Can Anyone Verify These Disturbing Allegations About Trayvon’s Family?

Posted on Comments

A commenter on the earlier post wrote this:

Here’s something else you don’t know. From the age of 3 until age 15 or 16, Trayvon Martin lived NOT with Sybrina Fulton but with Tracy Martin, a known member of the Crips, and his then-wife Alicia Stanley-Martin, who was mentioned above. Alicia Stanley-Martin in that interview with Anderson Cooper said Trayvon spent 90% of his life in her home being raised with her two daughters from a previous relationship.
When Tracy Martin dumped Alicia for Brandy he sent Trayvon to live with Sybrina — a woman he hardly knew. The two didn’t get along at all. Sybrina kicked Trayvon out two days before he jumped Zimmerman.
Oddly, at that point Tracy was living with his sister because he’d dumped Alicia but hadn’t yet convinced Brandy to let him shack up with her and her son Chad. According to Trayvon’s text messages the plan was for him and Tracy to move in with Brandy soon but there was no definite date.
So Sybrina kicked Trayvon out knowing that Tracy had no home of his own, meaning Trayvon had no home to go to other than his aunt’s house where his father was staying.
Mother-of-the-year award material.
The part that gets me, however, is that Sybrina would let a known member of the Crips to raise her child from age three. I’m sorry but that’s too messed up for words.
You ought to check out Trayvon’s text messages, the released ones anyway. All evidence points to Tracy initiating Trayvon into the Crips, including purchasing illegal guns on the street. Yes, you read that correctly.
The text messages may be found at the website created and ran by Mark O’Mara. Look at the ten text message reports. Oh, and Tracy Martin’s Crip nickname is “Fruit.”

Is this true? The commenter references the “Third Supplemental Discovery” at George Zimmerman Legal Case, and says that all this information has previously been cited by The Last Refuge, a.k.a. The Conservative Treehouse. I find it difficult to believe that anyone — even the most biased liberal reporter at the New York Times — covering this case would look at that and say, “Irrelevant.”

As I’ve explained elsewhere, I didn’t pay much attention to this story when it broke, because in March/April 2012 I was covering the end of the GOP presidential primary campaign. Controversy about a shooting in Florida wasn’t really on my beat. So you’ll forgive me if I’m re-hashing anything everybody already knew. But . . . Trayvon’s father was a member of the Crips? Really? This is “irrelevant”?

Welcome to the New Normal, I guess.

 

402 comments

  1. You know, until a few years ago, I really didn’t give a damn what color anyone was. It was a physical identifier, just like blond hair or brown eyes.
    over the last few years however, I’ve been told that disagreeing with someone who is black makes me a racist, no matter the grounds on which I disagree. Disagree with Obama’s plans for Health Care? Racist! Disagree with Holder’s decision not to charge the NBP poll intimidators? Racist! Disagree with Michelle Obama’s school lunch ideas? Racist!
    The truth of the matter is, that Trayvon had reached the house where he was staying, and then decided to go back and give the “creepy ass cracker” a beat down. If he had gone into the house instead of doubling back and sucker-punching Zimmerman, he wouldn’t be dead.
    Note: I’m not saying “if he hadn’t gone to the store that night”. He had every right to go to the store. But, he didn’t have the right to assault someone simply because he thought the guy was “creepy”. And that’s why he was shot.

  3. And therein lays another problem – if you draw the weapon without reasonable fear, you will be arrested and potentially could be charged with a variety of crimes, some of which are felonies. The same people who are arguing that getting beaten to a pulp is not sufficient grounds to use lethal force would be arguing that Zimmerman shouldn’t have “brandished” his weapon under a different set of circumstances. Like it or not, this is an argument for open carry. http://hogewash.com/2013/07/15/arma-virumque-cano/

  4. Resorting to shouting, huh? Maybe we *do* understand, but we just don’t agree.

    Ever consider that possibility?

  6. Don’t you know, the NY Times, CNN and MSNBC have said the GZ is a “white” Hispanic…that means he’s an EEEEvil oppressor of minorities…and has no right at all under our new progressive masters like Jondaris…

  7. I live just outside of Baltimore, MD. The apartment complex I live in is 90% black. I had 2 beagles that I used to take out back and let run in the field behind the complex. My neighbors appreciated this because in the course of walking my dogs over the past 5 years, I have personally caught 5 sets of burglars, reported more than 20 break ins, and stopped 2 rapes.

    Maryland doesn’t yet have a functioning CCP law (it’s being worked out as we speak), I always carry a 50″ long x 1 1/8″ thick brass topped “walking stick”…aka a “city stick.” Between my stick and my dogs (whom my neighbors adore–they’ve gotten fat on all the treats), unless someone has a gun, there are very few people I’m afraid of.

