Black Man Shoots White Teen, Jury says Self Defense. And Nobody Cares

Huh. Roderick Scott went out of his house to confront a trio of punks breaking into cars in his Greece, New York neighborhood. Scott’s story was that he fired two rounds at one of them when the young man charged him after being told to freeze and wait for the cops. So, we largely have an inverse image of the incident in which Trayvon Martin perished, complete with the kinfolk weeping thusly . . .

“The message is that we can all go out and get guns and feel anybody that we feel is threatening us and lie about the fact,” said Jim Cervini, Christopher’s father. “My son never threatened anybody. He was a gentle child, his nature was gentle, he was a good person and he was never, ever arrested for anything, and has never been in trouble. He was 16 years and four months old, and he was slaughtered.”

Alas, for the future value of the Christopher Cervini trademark and subsequent merchandise sales, young Chris didn’t really look like the son of anyone famous or influential. If they’d had one.

How heavily did stories of gangs of rednecks beating the life out of a black man hang upon the mind of Mr. Scott in the split second before he pulled the trigger? Who cares?

The jury clearly believed that Scott was in fear for his life when he defended himself, and all the second-guessing and carping about him being a wannabe cop went either unmentioned, or unheeded. Absent more information that the state, with all its resources, was not able to cobble together a case to the satisfaction of the jury, I believe that Cervini’s death is one of the possible outcomes of a young man being out screwing around when he shouldn’t have been.

When I was growing up, that’s what I was told. Run with a bad crowd, bad things can happen. Act a certain way, dress a certain way, mouth off to the wrong person, and bad things can and do happen.

Neither President Obama nor Attorney General Eric Holder were not available for comment.

301 Responses to Black Man Shoots White Teen, Jury says Self Defense. And Nobody Cares

  1. avatargof says:

    Are we sure this teen wasn’t profiled? I mean, white guys breaking into cars. This is discrimination against a criminal. Come on, criminals have rights, we all know it.

    I demand a civil rights investigation!

    • avatarready,fire,aim says:

      wheres Jessie and Al when you need them?

      • avatarhi there says:

        they are not needed this kid was commiting a crime Trayvonne was not. Zimmerman perued Trayvonne and this kid charged…..big difference.

        • avatarChris says:

          Extra “N” and “E” for effect eh?

        • avatarknightofbob says:

          Martin was supposedly taking a “shortcut.” When you’re an adult, a “shortcut” on private property is what the judge calls “trespassing.” It’s a crime.

        • avatarhalfscot says:

          So Trayvonne (sic) wasn’t committing a crime, huh? I guess beating someone senseless, potentially to death, isn’t a crime? Maybe not in your world. I guess it’s quite OK to beat the crap out of someone ‘following’ you. How dare they! All he had to do was stop and talk to Zimmerman, instead he sucker punches him, as is done in street fights, and even says he’s going to kill him. Yep, no crime there. Poor ‘innocent’ kid killed. I’ve seen people killed with lesser beatings.

        • avatarJake says:

          So you’re taking the shooters word on something in this case? Instant discrepancy, son.

        • avatarWilliam Burke says:

          Hi there, Hi There! Were you trying to say Zimmerman “perused” Martin? NO?

          “Hi” is short for “Hiram”, right?

        • avatarSandyLester says:

          You have zero idea what you are talking about Zimmerman was jumped from behind standing at his truck

        • avatarMatt in FL says:

          Speaking of having zero idea…

        • avatarIGotBupkis, "'Faeces Evenio', Mr. Holder?" says:

          }}} You have zero idea what you are talking about Zimmerman was jumped from behind standing at his truck

          Unfortunately, I believe you are almost as mistaken as he is.

          This is GZ’s own filmed statement to the police THE DAY after the event. So he didn’t exactly have a lot of time to try and carefully match his statements to the evidence left at the scene:

          I have no doubt at all that the police and forensics experts AND the prosecuting attorney AND the legion of DOJ people who had access to the video went over it with a fine-toothed comb to compare with the collected forensics, etc., to find any clear discrepancies between known, verifiable facts and the description of events GZ provided in the video.

          The main thing is, while he was headed back towards his truck, he was still well away from it in terms of how far he had walked.

        • avatarJake says:

          Bupkis, if you read very carefully you’ll notice I was referring to HT taking THIS shooter’s word about the incident. Nothing about GZ. You are replying to a sentiment that does not exist, good play.

        • avatarEqualizer says:

          Incorrect. Martin attacked. Zimmerman only FOLLOWED. He did not pursue. Pursuit indicates eventual capture. Zimmerman was not looking to capture Martin. Only keep him in sight in order to inform the Police upon arrival. Which is why he was attempting to give the Dispatcher directions to where he was located.
          And Assault IS a crime.

        • avatarblack man says:

          trayvon charged george and punched him in the face, thats assault and battery right there and george had every right to defend his life. get the story straight and don’t post stupid comments.

        • avatarYourMom says:

          are you kidding ?? trayvon was not committing a crime ? beating someone’s head into the ground isn’t a crime, then i need to come see you and smash your head into some concrete you moron!

        • avatarYouidiot says:

          Assault is a crime you damn fool.

        • avatarKypsalis says:

          Turns out…assault is a crime. A pretty serious one. Trayvon was beating the crap out of Zimmerman.

        • avatarJANET says:

          HI THERE IS CORRECT. THERE IS A BIG DIFFERENCE IN THIS CRIME & WHAT HAPPENED TO TRAYVON. TRAYVON WAS MINDING HIS OWN BUSINESS, ZIMMERMAN WAS STALKING HIM. ALSO TRAYVON WAS NOT WALKING ON ANYONES YARD HE WAS ON THE ROAD KNIGHTOFBOB GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT.

        • avatarcrockett says:

          If hi there is correct Janet would be smart. The problem is hi there is wrong and Janet is ignorant.

        • avatarcommon sense says:

          Im sure assault is a crime

        • avatarJoe says:

          Aggravated assault is a crime….more severe than breaking into cars.

        • avatarJoe Dirt says:

          Charged at him Huh?…….We’ll never hear Cervini’s story! (sounds familar?) GET OVER IT

        • avatarBo Kassa says:

          No… Trayvon “doubled back” and attacked Zimmerman as the court records and witnesses attested to. Same thing as happened above. Only difference was Trayvon was a professed thug who had a prior record Cervanti did not. They both got what they were looking for and deserved.

        • avatarshempus says:

          rrrnt. First assaulting someone could be a felony, and it NOT a justifiable response to being watched by a neighborhood WATCH person, that IS a crime. Secondly crime or no crime, self defense is the issue.

        • avatartim says:

          even if they were committing a crime,they were unarmed …. so no, here is little difference…janet,following someone is not a crime,there were alot of robberies in that area so anyone was suspicious…but when martin decided to then pursue zimm after he turned around to go back to his vehicle…martin is responsible because he asaulted zimm..

        • avatarInnessa111 says:

          Mr. Scott was not injured, not beaten in any way and he really knew the marshall arts! He didn’t give that young man any chance to act: he shot him (rightfully, in my opinion) when the teen started running toward him. A little different scenario, isn’t it?

        • avatarfedupwith mediabias says:

          Apparently physically attacking a person including slamming his head on concrete is not a crime?? Everyone seems to forget or ignore who attacked who.

        • avatarJames G says:

          Trayvon’s girlfriend told Piers the other night, something to the affect that “T went back to whoopass”
          She also said on another show that T “hit first, and that he told her “I am almost at my daddy’s”.. which, if you look at the map, proves that T went BACK, out of his way, to run into Zimmerman again..

        • avatarBenny says:

          What is it to perued someone? Ignorant… Learn to spell.

        • avatarpercynjpn says:

          So it’s wrong to defend yourself against a teen when he’s brutally attacking you, but ok to kill a teen for allegingly breaking into a car. You are no doubt one of the black racists who support any black for any reason, anytime – just cause you’re black. And then claim “I want justice” (for the blacks who commit the majority of violent crimes).

        • avatarjay says:

          Actually Trayvon DID commit a crime. Assault. Because George-Peruvian-African-American Zimmerman wanted to know what he was doing in the 40% black neighborhood, Trayvon punched him. In unrelated news, Fruit juice and hard candies are great for creating “Purple Drank”.

        • avatarBernardo Stevens says:

          When Trayvon snuck up on Zimm, got him to the ground, broke his nose and straddled him, bashing his head on the concrete….that was his crime.

          And the jury, who heard all the evidence, was convinced that’s what happened.

        • avatarCombat Veteran Seabee says:

          I see that you conveniently have a loss of memory of the facts, as presented in the trial, and by witnesses!
          Martin was followed, yes, as a suspicious person, but he did reach his home, but instead of going inside, he decided to confront and attack Zimmerman, which became felony assault! Too bad, you lose! He escalated the whole situation, and quit showing the picture of a 12 yr. old, show him as he really is, or was, a thug black kid stoner, training to be an MMA fighter! TRUTH after the fact!

      • avatarTo_Live_Free says:

        Please enlighten me with your definition of “big difference”.

        Is it a big difference that you read the story wrong or perhaps you still believe the main steam media that Trayvon was doing no harm?
        Yes GZ is guilty for giving chase after he was told not to do so..But if you would have listened to the trial you would have found out that Trayvon hid on GZ and when GZ lost track of him He tried to return to his car. Trayvon hid in the bushes and came at GZ as he was returning to his car. you can get a transcript of the trial by asking for it.. or do some research on the web.

        In this story

        “Scott’s story was that he fired two rounds at one of them when the young man charged him after being told to freeze and wait for the cops.”
        This man fired 2 shots as this kids came at him. and then ultimately find his untimely death.
        Kind of sounds similar right? except this man in this story fired 2 shots . this is not a stand your ground thing now is it? Hell this isn’t even self defense Because the fact of the these kids where just burglarizing his car.
        Trayvon had Skittles and Watermelon Arizona Tea. Mix those together along with cough syrup.. What do you get? Purple Drank. Look it up These boys were not on drugs But trayvon Was on Purple Drank.

