analyze this - trayvon martin case

this is the first time I’ve paid any attention to the trayvon martin case. i read the wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin then watched a video my fb friend posted - http://youtu.be/Ebu6Yvzs4Ls . as usual, i’m just going to write what you can’t read or hear anywhere else. note that contributors to a wikipedia article can come from all walks of life and spans the entire political and ideological spectrum so it’s less likely to be bias compared to mainstream media. so if you were disappointed with the verdict, trust me – you don’t want to read the wikipedia article or watch the youtube video links in this paragraph. i don’t want you to end up feeling like a fool.

the media is a business – it is suppose to entertain. the dishonesty in mainstream media is really harmless in the big picture, and i even think it could be good for society as a whole. there are still too many racist people in america, although things are getting better. it’s good for the black people to think they have the media on their side.

assuming zimmerman is innocent and the media slanted the truth, it’s still ok. i support the right to carry guns, but you have to be extra careful when you carry a gun. you have to do your best to avoid situations where you end up using it. i would even go as far as saying zimmerman is still very lucky, even if the media unfairly demonized him. zimmerman made a mistake when he got out of his car – and the price he paid for that mistake is that the media demonized him – a very small price considering the mistake ended the life of another human being.

one interesting thing i wanna point out in the wikipedia article – it mentions the law professors like the harvard professor support the verdict, and they even go as far as criticizing the prosecutor. these professors are usually progressive liberals – they are anti gun and they would always side with minorities. so that’s all i needed to know to conclude that technically the jury made the correct verdict based on the available evidence.

however, i have a question that i think is very critical that is being left out in the wikipedia article. does the “benefit of the doubt” rule apply to a self defense case? i mean  there is no doubt zimmerman killed trayvon. so is it the burden of the prosecution to establish there is no doubt zimmerman act was NOT self defense, or is it the burden of the defense to establish no doubt that it was self defense?

NOW IT’S SPECULATION TIME.  this is what i think happened. first let me cut to the chase – my guess is that zimmerman is “a little guilty” and should spend around 5 years in jail.

zimmerman was already in a sensitive or intense emotion mode when he was following trayvon. it’s an instinct that automatically kicks in when you are in a dangerous situation. then trayvon said something that made zimmerman very angry (note that trayvon was already making funny comments about zimmerman over the phone while talking to his friend). you know kids nowadays they learn  many bickering words or zingers,

now if you look at both their weights in wikipedia, zimmerman is 30 pounds heavier than trayvon. so zimmerman probably thought he could take on trayvon but got beat up instead by a lanky kid. this probably made zimmerman angry.

now zimmerman was raised along 2 black children. based on my childhood experience, humans are more likely to be comfortable getting into a fight with someone whose physical attributes you are more familiar with. as a kid i remember sacrificing my pride and reputation rather than getting into a fight with an iranian, chinese or white kid (or probably the bruce lee and chuck norris movies made me more scared of them)

so it was a perfect storm that set off zimmmerman. so he attacks trayvon. this is where i think zimmerman should at least spend 5 years in jail. although zimmerman is not a murderer, i could even say he is a good man. but i think that if you are carrying a gun, it’s your responsibility to stay away from fights as best as you can. and my speculation is that zimmerman attacked first. but it’s a weak speculation. i give it 60% probability.

unfortunately, many kids nowadays are into mixed martial arts, including trayvon so zimmerman ends up getting beat up.

there is also a 40% chance trayvon may have attacked first because of his confidence from his mixed martial arts. it’s human nature to always jump on any opportunity to put into use a skill you have worked hard to become good at. and note that according to the phone conversation, trayvon was already creeped out by zmmerman following him.

i don’t think anyone really intended to kill anyone. even if trayvon was shouting “you’re a dead man now” in the 911 recordings, i believe it was just a figure of speech. it’s not clear if it was trayvon who said this, but based on the history of their character and trayvon’s facebook and twitter postings, i say there is a 90% probability it was trayvon. so logically it was zimmerman crying for help because it’s illogical for anyone to say “you’re a dead man now” and  cry for help.

but trayvon saw the gun and thought “holy shit i gotta take this gun away from him because he might shoot me for beating him up.”.  while trying to grab the gun, zimmerman probably thought “holy shit this kid is really trying to kill me. he is trying to take my gun to shoot me.”.

since zimmerman knows better how to take off the gun from it’s holster, he succeeds in getting hold of the gun. the forensic experts say the gun was fired from 1 to 18 inches away – at close range. so at this point zimmerman was still under trayvon, and i believe zimmerman still did not want to shoot trayvon. but then zimmerman thought “if this kid succeeded in overpowering me and pinning me down, he might also succeed in getting this gun away from me. i don’t want to take the chance”. so zimmerman took the shot.

(for more of my knowledge bombs, click the "ian's knowledge bombs" banner at the top of this article and choose any article in the table of contents that piques your interest)