Politics & Current Events
Dear Community,

Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.

If you have questions about this, please email [email protected]

Thank you.

Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.

Zimmerman not guilty

2

Re: Zimmerman not guilty

  • Well, juror B37 isn't exactly the brightest bulb in the bunch. 

    http://gawker.com/george-zimmerman-juror-b37-hates-media-called-trayvon-787873533

    For those of you who don't know, this is the juror who announced today she's writing a book about the trial.

    2 days after the trial ended.

    So if you consider George Zimmerman to be a complete nimrod without an ounce of brains, then yes, he was judged by a jury of his peers. 

    [IMG]http://i48.tinypic.com/28btqo9.gif[/IMG]
    The feeling is mutual, Harry.
  • You can go right ahead and say this wasn't about race.  That the American public was just misunderstandin' GZ and he's really the victim in all of this.   That the trial was a waste of time and money.

    You go right ahead and say that.

    That doesn't mean you're right.

    GZ killed a young man.  Pointed a gun at his chest and pulled the trigger.  That is fact.  That will never change.  He will always be the reason Trayvon Martin died. 

    If GZ had just asked Trayvon if everything was ok and if he could help him in any way, this may never have happened. 

    If GZ had listened to the police dispatcher and waited until the police got there, this may never have happened. 

    GZ was the adult in this situation.  He was the one with the power and the control.  He was the one with the gun and he called the police, who were on their way.

    He took matters into his own hands instead of waiting for law enforcement to arrive.

    GZ may have been found not guilty but he certainly is not innocent. 

    [IMG]http://i48.tinypic.com/28btqo9.gif[/IMG]
    The feeling is mutual, Harry.
  • image CinemaGoddess:

    Well, juror B37 isn't exactly the brightest bulb in the bunch. 

    http://gawker.com/george-zimmerman-juror-b37-hates-media-called-trayvon-787873533

    For those of you who don't know, this is the juror who announced today she's writing a book about the trial.

    2 days after the trial ended.

    So if you consider George Zimmerman to be a complete nimrod without an ounce of brains, then yes, he was judged by a jury of his peers. 

    So yeah, at least 1/6 of the jury was racist too.  

    image
  • snp605snp605 member
    Tenth Anniversary 100 Comments Name Dropper 5 Love Its

    First of all there was an autopsy performed on Martin. This includes a full toxicology. This is standard on all murder victims. The obsession that everything done by everyone involved only did everything because of some kind of bias is so incredibly racist in itself that I can't believe people can't see that.

     No one I've talked to has been able to produce one single shred of anything about Zimmerman that is evidence of racism. We live in a super public world where things stay public forever. No one has come forward with a single facebook post, text message, voice mail, email or even rumored story from an old girlfriend or grudgeholder that illustrates even one single shred of racist tone. (Interesting that we can't say the same for the victim which I only bring up because it goes to his state of mind and his intention in confronting Zimmerman). However, the media has been able to get away with making things up then apologizing later after it has gotten into the conversation of the public as if it were true. The family who couldn't be bothered to raise the victim suddenly had plenty of time to go around making things up as if they were true and appearing on national television to the general public without repercussion. It's tragic that a young man died but that doesn't mean you get to go around saying untrue things on national television.

    Even if, IF, Zimmerman was the racist to end all racists in his darkest of dark hearts and managed to keep it secret-(his secret plan included publicly fighting for the rights of a black homeless man against what he considered a corrupt sheriff, mentoring at risk youth and actively campaigning for Barack Obama) until the magical day 28 years into his life when he could get away with killing a black teenager, we have a system of laws. The overwhelming bounty of evidence corroborated his account of events. There is zero corroboration of any other sequence of events and mere speculation from people who don't like that someone not black killed someone black and called it self defense doesn't count. By Florida law, even if YOU start the confrontation, if at any point you believe your life is in danger, you are entitled to use deadly force to protect yourself. Considering that Zimmerman was the smaller of the two and was proven to have taken a beating, even if he taunted Martin and carried a sign with a Swastika on it, the second Martin started whaling on him he was entitled to use any force he needed to in order to defend himself. He was within the bounds of the law. If people don't like it they don't have to live in Florida or they can work with the legislature to have the laws changed. There are lots of laws I don't like in lots of different states. It doesn't mean I get to slander people because their state isn't punishing them the way I see fit.

    image
  • snp605snp605 member
    Tenth Anniversary 100 Comments Name Dropper 5 Love Its
    image Janimal:

    I agree with everything Geraldo said.  (Words I never thought I would be writing!)

