Much of the talk about
the tragic death of Trayvon Martin centers on Florida’s “Stand Your Ground”
law. As for as I can tell from news reports, this had nothing to do with “Stand
Your Ground” so whether or not it is a good law is irrelevant to this situation.
From the 911 call that I
assume was factual information, Trayvon Martin was doing nothing wrong, was
where he had a right to be and he was genuinely concerned when he saw he was
being stalked by someone in a van. From the cell phone call he made to a friend
he was obviously frightened and we now know it was with good reason.
George Zimmerman, on the
other hand, apparently told the 911 Operator he planned to follow the young man
and when he was told not to do so, he ignored correct and official advice from the police and continued with
his unlawful behavior. If there was a struggle between the two men, that means
George Zimmerman not only followed, but got out of his van, so the stalking
behavior was amplified. If he had a gun with which he shot Trayvon Martin, there
was even more reason for Trayvon to be concerned. Whether or not he knew it, he
was being stalked by a man with a gun and his life was in danger. If George
Zimmerman was genuinely concerned, he still should have stayed in his van and
left Trayvon Martin for the police after he made that 911 call.
George Zimmerman may have made an honest mistake, but what an awful and
heart-breaking tragedy his behavior caused Trayvon Martin and his family.
I'm Rick Blumenberg . . . and that's My View from Tanner Creek.
2 comments:
Rick in America a person is innocent until proven guilty, I have heard enough so called evidence that i believe Mr. Zimmerman could be innocent of committing a murder but not innocent of accidentally killing a 17 year old young man out in a gated community on a rainy night dressed like most burglars when they are looking for a place to rob. Mr Zimmerman had every right to be there, he was the security guard.We don't know what happened
I totally agree with you Rick. "IF" the details you are are truly factual. I believe all we have heard so far are "various" reports from "various" sources, none of which have been validated by sworn court testimony. I feel that it is much to early for anyone outside of a court room to draw any conclusions. Just my take.
Post a Comment