Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch (1 Viewer)

[BustedKnuckles]

So he was helpful at times. None of that changes by anything you said.

The dude was still sitting in his car with a gun (off duty) at night watching, following and confronting people.

From what I understand, he was sent out by his wife, to the store. Either on the way out, or on the way back, he saw what he thought was a suspicious person walking around some houses. So he called the police, while on the phone with the dispatcher he continued to watch and answer the dispatchers questions.. The dispatcher asked Zimmerman to watch by asking him what Trayvon was doing.

This "off duty" nonsense is ridiculous as well.. No one is ever off duty in a neighborhood watch program.. Everyone is expected to keep an eye out for suspicious behavior and potential criminal activity.. Whether its your turn to walk the neighborhood or not, if you see something suspicious, you call the police.. And you protect your neighbors..

And I'm pretty sure you have no evidence that Zimmerman was the one who confronted Trayvon, and not the other way around..

If he stayed in his car there would have been NO confrontation...end of story.

Getting out of his car isn't a crime. Neither is following someone. When the operator told him not to do that, he supposedly stopped.

Good luck getting a murder conviction on things that could have been done to avoid the situation.

That kid wasnt doing anything wrong for that ####### to get out of his car....what is so hard to understand about that????????????????

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

So he was helpful at times. None of that changes by anything you said. The dude was still sitting in his car with a gun (off duty) at night watching, following and confronting people.

From what I understand, he was sent out by his wife, to the store. Either on the way out, or on the way back, he saw what he thought was a suspicious person walking around some houses. So he called the police, while on the phone with the dispatcher he continued to watch and answer the dispatchers questions.. The dispatcher asked Zimmerman to watch by asking him what Trayvon was doing. This "off duty" nonsense is ridiculous as well.. No one is ever off duty in a neighborhood watch program.. Everyone is expected to keep an eye out for suspicious behavior and potential criminal activity.. Whether its your turn to walk the neighborhood or not, if you see something suspicious, you call the police.. And you protect your neighbors.. And I'm pretty sure you have no evidence that Zimmerman was the one who confronted Trayvon, and not the other way around..

If he stayed in his car there would have been NO confrontation...end of story.

Getting out of his car isn't a crime. Neither is following someone. When the operator told him not to do that, he supposedly stopped. Good luck getting a murder conviction on things that could have been done to avoid the situation.

That kid wasnt doing anything wrong for that ####### to get out of his car....what is so hard to understand about that????????????????

Absolutely correct, and Zimmerman was doing nothing wrong that deserved him receiving a broken nose, his head bashed against the pavement and the trauma of being suffocated to death by someone that said to them that they were going to die tonight...what is so hard to understand about that?If you question any of those events, then you have to equally question why Martin was walking between houses and if he was looking INSIDE them.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

So he was helpful at times. None of that changes by anything you said. The dude was still sitting in his car with a gun (off duty) at night watching, following and confronting people.

From what I understand, he was sent out by his wife, to the store. Either on the way out, or on the way back, he saw what he thought was a suspicious person walking around some houses. So he called the police, while on the phone with the dispatcher he continued to watch and answer the dispatchers questions.. The dispatcher asked Zimmerman to watch by asking him what Trayvon was doing. This "off duty" nonsense is ridiculous as well.. No one is ever off duty in a neighborhood watch program.. Everyone is expected to keep an eye out for suspicious behavior and potential criminal activity.. Whether its your turn to walk the neighborhood or not, if you see something suspicious, you call the police.. And you protect your neighbors.. And I'm pretty sure you have no evidence that Zimmerman was the one who confronted Trayvon, and not the other way around..

If he stayed in his car there would have been NO confrontation...end of story.

Getting out of his car isn't a crime. Neither is following someone. When the operator told him not to do that, he supposedly stopped. Good luck getting a murder conviction on things that could have been done to avoid the situation.

That kid wasnt doing anything wrong for that ####### to get out of his car....what is so hard to understand about that????????????????

Absolutely correct, and Zimmerman was doing nothing wrong that deserved him receiving a broken nose, his head bashed against the pavement and the trauma of being suffocated to death by someone that said to them that they were going to die tonight...what is so hard to understand about that?If you question any of those events, then you have to equally question why Martin was walking between houses and if he was looking INSIDE them.

everything

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

So he was helpful at times. None of that changes by anything you said. The dude was still sitting in his car with a gun (off duty) at night watching, following and confronting people.

From what I understand, he was sent out by his wife, to the store. Either on the way out, or on the way back, he saw what he thought was a suspicious person walking around some houses. So he called the police, while on the phone with the dispatcher he continued to watch and answer the dispatchers questions.. The dispatcher asked Zimmerman to watch by asking him what Trayvon was doing. This "off duty" nonsense is ridiculous as well.. No one is ever off duty in a neighborhood watch program.. Everyone is expected to keep an eye out for suspicious behavior and potential criminal activity.. Whether its your turn to walk the neighborhood or not, if you see something suspicious, you call the police.. And you protect your neighbors.. And I'm pretty sure you have no evidence that Zimmerman was the one who confronted Trayvon, and not the other way around..

If he stayed in his car there would have been NO confrontation...end of story.

Getting out of his car isn't a crime. Neither is following someone. When the operator told him not to do that, he supposedly stopped. Good luck getting a murder conviction on things that could have been done to avoid the situation.

That kid wasnt doing anything wrong for that ####### to get out of his car....what is so hard to understand about that????????????????

Absolutely correct, and Zimmerman was doing nothing wrong that deserved him receiving a broken nose, his head bashed against the pavement and the trauma of being suffocated to death by someone that said to them that they were going to die tonight...what is so hard to understand about that?If you question any of those events, then you have to equally question why Martin was walking between houses and if he was looking INSIDE them.

everything

case closed

 

[Underachievers]

So he was helpful at times. None of that changes by anything you said.

