racist.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 08:24 AM) Ok, so you're telling me that noise cancellation doesn't exist now? You are flat out, technically and factually...wrong. While you can hear chatter in the background, it's NOT clear, and it's NOT loud enough for you to claim you can hear clearly. The technology prevents that. That's why the technology exists. And, if it doesn't exist on your phone, you may have a "new" phone, but it's either old tech or running a very old OS. And yes, there are technical facts getting in the way here. Noise cancellation is real. It actually exists. Haha ok, your technical knowledge of noise cancellation in phones trumps the actual, real phone conversations I just had yesterday. I have a Droid X2 running whatever the version of Android before ice cream. My coworker has a Bionic. I heard him and the person he was talking to very clearly as well as the drone of the machinery in the background. but I guess that was impossible? But you've just admitted that not every phone in the world has this amazing noise cancelling technology (including phones that are fairly new!), so you've no reason to assume that "technical facts" are getting in the way here.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 08:28 AM) Defying the orders of a 911 operator is ok though. I don't know what authority if any 911 operators have. They're typically just call center employees.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Mar 27, 2012 -> 08:20 AM) Fact: Zimmerman is Hispanic, NOT white. Hispanics can be racist! Also, you can be Hispanic and white!