-
@MsLipGloss: She lied about her age and her whereabouts during the funeral. I think a juror can separate that from her testimony regarding the phone call. She certainly didn't do Trayvon any favors by repeating exactly what Trayvon said- describing the man following him as a "creepy cracker" or saying "the N word is still following me"
@Meltini: Let's not forget GZ first pursued Trayvon in his car. GZ then got out his car and took it upon himself to pursue him on foot. Trayvon sensed danger, someone following him. I dont see how anyone could possibly hold the victim responsible in this case. You say neither are innocent. What is Trayvon guilty of? Finally stopped walking to ask the guy on his tail what his problem was? What should he have done, kept walking or run? For GZ to do what run after him or shoot him in the back? GZ had no authority to follow him or question him about why he was in the neighborhood.
-
@Modern Daisy: This is not a one sided thing. I've seen fb posts from my fox news loving friends that basically implied that because trayvon smoked pot that he was a thug who'd be locked up soon anyways. I never comment on political fb posts but I had to comment on that one.
I've smoked pot and handled guns and I hope that that's not what gets splattered on TV if something tragic were to happen.
-
@Mrs. Jacks: thanks for that article, it definitely does make some good points- i do think that people shouldn't be using the stand your ground laws as an excuse to kill just anyone that so much as looks at them. also, it is very hard to prove self defense once the other person is indeed dead.
@FutureMrsMcK: i'm not so sure about that, i mean, yes I am sure the jury would empathize with the father and see his side, but he DID kill someone. i cant see him just walking away. maybe lesser charges like involuntary manslaughter or something, because he was not thinking clearly when it happened.
-
@Mrs. Lemon-Lime: I agree with this.
-
@Maysprout: I agree, I don't think it should matter at all who Trayvon was or what he looked like - that is totally irrelevant IMO. I've only seen the 'innocent' images in the media though, personally which makes me think they are more widespread than people going the other way trying to make him look like a thug.
-
Did the defense say they were using Stand Your Ground? I think they are claiming self-defense only. In the words of someo unknown genius " don't start no stuff, won't be no stuff. " GZ started it and tragically finished it.
-
@Mrs. Lemon-Lime: I think you're right, I don't believe they ended up using stand your ground.
-
@NovBaby1112: @Mrs. Jacks: I wouldn't consider that article a discussion . . . it is an article blatantly in favor of repealing the SYG law. I won't go through the article point by point, but even the first point is misleading (and it directly conflicts with point no. 8 . . . a presumption of innocence does not mean that someone should be limited in or refrain from presenting as complete a defense as possible). First, placing the burden of proof squarely on the shoulders of the prosecution is exactly where it belongs (we are, after all, talking about life and liberty here). Second, and most importantly, our system is based on the premise of *innocent until proven guilty* which is exactly why the prosecutors should be required to prove that someone did not act in self defense. ETA (otherwise it would be guilty until you prove yourself innocent.)
-
@MsLipGloss: as I said it merely points to some data
-
@Modern Daisy: TOTALLY agree.
-
At this point I can't say I would rule either way, BUT the defense is definitely fighting an uphill battle here.. I think it's pretty apparent that GZ was the initial aggressor.
-
I just wanting people to stop shooting other people.
And stop doing all bad things.Is that so much to ask?
-
@MsLipGloss: you explained the bail stuff well on the AH thread. Does mitigating circumstances play into the prosecution's case?
-
@Mrs. Lemon-Lime: I don't know Massachusetts law (I don't practice in MA), but generally, both mitigating and aggravating circumstances will factor into the prosecution's case (as well as the defense's case). In some states, some aggravating/ mitigating factors are defined by statute.
-
@Mrs. Lemon-Lime: I think you are misunderstanding me. I never said that I thought GZ did the right thing and I never said that Trayvon was to blame. My point is, under the letter of the law, I don't think he will be found guilty. Also, I don't think the stand your ground law can be used as a defense, I believe it can only be used to decide whether or not to charge someone with a crime (although I could be mistaken). I also don't think it is fair to go back and say "Well if Trayvon had done X, he would be alive. If Zimmerman had done Y, Trayvon would still be alive." We don't know what would have happened in any other situation so it isn't a fair question. As @MsLipGloss said, he is innocent until proven guilty. I just don't think, considering the laws on the books, that the prosecution will be able to prove that he did not act in self defense and that his actions are not protected under the stand your ground law.
-
I have changed my mind. I am undecided.
DH and I caught up on the witnesses' testimonies and even did some role playing. Apparently GZ's actions prior to the confrontation do not matter in a court of law. He could follow and leave his car and even ask Trayvon what he was doing in the neighborhood. The only thing that matters is if GZ legitimately feared for his life during the altercation with Trayvon. GZ was most likely losing the fight and felt his only way out was to use his gun. Still so sad over the loss of life. -
@Mrs. Lemon-Lime: i'm right there with you. initially, i for sure thought guilty of murder 2. but now i can totally see him being convicted of a lesser charge. this whole case enrages me because this all could have been avoided if zimmerman hadn't completely disregarded the instructions of the 911 dispatcher, but instead decided to play hero.
and i honestly think that anyone that thinks this wasn't racially charged is very naive. he was targeted because he was black. there's just no way around that.