    That being said, I regularly get thanked by my neighbors for “patrolling the grounds.” The last burglar I caught I was carrying a 22″ reproduction of a medieval Italian short sword. I held the little bastard @ sword point until the cops got there. So…the perp had a knife that he thought he could intimidate me with…until I did a “crocadile dundee” on him…he freaked out and started screaming, the cops thought it was pretty funny, especially after they found the kilo of heroin he was ripping off from the neighbor…

    Moral of the story? Jondaris you’re a hypocritical Liberal asshole. You don’t really know what you’re talking about when it comes to self defense, and what people do when secconds count and the cops are minutes away. Had my burglar tried to hurt me with his little knife, I’d have done the same thing the “samurai guy” did to a burglar in Baltimore City @ Johns Hopkins University a couple of years ago…off with his hand.

  8. At what point in your world would it be OK for George to go look for a street sign or check the back gate? Because that is what he did once he lost sight of Martin. And four minutes passed. He couldn’t follow or not follow Martin because George didn’t know where Martin was! But Martin knew where George was… at least well enough to lay in wait. George acted appropriately and responsibly every step of the way and we ended up with as optimal a result as Martin allowed us to have.

    This really needs to be emphasized… Martin got what he deserved. There is no tragedy here and it is a blessing that the person Martin chose to assault was armed and put him down. Had George gone to his car and cowered there is no telling who Martin would have jumped as he was already laying in wait by that point.

  9. You’re a liberal tool trying to use your Okie birth as street cred that you’re not. Interesting you show your diversity of opinion by taking a liberal stand on guns. (I believe in background checks) I think Zimmerman might well of been an unstable personality. The evidence in the trial does not support your position All you’re doing is parroting the liberal mainstream media position.

  10. No, what drives you nuts about cons is what you THINK we are like. You really need to get a larger circle of friends.

  11. “At what point in your world would it be OK for George to go look for a street sign or check the back gate?”

    Given the circumstances, at no point. First off, the police were already on their way, and second, the idea that Zimmerman didn’t know the name of one of the three roads in the gated community he lived in doesn’t pass the smell test.

    “George acted appropriately and responsibly every step of the way and we ended up with as optimal a result as Martin allowed us to have.”

    As your comment hit my e-mail box I was reading this comment and post . It explains several reasons why I think you’re mistaken, from a gun owner/concealed carry/pro-self-defense perspective. If after reading the comment (and as many of the others there as you have the time and inclination to take on) you still disagree, well, opinions differ…

    It’s my contention that neither Zimmerman or Martin were evil men bent on harming anyone; Rather, they were each scared of who they imagined the other to be, and both believed they were defending themselves, Zimmerman against the beating, and Martin against some pervert who kept coming. (Elsewhere in this thread, both the Allergic To Bull link and the Slate: William Saletan link believe this theory is either quite possible (AtB), or likely (Saletan). YMMV…

  12. Dumbass, I drive around everywhere with a gun. 100% legal. And self-defense is based on who throws the first punch, which wasn’t Zimmerman, because forensics showed he had no offensive wounds (unlike Saint Trayvon).

  13. You are trying really hard to find racism where there obviously is none. Unless you are saying that it is natural for black people to want to be thugs. Then yeah, you are a racist. Congratulations, you found what you were looking for. No one has made a call for laws to be enforced differently based on race other than you since the law was very clear here and the jury found George acted within their bounds. They could not find otherwise given the evidence.

    No one is saying Trayvon should be shot for anything he did in the past, just as he did not deserve to live just because he bought skittles in the past (nor because he made lean out of it often enough that he already had liver damage from doing so).

    He deserved to be shot (not murdered you legally illiterate numbnut) because he assaulted a man and could have either killed him or caused grave bodily injury. He assaulted a man and put him in grave fear. He forfeited his own life when he did that and you should at least allow him the courtesy of holding him responsible for his own actions and choices. I know this is hard for you to understand but just because he is black does not mean we can’t expect civilized behavior from him and hold him to the same standards as everyone else.

    Now where gang affiliation and past acts come in is in knowing the pattern of behavior a person regularly engages in. Martin had been kicked out of school for fighting and stealing. He had bragged about how he knew how to punch a person so as to break their nose and engaged in street fights. He had reported using the techniques Zimmerman claimed he used in their fight… all unbeknownst to George at the time. Do you not think all of those things are at least as relevant as George taking some MMA classes? Do you not see how this bolsters the credibility of George’s story? Or are you so blinded by racial animus that you cannot think rationally? Can you not see how these facts are more relevant than the fact he wore a hoodie?

    I know you thought you would come here and educate us all but things aren’t quite working out as you hoped. The only racism you can find is what you brought with you and your assumptions about us, and that Martin is being labelled a thug for his skin color rather than his bad acts, affiliations and aspirations. YOU DO NOT ALLOW HIM THE DIGNITY OF BEING AN INDIVIDUAL BUT RATHER THINK OF HIM AS A MEMBER OF A TRIBE, ALL OF WHOM HAVE THE SAME GRIEVANCES AND ACT THE SAME. And that is the key point here.

