[Phyxius]

Originally Posted by JimMe

Wrong! Race is absolutely necessary if the race pimps like Al Sharpton and Ben Jealous are going to make hay out of this incident.

That's my point. Al Sharpton doesn't need to be involved to spew his nonsense to determine that an unarmed teenager was killed with no logical explanation behind it. You have the media and the simple minded people bringing all this race factor into it just because the victim was black and make all this silly accusations. I've made my thoughts solely based on the 911 calls not what been reported which has been skewed to death.

[goldengrain]

Originally Posted by JimMe

Wrong! Race is absolutely necessary if the race pimps like Al Sharpton and Ben Jealous are going to make hay out of this incident.

There are now reports that Zimmerman actually said 'These f*&#ing c@@ns . . .'. This was heard on the enhanced tape. He also said 'These people always get away with it.' This was broadcast on several tv programs.

[justNancy]

Originally Posted by JimMe

I fail to see how the Sanford police department was negligent in conducting its investigation. Is it because Zimmerman was not immediately charged with a crime? Remember, the man is presumed innocent at this point.

Do you realize the shooting was in February and nothing has been done? They wouldn't even release the 911 tapes to the family. Also, why didn't they follow proper police procedure and test Zimmerman or run a background check on him? I agree everyone deserves a fair trial and I do not know what Zimmerman is really guilty of, but I sure know that nobody in the Sanford Police Department tried to find out, which you'd know if you read the accounts of witnesses who said they tried to give statements and were ignored. One woman said she told the officer on the scene that she heard the victim crying out for help and insisted it was the voice of a younger man, but he corrected her saying, "You're wrong, Ma'am. You heard Mr. Zimmerman's voice."

Of course I don't believe everything I read or hear, and I know some news sources jump to conclusions quickly for ratings, especially when they're competing to get the story out first. However, in 2005 a woman filed a complaint against Zimmerman for domestic violence. He also was arrested for assaulting a law enforcement officer after a bar brawl. So maybe he has a drinking problem or a propensity toward violence. Yet the man has a permit to carry a concealed weapon? Then when he shoots someone, his statement that he was defending himself is accepted? Against what? Skittles? I know the news keeps mentioning the candy and iced tea, but the police sent a narcotics detective to checkout the scene while a teenager was dead from a gunshot wound to the chest. This is what I read, and if it's true, it makes no sense at all. When there is a shooting, you send a homicide detective unless there is just cause to suspect drugs were involved. Maybe I watch too many Law & Order shows, but I do not agree the police were planning to pursue this case any further as you suggest in your post.

The one thing I do agree with is that we should never judge anyone before a fair trial. The problem here is that the police never did their jobs. They tested the victim for drugs and alcohol, when he only had a bag of candy in his hand, no drugs, no weapons, but they didn't check the shooter. They checked the victim for past criminal history, but they didn't check the shooter. When people say this isn't about race, it's possible that it isn't, but I'm guessing the Sanford Police took Zimmerman's word that he was assaulted by a young Black male because of his race.

[justNancy]

Originally Posted by Phyxius

That's my point. Al Sharpton doesn't need to be involved to spew his nonsense to determine that an unarmed teenager was killed with no logical explanation behind it. You have the media and the simple minded people bringing all this race factor into it just because the victim was black and make all this silly accusations. I've made my thoughts solely based on the 911 calls not what been reported which has been skewed to death.

I'm not Al Sharpton's biggest fan either, but I agree with him in this case. Sure I know it's possible the shooter wasn't a racist. However, there has to be corruption in that police department. When people fight for equal treatment of others, it's not just about being Black. We also need to protect women, the homeless, children, the poor and anyone else who is discriminated against in our society.

I removed the video, because it's very violent, but Google the youtube video about another Sanford attack.

"Cops Son Caught On Camera Punching Homeless Man"

[vaughanwilliams]

Originally Posted by JimMe

I fail to see how the Sanford police department was negligent in conducting its investigation. I'm sure that if the police conclude that a crime was committed Zimmerman will be arrested and charged.

Lol. That ship sailed, dude-the County, State and Feds are involved now. The Sanford po-lice will be lucky if they don't loose whatever certification they have and are disbanded.

[Cruzincat]

Originally Posted by goldengrain

There were witnesses all along this situation. Three heard a child screaming, not an old man. His girlfriend was on the phone when the lad expressed concern that someone was following him in a car. He was scared.

Zimmerman is 28. I guarantee, there are men of both ages that you might have trouble figuring out which was speaking from behind a curtain.

[justNancy]

Originally Posted by kyle19125

Yep...eyewitness reports that the Sanford Police Department didn't want to hear, even when witnesses phoned into report them. One of the most telling facts of their disinterest for me was the fact that they didn't even bother to tape off the scene where someone had been shot and killed. Witnesses said the following morning people were trampling all over the scene, which wasn't secured.

OMG! How awful and disrespectful. I just heard that the Chief of Police is temporarily resigning.

[justNancy]

Originally Posted by goldengrain

I beg your pardon, but I can go up to anyone and ask anything. I don't have the right to detain anyone.

I will have to go back and get the quote to which I was responding to make sure this is not out of context. I never said people can't talk to each other. I said you have no right to stop and question other people about why they are doing something or standing somewhere, if you have no official authority. Last night I was sitting in my car after dark in a parking lot. Why I was there isn't important. I was waiting for someone and using my laptop. If you walked out of a store or restaurant and began to head toward my car, I would probably put up the window and refuse to talk to you or drive away. You would have no authority to question me or follow me. It's none of your business!! Of course you can try to talk to anyone you want, but I'm quite certain that wasn't what the post I was answering said.

If you thought I was doing something suspicious, then you could write down the model of my car and my license plate. Period. I live in a very safe area, but I would be the one who could claim self-defense under the law if you approached me while I was sitting in my car. I don't think people are understanding what went on here. You are not "Standing Your Ground" if you are following someone.

Now, let me look for the quote I answered. Here it is:

Originally Posted by roadtrip75

In reality, we all have the right to question and confront people.

As I wrote earlier. No, we do not. We are not mini-cops. Big difference between talking to someone to get directions and confronting someone. You quoted me as if I said we don't have a right to ask someone a question.

[justNancy]

Originally Posted by goldengrain

At every turn the cops are trying to cover for this guy.

The police force needs to be investigated and probably retrained.

They are using the law to try to deflect blame from them. Don't be fooled.

Just want to add, so there is no misunderstanding, I agree with most of your post. I only felt you were misquoting me, since the other poster used the word "confront." From Dictionary.com

to face in hostility or defiance; oppose: The feuding factions confronted one another.

[kyle19125]

Originally Posted by vaughanwilliams

Lol. That ship sailed, dude-the County, State and Feds are involved now. The Sanford po-lice will be lucky if they don't loose whatever certification they have and are disbanded.

That would be ideal in my opinion as the Seminole County Sheriff's Department could easily undertake that responsibility without the "good ol' boy" way of doing things.