Zimmerman Trial Thread Locked

[Mykl]

Originally Posted By: 97tbird
+1 This.
I am amazed why 90% here don't see this.
But then again, this BITOG - one should not be surprised of the views where guns are involved.


That's not fair. Being an advocate for your one's personal self defense does not mean that you're an advocate for vigilantism.

 

[Benzadmiral]

Originally Posted By: Nick R
Originally Posted By: Benzadmiral
Just to correct a couple of things:

Trayvon -- I'll call him TM from now on -- was not a "kid." Dishonestly, the media have tried to make it look like he was, by continually running pics of him at age 12. He was 17, and larger and stronger than Mr. Z.

Mr. Z did indeed follow the dispatcher's directions not to follow TM. He was walking back to his truck when TM came after him and jumped him.

But in any case, as we've seen in this thread, there was no evidence to charge him in the first place; the cops declined and so did the original prosecutor. It was only when the case became racially and politically charged that a new prosecutor was brought in and Mr. Z went up on these charges.

Not to mention that the prosecutors have tried -- now that the evidence is clearly running against them -- to insert a new charge, one, I understand, of "child abuse." (??!!??) So nowadays in America, if the State doesn't get the verdict it wants, it'll charge you with something else, and then something else if that doesn't stick, until you're convicted of *something.*

That's why I say that the rule of law is apparently a thing of the past in America.



So he shot TM, and should be allowed to get away scot free without accountability for his actions? Without any investigation of whether or not it was lawful? So I could go shoot anybody I want, claim it was self defense and get away with it?

Come on now. HE SHOT HIM. He ADMITTED to it. Anytime someone is KILLED I think there should be a thorough investigation of the incident.

Also where is the evidence he was walking back to his truck? I haven't watched the full trial but I don't recall ever seeing/hearing that. I will admit that I am wrong if this is the case -- but I don't recall seeing it anywhere.

You sound pretty biased against Mr Martin anyway, race notwithstanding.

Yes, GZ shot him -- and of course there should be an investigation. There was, by the cops, who then declined to charge him. And the first prosecutor also declined. That sounds to me like they realized there was no evidence of anything but self-defense, or justifiable homicide, on GZ's part.

The networks and the rest of the regular media are showing you what they want you to see -- what will make for the best ratings. Why do you think they showed TM as a child, and deliberately called GZ a "white" Hispanic? As I understand it, the media refused to show the first 15 seconds of the Rodney King video all those years ago, because those 15 seconds showed King attacking the officers first; and they didn't show the other occupant of the car, who obeyed the officers and didn't get beaten. That didn't fit The Narrative.

Neither does the fact that TM was old enough to be treated, and tried if he committed a crime, as an adult. It doesn't matter, though, because if GZ was in fear for his life, and everything he's said and his defense team has brought up seems to confirm that, then he had a right to protect his life.

I'm biased against the prosecutors (read: "persecutors") and the judge, who are out to convict GZ of *something,* despite the evidence that all he did was protect his own life. Aren't we allowed to do that in America any more?

 

[Nick R]

Originally Posted By: Benzadmiral
Originally Posted By: Nick R
Originally Posted By: Benzadmiral
Just to correct a couple of things:

Trayvon -- I'll call him TM from now on -- was not a "kid." Dishonestly, the media have tried to make it look like he was, by continually running pics of him at age 12. He was 17, and larger and stronger than Mr. Z.

Mr. Z did indeed follow the dispatcher's directions not to follow TM. He was walking back to his truck when TM came after him and jumped him.

But in any case, as we've seen in this thread, there was no evidence to charge him in the first place; the cops declined and so did the original prosecutor. It was only when the case became racially and politically charged that a new prosecutor was brought in and Mr. Z went up on these charges.

Not to mention that the prosecutors have tried -- now that the evidence is clearly running against them -- to insert a new charge, one, I understand, of "child abuse." (??!!??) So nowadays in America, if the State doesn't get the verdict it wants, it'll charge you with something else, and then something else if that doesn't stick, until you're convicted of *something.*

That's why I say that the rule of law is apparently a thing of the past in America.



So he shot TM, and should be allowed to get away scot free without accountability for his actions? Without any investigation of whether or not it was lawful? So I could go shoot anybody I want, claim it was self defense and get away with it?

Come on now. HE SHOT HIM. He ADMITTED to it. Anytime someone is KILLED I think there should be a thorough investigation of the incident.

Also where is the evidence he was walking back to his truck? I haven't watched the full trial but I don't recall ever seeing/hearing that. I will admit that I am wrong if this is the case -- but I don't recall seeing it anywhere.

You sound pretty biased against Mr Martin anyway, race notwithstanding.

Yes, GZ shot him -- and of course there should be an investigation. There was, by the cops, who then declined to charge him. And the first prosecutor also declined. That sounds to me like they realized there was no evidence of anything but self-defense, or justifiable homicide, on GZ's part.

