George Zimmerman: Did the prosecution prove its case?

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar

Did the prosecution prove its case?

  • YES

  • NO

Results are only viewable after voting.
xj0hnx

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
peonyu said:
Where I live [Broward county Florida] there are short commercials on most TV stations prompting people to not riot over the upcoming verdict...I really doubt that they are aiming that message at white people either! Incoming acquittal most likely and the authorities know it.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/10/justice/florida-zimmerman-backlash/
Click to expand...

LOL, CNN just can not help themselves can they?

Zimmerman is a white Hispanic who is on trial for last year's shooting death of Trayvon Martin
Click to expand...
 
nextJin

nextJin

Golden Member
Apr 16, 2009
1,848
0
0
bshole said:
Doppel,

Didn't Martin have a right to stand his ground? He did not initiate the conflict. He was followed around by a stranger who outweighed him by 50 lbs. If Zimmerman hadn't stalked him (against Police instructions), the conflict would have never happened. Did Martin not have the right of self defense?
Click to expand...

I just got done discussing this with a bunch of my coworkers (who are black) and they apparently all feel the exact same way you do. All of the white guys had the exact opposite opinion.

They all say that GZ initiated the conflict by following TM. Not one disagreed with the statement and my arguments fell on completely deaf ears. The fact that he was very close to his home, he could have called the police, etc. is all meaningless. He HAD to beat down GZ because GZ initiated the conflict by following him.

All of the white guys said he had multiple outs both before and after the conflict started. He did neither and instead beat the hell out of GZ for close to 45 seconds which is an eternity in close combat for anyone who has been in a fight.

After this morning’s conversations I now FULLY agree there will be some serious civil unrest after the verdict (which will be not guilty). Maybe it's a cultural thing but initiating conflict only starts with physical contact which in this case no one can prove but points to TM being the initiator.
 
xj0hnx

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
bshole said:
Doppel,

Didn't Martin have a right to stand his ground? He did not initiate the conflict. He was followed around by a stranger who outweighed him by 50 lbs. If Zimmerman hadn't stalked him (against Police instructions), the conflict would have never happened. Did Martin not have the right of self defense?
Click to expand...

He was followed, not followed around. The difference is that GZ lost sight of TM, and TM made it to his house, and decided to go back and confront GZ.
 
N

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,669
8
0
xj0hnx said:
He was followed, not followed around. The difference is that GZ lost sight of TM, and TM made it to his house, and decided to go back and confront GZ.
Click to expand...

Which pretty much destroys the prosecution's case.

Lets say you are being followed by some "crazy-ass 'white' guy". Luckily you make it back to your house. You can no longer see that crazy guy following you.

If your only concern is for your safety do you:

a.) Go inside and lock your door?
b.) Go back and look for the guy who was previously following you?
 
chihlidog

chihlidog

Senior member
Apr 12, 2011
884
1
81
This concept of following is also somewhat murky.

Let's keep in mind that GZ did as he was taught by the neighborhood watch rep from the police department. There's following, and there's attempting to observe. Sometimes this can be a fine line, but it's pretty clear that GZ wanted to keep eyes on TM, not get right up close and personal with him.

Regardless, even if GZ walked up to Martin and spoke to him, he would have been breaking NO laws by doing so.
 
LTC8K6

LTC8K6

Lifer
Mar 10, 2004
28,520
1,575
126
State asks for M3 via child abuse at 7:30am this morning...

What case was this again?
 
Doppel

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,306
3
0
bshole said:
Doppel,

Didn't Martin have a right to stand his ground? He did not initiate the conflict. He was followed around by a stranger who outweighed him by 50 lbs. If Zimmerman hadn't stalked him (against Police instructions), the conflict would have never happened. Did Martin not have the right of self defense?
Click to expand...
There is no evidence to support the idea GZ attacked him and thus stand your ground from TM's perspective is impossible. The evidence does not support that GZ attacked TM and so self-defense is also irrelevant.

The police gave GZ no instructions. This is one of the biggest myths of the case, and the 911 operator who told him "we don't need you to do that" repeated multiple times under oath that he did not, nor ever does give orders of such a nature to people on the phone.

----

Those who claim that this never would have happened if GZ hadn't left his car are arbitrarily choosing a random moment in a sequence of events. If you get drunk and kill me in my car is it my fault because if I had never left the house I'd still be dead? No. Why? Because I did not act illegally or even negligently, and neither did GZ. The law is unequivocal and nobody is denying (including prosecution) that GZ acted legally when he left his car. This is precisely why the 911 operator never did, nor claims to have given instructions to GZ saying not to follow. What the 911 operator did and does as a matter of procedure is make it clear that the person calling is in no way at all expected to do anything to assist, is completely off the hook and there is no expectation of him to do anything. That is all.

----

If I am driving "suspiciously" and a cop pulls me over and finds out that in fact I am not high, not speeding, not drunk, or whatever, but then for some stupid reason I grab a gun and shoot at him and he kills me, is he responsible for my death because he shouldn't have pulled me over to begin with? Clearly no. And it's irrelevant whether GZ is a cop or not because he never acted illegally when he followed Trayvon. Stalking is the wrong term because there is no evidence to support it.
 
chihlidog

chihlidog

Senior member
Apr 12, 2011
884
1
81
Doppel said:
There is no evidence to support the idea GZ attacked him and thus stand your ground from TM's perspective is impossible. The evidence does not support that GZ attacked TM and so self-defense is also irrelevant.

The police gave GZ no instructions. This is one of the biggest myths of the case, and the 911 operator who told him "we don't need you to do that" repeated multiple times under oath that he did not, nor ever does give orders of such a nature to people on the phone.

