Quote:
Originally Posted by Caliber
Zimmerman was actually on his way home from the grocery store if I can remember correctly. "Looking for trouble" is a pretty farfetched accusation. Everyone hates the fake cop attitude, but the fact that you hold contempt for someone doesn't mean they're guilty. No, Zimmerman approached someone with the intent to find out if they were one of the burglars in the area, as specified in his call to police. Which he wouldn't have made if he was "looking for trouble". And last time I checked you don't need 'authorization' to speak to someone on the street.
I don't know about you, but talking to someone and asking them who they are in an authoritative tone doesn't seem like it would inevitably lead to them smashing my skull into the sidewalk. He was carrying a gun because he was a concealed carry permit holder and it was after dark. We don't "suspect Trayvon assaulted him", we know he did because Zimmerman was bleeding from the face and head and Trayvon wasn't. We know he did because witnesses have confirmed he was on top of him. Zimmerman could have been assaulted simply because Trayvon was a thug: there is no reason (and zero evidence) to think he "provoked a fight" besides the "dickhead" mindset you've painted on the guy who ended up screaming like a girl when he was attacked.
And yet provoking a situation which leads to a death, without malice afterthought, and then calling self defense is still not murder.
|
Caliber, you know, I don't have a dog in this fight. It is curious to me how people take a relatively ambiguous situation and come to such strong conclusions, in the absence of clear data. That says much more about us, and it's an opportunity to learn something about yourself. Why are you more able to understand the perspective and actions of Zimmerman, who by all accounts instigated the confrontation, instead of the victim?