Bill Kniess wrote in
:

Ed Pawlowski wrote in
news
On Mon, 26 Mar 2012 10:44:41 -0500, Jim Yanik
wrote:






Sorry,but fact is,blacks,particularly younger black males,commit
crimes far out our proportion to their percentage of the
population.

But rational people don't presume guilt just because someone is
black.

sure,the young man had every right to be there,etc,but the watch
man had every right to keep an eye on an unknown wandering their
neighborhood,even to ask him what he's doing there.

From what Zimmerman's father said last night on Fox35,Trayvon was wandering
around behind some townhomes,not just walking home from 7-11.
Places he was not supposed to be.


He did NOT have the right as a watch member to "ask what he's doing
there".

Yes,he did,same as any other adult. However,I don't believe any questions
were ever asked. Trayvon disappeared from Zimmerman's sight(that's on the
tapes IIRC),and that is when he returned to his SUV to wait for police to
arrive,and when he was attacked.

Watch members are NOT to interact anyway with the
"suspicious" subjects. Their job is to observe and report to the
police, then follow any directions given by the police.


He has the right to watch, but unless he has police authority, I
don't think he has the right to question. That can be
confrontational and start a problem.

As P stated, you are absolutely correct.

What if he were asking or going to ask for directions??
there's a lot of questions that are NOT "confrontational".
Unless you have a big chip on your shoulder,or are doing something wrong.



All the teen needed to do was ask why he was being followed,or
call 911,or knock on a door and yell for help.
Instead,he chose confrontation and attack,and it happened to be a
guy who was lawfully armed and who defended himself.

He may have been lawfully armed in that he has a permit to carry, but
the precepts of the neighborhood watch program do NOT include members
carrying.

Do you have a citation for that?
In the light of the Trayvon attack,it certainly seems prudent to go about
armed after dark.
Plus,I'm probably a bit more familiar with Sanford that most of you folks,I
live only 15 miles away,and have travelled through it many times. It's a
high crime area,the entire city. In some areas,people have BARS on their
windows and doors.

Further it is best when waych members work in pairs, so
there will be at least one who can act reasonably.

Zimmerman acted reasonably.
He defended himself from a vicious,unreasonable attack.
He also fired only ONE shot. That was verified by the officer that took
possession of and cleared his gun.
That shows restraint.

One more item;
Zimmerman and his wife were a mentor to a black single mom and her two
children.
does that sound like a racist?



We don't know for sure who was confrontational yet. Could have
been either one.



there is NO evidence of any "confrontation",nor was his following Trayvon
any "provocation".
There IS evidence and witness testimony of Trayvon attacking Zimmerman.

also,note that Trayvon was caught at his school possessing a burglar
tool(flat bladed screwdriver,a prybar used by thieves) and 12 pieces of
womens jewelry,so it's very possible Trayvon WAS looking for homes to
burgle when Zimmerman saw him.
I wonder if that is how his gold "grill" was paid for?

Trayvon was suspended multiple times,for vandalism,drug possession,and was
found in possession of a burglar tool and the womens jewelry,he was NOT any
"good kid".


--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com