    Conservatives think of people as individuals while progs think of people as members of groups. That is why you can’t understand how people can criticize what is in your mind a member of the privileged caste such as a black man without racial animus. Conflating all black people as being one is the very definition of racism and is why leftism is the last bastion of racism left in the country. We just aren’t capable of that sort of lunacy to the extent that you are and will not follow you into such madness because down that path lays only strife, division and hatred.

  14. Florida law even in regards to standing you ground is the same as in 33 other states. As far as this case goes it was not a factor. Why even mention it in the same sentence as Trayvon if you really know plenty about the case as you claim? Apparently “plenty” does not mean what you think it means.

  15. Once again… slowly… how could Zimmerman know any such thing? Not that is is really relevant whether he was armed but you need to try harder to follow the conversation.

  16. That also explains the time it took for Sabrina Fulton going to Sanford after receiving news of her son’s death – one week later she finally shoed up. Now she wants to play a ‘grieving, loving and crying mother’ labeling her son ‘angel’ knowing full well that he was anything but.
    Also, if the police responsible for crimes committed in Florida’s Schools would not have surpressed the truth about Trayvon’s criminal behavior to pad statistics – it surely would put him in jail and, he still would be alive today.

  18. The family social dynamics had a *huge* reason why he ended up in Sanford that fateful night. Trayvon didn’t live or go to school in Sanford. It was not his “home”.

    I would agree that the family social dynamics weren’t important to the last few seconds in the altercation before he was shot, but I feel the family social dynamics are key to understanding Trayvon and how he ended up in that situation – including his need to confront George for some sense of false bravado and “wanna be gangsta” personal cred. Sad.

  19. Yes. Trayvon didn’t “deserve” to be murdered. George didn’t “deserve” to be physically assaulted either. In Jeantel’s interview, she explains it away as just some “whoop-ass”, like it’s an everyday occurrence and perfectly acceptable to assault strangers. Shows the huge cultural gulf.

  20. I’ve been reading CTH regularly and never saw that. Cite?
    Or are you claiming inside information? Or making stuff up.

  21. Kick your son out win a cool million in a wrongful death suit yup I’d say that is mother of the year material

  22. The family social dynamics explain why T thought it was just fine to attack someone he thought was unarmed and tell him he was going to die.

  23. Your assumption, as usual, is massively stupid, and thus so is your argument. Also, logic.

    She even said on the stand that she wasn’t so empowered to issue an order. Have you paid ANY real attention to the case?

    It wasn’t even couched in that language (that you quote!), so you can dispense with with the “order” argument. but I suspect you can’t let go of that, everything else you argue flows from it.

    I think your head might explode.

  24. Innocent boys don’t smoke dope. Innocent boys don’t carry burglary tools. Innocent boys don’t steal jewelry. Innocent boys don’t get suspended from school. Innocent boys don’t post selfies holding a gun. Innocent boys don’t post selfies of the double bird. Innocent boys don’t attack people. Innocent boys don’t threaten to kill. Innocent boys who are in the act of attempting to kill don’t get shot by their intended victim.

  27. Yeah, and nobody thinks Martin should have ESP and know not to attack someone with conceal carry. Why is that?

  30. Not likely, because St. Skittles wasn’t likely the burglar. Some of the burglars did time; some were described as “white” or “hispanic”. It wasn’t just one person robbing homes in the area.

  31. ” Please, engage as an adult or STFU.”

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!

    There’s so much irony there you could mine it.

  32. “Hoodies in the heat of FL are a sign of no good.”

    It WAS February and raining, so it could have been chilly for Florida.

  33. “Had Zimmerman drawn his weapon when Martin first confronted him, Martin might still be alive.”

    And Zimmerman would have committed assault with a deadly weapon.

    Self defense laws and case law make it clear that if you pull your gun, you had better be ready to shoot to kill at that very instant. If you do not, you leave yourself open to doubt of whether you really were in fear for your safety.

  34. “One can reasonably assume that a police dispatcher is legally invested by the police department in issuing legally binding commands”

    No, one cannot. Dispatchers are not officers and have no legal standing.

  35. jondaris, you are a classic bully and thug. Your desire to be able to beat people up so strong, it overrides your respect for their rights.

  37. “the criteria for an idiot is stopping at believing he is right.”

    Projection, it’s ugly.

  38. Pinned to the ground, being beaten senseless is classic self-defense. No unusual laws apply.

    Why are you so ignorant of this case, yet so forceful in your opinions about it?

  40. “If you are driving around “patrolling” the neighborhood with a gun…”

    Didn’t happen. WHY ARE YOU MAKING THINGS UP?!

Comments are closed.