-
@Mrs. Lemon-Lime: Actually, Zimmerman's actions matter a great deal. Even if he legitimately feared for his life, if he started the confrontation, he loses his right to justified self defense. The key piece is whether or not he started a physical altercation. If he was walking away and Martin attacked him, his right to self defense would absolve him. However, if, as the prosecution argues, Zimmerman attacked Martin, he has no right to "defend" himself with a gun.
-
I haven't been following the case in any great detail but I don't believe any "civilian" should ever have the right to take another mans life. By all means shoot a guy in the leg if you're feeling threatened but GZ was not a Police Officer and had no place trying act like one.
-
@BlueWolverine: I heard that too about who ever threw the first punch cannot claim self-defense. Which is why Rachel Jeantel's testimony was so important. She could hear The initial confrontation, but could not say definitively who laid hands on whom first.
GZ's injuries were not that bad. He didn't seek additional medical attention for his nose and the paramedics just cleaned him up. I think using deadly force was excessive.
-
Well first and foremost I have certainly not read all the information there is out there because I dont trust a thing I hear/see about the case thanks to our stellar media in this country. (Isn't it scary that our media is considered so great and we all obviously agree that they have handled this case-and many others-so poorly?!)
Having said that - I do not think he will be found guilty of murder - I think there will be sufficient reasonable doubt. Similar to the unfortunate outcome of the Casey Anthony trial. I think Manslaughter would have had a better chance of a guilty verdict.
I do think he will be found responsible in civil court where there is no real concept of "beyond reasonable doubt".
I think with the witnesses in this case and the conflicting evidence it would be difficult to say with certainty one way or the other what happened that night. Unfortunately we are only able to hear one side of the story from those who know it best.
Either way - its a sad and unfortunate outcome of an incident that could likely be avoided. Its also a sad display of the media at its worst.
-
Guilty.
It wasn't self defense. He instigated it and he shot soeone who did not deserve to die. That "fight" did not need to end that way.
Bottom line: he shot somone who he instilled fear into. Treyvon was the one who was acting in self-defense. Zimmerman was acting in.....racism, self-righteousness and anger. He is a piece of shit IMO.*p.s: I don't give a rat's *** that T was a kid or that he was black or anything...I think anyone (Zimmerman) who shoots anyone and kills them for a reason as small as this is a murderer, not an innocent man.
-
Jury decided... He was found not guilty.
I was hoping he was guilty.
-
I just saw this too. I actually agree with the jury's decision.
That said, I feel this is a loss all around, and my heart absolutely aches for the Martin family...and to an extent, the Zimmerman family.
-
@bluestriped bee: wow. wow. wow. can't believe they didn't go with at least manslaughter... disappointing.
-
I had an awful feeling that this would have happened. Just so horrible. On Twitter, someone described it as a "legal lynching."
-
I am so already done with this trial. I am tired with media circus and how they tried to portray a hate crime just to incite people and increase their readership. I was thinking he would be guilty of lesser charge but then I guess it was prosecutor's fault for not pursuing this in first place and going after 2nd degree murder.
-
I'm not shocked or surprised but I am really sad about this. Too much to write here without going into an angry tirade that might offend people! I followed the trial and hoped the jury would at least go with manslaughter but knew he'd be acquitted. George Zimmerman should have never stepped out of his car and now he's gotten away with killing Trayvon Martin. Another sad day for the Martin family.
-
@Kemma: I'm thinking the same thing. Why shoot him in the head? He could have easily disabled him by shooting him in the foot, leg or arm?
-
@mrsjazz: I agree completely with everything you said. I am not surprised at all; this happens all the time. It's just sad.
-
I guess if you want to murder someone and get away with it, you can do it in Florida. Sickening.
-
very disappointed.
-
@bluestriped bee: you can't always disable that way, at least not with a 9 mm gun.
-
Too much reasonable doubt exists to not come back with a not guilty verdict. It sucks but unfortunately that is how we have to protect those who are actually innocent which means guilty sometimes fall through the cracks.
-
@Mrs Hedgehog: COMPLETELY AGREE. People always go off about the legal system when these things happen..but part of our supposed value system is that it's better for guilty people to go free than an innocent person to be locked up or killed on behalf of our government.
-
@bluestriped bee: if I am going to disable somebody who I consider a threat, I am going for the head or chest. Why am going to risk my own life? Also legs are MUCH harder to hit. They train police officers that way for a reason and if it is good enough for them, it is good enough for me. But that has nothing to do with this case for me. That is just how I would react if I thought my life were in danger and I needed to defend myself.
-
After watching the vast majority of the trial, there was wayyy too much doubt for a conviction. The prosecution presented a terribly weak case and I think based on that (which is what the jury has to base their decision on) the right verdict was delivered. But, based on everything I've read a out the case, I think he should've been convicted of manslaughter.
-
@Mrs Hedgehog: Ok. Good to know. I'll make sure not to miss with you.
But I guess we can agree to disagree on what we would do if we were threatened.
-
@mrsjazz: I agree with you 100%. I also don't see why they couldn't convict him of manslaughter.
-
@bluestriped bee: he was shot in the chest, not the head. I think it's hard to say what I'd do if facing a life-threatening situation.
But I guess we can agree to disagree on what we would do if we were threatened.
- Google Plus
- Stumbleupon
- Twitter
- Facebook
- Pinterest
- Favorite0
130 comments