The dude was still sitting in his car with a gun (off duty) at night watching, following and confronting people.

From what I understand, he was sent out by his wife, to the store. Either on the way out, or on the way back, he saw what he thought was a suspicious person walking around some houses. So he called the police, while on the phone with the dispatcher he continued to watch and answer the dispatchers questions.. The dispatcher asked Zimmerman to watch by asking him what Trayvon was doing.

This "off duty" nonsense is ridiculous as well.. No one is ever off duty in a neighborhood watch program.. Everyone is expected to keep an eye out for suspicious behavior and potential criminal activity.. Whether its your turn to walk the neighborhood or not, if you see something suspicious, you call the police.. And you protect your neighbors..

And I'm pretty sure you have no evidence that Zimmerman was the one who confronted Trayvon, and not the other way around..

If he stayed in his car there would have been NO confrontation...end of story.

Getting out of his car isn't a crime. Neither is following someone. When the operator told him not to do that, he supposedly stopped.

Good luck getting a murder conviction on things that could have been done to avoid the situation.

That kid wasnt doing anything wrong for that ####### to get out of his car....what is so hard to understand about that????????????????

Getting a little uptight are you? You might want to go into self imposed seclusion for the next couple months. Pretty sure you are not going to be able to deal with how this trial is going to unfold.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

So he was helpful at times. None of that changes by anything you said.

The dude was still sitting in his car with a gun (off duty) at night watching, following and confronting people.

From what I understand, he was sent out by his wife, to the store. Either on the way out, or on the way back, he saw what he thought was a suspicious person walking around some houses. So he called the police, while on the phone with the dispatcher he continued to watch and answer the dispatchers questions.. The dispatcher asked Zimmerman to watch by asking him what Trayvon was doing.

This "off duty" nonsense is ridiculous as well.. No one is ever off duty in a neighborhood watch program.. Everyone is expected to keep an eye out for suspicious behavior and potential criminal activity.. Whether its your turn to walk the neighborhood or not, if you see something suspicious, you call the police.. And you protect your neighbors..

And I'm pretty sure you have no evidence that Zimmerman was the one who confronted Trayvon, and not the other way around..

If he stayed in his car there would have been NO confrontation...end of story.

You're right, but he didn't.. And it would have never happened if trayvon would have just continued home..But he didn't..

And you don't know who confronted who, or whether Zimmerman was still following him, or looking for a street sign, or looking to see if he was at the back gate, or walking back to his truck, or standing around on his phone.. You don't know what Trayvon was doing either.

If Trayvon decided to attack Zimmerman instead of going home, he's just as at fault for his death as Zimmerman..

 

[Carolina Hustler]

So he was helpful at times. None of that changes by anything you said.

The dude was still sitting in his car with a gun (off duty) at night watching, following and confronting people.

From what I understand, he was sent out by his wife, to the store. Either on the way out, or on the way back, he saw what he thought was a suspicious person walking around some houses. So he called the police, while on the phone with the dispatcher he continued to watch and answer the dispatchers questions.. The dispatcher asked Zimmerman to watch by asking him what Trayvon was doing.

This "off duty" nonsense is ridiculous as well.. No one is ever off duty in a neighborhood watch program.. Everyone is expected to keep an eye out for suspicious behavior and potential criminal activity.. Whether its your turn to walk the neighborhood or not, if you see something suspicious, you call the police.. And you protect your neighbors..

And I'm pretty sure you have no evidence that Zimmerman was the one who confronted Trayvon, and not the other way around..

If he stayed in his car there would have been NO confrontation...end of story.

Getting out of his car isn't a crime. Neither is following someone. When the operator told him not to do that, he supposedly stopped.

Good luck getting a murder conviction on things that could have been done to avoid the situation.

That kid wasnt doing anything wrong for that ####### to get out of his car....what is so hard to understand about that????????????????

To Zimmerman, the boy looked suspicious. And he got out of the car while on the phone with the dispatcher who was asking him what Trayvon was doing.. He was attempting to give the dispatcher the information he asked for..

 

[Lutherman2112]

Fact vs. Fantasy

Nice. Quite revealing, really.

For those that may not know, the above link leads to a video by Jared Taylor, a self proclaimed white separatist. Some of the greatest hits from his organization and magazine:

"In fact, blacks and Hispanics are, compared to whites, far more likely to be poor, illiterate, on welfare, or in jail; they are far more likely to have illegitimate children, be addicted to drugs, or have AIDS. By no definition of international competitiveness can the presence of these populations be anything but a disadvantage."
— "‘Who Speaks for Us?' (A Word of Introduction to Our Readers)," American Renaissance, 1990

"There is a difference between blacks and whites — analogous to the difference in intelligence — in psychopathic personality considered as a personality trait. ... For psychopathic personality, the mean and distribution are higher among blacks. The effect of this is that there are more black psychopaths and more psychopathic behavior among blacks."
— Richard Lynn, American Renaissance, 2002

"Blacks and whites are different. When blacks are left entirely to their own devices, Western civilization — any kind of civilization — disappears."
— Jared Taylor, American Renaissance, 2005

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Fact vs. Fantasy

Nice. Quite revealing, really. For those that may not know, the above link leads to a video by Jared Taylor, a self proclaimed white separatist.

So instead of focusing on the content of the video, you decide to attack his character by delving into his past, interesting...Using your rationale, we should evaluate Martin's past to draw conclusions about his actions the night he was killed.