        • avatarJANET says:

          WRONG THERE IS NOT 1 WITNESS WHO SAW TRAYVON JUMP OUT OF ANY BUSHES SO NOBODY KNOWS WHAT REALLY HAPPENED & WHO THREW THE FIRST PUNCH. AGAIN PLEASE GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT.

        • avatarMike the Limey says:

          Surely you mean o evidence of GZ punching anyone, whereas TM had marks on his hands typical of those from punching someone about the head.
          Please get YOUR “facts” straight…..

        • Rachel Jeantel said Trayvon jumped Zimmerman because he thought he might be a ‘white ass cracker’ and a ‘gay rapist’. Therefore, Trayvon did the attacking first, she even admitted he threw the first punch. Trayvon sucker punched Zimmerman and pinned him down leaving him no choice but to defend himself from imminent harm or death as Trayvon was pounding his head on the sidewalk.

        • avatart says:

          There is no use arguing with people about the trayvone because they only hear what they want to hear. I have one question: If trayvone as so scared why didn’t he run home? how was only 100 yards from his house. This is what I teach my children to do. Of course my children don’t do drugs, do’t act like thugs and are not racist. In order to have a discussion you have to two or more parties willing to listen with out turning to name calling and getting angry. I don’t even bother to try with some people. It shows the intelligence level of some if they resort to vulgar language and name calling.

        • avatarjay says:

          Great points, To_Live_Free. I would like to amend the GZ issue with him not being guilty for refusing a “suggestion” by the 911 op. It was NOT a lawful order and he was not bound by the law to follow it. Yes, things nat have been different, but GZ committed NO crime. TM did when he smashed GZ in the face.

      • avatarCindy says:

        You are full of it. Trayvon committed a crime of assault and battery. Even his friend Rachel said zimmerman was suppose to just take the beating like white people do. Trayvon double back to attack zimmerman and pounded his head into cement. We are tired of the black on white crime. We will fight back so deal with it.

      • avatarRo Candle says:

        Zimmerman was heading back to his car and was jumped..NOTHING wrong?? try assult, last time I looked it was still breaking the law

    • avatarModel 31 says:

      I have no interest in what the victim looked like when he was shot. I want to see the yearbook picture when he was 12-14 yrs. /sarcasm

      • avatarCarrie says:

        This is nothing more than payback from blacks…it will continue until we start marching and screaming “racism” like every scumbag did with the Zimmerman case, from Obama on down…

        • avatarCathy says:

          I think calling our president a scumbag is wrong. If you don’t respect the man or woman, at least respect the office, please.

        • avatarMike the Limey says:

          Respect is earned & not an automatic right.

    • avatarHome says:

      This article fails to mention that the unfortunate teen was beyond legally drunk, with subtantial amphetamines in his system( not prescribed) ….

      • avatarJason says:

        You don’t get the sarcasm. He was saying by breaking into the car in the first place the kid probably had it coming. The jury decided to set the man free because the state couldn’t prove that the shooter didn’t feel reasonably threatened. What the article does point out is where are the protests on a similar case where the color is or at least seen to be reversed.

    • avatarMichael A Zarate Jr says:

      This is a Example of Exactly why this Stand Your Ground Law should be done away with. (You do it to Mine, And I will do it to Yours) What a Barbaric Law.

      • avatarMike the Limey says:

        Wrong.
        Doing away with SYG will not stop incidents of this type but it WILL lead to the deaths of & serious injury to people attacked by violent criminals.

      • avatarthinkpink414 says:

        Stand your ground laws are needed. They do however need only to be applicable when it is your ground to stand… What I mean is, going looking for situations that have forseeable consequences should not apply. Like Zimmerman for instance, had he never gotten out of his car, things may/most likely would have turned out without tragedy. Same thing with the story above… if scott would have called the cops and watched the kids til they got there, no one would be dead. Looking outside and seeing 3 kids in a car does not justify grabbing your gun, loading it, and running down to confront and shoot at them?.., not so much.

        Now if there were people running out of your home when you arrived home and they charge you, you need a “stand your ground” law. When there is an immediate moment of ‘him or me’ that is the point of the law. It is not for power happy men to go out looking to make a citizen’s arrest or shoot someone.

        As for the case comparison between scott and zimmerman, it is apparent that we can not win. White people will always be at fault when its black/white cases. Black shooter = justified while white shooter = racist.

    • I would like to know where are all the politicians who demanded an investigation on Zimmerman. Or how about the racial comments of our president, who by far had no right to involve himself in this state local issue!! Hey Eric Holder where are you? Why don’t you want to get on national TV and make stupid comments? How about an investigation on Roderick Scott??

  2. avatarpk in AZ says:

    No comments from jesse jackson or al sharpton?

    Imagine that….

    • avatarhi there says:

      they are not needed this kid was commiting a crime Trayvonne was not. Zimmerman perued Trayvonne and this kid charged…..big difference

      • avatarRalph says:

        No Big difference, both breaking the law by assaulting or attempting to assault. Justice it appears was rendered in both cases.

      • avatarDoug says:

        Trayvon pounced on Zimmerman and beat his head against the sidewalk. That’s a crime.

      • avatarMark says:

        Zimmerman’s following of Martin does Not constitute a crime in any sense. While confrontation of someone who is following you may be one alternative response, violence is not. Threatening is assault and striking someone unprovoked is battery.
        When you are assaulted and battered you may continue to be passive, but the law also allows you to defend yourself. Damage to Zimmerman in photos at the crime scene are consistent with the results of an assault, leaving Zimmerman the only one present with the choice to make of how he must respond.

        • avatarMichael A Zarate Jr says:

          What about Trayvon’s right to stand his Ground ? If he felt threatened by Zimmerman he did what any un armed person who felt his life in danger would do.

        • avatarMike the Limey says:

          TM didn’t “stand his ground”; he turned around from heading towards safety & attacked GZ.
          BIG difference.

        • avatarMatt in FL says:

          Aggravated Assault is not a proportional response to being followed. And that’s if you accept the premise that GZ was following TM when he got hit. I don’t accept that premise.

      • avatarJim says:

        How do you “peru” someone?

      • avatarAnon in CT says:

        I like how this troll cuts and pastes his typos into all his spam comments.

        What a low-quality troll. I demand a better caliber of troll.

      • avatarWilliam Burke says:

        Is there an echo in here?

      • avatarJeremyR says:

        Next time you are walking down the street, look up from the pavement. is that a person ahead of you? Are they going the same way you are going? HOLY CRAP! you are following some one and now they have the right to confront you, sucker punch you and maybe even keel you!

      • avatarMike the Limey says:

        Martin was shot whist committing a violent assault & the victim had already suffered a broken nose.
        The shot was justified.
        Anything else is fluff, conjecture & outright untruth.

        • avatarJANET says:

          OH COME ON ZIMMERMAN CLEARLY STARTED THIS BECAUSE HE WAS STALKING TRAYVON ALL BECAUSE TRAYVON HAD ON A HOODIE, WAS WALKING TO SLOW & WAS LOOKING ABOUT, LAST TIME I CHECKED NONE OF THESE WERE A FRICKING CRIME. ZIMMERMAN SHOULD HAVE STAYED IN HIS DAM CAR BECAUSE HE HAD THE COPS ON THE WAY.

        • avatarMike the Limey says:

          Third key up on the left side of your keyboard.

          If you weren’t there, then you know nothing of what you say.
          IF, for the sake of argument GZ was following TM, doing so was assuredly NOT a reason for TM to violently assault GZ.
          The moment he did, GZ was within his rights to save himself from even more serious injury or death. TM was a young thug played the hard man game & lost.

        • avatarJames G says:

          Janet didn’t watch the trial, did she? :\

    • avatarBLAMMO says:

      Maybe it’s because the story is from 2009. We must have missed the indignant outrage back then.

      TTAG – Instead of deleting the posting like you so often do, leave it in place and own up to it.

  3. avatarST says:

    That is because white voters are not the Democratic Party’s core constituency.

  4. avatarScott says:

    I care; this is another “win” for armed self-defense. I don’t necessarily feel great about someone losing their life, but they made that choice themselves. Therefore, I will sleep easy.

    • avatarGrande says:

      Thank you for being consistent with your viewpoint, not biting on this clear attempt at race-baiting, and not being a hypocrite. That sir, is so refreshing.

    • avatarPaul says:

      Well, I don’t agree. Strictly from a tactical standpoint, this guy was not under threat until he went outside and confronted the “teens”. Why not stay inside and call the po-po? By leaving his house he put himself in a position where he had to defend himself. If you ask me, he escalated the incident where he didn’t have to thus raising the odds of having to use his gun.

      • avatarDoc says:

        That’s the same thing with zimmerman he should have stayed in his damn car when the cops told him to

        • avatarCortney says:

          Irresponsible doesn’t equate to illegal, however. Should he have put himself in that situation? Absolutely not. Did he every right to do so? Sure! He was just seeing what was going on; he didn’t ask for those kids to break into cars, and I seriously doubt he wanted that kid to charge him.

          Is it a crime to put yourself in a situation in which you might get hurt? Nope, as long as you’re not the aggressor. Judicially speaking, that’s all that matters.

        • avatarRAE says:

          When are you going to get it in your head- THE COPS DID NOT TELL HIM ANYTHING! Did you even watch the trial? I didn’t think so.

        • avatarhi there says:

          they are not needed this kid was commiting a crime Trayvonne was not. Zimmerman perued Trayvonne and this kid charged…..big difference

        • avatarJake says:

          The man did not speak to a single oathed officer until after Martin was shot. 911 operators are minimum wage desk jockeys with ZERO training on how to handle any sort of criminal situation.

        • avatarWilliam Burke says:

          Except the cops never “told him so”. When you call 911, does a cop answer?

          Try it tonight. If a cop answers, tell him your neighbor is an alien, and is mutilating your cattle.

