patrick.net

Reasonable doubt. And yes, riots.

I wish I were on the jury.

In my opinion even if it went down very close to the way zimmerman says it did, he's guilty of murder and should do some serious time.

It's when he followed Trayvon in a menacing way, and then tried to detain him, that he made his biggest mistake. His getting beaten up, is grounds for shooting the kid ?

Are they really going to try to argue that if Zimmerman didn't have a gun, MArtin was going to kill him ?

Even if zimmerman didn't cause the confrontation, it's questionable to me that Zimmerman had the right to kill him, but I guess that FLorida law allows that ? Since Zimmerman totally did cause the confrontation, and posed what seemed to be a threat to Martin, I would easily find him guilty of second degree murder.

No brainer. And yes, it did happen because of how Martin looked.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/29/opinion/blow-the-zimmerman-trial.html?_r=0

marcus says

I wish I were on the jury.

Considering you've crafted an entire story that has little to do with the testimony of witnesses (and Zimmerman) I'm glad you're not.

I haven't been watching the trial, but there was the one beardo who seemed quite credible. He testified that Travon was straddling Zimmerman, and Travon's arms and hands were going up and down towards Zimmerman. While this witness could not see if Travon was bashing Zimmerman's head into the pavement, it is possible that what this witness said he saw was consistent with head bashing, hence reasonable doubt. You have Travon's position and arm motions, you have Zimmerman's head wounds, you have Zimmerman's testimony - reasonable doubt.

But in order to keep damages to small businesses, homes, and hapless semi truck drivers to a minimum, he must be convicted.

Blurtman says

He testified that Travon was straddling Zimmerman, and Travon's arms and hands were going up and down towards Zimmerman.

You really want me to believe this little kid could overpower Zimmerman?

A white man acquitted of the murder of a black man by an all-white jury? That could never happen in America.

The sad thing is that this acquittal is going to give lunatics an incentive to kill people so that their victims cannot ever tell what really happened.

Think about it. If Martin had had a gun, wouldn't he be in the right of the Stand Your Ground law to immediately turn around an shoot Zimmerman to death out of fear for his own life? The Stand Your Ground law seems to say, whoever is paranoid enough to shoot first has the side of the law.

We need to start embedding cameras in all guns.

What has the world come to when you can't take an ass whipping gracefully without having to pop a cap in somebody.

CMY says

Considering you've crafted an entire story

Good one. Care to elaborate ?

I doubt it.

Ceffer says

What has the world come to when you can't take an ass whipping gracefully without having to pop a cap in somebody.

Exactly ! Especially when it's deserved.

Blurtman says

While this witness could not see if Travon was bashing Zimmerman's head into the pavement, it is possible that what this witness said he saw was consistent with head bashing, hence reasonable doubt.

If he indeed bashed his head against the ground, the only way that Zimmerman could have gotten his gun out and shot him, is if Travon stopped, and was done kicking his ass.

Is that the defense ? That Trayvin kicked his ass, and stopped, feeling he had done enough. And that then Zimmermean pulled out his gun and shot him dead ? He couldn't pull a gun out and shoot him while his head was being banged against the ground.

You can't have it both ways.

Take race out of it. Some 17 yr old kid is walking in his own neighbourhood. Some fat ass pursues him in his car, calls 911 is told to back off-but ignores it and keeps pursuing the kid.

Kid ends up being shot to death by fat ass. Fat ass that murdered said kid is claiming self defense . Kid can't testify, because he was shot dead in his own neighbourhood. Anything else?

I'm gad this is still a democracy, and commies never make it on the jury. If Zimmerman walks it's because the Martins crass shit they pulled, making a road show out of the whole ordeal, and Obama instigating race riots.

I think if the jury wasn't tainted by the outlandish lies and distorted facts, that was the media circus from the get go.

I think if a jury never heard of either one of them, would have on their own with out Obama's help, thought something was fishy about the white community watchman taking things to a whole new level, in spite of being told not to by the dispatcher. I think what jurors are finding though, that it was not race motivated and Treyvon was not some cute apple pie faced wholesome kid just minding his own business.

The Martins fucked this whole case up, and their Lawyer should be shot for pretending to be one.

If someone starts to beat you up because you're "annoying" them then they deserve to die. If Martin threw the first punch then he got what he deserves. If Zimmerman threw the first punch then he deserves to be ass raped in prison.

I thought serial killers killed more than once.

marcus says

Blurtman says

While this witness could not see if Travon was bashing Zimmerman's head into the pavement, it is possible that what this witness said he saw was consistent with head bashing, hence reasonable doubt.

If he indeed bashed his head against the ground, the only way that Zimmerman could have gotten his gun out and shot him, is if Travon stopped, and was done kicking his ass.

Is that the defense ? That Trayvin kicked his ass, and stopped, feeling he had done enough. And that then Zimmermean pulled out his gun and shot him dead ? He couldn't pull a gun out and shoot him while his head was being banged against the ground.

You can't have it both ways.

I am not defending Zimmerman. I had said in a different post that his recounting of what had happened was unbelievable. So no, I do not believe him. But I do believe the jury will let him off via reasonable doubt.

John Bailo says

And by the way, only Martin's clothing had grass stains...on the back. Zimmerman's had none.

you mean the bruises and cuts on GZ back of the head was from being on a lawn or a hard asphalt road.. There is no grass on a road.

You're not going to get a unanimous conviction with this sort of evidence. Self defense is plausible, even highly plausible given the witness accounts and the evidence. There is no way a jury of people who aren't biased black people will convict him.
Trayvon was an increasingly violent young man who had recently punched his bus driver, and FBed about doing drugs. The circumstances of his death were unfair. He didnt deserve to die for getting into a brawl. But the fact is that a quarter of the murders in this country are committed with hands and feet. So attacking someone with those is grounds for self defense, as the possibility of being killed from a beating is quite high.
Look at the Dodgers fan who got his ass beat in the parking lot a year ago! That guy was in the hospital for like half a year before a very shaky recovery. If he had a gun, perhaps his assailants would be dead, and knowig what we know about their intent, could we punish him for defending himself? No? Well the assailants were Hispanic, so can we use race to say that this white guy shouldn't defend himself against a beating that almost killed him?

There's a proverb that still rings true: "live by the sword, die by the sword." Which I interpret to mean that those who commit violence should not be surprised when violence is committed against them.

John Bailo says

The state will also show evidence that Zimmerman applied to be a police officer, wanted to go on a police ride, was a criminal justice student and initiated a neighborhood watch program as captain, Guy said.

Cop wanna be but actually security guard is one of the profiles...of a serial killer.

rather nonsense because plenty good citizens become law enforcement officers.
serial killers have other issues.. being a cop isnt one of them.. red herring.

marcus says

Good one. Care to elaborate ?

I doubt it.

Sure!

It's when he followed Trayvon in a menacing way, and then tried to detain him, that he made his biggest mistake.

Then he made no mistake at all, because Zimmerman never tried to detain him:

Mr. Martin circled his car while he was on the phone to police dispatch. Mr. Martin reached for his waistband and then walked away. At that point, Mr. Zimmerman got out of the car and walked in the same direction to see the name of the street to phone it in.

On his way back to the car, Mr. Martin appeared out of nowhere and asked him, “Do you have a problem?” The answer was no. “You do now,” Mr. Zimmerman said Mr. Martin told him. Mr. Martin then attacked Mr. Zimmerman as he tried to use his cellphone to dial 911.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/22/us/documents-tell-zimmermans-side-in-martin-shooting.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

marcus says

Are they really going to try to argue that if Zimmerman didn't have a gun, MArtin was going to kill him ?

I realize you (or rather, the media) may have built up the image of a seven year-old boy flailing against a grown man, but GZ feared for his life and, by all accounts, was on the losing end of the fight. I don't agree with carrying a gun for a neighborhood 'watch' patrol, but it wasn't illegal; if you were on the ground getting the snot kicked out of you--and you had a weapon within reach--wouldn't it cross your mind that it could be used against you?

Zimmerman claims in the video that Martin said “you’re going to die” and reached for Zimmerman’s gun just before the shooting.

http://tampa.cbslocal.com/2012/06/21/zimmerman-trayvon-martin-reached-for-my-gun/

marcus says

Even if zimmerman didn't cause the confrontation, it's questionable to me that Zimmerman had the right to kill him, but I guess that FLorida law allows that ? Since Zimmerman totally did cause the confrontation, and posed what seemed to be a threat to Martin, I would easily find him guilty of second degree murder.

So let me get this straight: Martin would be justified in engaging Zimmerman, but not the other way around?

You seem to want to hold onto some version of the story that has Zimmerman executing Martin without any need for self-defense, which as the evidence suggests, is not what occurred.

Let's boil it down to one thing: Do you have the right to defend yourself? Yes or no. That is what the jury will be asking themselves, not if GZ 'deserved' to have the shit kicked out of him.

John Bailo says

Which one had the martial arts training.

Answer the question...

Zimmerman.

Now, who broke his nose?

Gotta love how many of the posters in this thread simply decide its ok to discard whatever the law is in Florida and instead decide guilt and innocence based on whatever their own convoluted bias tells them to decide.

Exactly what SFAce said.

robertoaribas says

you can't BOTH start the fight, then avail yourself of self defense. It doesn't work that way.

Ok, I'll bite.. how did Zimmerman start the fight?

I think everyone would agree that this should not have gotten to the stage of a physical altercation and shooting. Whether ot not the fact that this could have been avoided has any direct bearing on the verdict, I am not sure.

But you cannot rule out the possibility, beyond reasonable doubt, that:

1.) Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman, preventing his retreat.
2.) Zimmerman suffered injuries including to the back of his head.
3.) Zimmerman was screaming for help.
4.) Zimmerman feared for his life, including because he was being beaten, and because he believed that Trayvon was reaching for Zimmerman's gun.

So I think it depends on the respective legal teams' abilities to influence the jurors. And don't count out a jury that does not follow the strict interpetation of the law. But I think the odds are good that at least one juror votes to acquit.

CMY says

Then he made no mistake at all, because Zimmerman never tried to detain him:

Okay, so you are only considering Zimmerman's story.

The weakest part is this:

CMY says

if you were on the ground getting the snot kicked out of you--and you had a weapon within reach--wouldn't it cross your mind that it could be used against you?

Logically I still think he could have only accessed his gun when Martin was done kicking his ass (especially if it's true that he banged his head against the ground.) So to kill him at that point is murder.

But you may be right that he'll walk. I don't know. I hope not.

dodgerfanjohn says

Gotta love how many of the posters in this thread simply decide its ok to discard whatever the law is in Florida and instead decide guilt and innocence based on whatever their own convoluted bias tells them to decide.

A jury is instructed to follow the letter of the law, but ultimately they render what they consider justice. That's not to say there can't be appeals.

I'm aware that my opinion is just that, and that I don't have all the information. I'm also aware that I would pretty much ignore most of the details of what zimmerman claims happened (that can not be confirmed). He's obviously going to be willing to lie, especially even to himself.

Too bad Martin isn't around to tell his side.

The question that we should all be asking is why so many people are so aggressive, have a need to disrespect others and conversely feel so enraged when they feel "dissed?" "Imagine all the people living life in peace!"

Suppose for a moment that Zimmerman's story is true. All of it. Even the part about Martin coming to him and saying "you got a problem"

Say it's all true.

In that case, if I were Zimmerman, since there aren't better witnesses, I would insist on having a polygraph test done on me. Not only to help me be found not guilty, but also to try to prove to all of my friends and family and the world that I'm not a psychotic dirt bag.

I know those tests aren't perfect, but it would be worth it, and I would want the world to know the truth.

But alas, he is (or was) a psychotic dirt bag, and that isn't going to happen.

dublin hillz says

Imagine all the people living life in peace!

Agreed.

marcus says

But alas, he is (or was) a psychotic dirt bag, and that isn't going to happen.

I don't know many psychotic dirt bags who repeatedly call the police DURING their little dirt bag activities, but maybe that's just me..

marcus says

Suppose for a moment that Zimmerman's story is true. All of it. Even the part about Martin coming to him and saying "you got a problem"

Say it's all true.

In that case, if I were Zimmerman, since there aren't witnesses, I would insist on having a polygraph test done on me. Not only to help me be found not guilty, but also to try to prove to all of my friends and family and the world that I'm not a psychotic dirt bag.

I know those tests aren't perfect. But it would be worth it, and I would want the world to know the truth.

But alas, he is (or was) a psychotic dirt bag, and that isn't going to happen.

dublin hillz says

Imagine all the people living life in peace!

Agreed.

You are wrong.

Whether you are guilty or not, speaking to the police is ALWAYS a horrible move. Not giving the police something is ALWAYS a wise move.

The above is a non negotiable statement. People will quibble. Theres not a competent lawyer on the planet that would quibble, not even a criminal prosecutor, unless they are lying.

As to Zimmermans specific case....a lie detector test would not have helped. He was already crucified in the media...both mainstream, and by liberal blogs. What their agenda is in perpetuating racial issues, I do not know.

Unfortunately, even if he acted strictly in self defense, George Zimmerman is fucked in life from here on out. His best move should he be acquited is to move to a deep red state with like 90%+ Caucasian majority(yes I know hes of jewish south american descent).

APOCALYPSEFUCK is Shostakovich says

Could Zimmwitt have just plugged the kid and then grabbed his lifeless body and thrashed around for a while to pretend he was being attacked to fortify his self-defense/stand-your-ground line?

I think I speak for the entire forum when I say that you're the ONLY person who would've considered this possibility.

dodgerfanjohn says

You are wrong.

How can I be wrong about what I would do, if I were Zimmerman and my story was true ?

dodgerfanjohn says

What their agenda is in perpetuating racial issues, I do not know.

Yeah, the whole race aspect is annoying. As if a well dressed white business man in a suit trying to walk home with his snapple and skittles wouldn't have ended up in a confrontation with Zimmerman.

marcus says

As if a well dressed white business man in a suit trying to walk home with his snapple and skittles wouldn't have ended up in a confrontation with Zimmerman.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/25/us-usa-florida-shooting-zimmerman-idUSBRE83O18H20120425

Though civil rights demonstrators have argued Zimmerman should not have prejudged Martin, one black neighbor of the Zimmermans said recent history should be taken into account.

"Let's talk about the elephant in the room. I'm black, OK?" the woman said, declining to be identified because she anticipated backlash due to her race. She leaned in to look a reporter directly in the eyes. "There were black boys robbing houses in this neighborhood," she said. "That's why George was suspicious of Trayvon Martin."

CMY says

"There were black boys robbing houses in this neighborhood," she said. "That's why George was suspicious of Trayvon Martin."

Yes, yes. Of course. This may well be the case. And I understand, that it may be in large part because Zimmerman isn't too bright, that that alone would make him suspicious (regardless of whether it was even true that they know the robberies were done by black boys).

I don't want to get in to this argument. A lot of people just don't have enough experience or common sense to understand that lets say (with made up numbers), that with a white kid there's a one in 14,000 chance that you're looking at a burgler casing the neihborhood, and with a black kid it's one in 1,840, that doesn't lead to that much reasonable difference in the way you should percieve them.

(note: my numbers are greatly exaggerated - the difference probably isn't that high)

I get it, that there are retards out there that think gee, he's more than 7 times as likely to be a bad guy, therefore he probably is a bad guy.

As I said, experience and common sense would lead to a far healthier perception. And I get it. Zimmerman was a wanta be cop, who already was well on his way to having some of the worst mental habits a cop can have.

marcus says

And I understand, that it may be in large part because Zimmerman isn't too bright, that that alone would make him suspicious

you have 3rd party collaborative evidence to that ?

If he is freed, the economy is stimulated by the behavior you describe. It's a 'win-win' situation.

Blurtman says

But in order to keep damages to small businesses, homes, and hapless semi truck drivers to a minimum, he must be convicted.

lostand confused says

Take race out of it. Some 17 yr old kid is walking in his own neighbourhood. Some fat ass pursues him in his car, calls 911 is told to back off-but ignores it and keeps pursuing the kid.

Kid ends up being shot to death by fat ass. Fat ass that murdered said kid is claiming self defense . Kid can't testify, because he was shot dead in his own neighbourhood. Anything else?

To be fair, Zimmerman became a fat ass after his arrest.

Moderate Infidel says

If someone starts to beat you up because you're "annoying" them then they deserve to die. If Martin threw the first punch then he got what he deserves. If Zimmerman threw the first punch then he deserves to be ass raped in prison.

America has a 300-year history of beating, raping, and murdering blacks. It would be more than reasonable for a black teenager to think the white guy with a skinhead stalking him meant no good and for Martin to act in self-defense. Imagine if a black teen stalked you for miles. Wouldn't you be afraid for your life?

If Zimmerman had no gun, they'd both be alive today. Pulling out a gun in response to a fight you instigated by stalking someone isn't self-defense.