The networks and the rest of the regular media are showing you what they want you to see -- what will make for the best ratings. Why do you think they showed TM as a child, and deliberately called GZ a "white" Hispanic? As I understand it, the media refused to show the first 15 seconds of the Rodney King video all those years ago, because those 15 seconds showed King attacking the officers first; and they didn't show the other occupant of the car, who obeyed the officers and didn't get beaten. That didn't fit The Narrative.

Neither does the fact that TM was old enough to be treated, and tried if he committed a crime, as an adult. It doesn't matter, though, because if GZ was in fear for his life, and everything he's said and his defense team has brought up seems to confirm that, then he had a right to protect his life.

I'm biased against the prosecutors (read: "persecutors") and the judge, who are out to convict GZ of *something,* despite the evidence that all he did was protect his own life. Aren't we allowed to do that in America any more?


Here is my issue: What did TM have to defend himself with? His fists.

What did Zimmerman have? A GUN. I don't buy for a second that TM was repeatedly slamming ZM head into the ground and he had the presence of mind to pull out his gun and shoot him. Please. If he had been having his head slammed into the ground he would have been practically unconcious, or close to it.

Again,use of lethal force against non-lethal. ZIMMERMAN INSTIGATED THIS INCIDENT. He deliberately went after TM and WANTED something to happen. He WANTED a confrontation.

TM had no weapons. Shooting him was outrageous.

 

[Win]

Originally Posted By: NightRiderQ45
..... Zman's series of irresponsible choices and behaviors did in fact unnecessarily create the circumstances that caused the avoidable death of another person. That is manslaughter ....



That's not the definition of manslaughter in my state.

It sounds like you're trying to express a definition of negligent homicide. Why not just keep it simple and say something like "negligently causes the death of another person"?

 

[Mystic]

This thread probably will get locked up because some people just can't help themselves and want to put politics and race into everything. This entire incident and trial is a LOCAL matter and I blame the mainstream media for making it a national issue. I am so tired of hearing about this Zimmerman case on TV that I can hardly wait for it to be over. There are more important things to talk about on national news. What about the situation in Egypt, just to give one example.

I don't know if Zimmerman is guilty or not. He has already been convicted by most of the mainstream media. I don't think that is their job.

I think a person should be found guilty or not guilty based on the evidence. I have not watched this entire trial but I was on jury duty twice-once for a murder case and the other was a contraband case (contraband introduced into a state facility). In my opinion there is not enough evidence to convict Zimmerman of second degree murder. In fact, I don't think there is enough evidence to convict him of manslaughter. There is actually a reasonable amount of evidence that he acted in self defense. But it is impossible to say what the jury will decide. I am guessing that Zimmerman will either be found not guilty or charged with manslaughter. I would be stunned if he was found guilty of second degree murder.

The mainstream news media has shamefully made this Zimmerman case national news. In comparison, some incredible amount of people (I think it was 45 or something like that) died from gunshot wounds in Chicago over the Holiday weekend. But you did not hear about that, did you?

I blame the mainstream media 100%. The news media in this country is shameful and totally incompetent.

 

[Mykl]

Originally Posted By: Nick R
Here is my issue: What did TM have to defend himself with? His fists.

What did Zimmerman have? A GUN. I don't buy for a second that TM was repeatedly slamming ZM head into the ground and he had the presence of mind to pull out his gun and shoot him. Please. If he had been having his head slammed into the ground he would have been practically unconcious, or close to it.

Again,use of lethal force against non-lethal. ZIMMERMAN INSTIGATED THIS INCIDENT. He deliberately went after TM and WANTED something to happen. He WANTED a confrontation.

TM had no weapons. Shooting him was outrageous.


I think a great number of martial artists would disagree with your point that fists are always non lethal "weapons."

 

[97tbird]

If one agrees with that logic (That TM was using such effective MMM against GZ), then GZ couldn't have gotten his gun out, managed to maneuver it into correct direction of TM and effectively shot him fatally, all of this WHILE his head was being banged against the ground. That's [censored].

 

[Benzadmiral]

Where is the evidence that GZ went after TM, seeking a confrontation? Have a look here: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/2012/...oborates-story/

See what I mean? Al Sharpton and his race-baiting ilk (i.e., the traditional media) have people believing that GZ chased TM down, looking for a confrontation. He says he didn't, that he went back to his truck when the dispatcher said to; and no one has come up with any evidence to the contrary.

I don't want to make this a racial issue. As someone said above, it is indeed a local matter. It's the "news" media and various other race-baiting shills who have made it about race from the beginning.

Think of it this way: If the races were reversed, if the victim were white and the alleged perp black, would we even have heard about this on the national news?

