Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Unfortunately, many people believe the jury was not impartial due to race. Rodney King deja vu.

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

I honestly am very disappointed in the verdict. I don't think the shooting was justified whatsoever. Even if Trayvon "attacked" Zimmerman it all could have been avoided. Zimmerman was told NOT to pursue Trayvon but he did anyway because he felt like he needed to play cop. Zimmerman should have stayed in his car and went home. Then maybe Trayvon would be alive still and this case wouldn't have happened. Evidence or not - the truth of the matter was that it could have been avoided if Zimmerman would have listened and not tried to act as a cop for he is not one so it was not his place!

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Did you watch the trial? Because one of the jurors was actually Hispanic.

Which has actually been a re-occuring theme for the mob rule mentality that sparked this case. Zimmerman is half Peruvian and identifies as hispanic. Yet for about 90% of the people currently furious at the ruling, they think he's a white man.

Ignoring that whole fucking issue, if you've been following the presentation of evidence in the court case, and the manner in which the State handled the prosecution, it was obvious that this case wasn't based on anything even remotely solid.

An IT director was recently fired after revealing that the State had been withholding evidence from the defense, which is a major legal violation of a person's right to a fair trial. The media got ahold of the evidence, text messages from Trayvon's phone. The images show recent images of Trayvon, (as opposed to that one you're using as an avatar), who was larger and in better physical shape than Zimmerman physically. As well as a picture of him holding an illegal .380 handgun. The media also threw in pictures of him smoking weed, which I didn't like because I find the fact that he smoked weed irrelevant to the matter at hand, but they needed to make that "War on Drugs" plug.

The judge ended up throwing out the text messages because "any seven year old could have gotten through the dual passwords and sent the messages". She was referring to Trayvon's phone, which took the FBI some time to get into. I'm calling attention to all of this not to attack Martin's character, because who he is as a person is completely irrelevant. But there's blatant corruption and bias here at the hands of the Florida State Government, and it's not because they were trying to cover up Trayvon's wrongful death.

The accepted theory by police and forensic scientists is that after Z had gotten off the phone with giving his location to the 911 dispatcher, he was headed back to his vehicle when Trayvon confronted him. This, coupled with the fact that an eye witness reported seeing Trayvon on top of Zimmerman, raining blows down him; along with the grass stains on Trayvon's knees; the bullet wound suggesting that the pistol was away from his body but pointing upward during firing; and lack of defensive wounds, means that he was in control for most of, if not all of the fight, until Zimmerman got his gun out and shot him. If Zimmerman was hunting the kid down, he most likely would've had his pistol drawn instead of holstered, and the physical confrontation never would have happened.

If someone is following you, you have a right to confront them. If someone was following you, but starts to walk away, you have a legal obligation to retreat as well. "Shooting a man in the back" doesn't count as self defense, and neither does starting a fight with someone who was no longer a threat to you.

Which is what the jury believed happened.The prosecution couldn't convince them otherwise, even while withholding fucking evidence from the defense and giving the man an unfair trial.

However, a jury of his peers acquitted him. For a crime, I should also mention, that cannot constitutionally be prosecuted by the Federal government, in-case Eric Holder is "persuaded" into filing federal charges. The exception would be if he had commited a hate crime, but since the FBI's own investigation found no motive of a racial bias, they have empirically and legally blocked themselves from that option.

Knowing all of this, (and I encourage you to look up anything you're questioning) how exactly do you think things should have gone down?

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Don't give me that FBI polygraph racial shit.

Everyone is a little bit racist/predicted in the world including myself.

This trial and verdict has confused me from day 1.

For example this woman
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1510113.html

Sad world. Ashamed to be American and I seriously want to get out of this country. I'm almost at the point to hoping that Romney won the last election.

And I want to hear your feelings of that verdict. Don't give me your fucking semantics.

