Thread: Did The Hispanic Neighborhood Watchman Have Cause To Be Suspicious Of Trayvon Martin?

Here are some facts of the over-hyped Trayvon Martin case.

A Hispanic guy is neighborhood watchman of a Florida suburb community. He says there have been a rash of recent break-ins in his usually quiet, peaceful, suburban, neighborhood. He's extra vigilant and suspicious of anything out of the ordinary. It's a dark, rainy, night. He spots a male. Contrary to the mainstream media pictures of a smiling 12-year-old black boy, he looks a little more like the updated 17-year-old in the picture below. He's wearing a hoodie and the Hispanic watchman hasn't seen him in the neighborhood previously. He calls 911, but wants to track the black guy because he doesn't want to waste police time by calling them out only to find the guy gone.

Is he right to be suspicious?



This is a fair and balanced poll. I'm not asking whether Trayvon deserved to get shot. I wouldn't think that for a minute. I am asking whether Zimmerman had cause to be suspicious to begin with.

It would be interesting if those who voted "no" would explain, given the circumstances, why a neighborhood watchman wouldn't be suspicious. Remember, we're not talking about the smiling 12-year-old boy the mainstream media is tricking you with here.

I voted "Not sure" because it's the only honest answer - we don't have (and probably never will) all the information necessary to make the judgement Zimmerman did on that day.

I don't think there is anything in the information we do have that definitively justifies suspicion though. Being male doesn't, being black doesn't, being unrecognised doesn't and wearing a hood (especially in the rain) doesn't. After all, most the people he'd see on the street at that time would fit one or more of those categories.

Originally Posted by HonestJoe

I voted "Not sure" because it's the only honest answer - we don't have (and probably never will) all the information necessary to make the judgement Zimmerman did on that day.

I don't think there is anything in the information we do have that definitively justifies suspicion though. Being male doesn't, being black doesn't, being unrecognised doesn't and wearing a hood (especially in the rain) doesn't. After all, most the people he'd see on the street at that time would fit one or more of those categories.

Well, what about the recent rash of break-ins by a black burglar(s) in the otherwise peaceful, low-crime, neighborhood? Wouldn't a neighborhood watchman be on high alert for anything suspicious?

Personally, I think given all the information any neighborhood watchman would have cause to be suspicious on that night, in those circumstances.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/...ce-crime-watch

Originally Posted by Zook

Well, what about the recent rash of break-ins by a black burglar(s) in the otherwise peaceful, low-crime, neighborhood? Wouldn't a neighborhood watchman be on high alert for anything suspicious?

Had there actually been a rash of break-ins and were the burglars were clearly identified as black? Your link only quotes Zimmerman from previous calls to the police saying there had been break-ins and reporting suspicious people (who happen to be black).

Regardless, if Martin was just normally walking down the street, I don't think his skin colour, age, clothing or the fact Zimmerman didn't recognise him justifies automatic suspicion. The tragic consequences in this case clearly demonstrate the flaws in such over-generalised discrimination.

I also suspect that had there been break-ins by people identified as white, Zimmerman wouldn't have had the automatic suspicion of any white stranger walking down the same street in the same way.

I remember reading in one newspaper that Zimmerman had called the police over 30 times for suspicious behaviour. All of them bar one being about black individuals. Clearly racial profiling.

I'll try to find the article on the net so everyone can see.

of course, there is nothing wrong with being suspicious. or being the target of suspicion.

"The Miami Herald claims that in October, he was caught with a 'burglary tool' - a flathead screwdriver - and 12 pieces of women's jewellery. Martin insisted that they did not belong to him."


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz1qKcuZ3WW

According to the link he also might've attacked a bus driver at some point... of course, that's beside the point. Zimmerman couldn't have known any of that when he began following him.
I think it's understandable to be suspicious of any tall guy in a hoodie strolling along near an expensive neighborhood that had a string of recent robberies. Should he have played vigilante and followed him? Absolutely not. Anyhow, I voted yes on the poll.

Originally Posted by Wingless

I think it's understandable to be suspicious of any tall guy in a hoodie strolling along near an expensive neighborhood that had a string of recent robberies.

What does height have to do with it? If anything, burglars will be small, to squeeze through small windows and the like.

You just might be able to justify a hoodie being suspicious if you choose to entirely ignore the fact that it was raining!

I've still seen nothing outside Zimmerman's statements on his calls to the police about any actual spate of robberies in the area.

So, you're basically down to the statement that men are suspicious (which is fair, I wouldn't trust me as far as I could throw me ). Unless, of course, there are any other distinguishing features you've not mentioned.

Originally Posted by zack13

I remember reading in one newspaper that Zimmerman had called the police over 30 times for suspicious behaviour. All of them bar one being about black individuals. Clearly racial profiling.

I'll try to find the article on the net so everyone can see.

Wrong...he called apx. 4-5 times a year for the past 5 years. Not excessive.