    I would be more comfortable with a "jury of peers" if we didn't live in a country where Rick Perry was a governor for 13 years and the movie "Grown Ups" made enough box office to get a sequel.

    I simply cannot get my head around this.  He should have been charged, tried, and convicted of manslaughter.  The system failed.  A big fat fail.  A fail for the Sanford police, a fail for the prosecutors, and fail for the Martin family, a fail for Florida, and a big fat fail for all Americans who are stuck with the flawed system.

     

    What specific acts that Zimmerman did met the Florida criteria for  manslaughter?

    image
  • image CinemaGoddess:

    You can go right ahead and say this wasn't about race.  That the American public was just misunderstandin' GZ and he's really the victim in all of this.   That the trial was a waste of time and money.

    You go right ahead and say that.

    That doesn't mean you're right.

    GZ killed a young man.  Pointed a gun at his chest and pulled the trigger.  That is fact.  That will never change.  He will always be the reason Trayvon Martin died. 

    If GZ had just asked Trayvon if everything was ok and if he could help him in any way, this may never have happened. 

    If GZ had listened to the police dispatcher and waited until the police got there, this may never have happened. 

    GZ was the adult in this situation.  He was the one with the power and the control.  He was the one with the gun and he called the police, who were on their way.

    He took matters into his own hands instead of waiting for law enforcement to arrive.

    GZ may have been found not guilty but he certainly is not innocent. 

    With the two bolded points...I agree with you on the first. I used to work in a bank before SAHM-hood and we were always trained to "challenge" people in polite diplomatic ways rather than confrontational ones. "May I help you with something?" "Are you looking for someone?" If GZ thought TM was behaving oddly, he might have used a gentler technique.

    I think we all need to keep in mind, with the second bolded point, the time it takes for LE to arrive on scene it's not seconds, but minutes. We know GZ was taking a beating. If he had tried to endure for 1, 2 or 3 minutes, or more until cops arrived, might he be dead? Might he be paralyzed? Blinded? Obviously, there is no way to know this answer, but lots can happen in a few minutes. Think about how little time it takes for things to escalate.

    It's scary, but often times once people get worked into a blind rage like the one TM must have been in to hit GZ they way he did, little will stop them except force. Could GZ have walked or crawled away once TM started in beating him? Honestly, I doubt it. The emotions and testosterone in TM were probably in the way of his rational thought at this point.

     

  • snp605snp605 member
    Tenth Anniversary 100 Comments Name Dropper 5 Love Its
    image GeraldoRivera:
    image CinemaGoddess:

    Well, juror B37 isn't exactly the brightest bulb in the bunch. 

    http://gawker.com/george-zimmerman-juror-b37-hates-media-called-trayvon-787873533

    For those of you who don't know, this is the juror who announced today she's writing a book about the trial.

    2 days after the trial ended.

    So if you consider George Zimmerman to be a complete nimrod without an ounce of brains, then yes, he was judged by a jury of his peers. 

    So yeah, at least 1/6 of the jury was racist too.  

    Actually she rescinded the book deal. I can't see the video but the only thing I could see other than she seems a bit eccentric was the phraseology that Martin was a "boy of color". Is that why you tag her with the racist label?

     Here's a quote:

    People of Color have spoken out against white privilege and racism for two centuries. It?s time for white people to listen and to act. 

     That was Maya Angelou. Crazy racist.

     Another one:

    One of the reasons that so many people of color and poor people are in prison is that the deindustrialization of the economy has led to the creation of new economies and the expansion of some old ones ...

     Angela Davis. Political Activist and member of the Black Panther party.