          Don’t forget to scream, “HELP!”

        • avatarJeremyR says:

          The 911 operator asked him where the subject was now. In order to get an answer, he HAD to exit his car. When the dispatcher realized he was out of his car, he did NOT order him to return, but merely stated he did not have to follow the teen.
          Tough crowd some times, as in hard to splain stuff to. The regulars are trying though, keep on em.

        • avatarEqualizer says:

          Again, a false statement. No instruction was given by the Civilian Dispatcher, no cops were on the phone, to remain in his vehicle. When he exited his truck, he dispatcher heard him running. The Dispatcher asked if he was following, Zimmerman said yes, the Dispatcher said We don’t need you to do that, Zimmerman said ok and headed back to his truck. That is when Martin assaulted him.

        • avatarmrstockenstine says:

          You keep repeating a lie. He was out of his car when the dispatcher told him “we don’t need you to do that”. A big difference in telling him not to follow. Zimmerman answered “O.K.” and ceased following at the time. He had lost sight of Martin and was looking for an address to relay to the dispatcher when Treyvon attacked him. Bad decision on Treyvon’s part.

      • avatartraye says:

        My car, my property.

        Nothing else needs to be said. The man had an absolute right to be were he was.

      • avatarMark N. says:

        Read the story again, he HAD called the police, and told the chumps to stay put until they arrived. If this kid had run and been shot in the back, different result, but charging was a bad idea. Oh, and doncha know, citizens are authorized to make arrests for crimes committed in their presence.

        • avatarCortney says:

          Mark, you’re right. He called the police, but he didn’t speak to an officer. He spoke to a dispatcher. The advice (and I stress this word, ADVICE) they gave was to stay in the vehicle for his safety, only. There are no legal repercussions from that.

        • avatarPat says:

          Kid must have been high as a kite (heard he was) to rush at that big dude with a gun. Strange, but I don’t know the story.

      • avatarCentralIL says:

        He was being a good neighbor and attempting to stop a crime in progress, just like a clerk confronting a shoplifter. The individual who attacked him escalated the incident.

      • avatarWLCE says:

        Bullshit.

        More “Zimmerman should have stayed in the car” bullshit.

        • avatarPat says:

          SOOOO damn many on the TM bandwagon just cant get past that irrelevant point. If the teen had minded his watchman elder and stayed put, til the cops showed up (or at least ran away, like criminals do on COPS), NOTHING would have happened. But, as so many troubled teens do, he lost his temper and brought a knuckle sandwich to a lead buffet.

        • avatarjoseph kavanagh says:

          Pat, you hit the nail on the head! never bring a knuckle sandwich to a gunfight.

        • avatarfedupwith mediabias says:

          Neighborhood watch should have stayed in his car instead of keeping an eye on the person walking around in the middle of a rainy night, while so many burglaries are going on?? I would have fired him!

  5. avatarColby says:

    There was similarly zero outcry when John White was pardoned from his manslaughter conviction after shooting 17 year old Daniel Cicciaro in the face – with a OMG unlicensed Beretta pistol – IN NEW YORK.

    It was on Long Island, as opposed to NYC, but I doubt the outcome would have differed.

    • avatarhi there says:

      they are not needed this kid was commiting a crime Trayvonne was not. Zimmerman perued Trayvonne and this kid charged…..big difference

      • avatarMichael B. says:

        So you think it’s okay for people to be executed over simple crimes?

        Nice.

        The Trayvon supporters have no sense of shame and are incapable of experiencing cognitive dissonance, apparently.

        • avatarrobert says:

          A crime doesn’t have to be committed ,you only have to fear for the life or safety of yourself , wife , kids neighbors ,or anyone not able to defend themselves . and as far a executing criminals for minor offenses , at any point they have the ability to stand down or further the problem ,…..what was his intensions when he charged? was he going to run home to mommy or rid himself of a witness ? THIN the HERD and there wont be another crime committed by this young man . He choose to commit the crime he knew it was illegal and therefore all blame goes to him… Know this if someone attempted to attack or restrain my family illegally I have no problem with removing them from the equation…..

      • avatarJon R. says:

        Colby’s comment had nothing to do with the Zimmerman trial.

      • avatarRalph says:

        No Big difference, both breaking the law by assaulting or attempting to assault. Justice it appears was rendered in both cases.

      • avatarpyratemime says:

        You keep saying this but it still remains untrue.

      • avatarJake says:

        he just kept talking in one long incredibly unbroken sentence so that no one had the chance to interrupt it was really quite hypnotic

      • avatarC says:

        Spell check before you start copy pasting.

      • avatarBig un says:

        You keep saying Trayvon was not committing a crime, however assault is a crime, he assaulted Zimmerman, the other kid attempted to assault when he charged, there is no difference here, Trayvon was not committing a crime by walking through the neighborhood, when he attacked Zimmerman he WAS committing a crime, Zimmerman did not shoot him arbitrarily simply because he was walking innocently through the neighborhood, he shot him while in the midst of being BEATEN by Trayvon, so continually trying to say Trayvon was not committing a crime while the other kid was merely makes you mentally deficient, because the reality is that they were BOTH committing crimes at the MOMENT they were shot, or at least that is what the evidence in both cases indicates. Both deaths were tragic events that could have been avoided by the victims. All they had to do was NOT assault the man holding the gun.

      • avatarCommon Sense says:

        Hi there, you just don’t get it do you. I think you only see and hear what you want to. Trayvonne was committing a crime. If I go and bash a man’s head (any color) on a sidewalk when I am unprovoked, it is a crime. So shut up and quit spouting a lie. The truth is the truth, and just because you want it to be a lie don’t make it so!!!!
        Both Zimmerman and the man in the story above where in their rights under the law to kill these kids. It is a shame the boys lost their lives, but if you commit a crime, you stand the chance to lose your life.

  6. avatarCyrano says:

    How could he shoot an unarmed Yoot? If Dick Cheney would have had a son it would have looked like Chris!

    • avatarhi there says:

      yes he would have and your point is.

      Two very different cases. This kid was breaking the law and charged while martin kid was followed and not doing anything. There was no bias steretyping views here that led to death.

      • avatarJon R. says:

        Do you know for sure that it was bias and stereotyping that led Zimmerman to follow Martin, or are you just basing these claims on your own emotions and bias?

      • avatarKathy says:

        You’re an complete idiot…

      • avatarRena says:

        Beating someone is most certainly a crime.

      • avatarPat says:

        Breaking a nose and smashing a skull into the ground are breaking the law. You are a moron.
        Dorks just cant get over the irrelevancy of somebody leaving their car and following.
        Wise up.

        • avatarjoooon says:

          Do we know that a crime was being committed? He said he saw people breaking into his car. It is the shooters testimony we have to rely on. Also the “fact” that he charged. I personally believe him, as I belived Zimmerman. But if you question one, you gotta question the other.

  7. avatarIllumFiati says:

    What bothers me is that there are situations where race relations could be improved – chances where people can make a better decision in how they deal with a culturally sensitive situation – and they choose not to.

    I refereed a youth basketball game this last weekend and it was the uptown kids playing the downtown kids. The good team of inner city kids lost by 2 points, but not without a melee with 35 seconds left in the game where me and my white referee partner were accused of cheating, had to remove parents and coaches from the floor and an 11 year player faced me and told me to “Shut up bitch” and his dad rushed me. After the game the ‘white’ team was upset and visibly shaken and the losing team chased them into the parking lot yelling racial slurs, including the 11 year olds, at the winning team, parents and grandparents. Why – because you lost a stupid basketball game? In all my years of referring and coaching I has never seen something like this -and it may have been tied to the Trayvon Martin news as well. I was deeply saddenly by this. The black coaches and parents had a chance to just take the loss, support their kids in a positive way and move on. Instead they reinforced the racial divide for another generation of kids by playing the victims. So sad.

  8. This was a great parallel that I had completely forgotten about… thx for posting guys.

    -Dan

    • avatarhi there says:

      Two very different cases. This kid was breaking the law and charged while martin kid was followed and not doing anything. There was no bias steretyping views here that led to death.

      • avatarJake says:

        little red cook book little red cook book little red cook book little red cook book little red cook book little red cook book

        See anyone can play this game, no people will do it the same, you got it down, when you appear to be in pain.

  9. avatarIdahoPete says:

    Wait a minute: this took place in NOO YAWK? I hope Mr. Scott used a magazine of 7 rounds or less! And thank God NY does NOT have “stand your ground” laws, or there might have been a tragedy!

    Gee, wonder why Obama, Holder, the NAACP, the Brady twits, and other civilian disarmament dweebs aren’t trying to exploit this shooting for their agenda?

    • avatarhi there says:

      Two very different cases. This kid was breaking the law and charged while martin kid was followed and not doing anything. There was no bias steretyping views here that led to death.

      • avatarMatt in FL says:

        Hi there, hi there. I can tell you’re a new reader here, and that your accustomed environs are Facebook-based comment sections. I know in Facebook based comment sections it’s very common to scroll down through and paste in basically the same comment after every single person you disagree with, but please stop doing it here. You’ve now posted almost exactly the same comment ten twelve fifteen times, including four word for word, complete with misspellings. (It was ten when I started writing this comment.) Unlike those Facebook comment sections, the readers here actually read the comments, so you only have to say it once for people to get your message, and we don’t take kindly to people who try to shout others down. If you want to reply to more than one person, that’s fine, but try to have some variety in your comments.

        tl;dr: hi there, stop spamming the comments section

  10. avatarBobtrumpet says:

    FWIW, this is a nearly 4 year old story . . .

    • avatarMatt in FL says:

      Yeah, it is, but I’ve seen several news outlets run it over the past few days with a new date on it. They say “Updated July 17, 2013,” but I don’t see anything new, so I guess they fixed a comma or something just so they could say “updated” and get it on the front page and contribute to the “ongoing conversation.”

