Welcome to Gaia! :: View User's Journal | Gaia Journals

Removing color of skin tone from this equation you have this:

29-year old male shoots and kills 17-year old teen boy in the middle of the night in the rain.
29-year old male has history of violence, psychiatric problems (he is on two medications at the time of this murder) and the physical evidence at the crime scene does not support what has occurred.
17-year old teen boy has history of violence in school and with peers, is a straight A student and lives in the neighborhood where he was shot dead. No history of mental illness.

No witnesses present at scene of crime.

When law enforcement arrives on scene, drug tests are administered to deceased teen boy and a boy search is conducted. No search was conducted of 29-year old male suspect. Suspect was not tested for drugs. Suspect was not taken in for questioning, processing or evidence collection.

Medical staff arrive at scene. Suspect treated for lacerations to the head in the rear of the skull, minor cuts to facial region and cracked nasal septum. Suspect is free to go.


The problems occur not first with what really happened but with the law enforcement not following up and arresting the suspect to determine what occurred from evidence at the scene. 29-year old male gave a statement of account and was set free. This is not how police work is conducted in normal circumstances.

This is the clear measure of guilt for most people.

"If the police at the scene felt that Zimmerman was a danger, they would have arrested him then." This is the general mood of the supporters of Zimmerman in this case. All other arguments stem from this point.

-The presumed guilt of the deceased.
-The perceived attach on Zimmerman once the case was brought to court. 'If the cops let him go the night this all happened, why bring it up again? This case is a sham and the liberal view on it is trying to make a racist case where there is not one.'

-The constant banter of how the deceased or his attacker is somehow more a detriment to society and as such deserved what happened or much worse. The back ground of a dead person is only relevant in situations where the circumstances of death are unknown and as such may have relevance as to why this person is dead. This child did not die in a gang shooting and the motives of his death are unclear. So his alleged involvement in recreational drug use or gang violence is only relevant if this was the reason he was shot.

According to most of the evidence of his peers and family, he was no longer involved in his violent past. The same cannot be said about this child attacker. The 29-year old adult male had several very recent run ins with people regarding his over zealous work as Neighborhood Watch and had several recent assault charges.

Again. Remove the color of flesh from this case and you have a mentally unstable adult male with a gun who has just shot a teenage boy. The officers on seen did not see fit to arrest the adult for processing and as such no background into his mental health or recent violent behaviors were found out until the trail had been conducted.

The death of this child has been overlooked as an eventuality from the beginning. This started with how the police on seen at his death handled the evidence that was in front of them. They are naturally the first poor link in this case, then the prosecution, and finally Zimmerman himself.

After looking at this evidence, it is irrelevant what occurred in the altercation between Zimmerman and Trayvon. Zimmerman, due to his recent past and medical history, should have have heeded the instructions of local law enforcement and ceased Neighborhood Watch activities as he had been instructed to do weeks prior to the altercation with Trayvon Martin. If not for his poor judgement a child would not be dead.

His only duty at that time would have been as a citizen calling to alter authorities of a suspicious character of unknown intent on the street he was driving on. Police arrive, find no evidence of a crime and no child is dead. Zimmerman is at fault yes, but it is the duty of an officer of the law to uphold the processes that keep us all safe and secure. That night, the police in Florida did no such thing. Their negligence caused this entire situation to spiral out of control.