 

[Toad_1234]

Fact vs. Fantasy

Nice. Quite revealing, really. For those that may not know, the above link leads to a video by Jared Taylor, a self proclaimed white separatist. Some of the greatest hits from his organization and magazine: "In fact, blacks and Hispanics are, compared to whites, far more likely to be poor, illiterate, on welfare, or in jail; they are far more likely to have illegitimate children, be addicted to drugs, or have AIDS. By no definition of international competitiveness can the presence of these populations be anything but a disadvantage." "Who Speaks for Us?' (A Word of Introduction to Our Readers)," American Renaissance, 1990 "There is a difference between blacks and whites analogous to the difference in intelligence in psychopathic personality considered as a personality trait. ... For psychopathic personality, the mean and distribution are higher among blacks. The effect of this is that there are more black psychopaths and more psychopathic behavior among blacks."Richard Lynn, American Renaissance, 2002 "Blacks and whites are different. When blacks are left entirely to their own devices, Western civilization any kind of civilization disappears."Jared Taylor, American Renaissance, 2005

JoJo gets his info from a white separatists group? I'm SHOCKED! SHOCKED i tell you!

This guy has the same smug, know-it-all look on his face that drives me nuts when I hear most Liberals talk. It's like they're cut from the same cloth. Equally deluded, but on different ends of the spectrum. He's so proud of his video!

 

[timschochet]

Ive decided that JoJo and Carolina are right about everything.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Ive decided that JoJo and Carolina are right about everything.

320 pages, new record

 

[BustedKnuckles]

So he was helpful at times. None of that changes by anything you said.

The dude was still sitting in his car with a gun (off duty) at night watching, following and confronting people.

From what I understand, he was sent out by his wife, to the store. Either on the way out, or on the way back, he saw what he thought was a suspicious person walking around some houses. So he called the police, while on the phone with the dispatcher he continued to watch and answer the dispatchers questions.. The dispatcher asked Zimmerman to watch by asking him what Trayvon was doing.

This "off duty" nonsense is ridiculous as well.. No one is ever off duty in a neighborhood watch program.. Everyone is expected to keep an eye out for suspicious behavior and potential criminal activity.. Whether its your turn to walk the neighborhood or not, if you see something suspicious, you call the police.. And you protect your neighbors..

And I'm pretty sure you have no evidence that Zimmerman was the one who confronted Trayvon, and not the other way around..

If he stayed in his car there would have been NO confrontation...end of story.

Getting out of his car isn't a crime. Neither is following someone. When the operator told him not to do that, he supposedly stopped.

Good luck getting a murder conviction on things that could have been done to avoid the situation.

That kid wasnt doing anything wrong for that ####### to get out of his car....what is so hard to understand about that????????????????

Getting a little uptight are you? You might want to go into self imposed seclusion for the next couple months. Pretty sure you are not going to be able to deal with how this trial is going to unfold.

You`re right...im letting JOJO the clown aggravate me ...hes not worth it as ive seen his true colors and you cant help ignorance

 

[ducktales]

he is innocent /thread over

 

[Toad_1234]

THIS THREAD IS LOCKED

 

[BustedKnuckles]

THIS THREAD IS LOCKED

* ribbit*

 

[pittstownkiller]

If white guys on a football forum are this emotionally tied to Martin's story, there will be blood on the streets when the jury fails to convict Zommerman. Personally, I see this as a tragic chain of events and not one to get all emotionally charged up about.

I really don't believe there will be riots if Zimmerman is acquitted. One thing that most people don't understand about the the Rodney King Riots (the last time there was a serious riot in this country after a court case) was that they were unnecessary. The Los Angeles Chief of Police, Darrell Gates, screwed up and didn't get his officers in place in South Central until it was too late. The initial protests could have easily been controlled had he been on the ball. More importantly, those riots occurred because it was police officers that were acquitted, which meant that African-Americans perceived that the system was against them. In this case a private citizen, George Zimmerman, is on trial. Though many blacks consider his actions to be racially motivated, his guilt or innocence will not be a reflection on the question of police authority, as it was with Rodney King. There were no riots after the Bernard Goetz trial, for example.

That is an interesting take Tim, that the riots were caused because of a lax police presence; it is nice to know that people will act like animals if there isn't a zookeeper to control them.

You're the one using the word animal, not me. But I would say that if chaos is encouraged it will grow.

How was the chaos encouraged; because it wasn't "put-down"? If people need to be restrained to keep from destroying themselves, then you are implying that they are animals.

 

[pittstownkiller]

Just so I can update my notebook; can I go with JoJo is a racist?

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Fact vs. Fantasy

Nice. Quite revealing, really. For those that may not know, the above link leads to a video by Jared Taylor, a self proclaimed white separatist. Some of the greatest hits from his organization and magazine: "In fact, blacks and Hispanics are, compared to whites, far more likely to be poor, illiterate, on welfare, or in jail; they are far more likely to have illegitimate children, be addicted to drugs, or have AIDS. By no definition of international competitiveness can the presence of these populations be anything but a disadvantage." "Who Speaks for Us?' (A Word of Introduction to Our Readers)," American Renaissance, 1990 "There is a difference between blacks and whites analogous to the difference in intelligence in psychopathic personality considered as a personality trait. ... For psychopathic personality, the mean and distribution are higher among blacks. The effect of this is that there are more black psychopaths and more psychopathic behavior among blacks."Richard Lynn, American Renaissance, 2002 "Blacks and whites are different. When blacks are left entirely to their own devices, Western civilization any kind of civilization disappears."Jared Taylor, American Renaissance, 2005

JoJo gets his info from a white separatists group? I'm SHOCKED! SHOCKED i tell you!

If by white separatists you mean reddit, yep you got me.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Book out by George's Dad

 

[Toad_1234]

So there are 29 potential jurors left. Does each side get 10 challenges now or is that part over with?