----

Those who claim that this never would have happened if GZ hadn't left his car are arbitrarily choosing a random moment in a sequence of events. If you get drunk and kill me in my car is it my fault because if I had never left the house I'd still be dead? No. Why? Because I did not act illegally or even negligently, and neither did GZ. The law is unequivocal and nobody is denying (including prosecution) that GZ acted legally when he left his car. This is precisely why the 911 operator never did, nor claims to have given instructions to GZ saying not to follow. What the 911 operator did and does as a matter of procedure is make it clear that the person calling is in no way at all expected to do anything to assist, is completely off the hook and there is no expectation of him to do anything. That is all.

----

If I am driving "suspiciously" and a cop pulls me over and finds out that in fact I am not high, not speeding, not drunk, or whatever, but then for some stupid reason I grab a gun and shoot at him and he kills me, is he responsible for my death because he shouldn't have pulled me over to begin with? Clearly no. And it's irrelevant whether GZ is a cop or not because he never acted illegally when he followed Trayvon. Stalking is the wrong term because there is no evidence to support it.
Click to expand...

You're wrong. Based on the updates in the actual thread, the prosecution IS going to tray and claim to the jury that getting out of the car was ILLEGAL.
 
W

WackyDan

Diamond Member
Jan 26, 2004
4,794
68
91
soundforbjt said:
The Sanford police blew any chances they had from the very beginning. Poor police work from the initial questioning by a drug officer instead of a homicide detective on down to the evidence gathering. The whole force needs to be replaced with competent workers.
Click to expand...

http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/10/justice/sanford-bill-lee-exclusive/index.html

That pretty much backs up what many of us have been saying - That the Sanford police were not given the time or the respect they needed and that this was indeed mob mentality being pacified.

I love the part about how the mayor broke protocol by playing the 911 tapes of the screaming (EVIDENCE) to his parents.
 
I

Incorruptible

Lifer
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
The prosecution did a horrible job in this case but GZ should never have approached TM though and just stayed back.
 
Attic

Attic

Diamond Member
Jan 9, 2010
4,282
2
76
xj0hnx said:
LOL, CNN just can not help themselves can they?
Click to expand...

Regarding rioting.

If anyone believes that GZ stalked, followed, then killed TM in cold blood while TM was trying to defend himself and get away, then they better take to the streets if GZ is acquitted.

I'd disagree on the belief, but not the action. The case is pretty clear to me, but our identity and beliefs are our own, not determined by the justice system or some ah heck in DC.
 
N

nehalem256

Lifer
Apr 13, 2012
15,669
8
0
Attic said:
Regarding rioting.

If anyone believes that GZ stalked, followed, then killed TM in cold blood while TM was trying to defend himself and get away, then they better take to the streets if GZ is acquitted.

I'd disagree on the belief, but not the action. The case is pretty clear to me, but our identity and beliefs are our own, not determined by the justice system or some ah heck in DC.
Click to expand...

then they either should stop smoking the dope or get back on their prescribed psychiatric medication.

Since there has been 0 evidence presented supporting such a belief. And in fact evidence presented by the prosecution specifically contradicting it.
 
T

Tom

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
13,293
1
76
nextJin said:
I just got done discussing this with a bunch of my coworkers (who are black) and they apparently all feel the exact same way you do. All of the white guys had the exact opposite opinion.

They all say that GZ initiated the conflict by following TM. Not one disagreed with the statement and my arguments fell on completely deaf ears. The fact that he was very close to his home, he could have called the police, etc. is all meaningless. He HAD to beat down GZ because GZ initiated the conflict by following him.

All of the white guys said he had multiple outs both before and after the conflict started. He did neither and instead beat the hell out of GZ for close to 45 seconds which is an eternity in close combat for anyone who has been in a fight.

After this morning’s conversations I now FULLY agree there will be some serious civil unrest after the verdict (which will be not guilty). Maybe it's a cultural thing but initiating conflict only starts with physical contact which in this case no one can prove but points to TM being the initiator.
Click to expand...

The bolded part is not true as a legal matter. Or in any way for that matter. The instigator of a fight cvan throw a punch and miss, that doesn't mean the counter-punch that the second party lands now means he started the fight.

The real issue isn't who started the fight. The issue is Zimmerman's words and actions before the confrontation and do they indicate he shot Martin for a reason other than self-defense. Like how he thought he was a criminal, or was angry.

The other issue is if he had alternatives at the time he shot. Like waiting since he now knew someone knew about his predicament and was calling 911. As it happens it was only about 15 seconds after he shot that the police arrived.


I'm not saying anyone's right or wrong for coming down on either side of those issues, there's evidence of both. But Zimmerman does have the benefit of reasonable doubt on his side.
 
R

RabidMongoose

Lifer
Aug 14, 2001
11,061
0
0
I'm worried about what will happen if Zimmerman is convicted of anything. We have already seen the de-assimilation of white men from American society in response to the election of Obama. This case has been so publicized and in the national spotlight that if Zimmerman were to be convicted of ANYTHING, then we may need to brace ourselves for further de-assimilation of white men from American society.
 
I

Incorruptible

Lifer
Apr 27, 2012
10,086
58
86
RabidMongoose said:
I'm worried about what will happen if Zimmerman is convicted of anything. We have already seen the de-assimilation of white men from American society in response to the election of Obama. This case has been so publicized and in the national spotlight that if Zimmerman were to be convicted of ANYTHING, then we may need to brace ourselves for further de-assimilation of white men from American society.
Click to expand...

Yet you're not worried about race riots if GZ is acquitted? Fucking hypocrite.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom