George Zimmerman trial

Spang said:
The night George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin for giving him a broken nose and bloodying him up a little bit, Zimmerman was an armed vigilante who took the law into his own hands. And in the gif set, his brother is worried about armed vigilantes taking the law into their own hands, doing to Zimmerman what Zimmerman did to Trayvon.
Click to expand...
Zimmerman was a guy going to Target that night, who called law enforcement when he saw what looked like suspicious activity in his neighborhood full of crime, a young man unknown to Zimmerman, who looked like he was on drugs.

Zimmerman was not an armed vigilante; he called law enforcement and tried to answer their questions about which way Travon was headed. Vigilantes do not call the police and stay on the phone trying to help them. As for his being legally armed, that is imo why the media blew up the story. Guns are bad and scary, they might kill you and your child, buy our newspaper, watch our news.

I really don't understand how people could be happy that another man, one found not guilty in the court, might be shot and killed. Would that bring Travon back? To teach the "white hispanic" "cracker" a lesson, we need another tragic death? Is revenge that sweet? Do we like and accept vigilantism if we don't like the victim, a la Dexter?
 
ledboots said:
Zimmerman was a guy going to Target that night, who called law enforcement when he saw what looked like suspicious activity in his neighborhood full of crime, a young man unknown to Zimmerman, who looked like he was on drugs.
Click to expand...

How is Trayvon Martin supposed to act when a person is creeping on him in a vehicle? Is he supposed to not be nervous?

ledboots said:
Zimmerman was not an armed vigilante; he called law enforcement and tried to answer their questions about which way Travon was headed.
Click to expand...

Why? Do most people call the cops when they see someone in their neighborhood that they don't recognize?

ledboots said:
As for his being legally armed, that is imo why the media blew up the story. Guns are bad and scary, they might kill you and your child, buy our newspaper, watch our news.
Click to expand...

It's interesting that the gun-rights activists didn't come to Trayvon's defense, arguing that he should have been armed.

ledboots said:
I really don't understand how people could be happy that another man, one found not guilty in the court, might be shot and killed.
Click to expand...

I won't be happy or sad when Zimmerman is killed, but I'll understand. However, he was only found acquitted because of Stand Your Ground. That law needs to go the way of the dinosaur.
 
Spang said:
How is Trayvon Martin supposed to act when a person is creeping on him in a vehicle? Is he supposed to not be nervous?



Why? Do most people call the cops when they see someone in their neighborhood that they don't recognize?



It's interesting that the gun-rights activists didn't come to Trayvon's defense, arguing that he should have been armed.



I won't be happy or sad when Zimmerman is killed. However, he was only found not guilty because of Stand Your Ground. That law needs to go the way of the dinosaur.
Click to expand...
1. Zimmerman was watching him from the parked car, not slowly following him in a creepy way. Was Travon acting suspiciously? Idk, for the neighborhood he may have seemed it. Zimmerman exited the car when the operator asked which way Travon was going, you can hear the door open on the tape.

2. The cops tell the neighbors who join Neighborhood Watch to call if you see anything or anyone suspicious. We had trouble with vandalism and cars being broken into in my neighborhood years ago, and a law enforcement officer helped set up a neighborhood watch. Though not a member, I attended the first meeting. Zimerman did precisely what LE told us to do--call if you see anyone suspicious that you don't know.

3. If Travon had had a permit to carry, he would have had a perfect right to be armed, but then he probably wouldn't have allegedly jumped Zimmerman. It could have then ended in a gun battle, or Travon may not then have felt nervous and the need to engage Zimmerman and everyone would be home safely. Though Martin did call Zimmerman a "cracker", making it sound as if he was more angry than nervous, so who knows.

4. 'Stand your ground' was not brought up at this trial as a defense. Simple self-defense was the successful strategy used. Stand your ground trials are not juried nor televised in Florida, if my understanding about them is correct.

Anyway, I watched a good part of the trial on local cable on demand, and imo Zimmerman would have walked even if the defense hadn't said a word. I don't think the prosecution proved their case.

5. Saying you don't give a **** if someone found not guilty is gunned down in the street is pretty close to wanting them dead imo.

Eta from cnn
" In a pretrial immunity hearing, a judge would have ruled whether Zimmerman's actions were protected under the "stand your ground" law; a ruling in favor of the defendant would have meant that no criminal or civil trial could proceed."
http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/30/justice/florida-zimmerman-defense/index.html
 
ledboots said:
2. Zimerman did precisely what LE told us to do--call if you see anyone suspicious that you don't know.
Click to expand...

...except that he also did precisely what LE told him *not* to do as well. He continued pursuit when LE told him to stay put. At the time of that phone call to police - had GZ done as instructed - this could all have been avoided and one young man would still be alive today.

It is disheartening that because of this negligence on the part of GZ - there are no consequences. In my opinion people that carry guns have an acute, always prevalent desire to use them. That they think about using them each day they strap them on - indeed - they likely imagine any number of scenarios in which they will be able to use them. GZ was one of these.
 
ledboots said:
5. Saying you don't give a **** if someone found not guilty is gunned down in the street is pretty close to wanting them dead imo.
Click to expand...

I'm full of apathy, so I don't "give a ****" about a lot of things. I don't condone the killing of other people, and I do not support the death penalty, but if someone were to kill an acquitted George Zimmerman, I would understand.
 
Dedalus said:
...except that he also did precisely what LE told him *not* to do as well. He continued pursuit when LE told him to stay put. At the time of that phone call to police - had GZ done as instructed - this could all have been avoided and one young man would still be alive today.