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

So there are 29 potential jurors left. Does each side get 10 challenges now or is that part over with?

peremptory challenges after they get to 40http://frederickleatherman.com/2013/06/15/zimmerman-trial-and-the-strategic-use-of-peremptory-challenges/

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

SANFORD – Quietly and with hardly anyone noticing, George Zimmerman's attorneys convinced a judge to ban prosecutors from using the word "profiled" in their opening statement.

That means the theory that was the backbone of the state's case – that 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was profiled — is now something prosecutors cannot mention as they launch into their case against the former Neighborhood Watch volunteer.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-geo-zimmerman-trial-profile-20130617,0,1761292.story

De la Rionda was referring not only to "profiled" but also five other words or phrases that defense attorney Mark O'Mara had asked the judge to ban in a motion he filed May 30, asking her to prohibit several "inflammatory terms".

The others are "vigilante," "self-appointed Neighborhood Watch captain," "wannabe cop," and the phrases "He got out of the car after the police told him not to," and "He confronted Trayvon Martin."

 

[ducktales]

You guys are still talking about this? He is innocent, this was just blown out of proportions because the media thought he was white --they wanted a juicy racial case of white vs black-- and now they are running with it even though he isn't http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdYChiGWKU4

 

[squistion]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/06/17/fox-news-host-trayvon-may-have-been-violent-because-he-smoked-pot/

Fox News host: Trayvon ‘may have been violent’ because he smoked pot

Fox News host Gregg Jarrett suggested on Monday that George Zimmerman might have been justified in killing Trayvon Martin because the teen “may have been violent” from smoking marijuana.

During a break in jury selection for Zimmerman’s trial, Jarrett told viewers of Fox News’ live Internet broadcast that the judge had tried to restrict the evidence to facts related to the day of the shooting.

“She’s said we’re not going to have any of this stuff introduced as evidence about the history of Trayvon Martin, whether he had a history of getting involved in fights, making threats, marijuana use, gun use, being suspended from school and so on and so forth,” he observed.

Former federal prosecutor Doug Burns pointed out that the judge may allow evidence that Martin had marijuana in his system at the time of his death.

“If an M.E. — a medical examiner — takes the witness stand and says he was high on marijuana based on toxicology, how does that play?” Jarrett wondered.

“That’s a very good question,” Burns agreed.

“If he is high, he may have acted irrationally and may have been violent,” Jarrett opined.

Burns noted that the prosecution could argue “the reverse spin, which is the effect of marijuana making you more mellow.”

“If it’s in his system, that’s a fact that the jury is entitled to know,” Burns added. “But again to repeat our point, it can cut both ways. You could call an expert to say that marijuana doesn’t make you violent.”

Speaking on the online Internet video broadcast last week, Jarrett offered the opinion that Zimmerman “has already been punished” for killing Martin because he “looks like he’s put on a hundred pounds.”

Oh yes, it is common knowledge how violent people become after they smoke marijuana.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/06/17/fox-news-host-trayvon-may-have-been-violent-because-he-smoked-pot/

Fox News host: Trayvon ‘may have been violent’ because he smoked pot

Fox News host Gregg Jarrett suggested on Monday that George Zimmerman might have been justified in killing Trayvon Martin because the teen “may have been violent” from smoking marijuana.

During a break in jury selection for Zimmerman’s trial, Jarrett told viewers of Fox News’ live Internet broadcast that the judge had tried to restrict the evidence to facts related to the day of the shooting.

“She’s said we’re not going to have any of this stuff introduced as evidence about the history of Trayvon Martin, whether he had a history of getting involved in fights, making threats, marijuana use, gun use, being suspended from school and so on and so forth,” he observed.

Former federal prosecutor Doug Burns pointed out that the judge may allow evidence that Martin had marijuana in his system at the time of his death.

“If an M.E. — a medical examiner — takes the witness stand and says he was high on marijuana based on toxicology, how does that play?” Jarrett wondered.

“That’s a very good question,” Burns agreed.

“If he is high, he may have acted irrationally and may have been violent,” Jarrett opined.

Burns noted that the prosecution could argue “the reverse spin, which is the effect of marijuana making you more mellow.”

“If it’s in his system, that’s a fact that the jury is entitled to know,” Burns added. “But again to repeat our point, it can cut both ways. You could call an expert to say that marijuana doesn’t make you violent.”

Speaking on the online Internet video broadcast last week, Jarrett offered the opinion that Zimmerman “has already been punished” for killing Martin because he “looks like he’s put on a hundred pounds.”

Oh yes, it is common knowledge how violent people become after they smoke marijuana.

Nice to know violent people don't smoke pot..

Glad we're basing our entire arguement on the Spicoli defense. This should go well.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

http://adai.uw.edu/marijuana/factsheets/aggression.htm

Marijuana and Aggression

This information was prepared by the National Cannabis Prevention and Information Centre in Australia, and used with permission. Some information may not be accurate for U.S. readers.

Does smoking marijuana cause aggression?

In general, after using marijuana a person experiences a sedating effect, which makes the drug less likely to cause violence in users than other substances such as alcohol and stimulants (e.g., amphetamines and cocaine).

However, sometimes when marijuana is used it can cause fear, anxiety, panic or paranoia, which can result in an aggressive outburst. For most people, however, once the effects of the drug wear off, their behaviour gradually improves.

Studies show that violence can occur more often among people who use marijuana regularly, rather than those who use it occasionally or not at all. It is unclear why this is the case, but it may be because people with violent tendencies can also have a range of other psychosocial problems and are therefore more likely to use marijuana. marijuana is also part of the illegal drug market, which may increase the chances of violence occurring in some social interactions.

Research also shows that marijuana users who commit violent acts usually have a history of violence before they start using the drug.

In addition, when people are withdrawing from marijuana they can be irritable, which can lead to abusive or aggressive behaviour.