      Remember the story from back in April about the cop in Port Canaveral who was using “hoodie targets” at the police range? One of my local stations “updated” that story on July 16th to get it back on their front page. At least in their case I could see the difference, as they added the fact that GZ was found not guilty.

      • avatarhi there says:

        Two very different cases. This kid was breaking the law and charged while martin kid was followed and not doing anything. There was no bias steretyping views here that led to death.

  11. avatarJim R says:

    Self defense is self defense. You do what you have to do to stay alive.

  12. avatarg says:

    Except this guy caught these teens actually committing a crime… Zimmerman caught Martin committing the crime of…

    …walking around while being black with a hoody.

    • avatarChris says:

      This guy also never got punched in the face whereas Zimmerman was getting beat on. Martin didn’t get shot because he was “walking in the dark”, he got shot because he decided to punch someone with a gun.

    • avatarSD3 says:

      “Zimmerman caught Martin committing the crime of…”

      Lemme help.

      Attacking an actual resident of the neighborhood, pounding his head into the pavement while telling him he’s going to die tonight.

      • avatarDave says:

        So what you are saying is that Zimmerman had the right to defend himself, but Trayvon did not?

        • avatarJason says:

          What was Trayvon defending himself from, someone following him from a distance? He had several opportunities to just go home. He could have politely asked why are you following me. He could have called 911 just like Zimmerman did and said there is a creepy ass cracker following me. He made a tragic mistake and as his ghetto friend said decided to open a can of whoop ass. Now he is dead.

    • avatarMichael B. says:

      So are you saying it’s okay? He confronted an unarmed child breaking into a car while brandishing a handgun, thereby instigating and escalating the entire situation.

      He should’ve stayed in his house and called the cops.

      Right?

      • avatarRAE says:

        WRONG

      • avatarCentralIL says:

        The individual breaking into a car instigated the situation and then escalated it when he attacked. Scott was simply being a good citizen and neighbor. If more people had his mindset instead of yours, we’d has a lot fewer of these kinds of crimes.

        Of course, some people consider fighting back against a rapist to be escalation so it’s probably a lost cause.

        • avatarWilliam Burke says:

          Reminds me of the Clayton Williams remark – he ran against Ann Richards for governor of Texas (and refused to shake hands with her); when rape was brought up in the campaign, he remarked, “if it’s inevitable, lay back and enjoy it!”, and compared rape to a bout of bad weather.

      • avatarrobert says:

        When he choose to break the law ,it meant he knew right from wrong and therefore could be considered an adult …at 17 you can enlist in the service with parental consent you can drive a car, in some states that can be lowered to 14 for farm vehicles , therefore you are given rites of an adult and should take the responsibilities ….

    • avatarIdahoPete says:

      Last time I checked, assault and battery was a criminal action. You know, breaking someone’s nose and beating their head against a concrete sidewalk? The stuff that Martin was doing to Zimmerman before Zimmerman acted in self-defense? As determined by a jury in a court of law?

      • avatarDoc says:

        None of that would have happened if he had stayed in his car like the cops said to

        • avatarRecon says:

          The police never told him to stay in the car. When they made the comment “you don’t have to do that” he was already away from his vehicle. In addition the dispatcher testified that it was a general comment and not intended as an instruction or order.

        • avatarMark says:

          Massad Ayoob said Zimmerman was responding to police inquiry regarding his and the suspect’s whereabouts and left his vehicle to verify his location and see if he could figure out where Martin had gone.

    • avatarCarlosT says:

      So in your head, it played out like the “yo homie” scene from Collateral? Zimmerman sees Martin, walks up to him and shoots him?

      … at contact distance, making sure the slide doesn’t cycle, so another round isn’t chambered. But before that he grabs Martin’s fists and uses them to break his own nose, to establish his self-defense claim. He then pulled Martin down on top of himself as he threw his head back on the ground repeatedly.

      Poor Martin never stood a chance.

      • avatarhi there says:

        witnessed speculated that martin was on top of zimmerman there was never proof and his injuries were said to be fabricated….funny how martin’s body was found on the grass but Georges injuries are “specific” to concrete. Don;t start a fight if you can’t fight otherwise if so with a gun you are setting the other person up to shoot them.

        Two very different cases. This kid was breaking the law and charged while martin kid was followed and not doing anything. There was no bias steretyping views here that led to death.

        • avatarJon R. says:

          “Witness speculated,” enough said. Another witness also “speculated” it was Martin on top, and he also seemed to be the one that saw the most of the confrontation and was even able to identify the clothes they were wearing. Which one do you believe most?

          There is no evidence that Zimmerman’s intent was to start a fight. If he is losing a fight he didn’t start, and did not want engage in, and was in fear for his life or serious injury, he had the right to use deadly force.

          There is also no evidence that “bias” or “sterotyping?,” led Zimmerman to follow Martin. You could argue profiling, but profiling is not the same as racist bias. A unfamiliar person who is by himself, and walking down your street, at night, with a hood over his head is cause for alarm. With out solid evidence, your version is just a conspiracy theory, and I don’t much care for conspiracy theory’s.

        • avatarJon R. says:

          I misread the first part of the comment, I apologize. Some witnesses, testified it was Zimmerman on top, the most reliable and credible witness testified Martin was on top. More “speculation” occurred with the witness who said Zimmerman was on top as they didn’t have as good of a view to the event as the witness who testified it was Martin on top. There was contradictory evidence, who’s version do want to believe? You seem to be picking the one that best fits your bias’s and emotions, that’s fine, but the most reliable evidence points in Zimmerman’s favor. With out solid evidence for your version, your actually the one speculating.

        • avatarJeremyR says:

          Hi tard, the thugs shirt was several inches from his body, clearly indicating he was on top. Are you really as dumb as a stump? Or did I just insult a stump?

    • avatarCarlos U. says:

      You mean aggravated assault/attempted murder.

    • avatarJake says:

      This guy was taken at his word that he was charged, Georgie couldn’t get people to believe he did anything other than slam his own head on the pavement. BIG. DIFFERENCE.

    • avatart-bird man says:

      According to Trayvon’s girlfriend, race was not an issue…Trayvon thought Zimmerman was a gay rapist, so he went back after him and proceeded to beat his face in. That is a crime…unless you’re a racist idiot. A bullet was authorized to preserve his life. It doesn’t matter that Zimmerman profiled him…he’s allowed to do that as part of a neighborhood watch since he isn’t actually a cop. He stopped chase when the dispatcher told him he didn’t need to do that. If Trayvon wasn’t a gay basher, he’d be alive today.

  13. avatarLarry says:

    This happened about a 20 minute ride from me, big story here faded fast though.

    This is in Monroe county,in Western NY, where its easy to get full carry permits,ok takes awhile and some paper work, but good for life no restrictions or classes to take.

    Monroe County courts have been very good to legal folks defending themselves.

    There are posters for upcoming guns shows on the county clerks office walls.

    See why we get pissed when everyone thinks the whole state is NYC ?

    • avatarDr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

      See why we get pissed when everyone thinks the whole state is NYC ?

      Then secede, form a new state (“Upstate New York”), exile the leeches and eaters from the cities, and reduce taxes and corruption.

      It’s a shame, I have friends who’ve bought houses in Western NY in the early 2000s who pay more in combined property tax than they do for their mortgages. A $90k house with $8-9k combined tax per year. Not quite as bad as Detroit, but not great either, and without the inflated wages to balance that.

  14. avatarPoppa Bear says:

    There is one small difference, these teen were actually in the process of committing a crime. Trayvon was simply walking down a street. Trayvon made a choice to aggressively go after Zimmerman instead of just to keep walking.

    • avatarMichael B. says:

      See my question for “g” above and feel free to answer it.

    • avatarShane says:

      Not sure how you go about “simply walking down a street” but when I do it, it does not include physically attacking anyone.

  15. avatarLow Budget Dave says:

    But you notice that there was an arrest and a trial. In the case of Zimmerman, there was not even an arrest until public pressure rose to the melting point.

    No matter how far you go, you are not going to convince me that Zimmerman would have followed a white teenager, nor bothered getting out of his car.

    • avatarMichael B. says:

      If Scott had only stayed in his house a child would be alive today.

    • avatarRAE says:

      Just like mine, your opinion does’nt matter to what actually happened.

    • avatarjwestham says:

      That’s because Florida has a Stand Your Ground Law, New York on the other hand does not.

    • avatarJake says:

      He did not know Martin was black until the second encounter, if established facts are to be believed. BUT WHY WOULD ANYONE EVER DO THAT

      • avatarDave says:

        That is Zimmerman’s side of the story. If Zimmerman had acted properly, then we might know the other side of the story. We don’t, because Zimmerman killed the other witness.

        We have no idea if he got out of his car with the intention of confronting Martin, because all we have is his word. And I happen to think he is lying.

        We do know that the victim was unarmed, and that the police rushed to do drug tests on the victim, but not the shooter. In effect, the police took sides in Sanford. The fact that they did not do the same elsewhere only makes Sanford look worse by comparison.

        • avatarJake says:

          My point is that this is the same, just the word of the shooter vs. corpse. We are not saying that the GZ case should not have been controversial, but if it is to be so, this would be controversial for the same reasons unless those ginning up the controversy want to admit to being flagrantly racist and only drumming up said controversy because the “victim” was black in the GZ case and the no quotes victim in this case was black.

  16. avatarAharon says:

    The solution is simple: no minors to walk America’s streets without an adult escorting them.

    • avatarOld Ben turning in grave says:

      Or perhaps a rule against teens physically attacking people. Perhaps we might call such an act, “assault and battery” or “aggravated assault.” Let’s get active and get such a law on the books. Oh, wait…

  17. avatarmina says:

    the story is 5 years old!!

    • avatarAharon says:

      from the link:
      “Updated 12/18/2009 10:41 PM
      Jury Finds Roderick Scott Not Guilty”

      Really good point Mina, I didn’t notice the date earlier when I clicked through to the link. The date should have been mentioned in the TTAG piece.

      • avatarhi there says:

        Two very different cases. This kid was breaking the law and charged while martin kid was followed and not doing anything. There was no bias steretyping views here that led to death.

        • avatarcrockett says:

          Hi there I’m sure that you have no idea what you are talking about. I’m sure that Zimmerman beat himself up and Trayvon did nothing. Yeah right Trayvon was beating on Zimmerman and you would have to be an idiot to not know that. If you are a troll you need to get better. Look at the facts not your own twisted fantasy.

  18. avatarRopingdown says:

    “Neither President Obama nor Attorney General Eric Holder were not available for comment.”

    • avatarhi there says:

      Two very different cases. This kid was breaking the law and charged while martin kid was followed and not doing anything. There was no bias steretyping views here that led to death.

  19. avatardwb says:

    in NEW YORK, outside the home? can’t be.

  20. avatarRusty Puma says:

    Exactly the way I figured it would have gone down if the races in the Zimmerman case had been reversed. No one would have cared.

    • avatarhi there says:

      Two very different cases. This kid was breaking the law and charged while martin kid was followed and not doing anything. There was no bias steretyping views here that led to death.

  21. avatarhi there says:

    it races reversed in zimmerman case whites would have been outraged and these cases are not similar as the Cervini kid was caught actually breaking the law.

    also this guy doesn’t have a past criminal record and storied of steretyping others like zimmerman had. Martin had not committed a crime this kid did and charged Scott zimmerman was the persuer of an innocent kid.

    • avatarjuliesa says:

      If races were reversed in the Zimmerman case it would have never gone to trial. Also, if Zimmerman went by the name Jorge Mesa (Mesa’s his mother’s maiden name), it would have never gone to trial. The state didn’t have the evidence to disprove self defense, so the only reason it went to trial was because of race based agitation, by an astroturf “student” group, with the help of US DoJ. It was politically motivated.

  22. avatarhi there says:

    also this guy doesn’t have a past criminal record and storied of steretyping others like zimmerman had. Martin had not committed a crime this kid did and charged Scott zimmerman was the persuer of an innocent kid.

  23. avatarLance says:

    Shows Obama and Holder as white hating fascist pigs like usual.

  24. avatarcubby123 says:

    Gee, somebody ought to send this to the liberal news media so the can pee their pants.

  25. avatarJozan says:

    What everyone is missing is that this kid was shot in the back.

    • avatarMatt in FL says:

      I’ve seen nothing that indicates that.

      “Scott says he shot Cervini twice when the victim charged toward him yelling he was going to get Scott” would imply Cervini was shot in the front.

      • avatarAZGarandGuy says:

        I can’t remember where I read it, but I also saw something saying that the kid was shot in the back. Not saying thats what happened, but that there are some reports out there saying as such.

        • avatarJozan says:

          The bullet went in his back near the left armpit and exited the right side of his chest. Y’know exactly how a bullet would travel when shooting someone turning away from you, not charging at you.

  26. avatardan says:

    I demand ERIC HOLDER…look to see if this ‘child’s’ civil rights were violated…..surly this was a hate crime as ….anyone has a right to walk freely home on a sidewalk…even while being profiled by a man in his yard…..get busy eric….oh wait you are already to busy, giving hate speeches in Fl…and dodging questions about mexico…such a busy man..but please find some time for this ‘child’……as you have done for others….imho

  27. avatarDenny says:

    Pure liberal media bullshit…business as usual.

  28. avatarSammy says:

    The song “Eve of Destruction” keeps playing in my head. This is very bad.

  29. avatarMike says:

    I have read the entire post and “hi there” keeps saying the same thing over and over and over and over again. Address this fact: Martin broke Zimmerman’s nose and repeatedly smashed his head on the ground – HOW IS THIS NOT A CRIME? How would you have defended yourself if you were in Zimmerman’s place (and don’t argue that you would never have been in his place)? YOU’RE on the ground with a broken nose and Martin is slamming your head on the ground. Would you have said “Oh please, innocent child, stop hurting me”?

    • avatarRuss Bixby says:

      The elephant in the room is that following stalking, harassment and possibly Zimmie throwing the first punch, T.M. had the right to stand his ground, quite possibly including the employment of lethal force.

      Not only is this true under Stand Your Ground, but also the Make My Day laws spell that out.

      If I’m being followed, harassed and so-on, woe be unto my nemesis. Who here doesn’t feel the similarly?

      We’ll never know the specifics, but Mr. Zimmerman is hardly blameless — even though ‘e was one o’ them Sacred Folk wot gots ‘isself a gun — and this case differs markedly from Z. vs T.M. for that and other reasons.

      • avatarNot Me says:

        At the point where T was straddling Z and doing a ground-and-pound bouncing his head off the sidewalk, and thereby cutting off his avenue of retreat, Z legally ‘regains innocence’ in the fight, no matter how it started.

        Further, there is no evidence whatsoever that Z threw a first punch. Even if he had though, again, once his ability to escape is cut off by being straddled and beaten, he has no choice to discontinue the fight and therefore can use whatever force is necessary to defend his life, consistent with the force being used against him. He could not shoot someone for tickling him or slapping him, for example, but punches can and do kill and so can hitting your head on the pavement.

        I won’t defend everything Z did, but I keep wanting to post this to friends I know who are all outraged right now: If I ever see someone I care about on the ground with someone straddling you and beating your head into the pavement, I will use whatever force necessary to stop that person immediately. I would ask the same from any of my friends, but I know a lot of them think it’s better to be carried by six than judged by twelve. Especially if letting yourself or your friend get victimized can prove how un-racist you are.

    • avatarMatt in FL says:

      Don’t worry too much about ‘hi there.’ S/he went through and pasted the same comment after virtually everyone s/he disagreed with, and will now probably never be heard from again. As I pointed out in my comment, that’s the type of commenting you usually see on news sites that use a Facebook login style commenting system. They scroll through, paste the same comment a couple dozen times, and then move on to the next news story to do the same thing.

    • avatarJeremyR says:

      Had George thrown a punch, his hands would have contained evidence of same. THEY DID NOT!

  30. avatarRuss Bixby says:

    Not quite a mirror image. To wit:

    • there was no stalking of someone with every right to be where he was and who was minding his own business;
    • there was no scuffle – either started by the stalker or (perhaps justifiably) by the stalking/harassment victim who was standing his ground;
    • the shooting was in response to a direct assault on the defender, not because the one who started the altercation — either physically or by frightening the eventual victim into a preemptive attack — went to plan B when the fight was not going his way.

    Apart from that, yeah – it’s real similar.

  31. avatarJohnD says:

    If Newt Gingrich had a son……………..

  32. avatarJ.R. says:

    Robert leone you’ll have that more than you know look at Rodney king that was a mess. But ever here of Robert leone in Pennsylvania YouTube or google it. It is crazy!!!

  33. avatarJames1000 says:

    Did he have a fat, idiot girlfriend testify too?

  34. avatarRoger says:

    Kll whitey night coming again!!!

  35. avatarAnonymous says:

    Former NY state resident here. NY state does not have a specific law re: use of firearms, it’s based on bunch of case law, starting with the Sullivan Act ( as an aside, Sullivan was a thug and crook who initiated the law to take out his crooked opponents). You cannot use a firearm to protect property, you cannot go outside with a firearm and point it at someone to prevent them from stealing anything.
    This shooter was given a pass.

  36. avatarAndy says:

    The jury has spoken,but how come the Boobama administration hasn’t come out and demanded an investigation by DOJ?Because the kid was white,not a real public relations event like the TM killing!It appears that Eric Holder might have political aspirations to run for president,due to his speech he made at the NACCP convention,and his investigating the GZ Aquital for supposed civil rights violations,violations that have already been investigated by the FBI and found no evidence of any crime!If any charges are pressed,they will be political,and racially influenced,and a travesty of justice,it appears that under this president that anything he can do to screw over white people he will do,even before the trial started he tired to influence the public,by stating that if he had a son,he would look like TM!I guess it pissed him off,almost as bad as his gun control didn’t pass in April,when GZ was acquitted.Be prepared and ready.Keep your powder dry.

  37. avatarpolice state by citizens says:

    I’m a middle aged white guy who looks about ten years younger. Suppose I’m simply walking down the street in my own closed neighborhood, wearing a hood because the temperature is in the 50s and drizzling rain. Somebody follows me for blocks then confronts me and I’m not totally sure of who they are are or what their intentions are.

    I would’ve thought I had the right to stand my ground before they make thier first move, which if they were armed I wouldn’t stand a chance. If he tells me he is neighborhood watch…hmmm, which now you know every new incarnation of Ted Bundy will start saying. Now it all changes of course if I’m seen actively breaking into cars at the time. Then by all means stop me. But if I’m not committing a crime and you stop me, I’m going to feel like my civil liberties are being trampled.

    Now if I were armed then apparently I can go all Han Solo and shoot first, but only if I’m armed. I’m not opposed to gun ownership or self defence, but I don’t believe they should be given special priviledge to act, when the rest of us are restrained from acting. We will never know if Martin felt he was about to be shot, and for that reason decided to jump him first, because running away you can still be shot in the back. If he did, then it seems both parties had the right to stand their ground. If not in this case, I can certainly envision cases where both parties are innocent and wrongly assuming the other is a threat and both acting accordingly.

    I saw early on that whichever way the verdict went down, we were losing a bit of personal freedom. I have never committed a crime in my life beyond speeding, and now I feel less at liberty to walk freely about in public. A perfect stranger cannot look at you and see your background, whether you are a trouble maker or a saint (the Ted Bundy type tend to look more like the latter in casual observations anyhow).

    If I ran out of gas in this day and age, in the middle of the night, as I did several times as a teen, I’d never in my life consider walking up to someone’s house for help. I’d rather walk through downtown Detroit to a gas station. Back then my only concern was they’d be mad I’d woke them up. Today my concern is they will shoot me dead and say, ‘oops my bad, thought he was coming to rob me,’ and then get away with it.

    I’m not concerned about an armed citizenry, what I am concerned about is a paranoid citizenry, whether armed with guns, with knives, with cars or any heavy object they can lay their hands on.

    They say crime rates are mostly down so I’m not sure why at this time the paranoia is increasing, it would seem to be something that would spike when the crime rate spikes and not when they fall. Perception is the key I suppose, which is often independent of reality.

    • avatarAndy says:

      And maybe it is the fact that some people think it is DHS coming to take them to the FEMA camps,or violate their rights,or kill them.Be prepared and ready.Keep your powder dry.

    • avatarArdent says:

      You’d be onto something there PSBC if you weren’t demonstrably factually wrong. Since the tape indicates GZ was on his way back to his car when TM attacked him, TM would have no recourse to SYG as a defense for attacking GZ. It is just what the jury found it to be, assault and battery. By finding GZ not guilty of murder there is a de facto finding that TM was engaged in an act that a reasonable person would believe was likely to case serious injury or death. In this case that act was straddling and repetitively punching. . .thus assault and battery. There is no SYG issue in this case what so ever, not for the armed or the unarmed. The issue is only there for the misinformed.

  38. avatarAndy says:

    Also,you have to look at the fight that led up to TM being shot,He was 17,GZ was 28,it is a proven fact that age does have a factor in the fight,also TM had fight training,so yes in the physical fight TM had an advantage,and GZ resorted to his only means to save his own life.As for profiling TM,GZ had a right to walk where he wanted,just as TM did,and if TM did initiate the fight by striking GZ first,then yes it was self-defense.What is wrong now is the fact of the MSM seeming to take the side of the parents to push for civil rights violations,like they are on some kind of agenda,maybe possibly pushing for a larger racial rift,or maybe pushing for a civil war to let Boobama declare martial law,because he is chomping at the bit to do it,or just using this to keep attention away from the scandals going on in DC!Be prepared and ready.Keep your powder dry.

  39. avatarJeff says:

    This incident was brought up on a local radio talk show last night. The responses and attitude from Nicole Brodeur (Seattle Times), who was a guest on the show were hilarious. Brodeur is a self-proclaimed liberal. Her response to the story was that the guy should have not shot the attacking teen, but instead should have just “had a good old fashioned brawl.” She just stated over and over again, he should not have had a gun. He should have just fought it out with the kid, got a black eye, and that’s it. Completely in denial about the reality that criminals, even young kids, often don’t fight fair, and routinely leave innocent people left for dead with severe or even fatal injuries.

  40. avatarrhampton says:

    Did Roderick Scott take college courses in criminal law, criminal justice and investigation and apply to be a cop? That’s the reason George Zimmerman was labeled a “wannabe cop”.

  41. avatarRoadrunner says:

    Neither Scott nor Zimmerman deserved to be prosecuted. Kids do stupid, dangerous, and even criminal acts sometimes. I know, because I was one once. But the answer is to teach kids who can be taught so they can reach adulthood, and avoid heartbreak for the parents. It’s not to blame people who defended themselves from the kids’ stupidity.

    And not only is it stupid to break into cars and charge a man, or to pound the head and face of another man who hadn’t threatened you, it is a crime. It should not be safe to commit this type of crime.

  42. avatarWLCE says:

    The illusion that people have is that they think just because someone is under 18, that they are “a baby and innocent”.

    Not true. Those under 18 can be just as dangerous, if not more so, than adults. This is not even talking about mass shooters like Holmes or Lanza either. There are plenty of teenagers with muscle density, strength, and endurance that surpasses adults, meaning that even without weapons, they are capable of causing injury or death.

    http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/highschool-prep-rally/utah-referee-ricardo-portillo-dies-days-being-punched-173516958.html

    Like in George Zimmerman’s case, I agree 100% with what Roderick Scott did. Its terrible that it had to end that way, but just because someone is unarmed, doesn’t mean that they dont present a credible threat to a person’s well being.

    Christopher Cervini, like Treyvon Martin, died being stupid. I personally don’t like those outcomes, but nature is unforgiving that way.

  43. avatarMediocrates says:

    Bad things happen to good people when they engage in deviant behavior. No sympathy.

  44. avatarJW says:

    Somehow I don’t get the sense this kid was in anyway like Ferris Bueller…

  45. avatarDave says:

    The reason no one is upset about Roderick Scott is that the jury seems to have come to a correct conclusion. The reason everyone is upset about Zimmerman is because the jury seems to have reached an incorrect conclusion. See the difference there?

    It is not about race, nor even about self defense. It is about whether you kill someone who is innocent. It is about why you put yourself in a bad position.

    The outrage, originally at least, was because the police refused to arrest Zimmerman, and because the state refused to prosecute him. If you think the police were exactly correct, then why don’t you compare that to the police treatment of Roderick Scott?

    Because if you do, you will realize that you are making an obviously racist comparison. You are saying that any time a black guy shoots a white guy, he needs to be put in front of a judge and jury; but when a white guy shoots a black guy, he does not.

    Also missing from your racist analogy: The white shooting victim was engaged in a crime, while the black shooting victim was not. Did this miss your attention? Were you too excited to post your racist insults to bother pointing out the obvious difference? Do you even understand that a different law applies?

    Shame on you for feeding into this “white-mob” mentality. Shame on you for using half-facts and false juxtapositions to make yourself and your white friends look like the victim.

    Shame on you.

    • The Racists just keep saying the same false statements over and over as if that will make them true.

      “The reason everyone is upset about Zimmerman is because the jury seems to have reached an incorrect conclusion.”

      False. More people think the jury reached the correct conclusion. Most of the people who think it reached the incorrect conclusion are basing their opnion on misinformation and lies, such as:

      “The white shooting victim was engaged in a crime, while the black shooting victim was not.”

      False. The best evidence we have is that Trayvon Martin assaulted George Zimmerman. That is a crime.

      The shame all belongs on the race baiting side that refuses to accept that George Zimmerman had a right to walk in his neighborhood, report suspicious activity, and defend his life.

      As for the fact that George Zimmerman was not initially charged, there is a difference in Florida and New York law on this issue. The Sanford police did what was correct in Florida law, and it seems quite clear, from the evidence brought forth at the trial, that they were correct and that the trial should never have happened.

    • avatarPaula says:

      “The reason everyone is upset about Zimmerman is because the jury seems to have reached an incorrect conclusion. See the difference there?”

      Based on…?

  46. avatarBOBBY says:

    THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT G.Z. CLAIMS….. HE SET THIS KID UP….UMMMMM AT WHAT POINT DID YOU PUT A BULLET IN THE CHAMBER AND TAKE THE SAFETY OFF………ALSO HOW MUCH OF THE INJURIES WERE SELF INFLICTED…….THIS IS NOTHING NEW IN AMERICA…THEY BEEN KILLING US AND GETTING AWAY WITH FOREVER WHY DO WE EXPECT ANTHING ELSE

    • avatarMatt in FL says:

      BOBBY, I’m very proud of you for discovering the keyboard. But I need you to do something for me. First, look at the bottom left corner of your keyboard. You’ll see a button there that says ‘Ctrl.’ Now, from there, we’re going to count up three buttons. Ready? One. Two. Three. Now you should be looking at a button that says ‘Caps’ or ‘CAPS’ or ‘Caps Lock.’ Press it. Done? OK, thanks.

      Now, on to your actual message.

      “THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT G.Z. CLAIMS”

      Wrong. Not only is there evidence to support it, but more importantly, there isn’t any evidence to disprove it.

      “HE SET THIS KID UP”

      How, exactly? By jumping in front of his fast-moving fist?

      “AT WHAT POINT DID YOU PUT A BULLET IN THE CHAMBER AND TAKE THE SAFETY OFF”

      Well, most recently, after I finished dry fire practice yesterday, and before I did dry fire practice yesterday, respectively. Oh, wait. You weren’t asking about me. Let’s assume you were intending that question for GZ. In that case, the answers are: “the last time he loaded his gun” and “never, because GZ’s gun doesn’t have an external safety.”

      “ALSO HOW MUCH OF THE INJURIES WERE SELF INFLICTED”

      Well, GZ may have gotten a minor injury or two as he fell to the ground, so I suppose you could call that self-inflicted, sorta. But beyond that, most likely none. I mean, unless you think he hit himself in the nose and bounced the back of his own head off the ground a few times.

      “THIS IS NOTHING NEW IN AMERICA”

      I suppose that depends on what your definition of “THIS” is.

      “THEY BEEN KILLING US AND GETTING AWAY WITH FOREVER”

      Who, exactly, is “THEY” in this example? I’m assuming “US” is black people, based on context. So is “THEY” white people? Hispanics? Peruvians? Wait, could it be other black people? You did know that GZ has a black great-grandfather, right? (At least, I’m pretty sure that he does.) Because if you meant “other black people” then I think we finally found something we can agree on! The leading cause of death among young black males is homicide, and the perpetrators of those homicides are overwhelmingly other young black males. So hey, it’s true. If you look hard enough, you can find common ground with anyone!

      “WHY DO WE EXPECT ANTHING ELSE”

      Well, I mean, why would you?

      Thanks for the low-hanging fruit. This was fun for me.

  47. avatarIronhrse says:

    As long as blacks kill blacks everything is ok , but when a black guy crosses the line and a brown guy kills him its time to pull a race card , riot, loot, and attack innocent white folks that have asolutely nothing to do with anything. This is grounds enough to shoot these MFs because they intend to severely hurt you or your family. When its an out of control black thug mob assualting 1 or 2 white folks, shoot every fking one of them, or they will kill you . That is always their intent. Them they wonder why they are profiled as animals, because they are. They are not normal citizens. Only thing is that the good blk folks also pay for the crap the assholes do. But isnt that the way it really is with the whites. He is a perfect example, Zimmerman is blk he kills another blk and white folks get attacked . Thats really fcked up. That shows me blks just want to attack white folks no matter what. So blks prepare to get shot at for your stupidity and assualtful manners.

    • avatarPaula says:

      Actually, it is very dangerous to do anything like shoot in an out of control mob. That’s why people mob. They are out of control. They easily overwhelm anything. You might hit one or two people if you’re lucky, and then the rest will draw and quarter you if they’re feeling particularly benevolent. In a mob situation, the best thing is to just get the heck out of there before they discover you’re armed.

  48. avatarJohn says:

    Come on folk, everyone knows a white kid wouldn’t attack someone like that when confronted (Sarcasm) This guy did what he had to do to protect his home. It’s always a sad day when a young person puts themselves it a position that gets them killed, but it sounds like this man did what he felt like he had to.

  49. avatarLane Meyer says:

    In both cases the person that was shot were doing something they shouldn’t have been which lead to their demise. several had stated before if they would not have been commiting criminal activities (assault, breaking in to cars) they wouldn’t have put themselves in a position to be shot or make the person that did the shooting do something that would now make them have to live with their actions.

    I would have done exactly the same thing no matter what the color of skin. Best advice, follow the rules of society and you could potentially live a long and happy life.

  50. avatarRon Sutton says:

    Walking on multiple people’s property especially at night is not a crime? Assulting someone by sucker punching them in the face and breaking their nose is not a crime?! Beating someone’s head repeatedly in the concrete is not a crime?! Trying to suffocate someone is not a crime?! Telling someone, “You’re going to die tonight” while reaching for the man’s weapon is not a crime?! Uh…yes it is. It’s called Tresspassing. It’s called Assalt. It’s called Attempted Murder!

    • I have not seen tresspassing addressed in the Martin/Zimmerman case, but it seems that it might be applicable.

      I know that when I was growing up, entering other peoples property was something that should be done carefully.

      I do not know enough about the physical local where the events took place to know if tresspass was plausible or not. Perhaps others can comment on this.

      • avatarPaula says:

        Since he was being beaten up on a sidewalk near his truck, and he was the neighborhood watch captain, one would think it was probably fair game. Even so, tresspassing is kind of a silly nit to pick here compared to the crime that actually happened.

        People seem to forget that what makes you suspicious is not your skin color, but your behavior and posture. Everyone knows what threatening body language is, but for some reason no one seems to want to admit there is ‘suspicious’ and otherwise abnormal body language… but if you saw it you certainly would think it was suspicious/abnormal. I’m white and I dont’ engage in suspicious body language in the store or anywhere else, because I don’t want to alarm people. Isn’t that just common sense?

        I once called the police on a guy on a bright snowy Sunday morning because he was walking down the middle of the highway somewhat aimlessly. I think he was hispanic as I recall but he was wearing a parka, so… He almost got hit by a car. I followed him around until the police caught up and talked to him. I suppose I could be guilty for ‘pursuing’ if he noticed me and came after me, too. I have no idea what happened, but the guy seemed drunk/ill/out of sorts. Suppose it had been late at night? I guess I’d be guilty of profiling because I’m not hispanic?

  51. avatarnojustace says:

    why is no one talking about an epidemic! Black on white crime. Not the attorney general or president, or media. what the hell is going on!!! everyday in my state blacks kill unarmed whites. if cracker is part of their language what did paula do wrong. this is sick

  52. avatarnojustace says:

    I am so sick of this double standard …..killing a baby in a stroller too…where are the hate crimes for blacks. the only women dating outside their race are white women….Indians, greeks,mexicans, black women Asian… nobody has this problem like kill off the white people and excuse it .. no I am not a racist ..this shit is real

  53. avatarnojustace says:

    boycott nba like they do country music, nascar, and hockey

  54. avatarWhitey says:

    Blacks will always be Blacks and live like animals !!! Their neighborhoods reflect their way of life. You wonder why they are profiled ? It’s because of the way they live. CRIMINALS !!!

  55. avatarJames Finchum says:

    I beg to differ with those who say that Travonne did not commit a crime. So where did George Zimmerman get the cuts in his head? Why did witnesses testify that they say Travonne bashing Zimmerman’s head into the ground? Hmmm last time I checked ASSAULT AND BATTERY is a crime. Don’t say there were no witnesses who testified to the fact of Zimmerman having his head bashed into the ground. I tape the entire trial, also reviewed the records from his arrest.
    There are pictures of the wounds. So if a black man kills a white teen its ok. But God help us if a half white/ half hispanic male kills a black teen. It immediately becomes RACISM.

  56. avatarJames Finchum says:

    Dutz you must be a bottom feeder as last time I checked more blacks are killing each other than there are whites killing them. The problem with some of the black teens these days is the fact that they feel to be a man you have to carry a gun.
    This is bullcrap a real man does it with his hands not a weapon. A punk has to resort to a gun.

    • avatarMike the Limey says:

      Wrong.
      A gun is a fine way for anyone to even the odds against an aggressor – especially if the intended victim isn’t physically built to defend themselves with muscle power, or the aggressor is armed.
      Using a firearm isn’t being a punk; it’s using the appropriate tool.

  57. avatarJames Finchum says:

    If you live by the sword, you shall die by the sword. If you are in my neighborhood and I am doing neighborhood watch and you begin attacking me and break my nose, smash my head into the concrete and tell me that I am gonna die tonight, GUESS WHAT?
    I will be another George Zimmerman and put you six feet under also.

  58. avatarBryan says:

    So Obama and the AG were available for comment or was the double/tripple negative a mistake? (last sentence)

  59. avatarTJ says:

    While you all are arguing over this, your government is making more plans to screw the American people besides dividing the country over race.

    • avatarPaula says:

      yeah well, we’re aware of that too. We can multitask.

      On a related note, rumor has it that Zimmerman changed his name to Ben Ghazi so that the media will never bring him up again.

  60. avatarmzaz says:

    RACIST… He saw they were white. “Sounds just as bad as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton accusing GZ of the same thing.” BO is causing a racial war and so many IGNORANT people just don’t see it. Now BO says “That could have been me 35 years ago.” WTF is wrong with our country. OH WAIT, I know. It’s that racist ILLEGAL ALIEN occupying our WH. (That racist remark above was an “EXAMPLE” of the racist remarks the idiots are saying about GZ.)

  61. avatarRisorg says:

    Can some one please tell me where are all of you wonderful lawyers getting your information from. Who says Trayvon charged or even threw the first punch on GZ? Unless you were there I would have to assume that you are taking GZ statement as facts. Now let me ask you this question, if you are looking at a possible 30 years to life or a possibility of going home, what story would you come up with? Would you actually admit, I shot in cold blood, and beat myself up? Would you admit that you threw the first punch in which case dismisses any possible thoughts of self defense and seals your fate of definite jail time? Or would you say any and everything to guarantee that you get to go home when its all said an done, considering you made it pretty easy, by making yourself the only witness. And to whoever posted the video stating that it was taking the next day and GZ didnt have time to make anything up to match the evidence. Its pretty easy to make up a story to fit evidence that you manufactured…. Looking at the re-enactment video what bushes did Trayvon jump out of.

    • avatarMike the Limey says:

      The choice was between what GZ said, backed up by physical evidence & what witnesses saw & the prosecution’s conjecture, backed up by nothing.
      What reason is there to believe the prosecution, except racism?

    • avatarKyle says:

      This is why they need to be hooked up to lie detectors in the court room while they are being questioned. It will be the ONLY definitive proof of people lying and telling the truth, which you swear to tell while you are in there.

    • avatarPaula says:

      “Who says Trayvon charged or even threw the first punch on GZ?”

      The autopsy report and the medical evidence. Trayvon got quite a few blows in, and the only blow Zimmerman got was the final one after he was told by Trayvon he was going to die and saw Trayvon reach for Z’s gun.

  62. avatarjeff Kirkland says:

    To Hi There: You are correct, Al and Jesse are not needed, and never have been. They will be out of business if racism is ever eliminated, so they keep it going full steam ahead. When has either done anything constructive in the black community? Marched with Rev. King? Ok, but so did some white people, which was far more dangerous as a white than a black. All either has done is extort money from people or companies by calling them racist or threatening to file discrimination lawsuits. If they want to be constructive and truly care about the plight of blacks in America, they would institute job and education programs IN WHICH NEITHER OF THEM PROFIT!! They are both laughable to the white population, and as long as we allow these two idiots to be our spokesmen we will continue to be marginalized! By the way, my grandparents were sharecroppers and finally were able to afford a home of their own when they were in their fifties, so don’t call me an Uncle Tom.

  63. avatarTim says:

    PROOFREAD!! Why should I take your reporting and story telling seriously if you’re too stupid to proofread your own writing?

  64. avatarRon says:

    So we are even now right!
    That does not make the Zimmerman case racist still!

  65. avatarDavid Cervini says:

    This is not meant to be rude to anyone.
    911 call starts the clock is ticking. Scotts girlfriend is on the phone with 911. She tells the dispatcher she heard kids being loud outside. Scott comes up the stairs grabs his gun and chambers it. She sees Scott in her words “jogging” towards the kids who were headed towards Manitou Rd. He is now two houses away across the street which is no longer visible from Allen’s home. He sees all three boys, two went up a driveway and the other walked quickly from him towards Manitou rd… Christopher opens a car door and closes it. Scott yells up through the winds that were 30+ miles per hour “freeze don’t move” and out of no where fires the gun. Christopher was facing James not Scott when the gun went off. The clock is still ticking. Christopher is trapped between two cars and a garage door with a bullet through his back. James ducks down and is able to escape. Christopher heads down the driveway and is shot once again as he is falling. James heard the second shot as he was running. The bullet has a downward trajectory and hits the back of his hand that is covering the exit wound of the first bullet. This bullet also hits his left chest and goes into his arm. The first bullet has a path through a garage door and into the family room of the neighbor where the crime took place. This bullet had an upward trajectory. Where is this information? It is in the coroner’s report. The ballistics expert explained that Christopher could never have been as close as 6 feet to the guns muzzle. The clock is ticking. Scott heads towards Manitou Rd looking for the witnesses. Scott is now seen by the neighbor heading back towards Allen’s home where he has been living. He gets in the house and tells Allen part of his story. She gets on the phone and calls 911. The clock stops. 58 seconds has gone by. The question everyone should be asking is how did he not get convicted? There is a story that everyone should hear and know. Christopher opened one car door that morning and closed it. The two witnesses stated that they were looking for a cigarette. There was no break-ins, burglary, or damage to any ones property. Was there mischief? Yes, but nothing that deserved an execution. No one, absolutely no one heard anyone yell out “I am going to get you”. Did Christopher charge this guy? Absolutely not! NYS law is very strong/Self-defense law is much different than Florida’s law and Scott should have been easily found guilty, if it was followed. What you do not know, is what you should know.

  66. avatarSteve Peterson says:

    Not sure HOW the media kept getting it wrong! Zimmerman was NOT “white”, he was Hispanic!

  67. avatarQue sera sera says:

    OK the bottom line is, and no matter what anyone says, thinks, or feels has already been decided by a court of law. TM is dead ( and it is tragic, he had his whole life ahead of him, but he will never live it) GZ was found innocent ( he has the rest of his life to think about taking a young mans life) There is no winner in this whole mess.

  68. avatarCece says:

    So, knightofbob, any time someone walks through my yard without asking me for permission, you’re saying I’m within my legal rights to shoot first and ask questions later?

    In my neighborhood, a man used to regularly walk through my yard with his children on the way to school. Fair game? I mean, it’s illegal — I might have felt threatened, right?

    • avatarMatt in FL says:

      No, Cece, you’re not. And you know that. And the number of people here who have said that is the case is precisely zero. And you know that, too.

  69. avatarNam Marine says:

    Typical reverse discrimination! Send that boy to my town!

  70. avatarmike says:

    ONLY IN AMERICA CAN A BROWN KILL A BLACK MAN AND STILL BLAME THE WHITE MAN

    • avatarMike the Limey says:

      And then have a half white, half black President come out publicly on the side of the black aggressor after a jury has decided otherwise.

  71. avatarDiBaskin says:

    Some people are just lost and will never be found. The ones saying TM attacked Zimmerman and doubled back blah blah blah. None of you were there. No one saw what happened or how the fight started. All we know is that GZ didn’t say TM was doing anything wrong. He said he was a suspicious looking black kid walking about slowly. He said he was running and he was following him. That much we know. We know he was angry because he called him and F’ing Punk (coon or whatever he said). We know GM said TM jumped out of bushes and said something about Homie. There were no bushes and no one uses Homie anymore. That is like from the 80′s. If he would have jumped out of bushes and hit him in the back chances are he wouldn’t have gotten up because he would have used a weapon not his fist. We know GZ had no blood on him from the shot at close range. We know TM had no DNA on him. We know GZ said his head was pounded in the concrete over and over. (How did TM grab his bald head)? We know his injuries don’t support that because they were minor and he didn’t get medical attention. We know GZ has changed his story more then once and been caught in many lies. We know he was trained in self defense. The rest is speculations and lies. If you want to believe GZ believe him but to state what he says as facts just makes you look foolish. Your hatred is clouding your commonsense.

    • avatarMike the Limey says:

      There’s no hatred, except of race baiting ne’er do well’s like Al Sharpton who are doing their damnedest to make a Hispanic/Black incident into a White/Black incident to further their tawdry agenda.
      You do the same by alluding to GZ using the “coon” word when he didn’t.

      Get over this; it’s done.
      Go & do something about the biggest cause of violent death among young black men: Other young black men.

  72. avatardr dry says:

    I’m not sure that following someone one time can count as “Stalking”. Janet is skewing the facts! This is a free country, like it or not! If I think you’re up to no good, I can go wherever the hell I want. If you jump on me, you brought on yourself whatever happens next! Plain & simple!

  73. avatarJason says:

    I’m confused how a white breaking in to cars equal the same as a black kid walking home. Does that mean just being black equals a crime? Cause that white kid was in the middle of a crime when he died what crime was trayvon committing to cause him to be followed for blocks and then killed? It is sad that another young teen will never have the chance to grow up and become a responsible adult. But as I said b4 at the time trayvon was killed he was only walking home.

    • avatarMike the Limey says:

      TM wasn’t “only walking home”; he had doubled back & attacked GM.
      He wasn’t shot for being black.
      He was shot because he was assaulting GZ.

  74. avatarJason says:

    Dr dry I don’t know if you have kids or not but yes we do live in a free country But if ssomeone was following your child for blocks you child even tried to run but the person caught them 70yrds from your back door. would you not expect your kid not to fight your kid just got done running in fear and now they are caught they have your child. i can only think of a few people that do that to children ‘murders, kidnapper, and child molester. What should your child do if you don’t have a child at 17 a man 10 years older than you have just chased you home you lose sight of him you think your safe than 70yrds for home he’s got you what do you do?

  75. avatarKAT says:

    At the time, I was in my early 20′s, lived in Dallas, was followed by a guy on a street, with little around it, pitch dark. I walked faster, he walked faster. I slowed down, he slowed down. Finally, could not stand it anymore, so turned around facing him said “Hey, get up here” and he did. Asked why was he following me. Turns out he lived in the same apartment complex and was afraid of walking in the dark. Made him walk in front of me until I saw him let himself into his apartment. A little communication goes a long way to each getting home safely

  76. avatarWhiteRabbit says:

    Look at all this anti-whitism. In the 60′s, anti-whites forced ALL and ONLY white countries to bring in millions of non-whites. Then anti-whites forced ALL and ONLY white people to “integrate” or face penalties for being “naziswhowantokill6millionjews.” Now anti-whites are praising and counting down the days till ALL and ONLY white children are minorities and extinct EVERYWHERE. That makes it genocide. “Anti-racist” is a codeword for anti-white. /watch?v=lKDeyuM0-Og

  77. avatarPaula says:

    Just fyi you have a double negative in this sentence:

    “Neither President Obama nor Attorney General Eric Holder were not available for comment.”

    :-)

    great article btw. The reverse racism in this country is sickening. I love people of all colors, shapes and sizes. A meeting of minds is far more important than matching outward appearance. And there are jerks in all colors shapes and sizes who hate everyone but themselves or those that look like them. It’s the hatred that precludes any meeting of minds with non-bigots in that case, not the outward appearance.

  78. Pingback: Black Man Shoots Unarmed White Teen, Jury Acquits - Blur Brain

  79. avatarMike the Limey says:

    Take your KKK inspired drivel & stick it.

  80. avatarantonio says:

    Trayvon Martin wasn’t committing a crime though. !Ah.

    • avatarMike the Limey says:

      Are you suggesting assaulting someone & causing them physical injury isn’t a crime?
      The last time I looked it was & that’s what martin was doing when he was shot.

      • avatarPierre-Luc says:

        Excuse me but Trayvon do nothing zimmerman was told to not following him until the police arrive.

        • No he wasn’t: The words were “we don’t need you to do that” which is in no way an order.
          Martin then backtracked & confronted Zimmerman.

  81. avatarPierre-Luc says:

    Excuse me but i’m white but i’m in the two side because this two kids was no need to die but you still going on the racist way that will arrange nothing yes injustice exist for both side but fighting against each others will not arrange all the bad things they did i’m sure if they we’re still alive they will not want to see that don’t you all agree with me.

  82. Pingback: Zimmerman Terrorizing Women {KING} - Page 3 - US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

  83. avatarshut up already says:

    I think everyone is missing the main point here… We speak of TM and the other teen as if they were men. These were boys, just boys at the wrong place and wrong time. No child deserves to die. GZ was well aware of TM being a young boy and I could almost bet if TM would have been a of age adult, GZ would have called and waited for the authority’s to arrive and never made his presence know. About this case above, why would Jessie or Al get involved. There is no need here. Should there be other activist involved, I’m not sure.. maybe! But that’s not for the NAACP or other activist of color to decide. We stand for US! Our President did the right thing in the TM case. Besides, we face battles everyday that “questionably” don’t make the news, so I believe certain injustice against blacks should be acknowledged and publicized. I swear I see more racist jokes referring to “blacks” from whites than I see African Americans lashing out! I laugh. Racism is still alive. The TM case was not a case of self-defense but a case of modern day racism. This post and all the statements above prove that!….

    • avatarMike the Limey says:

      Missing the point???

      Martin was banging Zimmerman’s head on the concrete; an action almost certain to cause serious injury or worse.
      That’s grounds to use lethal force in anyone’s book – except for apologist “liberals” (socialists) of course.
      YOU are the racist here; with your anti-white lies & accusations & convenient omission of the fact that Zimmerman is Hispanic.
      If you want to do something about crime against blacks, then deal with the MAIN perpetrators of those crimes: Other blacks.

  84. avatarFive Ten Train says:

    Honestly, I really don’t care about this kid, Trayvonne, or anyone else that commits a crime and then finds that they’ve messed with the wrong person. If someone was breaking into my car, or assaulting me or my family, I’d have no problem protecting myself, my family or my property. As with Trayvonne and countless others, the black community would be better served to not rationalize the criminal behavior, because it reinforces the stigma that black people aren’t able to control their actions. In this case, it appears that Scott was justified in protecting his property and his family, and the stupid white kid was the one who created the dangerous situation. Fine and good, I’d rather him be gone than to have to pay taxes to support his loser self in prision. As twisted as our legal system is, it often makes more sense to shoot someone dead than to just disable them and then get sued later. I’d rather more public effort be spent on actually reducing the need to defend ourselves and our property, and less time defending the criminals.

  85. avatarMark says:

    So why was he there causing trouble in the first place? Huh Republicans?

    • avatarMike the Limey says:

      If you’re referring to Scott, then you plainly have a different concept of “causing trouble” to the one used by rational people.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.