It is disheartening that because of this negligence on the part of GZ - there are no consequences. In my opinion people that carry guns have an acute, always prevalent desire to use them. That they think about using them each day they strap them on - indeed - they likely imagine any number of scenarios in which they will be able to use them. GZ was one of these.
Click to expand...
A civil servant operator told him he "didn't need to do that" after he asked if Z was following T. No LE told him to stop.

~Edited to delete my apparently off-topic remarks about gun control.~
 
This case has clearly stirred up a lot of emotions, so I think it's important that everyone keeps an open mind at least until we have the facts straight. Again I will suggest checking out the Wikipedia article about the trial, which I feel pretty certain is much more accurate than what we've been told by various news media and talk show hosts. For example, ledboots is correct that Zimmerman was not told by the operator to stop following Martin:
Sean Noffke, the dispatcher who was on the phone during Zimmerman's non-emergency call, testified regarding his own statements at that time. Noffke said that when he told Zimmerman "We don't need you to do that," he was making a suggestion, not giving an order. He said that dispatchers do not give orders because of liability issues. During cross-examination, Noffke testified that Zimmerman did not seem angry during the call, and that he wanted the police to come to his location. Noffke also testified that he asked Zimmerman which way Martin was going, and that his question could be interpreted as a request to go and see which way he was going.
Click to expand...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Zimmerman_trial#Police_and_investigator_testimony
 
beancounter said:
I'm confused as to why the prosecution didn't opt for involuntary manslaughter, since they couldn't prove intent.

This would at least have made him responsible for his poor judgement.
Click to expand...


They did the same thing with the Casey Anthony trial. The only choice the jurors had was murder.
 
beancounter said:
Many, if not most of the sources referenced by the article are from the new media.
Click to expand...

This is true, but most of the paragraphs in the W article are referenced by more than one source, so for an error to find its way into the article, it would have to be made by more than one source. Also, I'm sure the article has been scrutinized by W editors who have actually watched the trial.
 
The problem is that only one person involved in the incident from start to finish is alive, and that the available evidence in the trial doesn't account for every minute of the incident. This leaves potential gaps that allows for speculation. Also, I provided an article (re: bail) that shows that GZ is willing to lie to make an outcome turn in his favor. This futher provides possible speculation for what he may be leaving out of his story.
 
Spang said:
However, he was only found acquitted because of Stand Your Ground.
Click to expand...

.....No. SYG applies only when you use self defense in a situation in which you have the opportunity to retreat. TM was on top of GZ at the time when GZ shot his gun, so SYG is not relevant.
 
Dedalus said:
...except that he also did precisely what LE told him *not* to do as well. He continued pursuit when LE told him to stay put. At the time of that phone call to police - had GZ done as instructed - this could all have been avoided and one young man would still be alive today.
Click to expand...

-Sean Noffke (the non-emergency number operator) is not a law enforcement officer
-Noffke did not tell him to do or not do anything. He just said "we don't need you to do that [follow him]". Sean Noffke testified: "We always try to give general, basic, not commands, but just suggestions."
-It's not clear that any pursuit was involved.
-Noffke's suggestion wasn't to "stay put".
-It's not clear the GZ did not follow Sean Noffke's suggestion. By GZ's account he did not continue attempting to follow after Noffke had said "we don't need you to do that" and GZ had responded "okay". I'm not saying GZ's account must be believed, just that it's not clear one way or the other.

ledboots said:
The entire trial is on youtube. My sources are the actual trial, which is local for me so I watched a lot of it on cable; they even had it on demand.
Click to expand...

The actual trial is the best source of info, however there is some information that was not covered in the trial. Wiki is, IMO, probably a better source than most. Not that people shouldn't take it with a grain of salt, but I've usually found it to be pretty accurate.
 
cornsail said:
The actual trial is the best source of info, however there is some information that was not covered in the trial. Wiki is, IMO, probably a better source than most. Not that people shouldn't take it with a grain of salt, but I've usually found it to be pretty accurate.
Click to expand...
Yes but I am certainly not going to get into the phone photos and stuff about Trayvon and Zimmerman that was kept out of court.

I feel the trial is the best source of information that the jurors were privy to. They didn't know lots of stuff that was kept out by that oh so annoying judge, so they could only decide on what they knew.

Btw it cost $33, 000 just to sequester the jury. :eek:
 
"If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony." - Judge Debra Nelson to jurors
 
Spang said:
"If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony." - Judge Debra Nelson to jurors
Click to expand...
Yes, stand your ground does influence the self-defense instructions to the jury, presumably in all the states that have this law in place.

Wiki
Many states have some form of stand-your-ground law. Alabama,[16] Alaska,[17] Arizona,[18]California,[19][20] Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa,[21]Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana,[18] Maine, Massachusetts (though the term is used very loosely there),[22] Michigan,[18] Mississippi, Missouri, Montana,[18] New Hampshire,[18] North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma,[18] Pennsylvania ,[23], Rhode Island,[24] South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee,[18] Texas,[25] Utah,[26] West Virginia,[18], Wisconsin[27] and Wyoming have adopted Castle Doctrine statutes, and other states (Iowa,[28] Virginia,[29] and Washington) have considered stand-your-ground laws of their own.[30][31][32]
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-your-ground_law
 

Similar threads

Calliegirl
New George Zimmerman interview
Replies
4
Views
2K
General Discussion
Spang
Spang
Top Bottom