Why do people become abusive or aggressive?

Using marijuana can produce strange behaviour and reactions in people when they are intoxicated. These reactions can be similar to psychosis and paranoia and because of this, marijuana users may experience the following:

• confusion – they misunderstand what is going on or what someone has said or done
• feeling threatened or frightened
• paranoia – they hear voices or think that people are out to get them

When people stop using marijuana they may experience a variety of withdrawal symptoms including:

• sleep disturbance
• irritability
• loss of appetite
• nervousness
• anxiety
• restlessness
• sweating

Experiencing any of these symptoms can make a person angry, which is an emotional response to feeling threatened or frustrated. Anger ranges from mild irritation to violent rage. Some people can express their anger in a controlled and constructive way while others lash out in an aggressive, uncontrolled way, either immediately or letting their feelings build up. This can lead to intimidating, violent or bullying behaviour, endangering them, other people and property.

How can you respond to threatening or violent behaviour?

The impact and the effects of violence on an individual can be profound and long-lasting, so doing all you can to prevent violence actually occurring is important.

The aim of calming someone down is not to prove them right or wrong, but to allow them to regain control of their behaviour without resorting to violence.

The best time to intervene is when a person is feeling anxious. Be supportive, empathic and neutral. Ask them what is wrong and try to calm them down. Move them to a quiet place and stay with them until the effects of marijuana wears off.

If a person's behaviour becomes aggressive, you could try the following tips to help calm them down:

• Before trying to intervene it is important to remember your own safety as well as the safety of the threatening person and all the people and things around them. If you think you can achieve a safe outcome for all, try to calm your friend down.
• Try to get other people who don’t need to be there to leave the area.
• Even if you’re scared and nervous, act calm. Use their name and talk in a soft, even tone – do not shout back at them. Have a relaxed posture and be non-confrontational.
• Don’t touch them.
• Ask them "What’s made you feel upset/angry?"
• Listen carefully and show empathy, acknowledging their concerns or frustrations without being patronizing.
• Let them know that you are here to help them. If there is something you can do for them, do it.
• Give them time to express themselves. Don’t hurry them.
• Keep them talking and ask open-ended questions.
• Be truthful.
• Help them set limits – "Come on mate, keep your voice down."
• Re-assess – is what you are doing working? If it’s not try something different or get help.
• If they calm down, try to distract them with other things that may take their mind off things.
• Stay with your friend until they and others are safe.
• Get them help if need be – Accident and Emergency, Police, other friends.
• If there is nothing you can do, retreat and get help.

After the effects of marijuana or marijuana withdrawal wear off, talk to your friend about what happened, how it affected you and those around you, and how this can be prevented in future.

How to help prevent aggressive and violent behaviour happening again

As a friend, you can do things that may reduce the likelihood of this happening to them again. These may include the following:

• Suggest they avoid marijuana use.
• If your friend has a mental illness like depression, anxiety or schizophrenia, encourage them not to take marijuana or any other drug, unless prescribed by a doctor.
• Encourage your friend to seek help from their GP or a counselor about their marijuana use and/or anger issues.
• Remind them of what happened last time they used marijuana.
• Suggest they avoid bingeing or polydrug use (using more than one drug at the same time), or anything that will intensify the effects of marijuana.
• Do other activities with them that don’t involve drug use.

 

[squistion]

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/06/17/fox-news-host-trayvon-may-have-been-violent-because-he-smoked-pot/

Fox News host: Trayvon ‘may have been violent’ because he smoked pot

Fox News host Gregg Jarrett suggested on Monday that George Zimmerman might have been justified in killing Trayvon Martin because the teen “may have been violent” from smoking marijuana.

During a break in jury selection for Zimmerman’s trial, Jarrett told viewers of Fox News’ live Internet broadcast that the judge had tried to restrict the evidence to facts related to the day of the shooting.

“She’s said we’re not going to have any of this stuff introduced as evidence about the history of Trayvon Martin, whether he had a history of getting involved in fights, making threats, marijuana use, gun use, being suspended from school and so on and so forth,” he observed.

Former federal prosecutor Doug Burns pointed out that the judge may allow evidence that Martin had marijuana in his system at the time of his death.

“If an M.E. — a medical examiner — takes the witness stand and says he was high on marijuana based on toxicology, how does that play?” Jarrett wondered.

“That’s a very good question,” Burns agreed.

“If he is high, he may have acted irrationally and may have been violent,” Jarrett opined.

Burns noted that the prosecution could argue “the reverse spin, which is the effect of marijuana making you more mellow.”

“If it’s in his system, that’s a fact that the jury is entitled to know,” Burns added. “But again to repeat our point, it can cut both ways. You could call an expert to say that marijuana doesn’t make you violent.”

Speaking on the online Internet video broadcast last week, Jarrett offered the opinion that Zimmerman “has already been punished” for killing Martin because he “looks like he’s put on a hundred pounds.”

Oh yes, it is common knowledge how violent people become after they smoke marijuana.

Nice to know violent people don't smoke pot..

Glad we're basing our entire arguement on the Spicoli defense. This should go well.

I honesty hope Zimmerman's lawyers go with this. If anyone on the jury has smoked pot or been around someone who has, this is a silly argument that is not going to help the defense. Maybe some of the jurors are older folk that might believe that Reefer Madness was a documentary, but, outside of that, this is not a winning position for the Zimmerman side.

 

[Ballstein]

If white guys on a football forum are this emotionally tied to Martin's story, there will be blood on the streets when the jury fails to convict Zommerman. Personally, I see this as a tragic chain of events and not one to get all emotionally charged up about.

Should the Latin community start preparing for riots?

 

[Lutherman2112]

SANFORD – Quietly and with hardly anyone noticing, George Zimmerman's attorneys convinced a judge to ban prosecutors from using the word "profiled" in their opening statement.

That means the theory that was the backbone of the state's case – that 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was profiled — is now something prosecutors cannot mention as they launch into their case against the former Neighborhood Watch volunteer.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-geo-zimmerman-trial-profile-20130617,0,1761292.story

De la Rionda was referring not only to "profiled" but also five other words or phrases that defense attorney Mark O'Mara had asked the judge to ban in a motion he filed May 30, asking her to prohibit several "inflammatory terms".

The others are "vigilante," "self-appointed Neighborhood Watch captain," "wannabe cop," and the phrases "He got out of the car after the police told him not to," and "He confronted Trayvon Martin."

From your link:

"I don't have any objection to not mentioning these words," said lead prosecutor Bernie de Rionda, and the judge quickly moved on to another issue, jury selection.

The prosecution won't use any of those words or phrases in their opening statements, but once the ream of documents ordered sealed by the court are opened as evidence, the no-no words will be flying about the courtroom.

 

[timschochet]

Of course the words will be used. But more importantly, their implication to the jury will be clear for all to see anyhow.

If I'm the prosecution, one of the very first set of questions I have for George Zimmerman when he takes the stand is:

What was it about Trayvon Martin that made you suspicious?

Why did you call 911?

Why did you step out of your car to look for Martin when the 911 operator told you it wasn't necessary?

Etc. etc. I don't think Zimmerman has a particularly good answer for any of these questions. I think he will, over the period of cross-examination, be revealed as a gung-ho wannabe cop who followed Martin because he racially profiled him as a young black thug.

 

[avoiding injuries]

Is profiling necessarily a bad thing? For instance, in my neighborhood one of my neighbors kids just got out of some type of correctional institute and moved in with them. He got caught trying to get into another house in the neighborhood after he had been drinking. I've never met the guy but I've driven past him and know what he looks like. If I see him, or someone who fits his description, I'm profiling.

 

[jon_mx]

Of course the words will be used. But more importantly, their implication to the jury will be clear for all to see anyhow.

If I'm the prosecution, one of the very first set of questions I have for George Zimmerman when he takes the stand is:

What was it about Trayvon Martin that made you suspicious?

Why did you call 911?

Why did you step out of your car to look for Martin when the 911 operator told you it wasn't necessary?

Etc. etc. I don't think Zimmerman has a particularly good answer for any of these questions. I think he will, over the period of cross-examination, be revealed as a gung-ho wannabe cop who followed Martin because he racially profiled him as a young black thug.

1. He was a stranger who looked to be casing the neighborhood.

2. We had numerous robberies and he fit the profile.

3. They always get away.

I am not sure what is so hard about it. Although I doubt Zimmerman ever takes the stand. The case against him is non-existent.

 

[avoiding injuries]

Of course the words will be used. But more importantly, their implication to the jury will be clear for all to see anyhow.

If I'm the prosecution, one of the very first set of questions I have for George Zimmerman when he takes the stand is:

What was it about Trayvon Martin that made you suspicious?

Why did you call 911?

Why did you step out of your car to look for Martin when the 911 operator told you it wasn't necessary?

Etc. etc. I don't think Zimmerman has a particularly good answer for any of these questions. I think he will, over the period of cross-examination, be revealed as a gung-ho wannabe cop who followed Martin because he racially profiled him as a young black thug.

It may not be the answers you want to hear or will accept, but those questions can easily be explained.

"Why did you call 911"... Wouldn't "why didn't you call 911" be a more difficult question to answer?

He was suspicious of someone walking in the rain who fit the description of a suspect in recent burglaries.

 

[timschochet]

Of course the words will be used. But more importantly, their implication to the jury will be clear for all to see anyhow.

If I'm the prosecution, one of the very first set of questions I have for George Zimmerman when he takes the stand is:

What was it about Trayvon Martin that made you suspicious?

Why did you call 911?

Why did you step out of your car to look for Martin when the 911 operator told you it wasn't necessary?

Etc. etc. I don't think Zimmerman has a particularly good answer for any of these questions. I think he will, over the period of cross-examination, be revealed as a gung-ho wannabe cop who followed Martin because he racially profiled him as a young black thug.

1. He was a stranger who looked to be casing the neighborhood.

2. We had numerous robberies and he fit the profile.

3. They always get away.

I am not sure what is so hard about it. Although I doubt Zimmerman ever takes the stand. The case against him is non-existent.

He has to take the stand. It's a self-defense claim. If he refuses to take the stand, it's open and shut guilty.

 

[Toad_1234]

On Zimmerman's 911 call he said that Martin looked like he was on drugs. Well, Martin was on drugs. Probable cause for suspicion is validated. You're free George. Next case on the docket.

 

[Witz]

Of course the words will be used. But more importantly, their implication to the jury will be clear for all to see anyhow.

If I'm the prosecution, one of the very first set of questions I have for George Zimmerman when he takes the stand is:

What was it about Trayvon Martin that made you suspicious?

Why did you call 911?

Why did you step out of your car to look for Martin when the 911 operator told you it wasn't necessary?

Etc. etc. I don't think Zimmerman has a particularly good answer for any of these questions. I think he will, over the period of cross-examination, be revealed as a gung-ho wannabe cop who followed Martin because he racially profiled him as a young black thug.

I get the point you're trying to make but that last statement wouldn't even come up because based on the facts out there, it isn't a true statement. He was already out of his car before that statement by the operator was made.

 

[pantherclub]

Of course the words will be used. But more importantly, their implication to the jury will be clear for all to see anyhow.

If I'm the prosecution, one of the very first set of questions I have for George Zimmerman when he takes the stand is:

What was it about Trayvon Martin that made you suspicious?

Why did you call 911?

Why did you step out of your car to look for Martin when the 911 operator told you it wasn't necessary?

Etc. etc. I don't think Zimmerman has a particularly good answer for any of these questions. I think he will, over the period of cross-examination, be revealed as a gung-ho wannabe cop who followed Martin because he racially profiled him as a young black thug.

1. He was a stranger who looked to be casing the neighborhood.

2. We had numerous robberies and he fit the profile.

3. They always get away.

I am not sure what is so hard about it. Although I doubt Zimmerman ever takes the stand. The case against him is non-existent.

He has to take the stand. It's a self-defense claim. If he refuses to take the stand, it's open and shut guilty.

that seems to be the general consensus

 

[pantherclub]

On Zimmerman's 911 call he said that Martin looked like he was on drugs. Well, Martin was on drugs. Probable cause for suspicion is validated. You're free George. Next case on the docket.

do you honestly think Treyvon just walked up and punched zimmerman unprovoked?

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

Of course the words will be used. But more importantly, their implication to the jury will be clear for all to see anyhow.

If I'm the prosecution, one of the very first set of questions I have for George Zimmerman when he takes the stand is:

What was it about Trayvon Martin that made you suspicious?

He was walking slowly [a pace of 1.25-1.5 mph based on location/time stamps in evidence] between houses and staring at them, the temperature was 61 degrees and raining, 61 degrees is cold for FL especially when it is raining, this is not behavior I normally see from my neighbors, he did not look like he was out exercising. We have had a rash of break-ins in our neighborhood and his activity looked suspicious so I called it in.

Why did you call 911?

see above

Why did you step out of your car to look for Martin when the 911 operator told you it wasn't necessary?

the NEN operator did not make that request until I was already out of my truck at which point I stopped following him.

Etc. etc. I don't think Zimmerman has a particularly good answer for any of these questions. I think he will, over the period of cross-examination, be revealed as a gung-ho wannabe cop who followed Martin because he racially profiled him as a young black thug.

red

 

[jon_mx]

Of course the words will be used. But more importantly, their implication to the jury will be clear for all to see anyhow.

If I'm the prosecution, one of the very first set of questions I have for George Zimmerman when he takes the stand is:

What was it about Trayvon Martin that made you suspicious?

Why did you call 911?

Why did you step out of your car to look for Martin when the 911 operator told you it wasn't necessary?

Etc. etc. I don't think Zimmerman has a particularly good answer for any of these questions. I think he will, over the period of cross-examination, be revealed as a gung-ho wannabe cop who followed Martin because he racially profiled him as a young black thug.

1. He was a stranger who looked to be casing the neighborhood.

2. We had numerous robberies and he fit the profile.

3. They always get away.

I am not sure what is so hard about it. Although I doubt Zimmerman ever takes the stand. The case against him is non-existent.

He has to take the stand. It's a self-defense claim. If he refuses to take the stand, it's open and shut guilty.

that seems to be the general consensus

General consensus is often wrong. All Zimmerman has to do is present some proof that he acted in self-defense. Then at that point all he has to do is to create a "reasonable doubt" as to whether he acted in self-defense. So if Zimmerman shows pictures of his face bloodied up on the night of the shooting, that would be proof enough to show that he acted in self-defense. There is no requirement that he takes the stand. To say it is open and shut guilty is ridiculous. For someone who follows the case closely, Tim has a lot of misconceptions.

 

[jwp]

On Zimmerman's 911 call he said that Martin looked like he was on drugs. Well, Martin was on drugs. Probable cause for suspicion is validated. You're free George. Next case on the docket.

Wow. Lots of times in my life I've looked that way. I guess I'm lucky to be alive.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Of course the words will be used. But more importantly, their implication to the jury will be clear for all to see anyhow.

If I'm the prosecution, one of the very first set of questions I have for George Zimmerman when he takes the stand is:

What was it about Trayvon Martin that made you suspicious?

He has already said, trayvon was wandering around the houses, looking suspicious, looking like he was on drugs

Why did you call 911?

He didn't call 911, he called the none emergency line, and he did so because he saw a suspicious person he didn't recognize wandering around his neighbors homes. And that's what you do when you're in the neighborhood watch.

Why did you step out of your car to look for Martin when the 911 operator told you it wasn't necessary?

He stepped out of his car because the dispatcher said "what is he doing now" and he was going to continue to give the dispatcher updates, but needed to keep a visial to do so. He was already outside of the car when the dispatcher said he didn't need to follow, and there is no proof that he continued to follow, alternatively, based on the timeline, looks like trayvon stuck around or doubled back instead..

Etc. etc. I don't think Zimmerman has a particularly good answer for any of these questions. I think he will, over the period of cross-examination, be revealed as a gung-ho wannabe cop who followed Martin because he racially profiled him as a young black thug.

You are terrible at this.. He'd walk easily if you were asking the questions..

 

[timschochet]

It's so much fun reading Hustler and JoJo attempt to answer the questions I poised.

Of course the words will be used. But more importantly, their implication to the jury will be clear for all to see anyhow.

If I'm the prosecution, one of the very first set of questions I have for George Zimmerman when he takes the stand is:

What was it about Trayvon Martin that made you suspicious?

Why did you call 911?

Why did you step out of your car to look for Martin when the 911 operator told you it wasn't necessary?

Etc. etc. I don't think Zimmerman has a particularly good answer for any of these questions. I think he will, over the period of cross-examination, be revealed as a gung-ho wannabe cop who followed Martin because he racially profiled him as a young black thug.

1. He was a stranger who looked to be casing the neighborhood.

2. We had numerous robberies and he fit the profile.

3. They always get away.

I am not sure what is so hard about it. Although I doubt Zimmerman ever takes the stand. The case against him is non-existent.

He has to take the stand. It's a self-defense claim. If he refuses to take the stand, it's open and shut guilty.

that seems to be the general consensus

General consensus is often wrong. All Zimmerman has to do is present some proof that he acted in self-defense. Then at that point all he has to do is to create a "reasonable doubt" as to whether he acted in self-defense. So if Zimmerman shows pictures of his face bloodied up on the night of the shooting, that would be proof enough to show that he acted in self-defense. There is no requirement that he takes the stand. To say it is open and shut guilty is ridiculous. For someone who follows the case closely, Tim has a lot of misconceptions.

Sure I do. I will bet you $100 that Zimmerman takes the stand. Do we have a bet?

 

[jon_mx]

It's so much fun reading Hustler and JoJo attempt to answer the questions I poised.

Of course the words will be used. But more importantly, their implication to the jury will be clear for all to see anyhow.

If I'm the prosecution, one of the very first set of questions I have for George Zimmerman when he takes the stand is:

What was it about Trayvon Martin that made you suspicious?

Why did you call 911?

Why did you step out of your car to look for Martin when the 911 operator told you it wasn't necessary?

Etc. etc. I don't think Zimmerman has a particularly good answer for any of these questions. I think he will, over the period of cross-examination, be revealed as a gung-ho wannabe cop who followed Martin because he racially profiled him as a young black thug.

1. He was a stranger who looked to be casing the neighborhood.

2. We had numerous robberies and he fit the profile.

3. They always get away.

I am not sure what is so hard about it. Although I doubt Zimmerman ever takes the stand. The case against him is non-existent.

He has to take the stand. It's a self-defense claim. If he refuses to take the stand, it's open and shut guilty.

that seems to be the general consensus

General consensus is often wrong. All Zimmerman has to do is present some proof that he acted in self-defense. Then at that point all he has to do is to create a "reasonable doubt" as to whether he acted in self-defense. So if Zimmerman shows pictures of his face bloodied up on the night of the shooting, that would be proof enough to show that he acted in self-defense. There is no requirement that he takes the stand. To say it is open and shut guilty is ridiculous. For someone who follows the case closely, Tim has a lot of misconceptions.

Sure I do. I will bet you $100 that Zimmerman takes the stand. Do we have a bet?

I already have $100 from the person guaranteeing a plea deal.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

It's so much fun reading Hustler and JoJo attempt to answer the questions I poised.

Of course the words will be used. But more importantly, their implication to the jury will be clear for all to see anyhow.

If I'm the prosecution, one of the very first set of questions I have for George Zimmerman when he takes the stand is:

What was it about Trayvon Martin that made you suspicious?

Why did you call 911?

Why did you step out of your car to look for Martin when the 911 operator told you it wasn't necessary?

Etc. etc. I don't think Zimmerman has a particularly good answer for any of these questions. I think he will, over the period of cross-examination, be revealed as a gung-ho wannabe cop who followed Martin because he racially profiled him as a young black thug.

1. He was a stranger who looked to be casing the neighborhood.

2. We had numerous robberies and he fit the profile.

3. They always get away.

I am not sure what is so hard about it. Although I doubt Zimmerman ever takes the stand. The case against him is non-existent.

He has to take the stand. It's a self-defense claim. If he refuses to take the stand, it's open and shut guilty.

that seems to be the general consensus

General consensus is often wrong. All Zimmerman has to do is present some proof that he acted in self-defense. Then at that point all he has to do is to create a "reasonable doubt" as to whether he acted in self-defense. So if Zimmerman shows pictures of his face bloodied up on the night of the shooting, that would be proof enough to show that he acted in self-defense. There is no requirement that he takes the stand. To say it is open and shut guilty is ridiculous. For someone who follows the case closely, Tim has a lot of misconceptions.

Sure I do. I will bet you $100 that Zimmerman takes the stand. Do we have a bet?

I cant imagine the Defense would be THAT dumb...but god i hope they are haha

 

[Carolina Hustler]

It's so much fun reading Hustler and JoJo attempt to answer the questions I poised.

Hopefully as fun as it was reading your ridiculous questions...

I don't think Zimmerman has a particularly good answer for any of these questions

Well when you ask the mind blowing questions like Why did you call 911, and whats your favorite color, you know it's all gonna come down like a house of cards..

 

[Toad_1234]

On Zimmerman's 911 call he said that Martin looked like he was on drugs. Well, Martin was on drugs. Probable cause for suspicion is validated. You're free George. Next case on the docket.

do you honestly think Treyvon just walked up and punched zimmerman unprovoked?

Of course not. I think Zimmerman has hellbent on making sure Travyon didn't escape and thought he was some type of authority because he was neighborhood watch and had a gun.

Zimmerman chasing Trayvon doesn't give him the right to assault George. That's against the law.

 

[Toad_1234]

On Zimmerman's 911 call he said that Martin looked like he was on drugs. Well, Martin was on drugs. Probable cause for suspicion is validated. You're free George. Next case on the docket.

Wow. Lots of times in my life I've looked that way. I guess I'm lucky to be alive.

On Zimmerman's 911 call he said that Martin looked like he was on drugs. Well, Martin was on drugs. Probable cause for suspicion is validated. You're free George. Next case on the docket.

Wow. Lots of times in my life I've looked that way. I guess I'm lucky to be alive.

I think you're safe as long as you don't try to beat someone up that's packing a gun.

 

[Jojo the circus boy]

This is going to come down to Z not having a reasonable escape, his self-defense defense holds up and he walks.

For him to be convicted of Manslaughter if I have my legalese correct: he only needs to show "lawful justification" which between phoning in the suspicious activity to the NEN and given the wounds he sustained, and given his hands do not have as much as a scratch on him, he won't be convicted of Manslaughter either.

This never should have went to trial, what a waste of money.