Making Sense of the Zimmerman Verdict

[RandallFlagg]

Young black men with a thuggish bent are not intimidated by the rival gang bangers they meet every day, a thug would not have been intimidated by a creepy ass cracker.

I'm curious. Being a black man myself, I can't help but wonder if folks (such as yourself) who jump up on your soap box and decry the evils of the "crackers" and the senseless murder of this little angel Trayvon Martin will, in turn, run to Chicago and decry the senseless murder of 500 black men and women over the past year? Or, do they not really "count", as they were perpetrated by other blacks?

The hypocrisy of the left continually amazes me.

Is that what Fox " News " tells you "? Katzndogz is not "left" and the are plenty of people in the black communnity who trying to stop violence but they are no match for the NRA gun pushers.

My statement was a general statement directed only to those who seem to have "all the answers". I don't watch FOX. If so damned many in the "black community" are trying to stop it, why is it escalating? Your statement holds no water.

 

[Truthseeker420]

Zimmerman was not following Martin when the confrontation took place. Zimmerman was headed back to his car after having lost Martin. Martin approached him and then attacked him in a criminal assault. If my son had done that I would have buried him and apologized to Zimmerman. There are always consequences for the actions you take. Zimmerman will have to live the rest of his life knowing that he has killed. Even when done in self defense that is not an easy thing to do. Martin committed a felony and got the ultimate punishment. Both will suffer the consequences for their actions.

You don't know if Zimmerman was heading back to his car,of all the lies Zimmerman told who would believe that...?

Zimmeman was not going to let "these assholes", these "fucking coons" get away...he confronted Martin got in a fight and shot him in cold blood.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Zimmerman was not following Martin when the confrontation took place. Zimmerman was headed back to his car after having lost Martin. Martin approached him and then attacked him in a criminal assault. If my son had done that I would have buried him and apologized to Zimmerman. There are always consequences for the actions you take. Zimmerman will have to live the rest of his life knowing that he has killed. Even when done in self defense that is not an easy thing to do. Martin committed a felony and got the ultimate punishment. Both will suffer the consequences for their actions.

You don't know if Zimmerman was heading back to his car,of all the lies Zimmerman told who would believe that...?

Zimmeman was not going to let "these assholes", these "fucking coons" get away...he confronted Martin got in a fight and shot him in cold blood.

I'm sorry. I apologize. I didn't realize that you were there. My bad. Can I look for you in Chicago in the near future?

Here's a suggestion - learn the definition of "cold blood" is. You have no clue.

 

[Truthseeker420]

I'm curious. Being a black man myself, I can't help but wonder if folks (such as yourself) who jump up on your soap box and decry the evils of the "crackers" and the senseless murder of this little angel Trayvon Martin will, in turn, run to Chicago and decry the senseless murder of 500 black men and women over the past year? Or, do they not really "count", as they were perpetrated by other blacks?

The hypocrisy of the left continually amazes me.

Is that what Fox " News " tells you "? Katzndogz is not "left" and the are plenty of people in the black communnity who trying to stop violence but they are no match for the NRA gun pushers.

My statement was a general statement directed only to those who seem to have "all the answers". I don't watch FOX. If so damned many in the "black community" are trying to stop it, why is it escalating? Your statement holds no water.

Who said it was escalating? But the reason America is such a violent society is due to a number of factors. IMO

 

[Truthseeker420]

Zimmerman was not following Martin when the confrontation took place. Zimmerman was headed back to his car after having lost Martin. Martin approached him and then attacked him in a criminal assault. If my son had done that I would have buried him and apologized to Zimmerman. There are always consequences for the actions you take. Zimmerman will have to live the rest of his life knowing that he has killed. Even when done in self defense that is not an easy thing to do. Martin committed a felony and got the ultimate punishment. Both will suffer the consequences for their actions.

You don't know if Zimmerman was heading back to his car,of all the lies Zimmerman told who would believe that...?

Zimmeman was not going to let "these assholes", these "fucking coons" get away...he confronted Martin got in a fight and shot him in cold blood.

I'm sorry. I apologize. I didn't realize that you were there. My bad. Can I look for you in Chicago in the near future?

Here's a suggestion - learn the definition of "cold blood" is. You have no clue.

The second part was my opinion based on the facts. No one knows what happened between the time Zimmerman leapt out of his truck until the confrontation.

Cold Blooded

Web definitions

cold: without compunction or human feeling; "in cold blood"; "cold-blooded killing"; "insensate destruction".

 

[cathycollie]

Zimmerman molested his own cousin and he's innocent?

 

[Truthseeker420]

Zimmerman molested his own cousin and he's innocent?

That's the way it goes sometimes. I felt the same way I do now when wife abuser, murder OJ Simpson walked.

 

[Interpol]

The best sense you can make of the Zimmerman verdict is to take the lesson away that you should not walk while being black in America. It could cause someone to stalk you and kill you and for that to be called self-defense.

Saudi Arabia....coming to a Florida near you.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Making sense of the Zimmerman verdict.

The jury followed the law, common sense, the evidence and their oaths.

They found him not guilty because the State failed in its burden of proof and the State failed in its burden of proof because Zimmerman was in fact innocent.

'Nuff said.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I still say that Zimmerman could have stayed in his truck and the life of TM could have been spared. Is there anyone out there who wanted an acquittal agree with me on that one small point?

I also understand, that if someone is being beat you up, defending yourself is a natural progression of the altercation, even shooting the person who is beating you.

Can you agree with the other side on the on the points of argument?

I agree a little bit. Everyone has the right to defend themselves. But both people were at fault here. They both deserve blame for what happened. Except now one of them gets to walk free and one of them is dead.

Justice took a blow with that verdict.

Justice may, or may not, have taken a blow, but the justice system delivered the result it is supposed to.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I agree a little bit. Everyone has the right to defend themselves. But both people were at fault here. They both deserve blame for what happened. Except now one of them gets to walk free and one of them is dead.

Justice took a blow with that verdict.

Justice triumphed.

What would you do if he'd killed your son? Under the exact same circumstances?

I would probably kill him. Does that make me right?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Can we discuss the Zimmerman verdict without the vitriol and sarcasm?

Do you expect racial strife?

Do you understand the verdict although you did not agree with it?

Can you understand the viewpoints of others who disagreed with you? although the verdict validated your viewpoint?

Can you agree to disagree with others without being rude?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I still say that Zimmerman could have stayed in his truck and the life of TM could have been spared. Is there anyone out there who wanted an acquittal agree with me on that one small point?

I also understand, that if someone is being beat you up, defending yourself is a natural progression of the altercation, even shooting the person who is beating you.

Can you agree with the other side on the on the points of argument?

Can we discuss the Zimmerman verdict without the vitriol and sarcasm?

Likely not.

Do you expect racial strife?

No.

Do you understand the verdict although you did not agree with it?

Yes. It was the correct verdict, it was the charge that was wrong.

He was found not guilty on the charge of manslaughter, what should he have been charged with? Killing in self defense?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You are so right.

Self defense is an affirmative defense which means that the burden of proof switches to the defendant. Because of this, generally the defendant testifies in such cases. However, by playing the tapes the prosecution made it possible for Zimmerman to establish a self defense claim without ever taking the stand. Prosecutors usually salivate over the prospect of tearing a defendant apart on the stand, but in this case they blew their chance. Not a smart thing to do. Many in the legal profession have cirtiicized the prosecution's presentation of the case.

That was completely wrong.
For starters, they did not "over charge." They made the proper charge given the situation. I knew this little meme was coming down the pike and I've exploded it frequently here.
Second, self defense laws vary by state. In some states the person claiming SD must show a reasonable person in that situation would have been in fear of his life. In other states the state must overcome the claim. FL is the latter. Once Zimmerman claimed self defense it was the state's burden to prove it wasn't. They failed. Mainly because it was in fact clear cut self defense. So clear the cops at the scene understood what had happened.

I'm not sure you understand about affirmative defense. The burden if proof was on GZ. He had to prove it was self defense. And he would have had to testified to prove that and been on cross examination for a lengthy time, except the prosecution put his tapes in evidence that gave his story on how TM accosted him and brutally attacked him on the ground, not needing the direct testimony of Z on direct from the defense.

Sorry for the run-on sentence.

You definitely do not understand affirmative defenses because self defense is not an affirmative defense unless you are arguing that the guy you killed in his sleep was going to kill you if you didn't.

 

[FA_Q2]

Justice triumphed.

What would you do if he'd killed your son? Under the exact same circumstances?

I would probably kill him. Does that make me right?

LOL. Nice honesty. That really is true though. I don’t expect the parents to be satisfied with the verdict but that does not mean their idea of justice would be the right one.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Self defense makes little sense, it was Zimmerman's action that instigated the confrontation. If he was too scared or too weak or simply a coward, he should have waited for the police to support his profiling.

"I don't think the import of this is being appreciated. Effectively, I can bait you into a fight and if I start losing I can legally kill you, provided I "believe" myself to be subject to "great bodily harm."It is then the state's job to prove--beyond a reasonable doubt--that I either did not actually fear for my life, or my fear was unreasonable. In the case of George Zimmerman, even if the state proved that he baited an encounter (and I am not sure they did) they still must prove that he had no reasonable justification to fear for his life. You see very similar language in the actual instructions given to the jury..." Trayvon Martin And The Irony Of American Justice - Ta-Nehisi Coates - The Atlantic

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...e-zimmerman-prosecutor-corey.html#post7538186
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JE28xzIGnE8

Why do you think you are educated?

You cannot invoke self defense when you start a fight unless the other person applies with disproportionate force. In other words, I start a fight with you, and you pull a gun, I would then be justified in taking a bat and hitting you until the threat was over. If, on the other hand, I start a fight and am losing, I cannot claim it is self defense if I kill you.

Fell free to provide the evidence that;

• Zimmerman started the fight,
• was losing, but still not in danger, and
• then killed Martin even though Martin was not actually a threat.

It shouldn't be hard, the State of Florida just laid it all out for the jury, and tanked.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Self defense makes little sense, it was Zimmerman's action that instigated the confrontation. If he was too scared or too weak or simply a coward, he should have waited for the police to support his profiling.

"I don't think the import of this is being appreciated. Effectively, I can bait you into a fight and if I start losing I can legally kill you, provided I "believe" myself to be subject to "great bodily harm."It is then the state's job to prove--beyond a reasonable doubt--that I either did not actually fear for my life, or my fear was unreasonable. In the case of George Zimmerman, even if the state proved that he baited an encounter (and I am not sure they did) they still must prove that he had no reasonable justification to fear for his life. You see very similar language in the actual instructions given to the jury..." Trayvon Martin And The Irony Of American Justice - Ta-Nehisi Coates - The Atlantic

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...e-zimmerman-prosecutor-corey.html#post7538186

FRIDAY.mp4 - YouTube

Not true at all. You are making the conjecture that Z baited him into a fight. That is something that you simply cannot prove considering the evidence. Martin did not have to go back and engage Z. Simple as that.

No conjecture at all, Zimmerman stalked the boy, kinda simple, after being asked to stand back he continued. When someone follows you, what's your reaction? Do you call mommy? Only Zimmerman knows what happened and given Martin was a kid, Zimmerman is both a coward and a sissy. I guess carrying a 9mm made him a real man, huh? He could not even fight fair. Had he stood back with his gun, this would not have happened. Unless the coward pissed his pants so badly he'd shoot from a distance. You apologists for the sissy, pretend cop are sickening.

Your teenage son or daughter is walking home in the rain, it is growing dark, she is on the phone with a friend and eating the candy she just bought from a nearby convenience store. The hood is up on her jacket when a man starts following her in his car. She mentions this to a friend on the phone. Your son keeps walking. Soon your daughter walks behind a building, and the man in the car gets out and follows her. Your son does not know what motivates the follower. Soon they are so close, fear of each other causes a scuffle. Your daughter does not realize the man is armed with a gun. She fights the man to the ground and in the melee he is injured. He pulls a gun and kills your daughter. How do you feel? What gave him the right to follow and pursue your son or daughter. What motivated him to follow.

He followed him, and lost him. The state proved that conclusively when they put his girlfriend on the stand and laid out the timeline. That makes everything you said based on a fantasy, not reality.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

What would you do if he'd killed your son? Under the exact same circumstances?

I would probably kill him. Does that make me right?

LOL. Nice honesty. That really is true though. I don’t expect the parents to be satisfied with the verdict but that does not mean their idea of justice would be the right one.

Which is why we moved away from the "Blood feud" method of dispensing justice.

 

[auditor0007]

I still say that Zimmerman could have stayed in his truck and the life of TM could have been spared. Is there anyone out there who wanted an acquittal agree with me on that one small point?

I also understand, that if someone is being beat you up, defending yourself is a natural progression of the altercation, even shooting the person who is beating you.

Can you agree with the other side on the on the points of argument?

I agree a little bit. Everyone has the right to defend themselves. But both people were at fault here. They both deserve blame for what happened. Except now one of them gets to walk free and one of them is dead.

Justice took a blow with that verdict.

Justice was well served here. As for them both being at fault, I disagree. Either Zimmerman started the entire confrontation, initiating the fight that led to him shooting Martin or Martin jumped him for no good reason as he was walking back to his car. One of them is to blame. The only problem is that there was no evidence to support Zimmerman being the aggressor, therefore the not guilty verdict.

Of course, prosecutors knew this from the beginning. This was nothing more than a dog and pony show for the prosecution. They should have to pay Zimmerman's legal fees for making him defend himself.

 

[RandallFlagg]

The best sense you can make of the Zimmerman verdict is to take the lesson away that you should not walk while being black in America. It could cause someone to stalk you and kill you and for that to be called self-defense.

Saudi Arabia....coming to a Florida near you.

That's ridiculous and you know it. Let me guess - you're white. It's so refreshing to find so may "whites" that will jump in and defend something that they have no clue about.

Dang - that "White Guilt" is a killer........


Still waiting for the outrage about all the black on black crime that kills hundreds each year................and waiting..........and waiting.........and waiting.......

 

[midcan5]

Not true at all. You are making the conjecture that Z baited him into a fight. That is something that you simply cannot prove considering the evidence. Martin did not have to go back and engage Z. Simple as that.

No conjecture at all, Zimmerman stalked the boy, kinda simple, after being asked to stand back he continued. When someone follows you, what's your reaction? Do you call mommy? Only Zimmerman knows what happened and given Martin was a kid, Zimmerman is both a coward and a sissy. I guess carrying a 9mm made him a real man, huh? He could not even fight fair. Had he stood back with his gun, this would not have happened. Unless the coward pissed his pants so badly he'd shoot from a distance. You apologists for the sissy, pretend cop are sickening.

Your teenage son or daughter is walking home in the rain, it is growing dark, she is on the phone with a friend and eating the candy she just bought from a nearby convenience store. The hood is up on her jacket when a man starts following her in his car. She mentions this to a friend on the phone. Your son keeps walking. Soon your daughter walks behind a building, and the man in the car gets out and follows her. Your son does not know what motivates the follower. Soon they are so close, fear of each other causes a scuffle. Your daughter does not realize the man is armed with a gun. She fights the man to the ground and in the melee he is injured. He pulls a gun and kills your daughter. How do you feel? What gave him the right to follow and pursue your son or daughter. What motivated him to follow.

He doesn't need a right to follow you numbskull. What motivated him to follow? He was trying to prevent crime and get the information that the dispatcher asked for.

Not guilty no matter how dramatically you twist it.

You apologists for a cowardly man following a teenager, because he was black, seem to forget had Zimmerman left the law and the commons to the proper authorities, the police, a boy would still be alive and the coward, armed because it gave him the courage he obviously didn't have, would just be another pretend cop. Next time someone follows you or your children ask first if they are armed.