Saturday, May 19, 2012

The Most Outrageous Aspect of the Trayvon Martin Case

So now we know, through evidence released by prosecutors this past week, that George Zimmerman, the 28-year-old superhero-wannabe who shot and killed an unarmed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford, FL on February 26th, had wounds on his head and a broken nose. And as expected, ignorant racists nationwide rushed forward with disingenuous cries of "See!?...that proves the kid had attacked him!" But Zimmerman's wounds suggest one thing: that Trayvon fought like an animal to save his life.

Ever since this story hit the press I've been mortified about how Trayvon has been vilified as the aggressor when all evidence points to him being the one who desperately needed to exercise his state's Draconian 'Stand Your Ground' law. For the life of me I don't understand why the media has not explored this angle more than it has. The simple fact remains here: that a grown man with a gun, safe in his locked car, against the implicit instruction of a 911 police operator, left that car to pursue, confront and kill a child (yes, racists, under the age of eighteen one is legally considered a child) who was holding nothing more than a bag of Skittles and an iced tea.

What exactly does 'stand your ground' mean if not to fight like an animal to save your life when you believe it's being threatened with deadly force? Why does the fact that Zimmerman suffered wounds serve as evidence that Trayvon initiated the scuffle? To the contrary, Zimmerman's wounds reinforce that the kid bravely came at his attacker with everything he had. That after screaming for help seventeen times in a desolate area he fought furiously to save himself from being shot dead...something he unfortunately failed to do. Why is no one talking about how it was Trayvon who 'stood his ground?' Why does it seem that this law is only being discussed as it applies to Zimmerman?

As for Zimmerman's claim of self-defense? Bullshit. That defense went out the window the second he stepped from his locked car with a loaded semi-automatic weapon.


Dave said...

Maybe Zimmerman should have remained in his car. But the evidence points in a totally different direction than you are trying g to spin it. Multiple witnesses saw Travon on top of Zimmerman beating him senseless. They said Zimmerman was screaming for help. If a 6 foot 160 man of any color, broke my nose, was slamming my head into the concrete and wouldn't stop. I would shoot them too. I don't care if they are 17 or 70. When you brutally attack someone there can be repercussions for your actions.

Anonymous said...

actually zimmerman's wounds are very minor. 2 small cuts the back of the headand a alledged broken nose, brokn nose you cannot xray. These are MINOR injuries meaning the kid barley faught at all before being shot in the heart.

Stuntman Mike said...

Wow man - Sounds like you were there. Great job clearing this up for everyone I did not know there was an eye witness on the scene. Keep up the great job with your unbiased information that clearly slams the book on this case!

The Ostroy Report said...

All official reports list Martin's height at either 5'11 or 6ft....indicating that you guys paint whatever picture that helps your narrative

Anonymous said...

The simple fact remains here: that a grown man with a gun, safe in his locked car, against the implicit instruction of a 911 police operator, left that car to pursue, confront and kill a child

The police did not instruct Zimmerman not to leave is car.

There is no evidence Zimmerman confronted Martin.

Anonymous said...

Dave invents his witnesses to support his racist bias, but ignores some pertinent facts. It was Trayvon screaming for help (even Zimmerman's father sdmits that). Trayvon's girlfriend says the last words she heard him speak were "get off". Not to mention the eye witness who saw "the guy on top" stand up after the shot was fired. But you go on championing a child killer if it makes you feel better.

KVLG said...

"It was Trayvon screaming for help (even Zimmerman's father sdmits that)."

Actually, it was Martin's father who said that. He initially stated that it was not his son's voice, but recanted. A medical report the day after the shooting revealed that Zimmerman had suffered a broken nose, two black eyes and lacerations on the back of his head. Photographs from the night of the shooting confirmed it.

Furthermore, a police report also said that Zimmerman's sweatshirt had "grass stains and was wet on the back," consistent with his being flat on his back.

The lead investigator on the scene, Officer Christopher Serino, wrote that Zimmerman could be heard "yelling for help as he was being battered by Trayvon Martin." One witness said he heard 14 separate cries for help. ne responder at the scene said he saw wounds on the knuckles of one of Trayvon's hands, suggesting he had connected with a punch. Trayvon's hoodie had powder stains indicating he was shot in the chest from 1 to 18 inches away, consistent again with what Zimmerman said. Another eyewitness said the guy in the hoodie was on top beating the guy on the bottom "MMA style" -- mixed martial arts style.

Anonymous said...

How can so many people remain this ignorant despite all the evidence?

Anonymous said...

So Trayvon is not allowed to stand his ground when being followed by an armed adult? Yet Zimmerman is allowed to murder a teenager who was trying to defend himself from a stranger who was obviously stalking him. Ridiculous...

Mr Logic said...

Some of you people are just stupid…if one is in a highway dispute with their vehicles the person who leaves their vehicle to confront another motorist is considered the aggressor…Ask the police and they will tell you to stay in your vehicle.

If someone is walking down a public walkway and NOT commenting any crime, one has no right to confront that person in any way, or accuse…the confronting party would be the aggressor…. ask any cop.

Zimmerman left his vehicle, (1st offence), than confronted Martin, (2nd offence), and who knows what else he did to encourage a fight, (3rd offence) He got his ass kicked and resorted to using a loaded gun…(4th offence).

So according to some of you idiots I can…stalk the man who stole my girlfriend, leave my vehicle and confront him in a public place, scream at him to encourage a response and when he does begin a fight… then shoot him in self-defense. Sounds great, problem solved and I now have my girl back.

Sure beats the old way when one would just jump the guy in a dark place when no one was looking…it is legal to shoot him now!

Anonymous said...

"The simple fact remains here: that a grown man with a gun, safe in his locked car, against the implicit instruction of a 911 police operator, left that car to pursue, "

WRONG! He left the vehicle BEFORE the dispatcher gave him the ADVICE that he did not need to chase TM on foot.

He got out of his vehicle BECAUSE the dispatcher asked him which way TM went when TM took off running accross a lawn and around a building.