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Been away a while, but figured I'd come back to post my thoughts on this - after, inevitably, responding to some of Ben's comments. Wouldn't be the same otherwise. :p

The judge clearly felt otherwise, or else the matter wouldn't even have reached the jury for a verdict. The defence would have suceeded when submitting no case to answer, which they did not. Likewise, the jury took 16 hours to deliberate their verdict and felt it necessary to seek further directions from the judge - again, that doesn't point to it not being based on "anything even remotely solid". While your views on this matter have been both consistent and strong from the outset, please try not to skew the facts to suit them. Those of us with a more detailed understanding of the legal process know better and you are likely to be caught out.

With all due respect, it does appear that you are in fact calling attention to this to attack his character - because otherwise, there is very little reason to bring this information to light as it is of no relevance to the events of the shooting itself. Whether he owned a gun or smoked weed makes no material difference to whether the shooting was justified if neither was present at the scene (and the investigation established that pretty quickly); instead, this does appear more of an exercise in seeking to discredit the character of the deceased in order to make the self-defence argument more credible. Not an exercise from yourself, I add, but from those who sought to disclose such information in the first place.

Police initially accepted that theory, true, but evidently revised it in order to justify arresting Zimmerman and subsequently passing the file on to the DA's office. Likewise, forensic evidence was inconclusive, pointing to (among other things) a comparative lack of Zimmerman's DNA on Martin's hands and the angle at which the bullet was fired seeming inconsistent with Zimmerman's account. We can speculate as to what happened and the sequence of events, but only two people know for sure and one of them is dead.

With all due respect, I feel you are indulging in speculation there. What the jury believed happened is something we will not be privy to unless one of them decides to go public with their thought process; all we can be certain of is that they did not believe the prosecution had proven their case on the counts of second degree murder or manslaughter beyond reasonable doubt, on the basis that they did not prove beyond reasonable doubt that Zimmerman's claim of self-defence was not true. That is all we can be certain of, because that is the burden on the prosecution where self-defence is raised. Anything further is akin to speculating on what the jury had for breakfast, and about as meaningful.

Anyway...while I will admit the verdict was something of a surprise (mainly because I felt a manslaughter verdict would have been justified on the facts), having seen some of the issues which arose with prosecution witnesses and the tactics employed by the defence I can understand how the jury would find themselves in a position where they could not reach a verdict beyond reasonable doubt. As such, their verdict makes sense and I respect it - 16 hours of deliberation suggests it was hardly a spur of the moment decision, after all, and this will not have been an easy case.

That all being said, if a claim was brought in the civil courts on the basis of wrongful death (or whatever they call it nowadays in the US - my last awareness of it was in relation to OJ Simpson...), I would suggest the opposite outcome is very much possible.

As a final thought, ultimately no one wins with this. Martin's family will still be grieving their lost son, and Zimmerman will still carry the knowledge that he shot and killed a 17-year-old. I can't say I'd particularly want to be in either's shoes.

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

He was 17 years old. Where did you get 12 from?

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

I have no idea whatsoever. Happy to hold my hands up over that one and amend accordingly.

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Ok I feel like most people who are upset haven't actually listened to or watched the trial, or paid attention to the actual evidence at all. According to the transcripts of Zimmerman's call to the police, and what the girl Trayvon was talking to have said, while Zimmerman was in the wrong to get out of his car, he did return to his car when told by the police he didn't need to follow Trayvon. Trayvon knew he was being followed and instead of continuing on his way, or even running as his girlfriend suggested he went to confront Zimmerman. We know that at the moment of the shot Travyon was on top of Zimmerman, we know this because of the evidence presented that showed where the bullet entered the hoodie in reference to where it entered his body, the only way for them to line up is if Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman. I won't lie, I really thought he'd be convicted of manslaughter, but the prosecution failed to prove that Zimmerman started the physical confrontation and therefore negating his claim of self defense.


What truly bothers me is all of these people calling him a child. I'm sorry but he was 17, if he had been the one to kill Zimmerman and had been tried he would have been tried as an adult. He might legally be a child, but it gives the completely wrong visual. Also the fact that it ever became a race issue is ridiculous. Did Zimmerman become suspicious of Trayvon because he's black, yes but ONLY because the description of the person who had been breaking into houses in the neighborhood was of a black person. Also what if Trayvon had actually been the robber, what if Zimmerman did nothing and then Trayvon broke into someones house? Do you know how many people are not going to report suspicious activity now because of this case? Why risk it? I heard someone on the radio the other day who saw these black kids in his neighborhood that he thought they were suspicious but he didn't do anything because of the Zimmerman case, and those kids broke into his neighbors house. The whole damn case is ridiculous. Also just for those who didn't know the DA was ready to take the Zimmerman case to the Grand jury to see if they could even get an indictment, and then the governor feel victim to media pressure and took over, imagine what would have happened if people had just let it be, maybe he would have served some time. You can't say the justice system didn't work when the media didn't even give it a chance to work properly.

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Again, like Ben this is pure speculation (unless there was something in the witness testimony to the effect that he was returning to his car, in which case I would be grateful for a source as thus far I haven't found it). We can assume he returned to his truck, but at the same time he admitted in the initial police interviews that he was trying to find out which direction Martin had gone in which would contradict that somewhat.

True, we know he was on top - but that's about it. The distance at which the gun was fired (pressed against Martin's clothing) was estimated by the defence expert witness at between two to four inches from his body - that accounts for a wide range of positions, from leaning directly over Zimmerman and assaulting him to being further back while still pinning him down. Hence my comment about it not seeming entirely consistent with the defence's account of what happened.

Whether it gives the correct visual or not is, quite frankly, irrelevant. If he's not considered an adult under state or federal law, then he's a child - as you admit yourself by saying "he might legally be a child". That's all there is to the matter, and speculating about how he might have been charged in the event of a theoretical crime is something of a smokescreen in my view - particularly given there would be a whole range of factors to consider by both the DA and the court before such an indictment could be made.

Not sure it's really fair to blame the prosecutors for that one. Had Zimmerman abided by his training, the suggestions of the dispatcher and the guidance provided by his manual - to say nothing of not carrying a firearm in the first place - then arguably none of this would have happened at all. The police were on their way, and arrived not longer after the call. Likewise, the person on the radio you refer to seems to have missed a key part of what happened in the case, as nothing in what happened to Zimmerman would have warranted such a course of action (even with the racial claims). Those claiming that it would put them off reporting suspicious activity would do well to educate themselves as to what actually happened - Zimmerman went wrong AFTER reporting it, not BECAUSE of reporting it. It's a clear example of the law of unintended consequences, admittedly, but one borne of irrationality rather than an actual "chilling effect" arising from the decision to charge.

Agreed - the publicity has left something to be desired at times, and it looks like it's going to rumble on for a while afterwards.

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

And not guilty doesn't mean not innocent. He's going to deal with the consequences and hopefully it happens sooner than later.

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

I think the guy was hesitant not because Zimmerman was charged with a crime, but because the prosecution was using previous calls Zimmerman had made reporting suspicious activity against him.

Really what this all boils down to is the media in this country being able to control politics and the action officials take. They squirm their way into issues, some being none of their business and make a mess out of everything. Another great example of this is the Terri Shivlo case, another Florida one. Had the media not stuck it's nose in that woman would not have had to suffer as long as she did, not to mention that Governor Duh wouldn't have re-opened a senseless investigation of her husband concerning how she ended up in her state in the first place. Those protests got so out of control they had to cancel school at a nearby campus.


Also I find it highly amusing that OJ Simpson could slaughter his wife and people cheered when he was acquitted but when there are two races involved suddenly it's a crime against the world and justice everywhere.

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Technically, since the incident happened solely within Florida's jurisdiction, the Federal government has no constitutional authority to file charges against Zimmerman. The Federal Government cannot supersede state sovereignty when it crimes to judiciary matters, unless the crime falls within Federal jurisdiction.

Their only "constitutional" option is an executive order signed by Obama earlier in his tenure. If a crime is considered a "hate crime", the Federal Government has the authority to file federal charges. However, they can't just throw charges to see what sticks- there has to be clear evidence of a racially based crime, which may have already been ruled out by the FBI's investigation, because they couldn't find any evidence of a racial bias.

However, Eric Holder's already on thin ice, and it sounds like Obama's already given up on it- he made his gun control plug after admitting that "a jury has spoken", and that was about it.

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Again, that speaks more of irrational paranoia than an understanding of the case. But I see your point, and I agree with what you said about the media's role in all this and in similar cases. Sometimes it feels like a bit more editor accountability wouldn't go amiss, or perhaps the odd contempt of court charge...

I believe this review is in relation to allegations made regarding a potential civil rights offence, which were under investigation before the state prosecution went ahead. My understanding is that such offences are federal responsibility and not state, so were there a viable case to answer the Justice Department would be within its rights to begin a prosecution. I do not believe it is related to a hate crime charge, but we'll have to wait and see.

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

The thing is it would HAVE to be a hate crime charge. The Federal government can't slap federal charges on state level crimes at will. The only reason they're "looking into it" right now is that hate crimes are the only crimes that they can peruse, because hate crimes fall within their jurisdiction. It's kind of like how bank robberies, no matter how small, automatically fall within the jurisdiction of the FBI.

This incident, as it stands right now, doesn't fall under the jurisdiction of the federal government. They need clear and present evidence of racial motivation behind Zimmerman's actions, and as of right now there isn't any.

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

My understanding (again limited by the fact I don't know US federal law inside out) is that a civil rights violation charge could be brought separately from any potential hate crime charge. Certainly, this article would suggest that to be the case. I'll need to do some more reading on the background law though.

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

http://main.aol.com/2013/07/14/_n_35...6pLid%3D344087

""There are several factual and legal hurdles that federal prosecutors would have to overcome," Alan Vinegrad, the former US Attorney in the Eastern District of New York, told the AP. "They'd have to show not only that the attack was unjustified, but that Mr. Zimmerman attacked Mr. Martin because of his race and because he was using a public facility, the street."

That's about all I could find on the matter. Again, I'm not seeing the evidence.

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

If women think with emotion, I for one am glad that these women were able to put their emotions aside and look at the evidence presented. The people who think Zimmerman should have been convicted clearly could not do that IMO.

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

If you can get away with this murder than what can you go to jail for? o.O. You can just pull the self defence card and get away with anything.

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

I think people calling this murder don't really understand the legal terms

1st degree murder is premeditated. The person planned the killing and intended to kill the person.

2nd degree murder is an intentional killing but with no premeditation. This is what the prosecution was trying to prove. That while Zimmerman had not gone out that night planning to kill Trayvon Martin, upon seeing him and deciding he looked suspicious he decided to follow and kill him. (See how ridiculous that sounds when you know the evidence of the case)

Then you have Involuntary Manslaughter, where you find yourself in a highly emotional situation and you perform an action that results in someone's death but you did not intend that result. Such as arguing with someone and pushing them and they fall and hit their head and die.

Finally there's Voluntary Manslaughter (the other option for the jury) It's a crime of passion, where you find yourself in a highly emotional situation and in that moment take action with the intent to kill. Such as having the crap beat out of you and getting pissed and shooting the person attacking you. In other words something that would have been easier to prove if the prosecution had actually bothered to bring the proper charge.

In short what happened, as we know from the evidence, wasn't murder. At the most it was manslaughter.

Also here's another fun tidbit, the prosecution tried to get the jury to consider a 3rd degree murder charge, which is pretty much the same as murder 2 just with child abuse thrown in. Luckily the judge saw that suggestion for the travesty that it was and said so and did not allow it.

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

This case stresses me out too, especially since I lived in Sanford for 6 years. And I'm not gonna lie, it wasn't a good neighborhood, there was a crack house with hookers across the street. I wasn't allowed to go trick or treating door to door (my parents took me to the mall and the stores gave out candy) and we didn't open the door at all during Halloween. That being said when a neighbors house caught on fire my parents let the woman in our house when no one else would, I don't know if no one else did because she was black or just because people were paranoid about everyone in the neighborhood regardless of skin color.

You are right that Zimmerman had no right to follow Trayvon, but as far as having a gun goes, you are allowed to carry a gun here if you have a license, and a lot of people keep their guns in their car. Now I could be wrong but I don't think that Zimmerman was actually out patrolling at that time, he was just out and probably just had his gun in his car. I mean if you lived in a neighborhood that had a lot of break-ins and you had a gun would you not bring it with you when you go out?

According to the phone calls both Zimmerman's to the police and Trayvon's to his girlfriend, Zimmerman never talked to Trayvon until Trayvon approached him. And honestly I don't find it all that odd that Trayvon would go to confront Zimmerman. A lot of teenagers now, especially boys think they are invincible, and tough guys, he was probably trying to show that he was someone not to be messed with. That being said I don't think Trayvon went to Zimmerman intending for the confrontation to become physical. That's the one part we will never know, is why the physical confrontation started, and who started it.

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

I'm not sure what source gave you that definition of 3rd degree murder, because that description is incorrect. The 2012 Florida Statutes define 2nd degree murder as follows:

"(2) The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual, is murder in the second degree and constitutes a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment...

(3) When a human being is killed during the perpetration of, or during the attempt to perpetrate, any:
(a) Trafficking offense prohibited by s. 893.135(1),
(b) Arson,
(c) Sexual battery,
(d) Robbery,
(e) Burglary,
(f) Kidnapping,
(g) Escape,
(h) Aggravated child abuse,
(i) Aggravated abuse of an elderly person or disabled adult,
(j) Aircraft piracy,
(k) Unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb,
(l) Carjacking,
(m) Home-invasion robbery,
(n) Aggravated stalking,
(o) Murder of another human being,
(p) Aggravated fleeing or eluding with serious bodily injury or death,
(q) Resisting an officer with violence to his or her person, or
(r) Felony that is an act of terrorism or is in furtherance of an act of terrorism,

by a person other than the person engaged in the perpetration of or in the attempt to perpetrate such felony, the person perpetrating or attempting to perpetrate such felony commits murder in the second degree"

while 3rd degree murder is defined thus:

"(4) The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated without any design to effect death, by a person engaged in the perpetration of, or in the attempt to perpetrate, any felony other than any:
(a) Trafficking offense prohibited by s. 893.135(1),
(b) Arson,
(c) Sexual battery,
(d) Robbery,
(e) Burglary,
(f) Kidnapping,
(g) Escape,
(h) Aggravated child abuse,
(i) Aggravated abuse of an elderly person or disabled adult,
(j) Aircraft piracy,
(k) Unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb,
(l) Unlawful distribution of any substance controlled under s. 893.03(1), cocaine as described in s. 893.03(2)(a)4., or opium or any synthetic or natural salt, compound, derivative, or preparation of opium by a person 18 years of age or older, when such drug is proven to be the proximate cause of the death of the user,
(m) Carjacking,
(n) Home-invasion robbery,
(o) Aggravated stalking,
(p) Murder of another human being,
(q) Aggravated fleeing or eluding with serious bodily injury or death,
(r) Resisting an officer with violence to his or her person, or
(s) Felony that is an act of terrorism or is in furtherance of an act of terrorism,

is murder in the third degree"

You will note there is quite the difference in definition. In the case of 3rd degree murder, "aggravated child abuse" is expressly excluded, which again renders that description inaccurate. If that is indeed how the prosecution sought to introduce the alternative verdict in their submissions, then that would perhaps explain a lot about why their case was not persuasive...

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

The case represents the media turning it into a circus as far as I am concerned along with greed from the prosecutors to have a large win under their belts. Is he guilty? I don't think he was but I thought they would have convicted anyway.

Also, the race card was brought into play by the media. It started out with the tapes. Then with old mug shots of Zimmerman while using younger pictures of Martin to make him appear younger.

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

If Trayvon was white this thread would have never been made. Can you at least agree to that?

And I love how Ben still didn't answer my question.

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Or if Zimmerman was darker in color

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

I fully agree to that. Statistics and demographics prove that

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

You do know that Zimmerman was Hispanic? When that was pointed out, the media chose to call him white Hispanic.

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

[font="Arial Narrow"][color="Black"][size="3"][b]I haven't been following enough to pick a side but I would just like to throw this article I read. MUST READ.
http://www.whydontyoutrythis.com/201...zimmerman.html

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Re: Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman
 

Let me clarify.

If he were white Zimmerman wouldn't have thought anything of the child and would have assumed he was a resident.