There is a LOT of emotion in the air out there regarding the Trayvon Martin shooting, which is understandable because a young man is dead. It is a tragic event that should not have happened, yet it did. There were ’911′ calls made to the police by witnesses on the scene and an investigation was launched. Then the inevitable speculation began by those who were not present at the scene of the incident. In fact there is so much more to this case, it will take a series of posts here at The American Journal to really cover the full extent of what actually happened. This is a first in a series of posts.
In the aftermath of the shooting, what has taken place is despicable and deliberately deceptive to the public. This post does not serve to make any particular judgment in the actual case, but its purpose is put things into perspective in a fair manner and expose the agenda that has been launched.
For starters, the facts of the case are being completely tainted to project a narrative by the media and race baiting political opportunists all the way up to the White House. This is very irresponsible and it provides no contribution to justice being carried out.
The morning after the shooting there were witnesses interviewed by a local news outlet. In the link shown here, the anchor gives a bit of background on the case. What struck me first were the photos posted on the video. It shows what appears to be a sweet 12 year old boy with an “aw shucks!” smile on his face. Next to that photo, we are shown a photo that appears to be a mugshot not unlike the many the ones you might see on “Americas Most Wanted.” Then the video continues and the anchor points out that there was another side to the story as she segues to a reporter on the scene.
The video continues as we see the shot of the of the yellow tape and police congregating at the scene. Next we see another photo of the deceased. This photo is a bit different than the first. Trayvon looks a bit older, and is not smiling. He is wearing a hooded sweatshirt and is gazing into the camera. A portion of a non-911 police tape is played and we hear George Zimmerman complain that there is a suspicious guy…tape ends. Then we see the reporter interviewing a witness. He points out that someone wearing a red shirt was on the ground yelling for help, and the witness yelled back to stop and closed his door so he could call 911. He refused to have his face shown on camera.
As the video continues the another tape is played and prefaced by the report that the screams heard are that of George Zimmerman. The witness continued, but now added that the one on top of the of the guy in red was now laying in the grass and he believed that he was dead. Then the reporter cites the City Sanford website that Zimmerman said he was headed back to his SUV when he was attacked, not the 17 year old.
Then the anchor retakes the TV report and says that Police said that Zimmerman was bloody in his face and head and that the back of his shirt was wet and had a grass stain indicating that there was a struggle that took place before the shooting. The anchor adds that the first officer on the scene characterized the shooting as manslaughter and unnecessary killing in his police report. She says that the police report is available on line on their website.
The link to the Police Report is found here.
At the top of the report dated 2/26/12 it does indeed refer to the negligent manslaughter offense as the anchor had reported. Witnesses are listed with their names and addresses redacted. Then towards the bottom of the report the on the scene officer accounts were given. The first account describes George Zimmerman as a white male and Trayvon Martin as a black male face down on the ground with his hands under his body. Officer reports that they were unable to resuscitate the victim.
More on the report in a moment as there are further details. Locally the shooting had been reported and video of witness accounts were released. However, the story had not gotten national attention. It was only weeks later that the buzz had ratcheted up on the Internet. The media then kicked into gear and the narrative began:
White male not charged for killing unarmed black teen!
Stories like this went national:
With quotes like this getting regurgitated again and again:
“You hear a shot, a clear shot, then you hear a 17-year-old boy begging for his life,” said Natalie Jackson, the family attorney. “Then you hear a second shot.”
The racism aspect was played up as well with stories like this:
It’s easy to Google and find many many many (did I say many?) more stories like this supporting the whole narrative of a racially motivated cold blooded murder. The genie was out of the bottle!
Media was also reporting that Trayvon’s parents were filing a suit and if Trayvon were white and George Zimmerman were black, he would be in jail. Everyone had something to say on the matter. Twitter exploded with the #TrayvonMartin hash tag the emotion ratcheted up! Tweeters were weighing in on the tragic situation.
Facebook was also filled with posts complete with all the emotional opinions of the outraged!
What happened next was where things really went from sad and chaotic to reprehensible. The usual race baiting suspects just had to get involved:
Jesse Jackson quoted in the LA Times
“Blacks Are Under Attack” … Obama’s Victory Has “Triggered Tremendous Backlash”…
Spike Lee weighed in here.
Other Celebrity Tweets here.
Then we have Al Sharpton here.
- Just a day after his mother’s death flew to Florida for protests.
“We are tired of going to jail for nothing and others going home for something. Zimmerman should have been arrested that night … you cannot defend yourself against a pack of Skittles and iced tea. Don’t talk to us like we’re stupid! Don’t talk to us like we’re ignorant! We love our children like you love yours. Lock him up!”
Of course, Barack Obama didn’t let this crisis go to waste.
OBAMA: ‘IF I HAD A SON, HE WOULD LOOK LIKE TRAYVON”
ED SCHULTZ: JEB BUSH TO BLAME FOR TRAYVON MARTIN’S DEATH
OH – and Jeb Bush said this:
“This law does not apply to this particular circumstance,” he said. “‘Stand your ground’ means ‘stand your ground.’ It doesn’t mean ‘chase after somebody who’s turned their back.’”
The quotes are endless, and they are irresponsible especially for the President of the United States and the Former Governor of the State of Florida. We already know the media is irresponsible, and Hollywood loves to push their self-important opinions on the the rest of us. The responsible thing to say was that the investigation was going to play out, and the facts will come out after that concludes. There is no need to propagandize this sad situation, which only builds a hostile environment in the public creating potentially more violence.
In light of all this buzz, there were other facts the night of the incident that seem to have been pushed aside in the narrative. The police report cited above continues, and here is some information that seems to not have made its way into the hysteria generated by the media:
- George Zimmerman was disarmed and handcuffed.
- He was heard making a statement to the Paramedics that he had yelled for help and no one helped him.
- He received medial treatment for his wounds.
- He was taken to police headquarters for interview by a police investigator.
Here is a letter to City of Sanford citizens
One key portion of the letter addresses why George Zimmerman was not arrested:
Why was George Zimmerman not arrested the night of the shooting?
When the Sanford Police Department arrived at the scene of the incident, Mr.
Zimmerman provided a statement claiming he acted in self defense which at the time
was supported by physical evidence and testimony. By Florida Statute, law
enforcement was PROHIBITED from making an arrest based on the facts and
circumstances they had at the time. Additionally, when any police officer makes an
arrest for any reason, the officer MUST swear and affirm that he/she is making the
arrest in good faith and with probable cause. If the arrest is done maliciously and in
bad faith, the officer and the City may be held liable.
Then there’s this:
If Zimmerman was told not to continue to follow Trayvon, can that be
considered in this investigation?
Yes it will; however, the telecommunications call taker asked Zimmerman “are you
following him”. Zimmerman replied, “yes”. The call taker stated “you don’t need to do
that”. The call taker’s suggestion is not a lawful order that Mr. Zimmerman would be
required to follow. Zimmerman’s statement was that he had lost sight of Trayvon and
was returning to his truck to meet the police officer when he says he was attacked by
Trayvon
This particular point seems to be a really important matter to people that I have encountered in Twitter. The American Journal is continuing to research this matter. However, there is an assumption here that has not been proved that I think is critical. The assumption is that Zimmerman continued to follow Martin after being instructed by the police operator not to do so. Here is a link to the 911 tapes:
The tapes released were incomplete. There are a few versions floating around out there that have more and less detail, but I have yet to hear one that confirms Zimmerman did in fact continue to follow Martin after being instructed not to do so. One tape has Zimmerman complaining that “they always get away!” But that merely shows his dissatisfaction with the instructions. It doesn’t mean he continued to follow. Based on the police report and the witness statement seeing Martin on top of Zimmerman, it does not prove that Zimmerman continued the pursuit. Only in the last day or so has the witness account gone been publicized on a national level.
This report, again by a local news outlet, gives a response by the detectives that fill in some blanks on the case that also seems to be missing from MSM accounts:
- It was prosecutors not the police that said there was not enough evidence for a conviction.
- Martin attacked Zimmerman
- Witnesses corroborated Martin attacked Zimmerman
- Martin’s father denied that the voice heard crying for help was his son’s.
As shown here the commentary posted above by the media, Hollywood types and professional agitators are misleading and ill-informed. They were made by people not at the incident and they do not paint a complete picture of the events to make such judgments. While it is provably true that Martin was unarmed, it cannot be proved by facts presented that Zimmerman’s life was not in danger. Speculation about Martin not being a threat due to his size is also irrelevant. The police report lists his height at 6 ft and his weight as 160. There are a lot of guys out there that are smaller than that that can inflict lethal damage-especially ones that have played tackle football. The American Journal will explore the football element and other background soon.
Then the point that Zimmerman had no business to follow Martin is also invalid given this
From Miami Herald on March 17. Of course the MSM is failing to report this as well.…
“The answer may lie in police records, which show that 50 suspicious-person reports were called in to police in the past year at Twin Lakes. There were eight burglaries, nine thefts and one other shooting in the year prior to Trayvon’s death.
In all, police had been called to the 260-unit complex 402 times from Jan. 1, 2011 to Feb. 26, 2012.
“He once caught a thief and an arrest was made,” said Cynthia Wibker, secretary of the homeowners association. “He helped solve a lot of crimes.”
Zimmerman told neighbors about stolen laptops and unsavory characters. Ibrahim Rashada, a 25-year-old African American who works at U.S. Airways, once spotted young men cutting through the woods entering the complex on foot, and later learned items were stolen those days.
“It’s a gated community, but you can walk in and steal whatever you want,” Rashada’s wife, Quianna, said.
They discussed the topic with Zimmerman when the watch captain knocked on their door late last year. Zimmerman seemed friendly, helpful, and a “pretty cool dude,” Ibrahim Rashadasaid.
“He came by here and talked about carrying guns and getting my wife more involved with guns,” he said. “He said I should have a weapon and that his wife took classes to learn how to use one.”
Why is it unacceptable to follow a suspicious person in your neighborhood if the intent is to prevent a crime, not commit one. As we’ve just seen, Zimmerman had successfully assisted law enforcement in the past. There was frequent crime in the neighborhood, so why is this circumstance different? The media seems only interested in painting an unprovable narrative that Zimmerman’s intention was to commit a crime and Martin’s intention was just grab some candy and go home.
This whole narrative begs the question of why? Why paint this as a simple case of cold blooded murder? Why fuel speculation of police cover ups and malicious intent? We will continue to reveal what we have learned. The American Journal will next explore the backgrounds of Zimmerman and Martin as portrayed by the Mainstream Media and the race baiting opportunists vs. the facts.
{ 4 trackbacks }