 

[Mykl]

Originally Posted By: 97tbird
If one agrees with that logic (That TM was using such effective MMM against GZ), then GZ couldn't have gotten his gun out, managed to maneuver it into correct direction of TM and effectively shot him fatally, all of this WHILE his head was being banged against the ground. That's [censored].


So you know for a fact that GZ couldn't fight him off enough to get a handle on his weapon? That it was just a non stop "bash bash bash"?

There's so many assumptions here. What more evidence do you need that he was attacked than the pictures taken of him after the attack? How bruised and bloodied does a guy need to look before he's allowed to use lethal force to defend himself?

 

[97tbird]

LOL @ The Onion:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/george-zimmerman-offers-to-just-plead-guilty-and-p,33087/

(of course The Onion is a satirical site, but this is exactly how i feel GZ and his fans are thinking - The Onion is 90% accurate here).

Quote:
Claiming that his second-degree murder trial has “dragged on for way too long,” sources confirmed Thursday that former neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman offered to just plead guilty and pay the fine or whatever. “Look, I’m sick of having to deal with this, so just let me pay the 100 bucks or whatever it is and I’ll be on my way,” said Zimmerman, noting that he has already wasted three weeks in court fighting his murder charge in the February 2012 shooting death of unarmed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. “At this point, I don’t even care anymore. I’ll take the slap on the wrist if it means I can get back to my life. And if I have to do community service or something then, fine, I’ll do that too.” Zimmerman added that he really needed to wrap things up by tomorrow at the latest, since he has “already missed way too many days of work for this stupid thing.”

 

[Clevy]

This whole comment that tm only had his fists to fight with. Well I can honestly say I've seen guys fight with their fists that hit so hard they can break your jaw,and a few well placed punches can easily cause Bain swelling and coma.
My cousin has fists the size of cantaloupes and I've seen him knock guys clean out cold with 1 shot. Now lets imagine a man like that getting on top after the victim is asleep and plants a couple more.
Sorry. Not buying the only his fists argument. If seen men who's fists could put you in a coma.

 

[Nick R]

Originally Posted By: 97tbird
LOL @ The Onion:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/george-zimmerman-offers-to-just-plead-guilty-and-p,33087/

(of course The Onion is a satirical site, but this is exactly how i feel GZ and his fans are thinking - The Onion is 90% accurate here).

Quote:
Claiming that his second-degree murder trial has “dragged on for way too long,” sources confirmed Thursday that former neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman offered to just plead guilty and pay the fine or whatever. “Look, I’m sick of having to deal with this, so just let me pay the 100 bucks or whatever it is and I’ll be on my way,” said Zimmerman, noting that he has already wasted three weeks in court fighting his murder charge in the February 2012 shooting death of unarmed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. “At this point, I don’t even care anymore. I’ll take the slap on the wrist if it means I can get back to my life. And if I have to do community service or something then, fine, I’ll do that too.” Zimmerman added that he really needed to wrap things up by tomorrow at the latest, since he has “already missed way too many days of work for this stupid thing.”



Pretty much. He doesn't even care enough to defend himself in court in front of a jury. If he was really innocent, he would have sat in that chair and faced the questioning without hesitation.

 

[Nick R]

Originally Posted By: Clevy
This whole comment that tm only had his fists to fight with. Well I can honestly say I've seen guys fight with their fists that hit so hard they can break your jaw,and a few well placed punches can easily cause Bain swelling and coma.
My cousin has fists the size of cantaloupes and I've seen him knock guys clean out cold with 1 shot. Now lets imagine a man like that getting on top after the victim is asleep and plants a couple more.
Sorry. Not buying the only his fists argument. If seen men who's fists could put you in a coma.


Ok, now a professional medical examiner testified in court. She said the injuries that GZ had suffered were minor at worst and not even remotely close to life threatening. Sorry, but there is no evidence that it was justified to kill him.

 

[SteveSRT8]

It is tragic that the traditional media has decided to polarize this issue so determinedly. When I read about a black lady kidnapping a white kid and torturing him to death with a blowtorch and two black kids following a white kid home from school and lighting him on fire with gasoline as he was on his front porch trying to unlock his door...

Oh, wait, there was NEVER any mass media coverage, was there? Nope. There wasn't.

It's no surprise that so many are so misinformed. It's as much about what does NOT get reported as what gets over emphasized. I am no fan of any vigilante wannabe, but I do resent the attempts to distort the testimony presented in a court of law as our system allows.

 

[Clevy]

Originally Posted By: Nick R
Originally Posted By: 97tbird
LOL @ The Onion:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/george-zimmerman-offers-to-just-plead-guilty-and-p,33087/

(of course The Onion is a satirical site, but this is exactly how i feel GZ and his fans are thinking - The Onion is 90% accurate here).

Quote:
Claiming that his second-degree murder trial has “dragged on for way too long,” sources confirmed Thursday that former neighborhood watch volunteer George Zimmerman offered to just plead guilty and pay the fine or whatever. “Look, I’m sick of having to deal with this, so just let me pay the 100 bucks or whatever it is and I’ll be on my way,” said Zimmerman, noting that he has already wasted three weeks in court fighting his murder charge in the February 2012 shooting death of unarmed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. “At this point, I don’t even care anymore. I’ll take the slap on the wrist if it means I can get back to my life. And if I have to do community service or something then, fine, I’ll do that too.” Zimmerman added that he really needed to wrap things up by tomorrow at the latest, since he has “already missed way too many days of work for this stupid thing.”



Pretty much. He doesn't even care enough to defend himself in court in front of a jury. If he was really innocent, he would have sat in that chair and faced the questioning without hesitation.


You obviously know nothing about presenting a case as a defendant.
NEVER.EVER PUT THE DEFENDANT ON THE STAND,EVER. That's just the way it is. Anyone who has ever been on trial or is even familiar with trial knows you NEVER,EVER PUT THE DEFENDANT ON THE STAND.

A good trial lawyer is able to infuriate and twist the tongue of any innocent person. Its their job to twist words. Most normal people can't catch up,and could make themselves look guilty even if innocent.
Which is why a defence lawyer NEVER,EVER PUTS THE DEFENDANT ON THE STAND.

 

[Mykl]

Originally Posted By: Nick R
Ok, now a professional medical examiner testified in court. She said the injuries that GZ had suffered were minor at worst and not even remotely close to life threatening. Sorry, but there is no evidence that it was justified to kill him.


How do you know that when you're in the moment? Was there a medical examiner there to tell GZ that the injuries he sustained where nothing to worry about and he should have simply walked it off? Is there any reason to believe that GZ knew at that exact moment that the beating he recieved wasn't life threatening and was going to stop short of life threatening?

 

[Win]

Originally Posted By: Philth
...
What are the rules/procedures for a judge blatantly disregarding law? Anything?


In Florida, I don't know.

In my state, if it occurs during the course of a trial, you have to make an immediate objection, and state with specificity the precise nature of the error, so the judge can have a chance to correct it. If the error is so bad that it's not correctable, then the remedy would be a mistrial.

If the judge fails to correct the error, then having made your objection, you move on and at the conclusion of the trial, if the result is adverse, the remedy is an appeal. If a timely and specific objection was not made at trial, then the alleged error, even errors of constitutional magnitude, will almost certainly be disregarded by the appellate courts.

Not all errors are equal. Those that are unlikely to have had any effect on the outcome are usually deemed harmless. Those that might have affected the outcome will typically result in some degree of reversal, depending on the error and when it occurred.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: Clevy
This whole comment that tm only had his fists to fight with. Well I can honestly say I've seen guys fight with their fists that hit so hard they can break your jaw,and a few well placed punches can easily cause Bain swelling and coma.
My cousin has fists the size of cantaloupes and I've seen him knock guys clean out cold with 1 shot. Now lets imagine a man like that getting on top after the victim is asleep and plants a couple more.
Sorry. Not buying the only his fists argument. If seen men who's fists could put you in a coma.


And this KID was a huge hunk of a guy. They showed little boy pics of him on the news, totally distorted. Anyone knows if you go down with one of these thugs they will kick you in the head repeatedly. That should make anyone afraid...

 

[Benzadmiral]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
It is tragic that the traditional media has decided to polarize this issue so determinedly. When I read about a black lady kidnapping a white kid and torturing him to death with a blowtorch and two black kids following a white kid home from school and lighting him on fire with gasoline as he was on his front porch trying to unlock his door...

Oh, wait, there was NEVER any mass media coverage, was there? Nope. There wasn't.

It's no surprise that so many are so misinformed. It's as much about what does NOT get reported as what gets over emphasized. I am no fan of any vigilante wannabe, but I do resent the attempts to distort the testimony presented in a court of law as our system allows.

Precisely.

(Personally I think we're doing quite well in this thread. We're sticking to topics about the case and the trial, and not calling anybody names. Good work.)

 

[Benzadmiral]

Clevy wrote, "NEVER.EVER PUT THE DEFENDANT ON THE STAND,EVER. That's just the way it is. Anyone who has ever been on trial or is even familiar with trial knows you NEVER,EVER PUT THE DEFENDANT ON THE STAND."

I don't know about laws 'n' courts 'n' such (though I did get called for jury duty once; I've dated lawyers; and I've never stayed in a Holiday Inn Express, either). But that advice makes every kind of sense. No matter how certain you are of your client's innocence, if you put him up there the prosecution can tear him apart; or he may make a poor impression on the jury through no fault of his own; or both.

Just because the defense doesn't put the defendant up on the stand is not an indicator of his guilt or innocence.