ExPatriatePen wrote: topshelf wrote: DelPen wrote:
topshelf wrote:... all that matters is Zimmerman provoked an innocent Martin to the point of retaliation, and then killed him for it.
I don't get this... What evidence is there that "Zimmerman provoked an innocent Martin to the point of retaliation"?
By what measure was Martin entitled to physically accost Zimmerman?
Following someone and asking them what they're doing IS NOT provocation. Certainly doesn't justify TM's actions.
The only way that makes sense is if Zimmerman threw the first punch. Seeing as GZ was armed, I seriously doubt that.
The minute you throw a punch at someone, I think there's justification for retaliation.
There's no way of knowing whether TM ways going to be satisfied with just smashing GZ's head against the pavement, or if he had list his tort to the point where he wouldn't have stopped until GZ was fatally injured.
If you're on top of me straddling me, and bashing my head into the ground, I think that's justification for deadly force.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not stating that TM couldn't have acted out of line after Zimmerman approached him.
My point is that George Zimmerman targeted Trayvon Martin (I'm giving GZ the benefit of the doubt and using the word "target" to mean he thought TM looked mischievous, regardless of his race), began following him and called the cops. The cops told GZ to "stand down" and stop following, to which Zimmerman replied "‘F****** punks. Those a*******, they always get away [...]" and kept his pursuit. At this point, Zimmerman is out of line and is blatantly refusing to do what he was told by those who are supposed to handle these situations. In addition to that, Zimmerman had already made up his mind that Martin was one of those "f****** punks", and he planned on doing something about it (which we all know was not the case).
It is from this point, until the moment that Trayvon dies, that things are cloudy, but we already know that there should have never been a "this point". Zimmerman was out of line and acting on his intuition that was way, way off. Also, up until "this point", Martin was merely a target of Zimmerman and was acting totally within the limits of the law.
It is basically a form of entrapment. If Zimmerman is making his "F****** punks" statements and following Trayvon, one would assume that, eventually, Trayvon is going to have enough and confront Zimmerman. Does that make Trayvon's actions right? Of course not, but he never should have been pushed to that point.