George Zimmerman trial

[ky54]

I'm not sure how anyone can pass judgement without seeing all the evidence first. Regardless of the outcome this will get pushed through the appellate system.

 

[SillyOReilly]

I'm not sure how anyone can pass judgement without seeing all the evidence first. Regardless of the outcome this will get pushed through the appellate system.

Since when does expressing opinions mean we're passing judgement?

Learn what context means.

 

[Tommy2000GT]

Innocent. The black kid was beating on him so he shot the black kid in self defense.

 

[mugs]

I think it comes down to who started the physical altercation. If Zimmerman started it, I don't think he gets to use his gun in self defense just because the kid was beating his ass. If Martin attacked Zimmerman and was on top of him beating him, I think Zimmerman can justifiably defend himself.

Either way the stand your ground law is not relevant. It doesn't allow you to start an altercation and then shoot someone when you're getting beat up. And Zimmerman wouldn't need to be relieved of his duty to retreat if he was unable to retreat.

Unfortunately it seems only two (maybe three) people know who attacked whom. Martin is dead, and Zimmerman and the girl Martin was talking to on the phone aren't unbiased witnesses.

 

[SillyOReilly]

Innocent. The black kid was beating on him so he shot the black kid in self defense.

Naw man, he was edumacated and headed to collage

 

[poopaskoopa]

Naw man, he was edumacated and headed to collage

Who are you mimicking there?

 

[Capt Caveman]

Naw man, he was edumacated and headed to collage

Not sure if trying to be funny or not. The aryan nation hacker did uncover from Martin's gmail account a number of emails about the SATs and applying to colleges. Of course, he didn't publicize that at all.

 

[MichaelD]

If you'd listened to the actual tape, you would have heard the 911 op telling him "we don't need you to follow him". There were no instructions for him to "back off and wait".

Zimmerman told the dispatcher that he'd lost sight of Martin, before the call ended. We don't know from that point if Zimmerman tried to regain sight of Martin, though it does seem likely. We don't know whether he challenged Martin, or vice versa.

In order to convict Zimmerman, we need evidence of what happened between the time that Zimmerman hung up and the time that neighbors saw Martin beating the crap out of Zimmerman. In the absence of any evidence, Zimmerman is entitled to the benefit of the doubt.

The affidavit said "when the police dispatcher realized Zimmerman was pursuing Martin, he instructed Zimmerman not to do that and that the responding officer would meet him. Zimmerman disregarded the police dispatcher and continued to follow Martin who was trying to return to his home.

It's right off CNN's main page in the story. Here: http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/13/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

He was TOLD by the 911 dispatcher not to pursue. The difference b/t "do not pursue" and "wait for police" is purely semantics. Bottom line is that he disregarded what a city/police official told him to do...or not to do in this case. The kid would possibly still be alive today if he'd have followed instructions.

And I'm all for a fair trial based on hard evidence. Zimmerman is screwed no matter what the outcome. If he's found innocent there's no doubt he have to go into some form of the Witness Protection Program with a new name/SSN/etc and move far, far away from where he lives now. Like Zambia or someplace.

 

[sixone]

It's right off CNN's main page in the story. Here: http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/13/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

He was TOLD by the 911 dispatcher not to pursue. The difference b/t "do not pursue" and "wait for police" is purely semantics. Bottom line is that he disregarded what a city/police official told him to do...or not to do in this case. The kid would possibly still be alive today if he'd have followed instructions.

You can listen to the actual recording here. http://www.orlandosentinel.com/videogallery/68871920/News/George-Zimmerman-911-call-reporting-Trayvon-Martin

Nowhere on that recording will you hear the 911 op tell Zimmerman not to follow Martin. GZ makes it quite clear at the end of the recording that he wants an officer to call on arrival, so that GZ can tell the officer where he is. That was the perfect time for the 911 op to provide some instructions, but he did not do so.

 

[DrunkenSano]

It's right off CNN's main page in the story. Here: http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/13/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

He was TOLD by the 911 dispatcher not to pursue. The difference b/t "do not pursue" and "wait for police" is purely semantics. Bottom line is that he disregarded what a city/police official told him to do...or not to do in this case. The kid would possibly still be alive today if he'd have followed instructions.

And I'm all for a fair trial based on hard evidence. Zimmerman is screwed no matter what the outcome. If he's found innocent there's no doubt he have to go into some form of the Witness Protection Program with a new name/SSN/etc and move far, far away from where he lives now. Like Zambia or someplace.

The media is heavily biased so all 'evidence' they provide you have to take with a grain of salt. They cut and reveal pieces that will benefit their ratings. Which means it is in their best interest to make this situation as inflamed as possible, so people will watch their news cast. That's why until actual evidence is presented during the trial, there isn't a lot of evidence we can see so far to go by to prove that he is guilty. And he is innocent until proven guilty.

 

[Linflas]

I'm pretty sure the prosecutor spent the time to ensure that their case would be able to pass that hurdle.

When you have the the lawmakers of the SYG bill and the former governor who signed the bill into law stating that the law does not apply to Zimmerman, I would have them subpoenaed as witnesses, if that's possible.

Alan Dershowitz disagrees:

“Most affidavits of probable cause are very thin. This is so thin that it won’t make it past a judge on a second degree murder charge,” Dershowitz said. “There’s simply nothing in there that would justify second degree murder.”

Dershowitz said that the elements that would constitute that crime are non-existent in the affidavit. “It’s not only thin, it’s irresponsible,” said Dershowitz.

Dershowitz went on to strongly criticize Corey’s decision to move forward with the case against Zimmerman. “I think what you have here is an elected public official who made a campaign speech last night for reelection when she gave her presentation and overcharged. This case will not – if the evidence is no stronger than what appears in the probable cause affidavit – this case will result in an acquittal.”

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/harvard-...arrest-affidavit-irresponsible-and-unethical/

 

[Capt Caveman]

Alan Dershowitz disagrees:


http://www.mediaite.com/tv/harvard-...arrest-affidavit-irresponsible-and-unethical/

Of course, he's an attention whore. And I'm sure that Dershowitz saw the evidence that accompanied the Affidavit that the defense asked to have sealed.

 

[zinfamous]

most likely scenario - the case is dismissed before it ever goes to a jury. The judge will hold a hearing on the self defense claim and if there is sufficient evidence to support it, he will dismiss the case himself.

this is what i think will happen.

I also think that innocence/dismissal will spell the end of SYG in Florida.

Maybe if Sharpton/Jackson can get behind that Marine that was murdered by the grumpy old codger back in 2010--which no one in the media seems to have cared about--and show that they truly think the law is bad, and not just a law that is bad because a black kid was murdered.

 

[highland145]

Maybe if Sharpton/Jackson can get behind that Marine that was murdered by the grumpy old codger back in 2010--which no one in the media seems to have cared about--and show that they truly think the law is bad, and not just a law that is bad because a black kid was murdered.

That will be the day......

 

[airdata]

Who are you mimicking there?

Black people because he's a racist.

 

[rasczak]

First Casey Anthony, now George Zimmerman. What's with Florida?

 

[Phokus]

First Casey Anthony, now George Zimmerman. What's with Florida?

 

[Lithium381]

he will be found guilty, but not on evidence, on emotion, just to apease the masses out there for blood

 

[SillyOReilly]

LMFAO for real.

Now where do I sit?

 

[Red Squirrel]

I have a feeling this will be like OJ Simpson case and it will drag on forever and he'll end up being innocent. Gotta like how the US justice system will let a murderer go but watch out if you're caught downloading an MP3.

 

[0roo0roo]

Of course, he's an attention whore. And I'm sure that Dershowitz saw the evidence that accompanied the Affidavit that the defense asked to have sealed.

no he has a point, if you watched the press conference its clear the folks in charge are freakin incompetent. and attention whore? lol you should have seen the press conference...

 

[Fern]

I'm not going digging for news articles. I know what I read.

That right there is the problem.

I've never seen worse reporting on anything in my life. Not even close. Somebody in the media always gets stuff wrong, but this time just about every channel and everyone on those channels is non-stop screwing stuff up, even the most basic of acts that should be well-known by now. Same with many newspaper articles.

E.g., just saw a fairly famous defense attorney who is paid as an legal analyst and on TV frequently talk about how shocked he was that the Sanford police didn't take Zimmerman's gun away.

FFS, the police Chief issued a public statement weeks ago confirming that they had indeed taken Zimmerman's gun and are holding it as evidence.

The 911 operator told him to back off and wait for the cops. Instead, he chose to chase the kid through the subdivision. What happened after that only two people know and one of them is dead.

If you want to get idea of what actually happened checkout the 911 tape for yourself. There are also some good accounts on the net. People have recorded the elapsed time etc and that makes it abundantly obvious there was no "chase". People have also analyzed the neighborhood and have a good idea of the distances traveled on foot etc.

The point being so much time elapsed between the time Zimmerman lost sight of Trayvon and finished talking to the 911 dispatcher you could have sprinted back and forth across the neighborhood several times. It was only after Zimmerman hung up with the dispatcher that he and Trayvon met up.

Fern

 

[Fern]

-snip-
Either way the stand your ground law is not relevant. It doesn't allow you to start an altercation and then shoot someone when you're getting beat up.

Yes it does. It's written clearly in the law.

And Zimmerman wouldn't need to be relieved of his duty to retreat if he was unable to retreat.

Correct.

Fern

 

[Gunslinger08]

I haven't really kept up with this case and all of the media attention, but I just googled to get a general summary of where we're at now.

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/04/05/espn-grantland-writer-twists-george-zimmermans-actions/

I don't know anything about this website or the author, but if he's got the facts straight, I really don't see why there is still a huge outcry over this. The guy should have been investigated by the police and not charged. I don't see that race really matters here. He didn't call up and say "we've got a <racial slur> in the neighborhood". He didn't even identify race until specifically asked for it and then he only stated "He looks black." It seems like a lot of the outrage was caused by very poor reporting early on, with some (maybe deliberate) mistakes made by a few networks that painted a picture of a racist out for blood instead of a concerned citizen involved in a terrible accident.

 

[mugs]

Yes it does. It's written clearly in the law.

I guess you're referring to this?

A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

In which case I stand by my statement that the law does not allow you to attack someone and then shoot them when they beat your ass. I'll amend it to include unless you have a lawful reason to attack the person, which isn't relevant here.