• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

George Zimmerman: Did the prosecution prove its case?

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Did the prosecution prove its case?

  • YES

  • NO

Results are only viewable after voting.
bshole said:
I have seen guys get alot worse than a broken nose in fights at bar time.... a WHOLE lot worse. Zimmerman had very minor wounds.
Click to expand...

His condition is immaterial. This may just mean he used the proper force at the right time. You don't have to wait to get the shit kicked out of you and be near death to use deadly force. All it takes is the reasonable fear of bodily harm to do that.

bshole said:
Basically is there any evidence about who initiated the confrontation? If Zimmerman initiated contact, then he is gulity of manslaughter, it is a no-brainer. If the other guy did, then Zimmerman is not. It is as simple as that. The 2nd degree murder charge is of course patently ridiculous.
Click to expand...

There is no definitive evidence either way which means Z walks.
 
bshole said:
Thousands of people get their asses kicked every day in fist fights. If you are losing a fight, is it justifiable to shoot the guy who is winning? Tough question.
Click to expand...

Tough question, bad comparison.

This wasn't a fist fight. Martin had no injuries. No marks. Aside from a few scrapes on his knuckles :hmm: and the gunshot. A fight suggests both were aggressors, as if Zimmerman was assaulting Martin. There is ZERO evidence of that.

Only thing the evidence suggests is Aggravated Assault and Battery. Deadly force is definitely legal and, far as I'm concerned, warranted.

If you see cops beating a man, is it justifiable to shoot the cops if you think they are killing the victim?
Click to expand...

Martin wasn't a cop... wth are you thinking? There are all sorts of various laws against resisting officers. No, a beating like that should never be legal. I'd want police stopped if they were committing such crimes.

I would possibly convict this guy of manslaughter if they can prove he initiated the conflict.
Click to expand...

The prosecution rested, they provided nothing to make that evident. I can point to 2 or 3 corroborating pieces of evidence to suggest it was Martin initiating the conflict.

If Zimmerman "initiated the conflict" I'd convict him too.
 
there are 60k+ posts on this. That's more than almost every other consideration ever.

With so much mouth invested in an outcome the trial results are irrelevant to most here. Zimmerman is already guilty or not, and has been for some time.

Here's a question. If Zimmerman is found innocent I expect riots somewhere. I may be wrong. I hope I'm wrong.

If I'm not and they happen, who and how many will justify them? That should be interesting.
 
I don't feel the prosecution has proven it's case at all.

While I don't care for cop-wannabes in the least, given the evidence it's pretty clear to me that TM, in typical male teen toughguy-wannabe fashion, attempted to state his position with his fists...and found his argument rebuffed by 9mm.

I don't think GZ should have elected to follow TM to begin with, but he broke no laws and no one is obligated or expected to take a life-threatening beating and just deal with it. An attacker's desire to resort to violence does not outweigh another person's right to avoid crippling or life threatening injuries. I don't care what state you're in!

I expect GZ to be found not guilty, and there will probably be some unrest from those hung up on race or emotions. A text book example of stupidity begetting more stupidity. 🙁
 
I like the way the media tried to take a young man that beat up women and smoked pot and was kicked out of school, into a sweet innocent little child.
 
Hayabusa Rider said:
Here's a question. If Zimmerman is found innocent I expect riots somewhere. I may be wrong. I hope I'm wrong.

If I'm not and they happen, who and how many will justify them? That should be interesting.
Click to expand...

Hopefully, we as a society have moved past the rioting mindset.

However, if there are riots I expect them to be in the inner cities.
 
Texashiker said:
Hopefully, we as a society have moved past the rioting mindset.

However, if there are riots I expect them to be in the inner cities.
Click to expand...

Gee, way to go out on a limb. In the last century, has there EVER been a riot that didn't take place in the inner city?
 
bshole said:
Gee, way to go out on a limb. In the last century, has there EVER been a riot that didn't take place in the inner city?
Click to expand...

Are you old enough to remember the james byrd jr incident?

How about the forced integration of Vidor Texas, do you remember that one?
 
Hayabusa Rider said:
there are 60k+ posts on this. That's more than almost every other consideration ever.

With so much mouth invested in an outcome the trial results are irrelevant to most here. Zimmerman is already guilty or not, and has been for some time.
Click to expand...

One thing is for certain, when the verdict is announced, whichever way it goes, there are going to be a lot of butt-hurt loudmouths.

Here's a question. If Zimmerman is found innocent I expect riots somewhere. I may be wrong. I hope I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

I would never underestimate the capacity of the black community to embarrass itself and to further injure itself.
 
LTC8K6 said:
What was the prosecution's case?

I can't tell what they were trying to prove.
Click to expand...

Can someone answer this? I have watched a lot of the case and I honestly don't know what the prosecution's argument is anymore. What do thy say actually happened?

My guess is their closing argument will have to rely more on facts than their opening did. I have lost sight of why they are saying GZ should be convicted.
 
Doppel said:
Can someone answer this? I have watched a lot of the case and I honestly don't know what the prosecution's argument is anymore. What do thy say actually happened?

My guess is their closing argument will have to rely more on facts than their opening did. I have lost sight of why they are saying GZ should be convicted.
Click to expand...

I would assume that their argument is the same as what it was at the start of the case: George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin because he wanted to.
 
But what was the process? Went up to Trayvon , pulled his gun, trayvon tried to attack to defend himself, then got shot?
 
Doppel said:
But what was the process? Went up to Trayvon , pulled his gun, trayvon tried to attack to defend himself, then got shot?
Click to expand...

In most concealed carry states, it is a misdemeanor crime to drawn your weapon in public, unless you are doing so in self-defense.

Considering Zimmerman was a law abiding citizen, I doubt he drew his handgun "just because".
 
Yes, but is that the foundation of what the prosecution is saying happened? We all know they have no evidence but they must at least be arguing some sequence of events.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top