    Link to advocacy for College Board for regarding "Young Men of Color".

    http://advocacy.collegeboard.org/sites/default/files/EEYMC-StudentVoice.pdf

    Considering the pictures shown in the media all along were pics of Trayvon when he was like 12, if that was all I saw I would think he was a boy instead of nearly a full grown man too.

     Did I miss something from the video?

    image
  • Snp - I disagree with your post.  There's too much in it for me to directly respond to but two things I wanted to point out - why do you think GZ called the cops on TM in the first place? You really think that it had nothing to do with his race?  Do you know that GZ had called the cops 44 times in the previous 10 years and every single time it was to report an african-american?  Please see my post below regarding racial profiling and ask yourself how you would have reacted.  We need to have an honest discussion about race in this country and the fact that many people think it's not an issue, or that racial profiling doesn't happen or that the "media" made this about race is just so sad to me. 

     ML - We don't know what happened that night.  We don't know he was taking a beating. There's evidence that he might have been but it's unclear and the jury decided GZ was credible.  The problem is that GZ never had to prove he acted in self-defense.  He just had to raise it and then prosectuors had to DISprove it beyond a r doubt.  That is an incredibly hard bar to reach and it's impossible if GZ never testifies. 

    Further, in most states, GZ would have had a duty to retreat. His claim of self-defense would have never worked in this situation where he not only did not avoid the confrontation, but he instigated the confrontation AND he didn't take reasonable steps to retreat.  Here's an explanation. 

    In the criminal law, the duty to retreat is a specific component which sometimes appears in the defense of self-defense, and which must be addressed if the defendant is to prove that his or her conduct was justified. In those jurisdictions where the requirement exists, the burden of proof is on the defense to show that the defendant was acting reasonably. This is often taken to mean that the defendant had first avoided conflict and secondly, had taken reasonable steps to retreat and so demonstrated an intention not to fight before eventually using force.

     

    Lilypie First Birthday tickers Lilypie Third Birthday tickers Lilypie Kids Birthday tickers
  • "I would have punched his azz in the nose too." you would have been shot as well then.

     

    this whole thing is that they were both wrong.

     

    However what the real debate should be about is actual racism. not from George Zimmerman. But racism from the police. LeVar Burton was recently on the news stating that even though he had grown up with a good family and with good money. He was still a black man and his mother had taught him when a cop pulls you over you set your hands outside of the car window to put the cop at ease. That is true racism. How many white people have to do that? However it was just a common thing for him. 

    The true debate should be why was Martin not able to call the police and yet Zimmerman was able to. Martin must have not trusted the police and felt the need to take matters into his own hands. 

    Which is why he DID initiate the fight. (proof from Martin not being harmed other than by gunshot)

    Zimmerman was trying to make sure his neighborhood was safe, did he do it in the wrong matter, OF COURSE! Should he have shot Martin? goodness no. Does the misunderstanding escalate extremely quickly when martin took it physical yes. Out of shock and fear Zimmerman then shot Martin. It was wrong, however it was not malicious intent to murder.

     

    The real problem here that needs solved is the ability for black people to feel comfortable enough to call the police and not be racially profiled. If Martin felt comfortable enough to do that then he would have never had to take matters into his own hands and would still be alive today. 

  • It was reasonable for George Zimmerman to believe that his use of force was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself.

    There was not enough evidence to prove that he acted with a depraved mind without regard to human life (Murder 2) or that he intentionally caused Trayvon Martin's death (manslaughter).

    Even though the jurors found GZ No Guilty, there is no doubt that this case remains a tragedy. A 17 year old young man is dead and nothing can change that. It's heartbreaking to imagine, as a parent, what Martin's family has gone through.

    Putting emotion aside is so difficult in any case (as I'm sure it was in this one) but that is what the jury was asked to do and simply focus on the evidence and the law. In the end, we must respect the jury's decision. They did everything that was asked of them and came to a difficult decision based on the law. 

  • image gonnabeJLBagain:

    It was reasonable for George Zimmerman to believe that his use of force was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself.

    There was not enough evidence to prove that he acted with a depraved mind without regard to human life (Murder 2) or that he intentionally caused Trayvon Martin's death (manslaughter).

    Even though the jurors found GZ No Guilty, there is no doubt that this case remains a tragedy. A 17 year old young man is dead and nothing can change that. It's heartbreaking to imagine, as a parent, what Martin's family has gone through.

    Putting emotion aside is so difficult in any case (as I'm sure it was in this one) but that is what the jury was asked to do and simply focus on the evidence and the law. In the end, we must respect the jury's decision. They did everything that was asked of them and came to a difficult decision based on the law. 

    Okay I have to put on my law prof hat.  There was enough evidence that GZ intentionally caused his death at the moment he shot TM.  GZ doesn't dispute that.  Here's how it works: Prosecution asserts a charge.  Defendant raises a defense (In this case, the defense raised was self defense). GZ agrees that yes, he intentionally caused TM's death but his actions were excused on self-defense ground).  That was GZ's argument in a nutshell. 

    Lilypie First Birthday tickers Lilypie Third Birthday tickers Lilypie Kids Birthday tickers
  • snp605snp605 member
    Tenth Anniversary 100 Comments Name Dropper 5 Love Its

    so what if he called 44 times? He lived in a BAD neighborhood. The reason it was gated was not because it was it was luxury but because it was ridden with crime. Check your facts as well because he only identified 4 as black and 3 were identified as white. Several calls were regarding loose animals, alarms going off, doors left open at neighbor's houses, potholes etc. Also because of the nature of the calls just the basic information is recorded. He may have called in and been ASKED to describe physical characteristics just as happened the night Trayvon was shot. He was a safety police type. I have a neighbor who reports every freaking loose shingle on every house to our HOA. Apparently that's her thing. Zimmerman is probably the kind of obnoxious neighbor no one really wants to have due to their zealousness (or perhaps is happy to have do their dirty work) but it doesn't make him a criminal or a racist.

     Meanwhile we have nothing to explain why a 10 minute trip to the store took 40 minutes or what the victim was doing that time. As far as standing your ground goes, the victim also had a chance to retreat. From the time he spotted Zimmerman he was less than 20 seconds from the house he was headed towards and where people were home yet it was 2 minutes later when the tussle took place. Fine play the "oh so scared of calling the police" card but why not head home to safety instead of hanging around for another 2 minutes? Why did he hang around in the rain outside of the 7-11 out of view (and thus in the rain) for 5 minutes after making his purchase before heading back to the house? He wasn't drinking the drink or eating the candy because those were found on him. 

    Why aren't we angry that the media lightened up pictures of him before they were shown? Are they implying that he would only look like an innocent starling if he were light colored? I find that so indefensibly racist and something actually tangible rather than the misinformation campaign regarding Zimmerman.

     list of 911 calls

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/03/22/george-zimmerman-s-history-of-911-calls-a-complete-log.html

     

    image
  • image GeraldoRivera:
    So snp and vcullars, I take it you wholeheartedly support Casey Anthony being a free woman, correct?

    Yes, based on the laws and the judicial system I do believe she has the right to be free.

  • image Annabelle92:

    "I would have punched his azz in the nose too." you would have been shot as well then.

     

    this whole thing is that they were both wrong.

     

    However what the real debate should be about is actual racism. not from George Zimmerman. But racism from the police. LeVar Burton was recently on the news stating that even though he had grown up with a good family and with good money. He was still a black man and his mother had taught him when a cop pulls you over you set your hands outside of the car window to put the cop at ease. That is true racism. How many white people have to do that? However it was just a common thing for him. 

    The true debate should be why was Martin not able to call the police and yet Zimmerman was able to. Martin must have not trusted the police and felt the need to take matters into his own hands. 

    Which is why he DID initiate the fight. (proof from Martin not being harmed other than by gunshot)

    Zimmerman was trying to make sure his neighborhood was safe, did he do it in the wrong matter, OF COURSE! Should he have shot Martin? goodness no. Does the misunderstanding escalate extremely quickly when martin took it physical yes. Out of shock and fear Zimmerman then shot Martin. It was wrong, however it was not malicious intent to murder.

     

    The real problem here that needs solved is the ability for black people to feel comfortable enough to call the police and not be racially profiled. If Martin felt comfortable enough to do that then he would have never had to take matters into his own hands and would still be alive today. 

    You are correct. We do not put our hands out the window. However, take your hands of the steering wheel or start fumbling through your car and see hoe the police officer responds. I think you will end up with your hands out the window or if you fail to comply, wrestled out of the car or shot.
  • Thanks for underlining check your facts.  With respect to the law TM had no duty to retreat.  The duty to retreat applies to those defendants arguing self defense in most jurisdictions. But not in florida or other syg states. I won't respond to the other irrelevant questions but instead ask you why didnt GZ just stay in his car like he was told and wait for police?   GZ was the one on trial.  Not Trayvon.
    Lilypie First Birthday tickers Lilypie Third Birthday tickers Lilypie Kids Birthday tickers
  • image GeraldoRivera:
    image JemmaWRX:

    The state's case was weak.  The prosecution could not prove George Zimmerman had the INTENT to kill.  That coupled with conflicting testimony (whose voice was on the 911 tape), unreliable witnesses (the girlfriend), and simply the law in Florida, I don't see how the jury had any other choice but to acquit.  I believe George Zimmerman profiled Trayvon Martin, absolutely without a doubt he did.  And I believe that had he not provoked/scared/intimidated Trayvon, he would still be alive.  But unfortunately, at least under Florida law, that does not make George Zimmerman guilty of murder.  The state never wanted to pursue this because they knew they couldn't prove him guilty.  The law is flawed.

     Florida law: 

     

    782.07 Manslaughter; aggravated manslaughter of an elderly person or disabled adult; aggravated manslaughter of a child; aggravated manslaughter of an officer, a firefighter, an emergency medical technician, or a paramedic.?

    (1) The killing of a human being by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another, without lawful justification according to the provisions of chapter 776 and in cases in which such killing shall not be excusable homicide or murder, according to the provisions of this chapter, is manslaughter, a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

     

     

    They didn't need to prove intent to convict him of manslaughter. 

     

    The bottom line is that the jury agreed that it's OK to kill someone if you're scared of him, regardless of the circumstances. That is a travesty. 

    Wrong again! What the jury decided was one of two scenarios;

    George Zimmerman acted in self defense or there was not enough credible evidence to prove that Mr. Zimmerman acted outside of the provisions in F.S.S 776.

    I do not know which scenario played upon the jurors decision. However, having sat once on a jury for an attempted murder case, I can tell you the burden of proof that the state must meet for even a man slaughter charge is tough. This is evidenced by the amount of time the jurors deliberated.

  • image CinemaGoddess:

    You can go right ahead and say this wasn't about race.  That the American public was just misunderstandin' GZ and he's really the victim in all of this.   That the trial was a waste of time and money.

    You go right ahead and say that.

    That doesn't mean you're right.

    GZ killed a young man.  Pointed a gun at his chest and pulled the trigger.  That is fact.  That will never change.  He will always be the reason Trayvon Martin died. 

    If GZ had just asked Trayvon if everything was ok and if he could help him in any way, this may never have happened. 

    If GZ had listened to the police dispatcher and waited until the police got there, this may never have happened. 

    GZ was the adult in this situation.  He was the one with the power and the control.  He was the one with the gun and he called the police, who were on their way.

    He took matters into his own hands instead of waiting for law enforcement to arrive.

    GZ may have been found not guilty but he certainly is not innocent. 

    What if TM had been more amicable in the exchange?

    What if TM had not proceeded to beat GZ, this may never had happened.

    What if GZ was not given the chance to wait for police?

    Lastly,

    What if it the altercation was reversed and GZ was on top of TM and he was shot and killed? Would there be such a national debate or public outrage? I doubt it.

     

  • image lasposa425:
    image gonnabeJLBagain:

    It was reasonable for George Zimmerman to believe that his use of force was necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself.

    There was not enough evidence to prove that he acted with a depraved mind without regard to human life (Murder 2) or that he intentionally caused Trayvon Martin's death (manslaughter).

    Even though the jurors found GZ No Guilty, there is no doubt that this case remains a tragedy. A 17 year old young man is dead and nothing can change that. It's heartbreaking to imagine, as a parent, what Martin's family has gone through.

    Putting emotion aside is so difficult in any case (as I'm sure it was in this one) but that is what the jury was asked to do and simply focus on the evidence and the law. In the end, we must respect the jury's decision. They did everything that was asked of them and came to a difficult decision based on the law. 

    Okay I have to put on my law prof hat.  There was enough evidence that GZ intentionally caused his death at the moment he shot TM.  GZ doesn't dispute that.  Here's how it works: Prosecution asserts a charge.  Defendant raises a defense (In this case, the defense raised was self defense). GZ agrees that yes, he intentionally caused TM's death but his actions were excused on self-defense ground).  That was GZ's argument in a nutshell. 

    But the defense of self defense would hold true for either charge.  I think the juror's followed the law.  

    As an attorney, I would think you understand that the judicial system isn't emotion based on how one feels.  It's fact based on laws and factual evidence.  Keeping all that in mind, I think the jury made the right call.  Even if some don't feel it's fair.

  • "But the defense of self defense would hold true for either charge.    

    Right - I never said that it didn't. 

    As an attorney, I would think you understand that the judicial system isn't emotion based on how one feels.  It's fact based on laws and factual evidence.  Keeping all that in mind, I think the jury made the right call.  Even if some don't feel it's fair."

    Of course I do.  I'm allowed to accept the verdict and still be upset about it.  The verdict turned out the way it did because of a multitude of factors some of which include the fact the there are some atrocious laws (in my opinion) and ridiculous burdens of proof (see my other posts).  I'm not going to say, oh well, the law is the law and that's that.  People can be upset and use that energy and emotion to try to make an outcome like this never happen again (please see my other posts on duty to retreat laws, etc).  I don't understand why emotion is such a dirty word. 

    Lilypie First Birthday tickers Lilypie Third Birthday tickers Lilypie Kids Birthday tickers
  • image lasposa425:

    "But the defense of self defense would hold true for either charge.    

    Right - I never said that it didn't. 

    As an attorney, I would think you understand that the judicial system isn't emotion based on how one feels.  It's fact based on laws and factual evidence.  Keeping all that in mind, I think the jury made the right call.  Even if some don't feel it's fair."

    Of course I do.  I'm allowed to accept the verdict and still be upset about it.  The verdict turned out the way it did because of a multitude of factors some of which include the fact the there are some atrocious laws (in my opinion) and ridiculous burdens of proof (see my other posts).  I'm not going to say, oh well, the law is the law and that's that.  People can be upset and use that energy and emotion to try to make an outcome like this never happen again (please see my other posts on duty to retreat laws, etc).  I don't understand why emotion is such a dirty word. 

    Emotion is not a dirty word whatsoever.  I am just tired of hearing how the jurors were wrong, ignorant, whatever (not saying you said that). You can feel whatever you like, but according to the law, I think the jury got it right.

    I also don't buy into the whole racial aspect of this case.  I don't believe GZ was racist.  He mentored at risk African american kids,  he fought for black man beaten by cops, heck he even took an African american girl to prom. Sounds like a hate mongering racist to me! 

  • I just wish all the GZ apologizers would admit that Trayvon did not deserve to die that night.  If you can't admit that, I don't think there is any hope that you have the appropriate amount of humanity to understand those who see the situation differently than you do.  

     


  • image missymo:

    I just wish all the GZ apologizers would admit that Trayvon did not deserve to die that night.  If you can't admit that, I don't think there is any hope that you have the appropriate amount of humanity to understand those who see the situation differently than you do.  

     


    Nobody deserves to die, EVER!  Just because I believe the jury made the right call, does not mean I believe this situation isn't a horrific tragedy.  As a mother I can't even begin to comprehend Ms. Fulton's grief. 

    I truly believe this case is a series of misunderstandings and misinterpretations. TM was walking close to the houses to get out of the rain (completely legal). GZ was patrolling his neighborhood as a part of the neighborhood watch (completely legal).  GZ misinterpreted that behavior as suspicions because of the recent string of break-ins in the neighborhood.  I believe as a result of those misunderstanding, a confrontation occurred and the rest is (unfortunately) history.

    A horrible tragedy anyway you slice it. 

  • Anyone who doesn't think race is an important factor with this incident and case doesn't know anything about race.

    I'm staying out of a legal argument because I am not qualified with a law education to analyze how the process worked, and if the verdict was in accordance with the law.  I have also never been on jury duty (not a citizen).  My uneducated opinion is that this was manslaughter - but again, without a law background I am unprepared to truly argue that point.  However, I am qualified to form an opinion and have strong feelings. 

     It is my opinion that GZ should be punished, and I suppose in many ways he is being punished outside of the legal system, because the legal system failed to exact a punishment. 

    He may have been found not guilty of any particular crime - but that doesn't mean he is without fault or blame.  Trayvon should not have been kiled that night.  There is no question that GZ made a series of decisions that were wrong with horrifying consequences.  He should suffer consequences for his actions.  That's not a legal opinion, that's plain old right and wrong that my 4 year old understands.

    Lilypie Pregnancy tickers
    DMoney will be a kickass big sister
    Lilypie - Personal pictureLilypie Third Birthday tickers
    image
  • snp605snp605 member
    Tenth Anniversary 100 Comments Name Dropper 5 Love Its

    image lasposa425:
    Thanks for underlining check your facts.  With respect to the law TM had no duty to retreat.  The duty to retreat applies to those defendants arguing self defense in most jurisdictions. But not in florida or other syg states. I won't respond to the other irrelevant questions but instead ask you why didnt GZ just stay in his car like he was told and wait for police?   GZ was the one on trial.  Not Trayvon.

    I didn't say he  had a duty to retreat. I'm just pointing out that if he truly felt endangered he was very close to safety and a simple 20 second walk would have brought him to safety yet he hung around for 2 more minutes. Zimmerman's account that he was lying in wait for Zimmerman lines up much more with these facts than the narrative that Martin was afraid and trying to get away.

     I hate to bother you with pesky details again, but Zimmerman was already out of his car when a dispatcher asked if he was following him then told him "You don't need to do that" to which Zimmerman replied "OK". This is all recorded on the 911 call transcript which is publicly available. According to Zimmerman he was now near the area where the final confrontation took place and was no longer pursuing Martin. All of the timelines, cell calls and witness statements seem to line up with this.That has been his account since the first statements were taken. Do you have evidence that this is not true? The prosecution could have used it.

    The reason I emphasized check your facts is that I believe many of the feelings that have been hurt over this case have come from outrage and disbelief that spawned from misinformation. It's very easy these days to independently attempt to verify the veracity of something you've heard from someone about the case. If people had not been told racial elements existed that didn't they wouldn't feel so victimized and perhaps might give a more critical eye to the actual details of the case. People have been blinded with negative emotions over things that didn't even occur.

     

    image
  • snp605snp605 member
    Tenth Anniversary 100 Comments Name Dropper 5 Love Its
    image missymo:

    I just wish all the GZ apologizers would admit that Trayvon did not deserve to die that night.  If you can't admit that, I don't think there is any hope that you have the appropriate amount of humanity to understand those who see the situation differently than you do.  

     


    Who said Trayvon deserved to die? where in the world did that come from?!   Did you just make that up? However, you don't have to apologize for facts so I think apologizer is an inappropriate word here. What the people who have not bought the bad bill of goods sold by the media magnates are saying is that GZ appears to have acted within the law thus does not deserve to be punished by the law nor persecuted for moral failings that no one has evidence of. 

    image
  •  "I hate to bother you with pesky details again, but Zimmerman was already out of his car when a dispatcher asked if he was following him then told him "You don't need to do that" to which Zimmerman replied "OK". This is all recorded on the 911 call transcript which is publicly available. According to Zimmerman he was now near the area where the final confrontation took place and was no longer pursuing Martin. All of the timelines, cell calls and witness statements seem to line up with this.That has been his account since the first statements were taken. Do you have evidence that this is not true? The prosecution could have used it."

    I'll bother you with pesky law details..This is one of my bigger concerns with this case and the burdens of proof in Fla.  Normally, defendant would have to prove he acted in self-defense.  In Fla, the defense just has to say "I acted in self-defense" at which point, the prosecution has to DISprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt.  That's almost an impossible standard to meet when the victim is dead and GZ doesn't take the stand.  Even if prosecutors presented evidence against that, it would be nearly impossible to DISprove something beyond a reasonable doubt.  Add to that the fact that syg was given to the jury in the instructions, even though GZ never invoked it and you have an impossible barrier to break. If this happened in a different state with standard self-defense burdens (with standard duty to retreat or excessive force doctrines), GZ would most likely be behind bars.

    I have to get back to work now but I will say that I respectfully disagree with your line of thinking.

    Lilypie First Birthday tickers Lilypie Third Birthday tickers Lilypie Kids Birthday tickers
  • image snp605:

    image lasposa425:
    .

    I . I'm just pointing out that if he truly felt endangered he was very close to safety and a simple 20 second walk would have brought him to safety yet he hung around for 2 more minutes.

     

    If a man were stalking me, I wouldn't go home where he could find out where I live. I don't know what went through Trayvon's mind that night, but it doesn't seem unreasonable that he wouldn't want to lead the guy directly to his residence. Just because GZ was found by 6 people to have acted within the law, doesn't actually mean he doesn't deserve punishment. A jury verdict is still an opinion - in this case the opinion of 6 women. Based on information presented. A not guilty verdict doesn't mean he is actually not guilty, it means it wasn't proven. All the timelines and witness statements actually do not align. That's not unusual, but it's a misstatement to say that they do.
    Lilypie Pregnancy tickers
    DMoney will be a kickass big sister
    Lilypie - Personal pictureLilypie Third Birthday tickers
    image
  • image snp605:
    image missymo:

    I just wish all the GZ apologizers would admit that Trayvon did not deserve to die that night.  If you can't admit that, I don't think there is any hope that you have the appropriate amount of humanity to understand those who see the situation differently than you do.  

     


    Who said Trayvon deserved to die? where in the world did that come from?!   Did you just make that up? However, you don't have to apologize for facts so I think apologizer is an inappropriate word here. What the people who have not bought the bad bill of goods sold by the media magnates are saying is that GZ appears to have acted within the law thus does not deserve to be punished by the law nor persecuted for moral failings that no one has evidence of. 

    Yes, snp, I just made that up.  Nobody is saying that.  No one at all.  Not a juror, certainly.  Nope.  No a single person has argued that Trayvon Martin is responsible for his own death.    Not one person has said that George Zimmerman had the right to kill him.  LOL.  


  • Right on missy.  Bingo.
    Lilypie First Birthday tickers Lilypie Third Birthday tickers Lilypie Kids Birthday tickers
  • I have seen exactly zero evidence to support that Trayvon Martin set out to harm someone that night.

    He walked to the store to get a beverage and a snack. 

    Someone followed him as he walked back to a neighborhood he had every right to be in.

    He didn't need help.  He knew where he was going.  AFAIK, he made no pit stops on the way.  He didn't peep into windows.  He didn't check the doorhandles on cars to see if the car was unlocked. 

    He did nothing suspicious but be a young man walking after dark. 

    As I said before, George Zimmerman was the adult.  HE was the authority figure.  All of the LEOs I have spoken with about this case, based on the information provided in the trial, said that they would never have done what GZ did.  They would've attempted verbal contact with TM before approaching him.  GZ did not do that, according to what I've read from the trial records.  He shot first and asked questions later. 

    And lol at this not being about race.   If you believe it wasn't, then it must be nice living in your little bubble. 

     

    [IMG]http://i48.tinypic.com/28btqo9.gif[/IMG]
    The feeling is mutual, Harry.
Sign In or Register to comment.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards