Zimmerman_Martin Trial

UNT90 · July 15, 2013

So would you have followed Martin?

Also, do you feel like it's within reason to confront someone who is following you?

Depends on what you mean by confront. If you mean punch that person in the nose, get on top of them and pounded their head into the concrete, of course not.

What a lot of you are missing is the testimony of the defense expert (and I believe the concurrence of the prosecution expert , although I may be wrong) that the evidence at the scene matched Zimmerman's account of events (such as Zimmermam saying Martin was on top of him when Zimmerman fired, and the expert testifying that Martin's short was away from his body when hit by the bullet, as it would be if he was on top of Zimmerman leaning forward and not vise versa).

Then you have Zimmerman's story itself. Keep in mind he just suffered trauma to the head in a physical confrontation where he took a life, yet the account of events match up with the evidence.

He is either the coolest customer in the entire world (he isn't), or he is telling the truth about the altercation. And if he is telling the truth about the altercation, why would he lie about what led up to it?

RAGEMASTER5000 · July 15, 2013

Depends on what you mean by confront. If you mean punch that person in the nose, get on top of them and pounded their head into the concrete, of course not.
What a lot of you are missing is the testimony of the defense expert (and I believe the concurrence of the prosecution expert , although I may be wrong) that the evidence at the scene matched Zimmerman's account of events (such as Zimmermam saying Martin was on top of him when Zimmerman fired, and the expert testifying that Martin's short was away from his body when hit by the bullet, as it would be if he was on top of Zimmerman leaning forward and not vise versa).
Then you have Zimmerman's story itself. Keep in mind he just suffered trauma to the head in a physical confrontation where he took a life, yet the account of events match up with the evidence.
He is either the coolest customer in the entire world (he isn't), or he is telling the truth about the altercation. And if he is telling the truth about the altercation, why would he lie about what led up to it?

Of course he was being beat up. That is obvious. Martin's self defense case would be just as strong had he not been killed. Police advised him to do nothing and he ignored them. Following a person is aggressive. It is enough to make a person fear for their life. That's why Zimmerman was acquitted. They were both acting in self defense and standing their ground. The jurors ruled in accordance with Florida law. He is most likely telling the truth about the event, but he set the event in motion. Had he not pursued Martin he would have continued reporting open garages and other strange characters for the rest of the night.

NT91 · July 16, 2013

To me, the 911 tape is the most damning thing for Zimmerman. It CLEARLY indicates that he was told not to pursue Martin, but he did anyway, putting him in an aggressor role. Dude is a murderer.

There's semantics and crap that could get him off. If so, it's a travesty. Black/White/Red/Yellow/whatever. Zimmerman killed a young man. He premeditated pursuit, armed, which kinda makes it premeditated murder. This should be crystal clear to everyone.

NOT

Rudy · July 16, 2013

Typo. Thanks for the correction. Still stand with the question though. Do you think an armed man who is deathly afraid of 17 year old kids is safe to be in public

Militas in Africa and terrorist organizations train actual children to kill. During the Serbian/Bosnian War, 6 year olds would walk up to soldiers and throw grenades. A 74 year old man shot and killed a Texas State trooper without remorse. My Kung Fu instructor's instructor could perform moves so fast at 70 years old, that they had to actually ask him to slow down so they could follow. A 15 year old who has been studying a martial arts form for 10 years is lethal. You can not judge a person's physical and fighting capabilities based on age and look alone.

Exactly, If either would have taken the time to just talk to one another instead of letting their personal suspicions run loose.

THIS x1000.

UNT90 · July 16, 2013

Of course he was being beat up. That is obvious. Martin's self defense case would be just as strong had he not been killed. Police advised him to do nothing and he ignored them. Following a person is aggressive. It is enough to make a person fear for their life. That's why Zimmerman was acquitted. They were both acting in self defense and standing their ground. The jurors ruled in accordance with Florida law. He is most likely telling the truth about the event, but he set the event in motion. Had he not pursued Martin he would have continued reporting open garages and other strange characters for the rest of the night.

1) Police did not tell him, nor could they tell him not to follow. A police dispatcher did. Again, it doesn't matter, because following someone is not illegal.

2) the defense did not use the stand your ground law as a defense. They went with straight self defense.

Censored by Laurie · July 16, 2013

NOT.

now that's how you debate.

RAGEMASTER5000 · July 16, 2013

1) Police did not tell him, nor could they tell him not to follow. A police dispatcher did. Again, it doesn't matter, because following someone is not illegal.
2) the defense did not use the stand your ground law as a defense. They went with straight self defense.

1) A police dispatcher is familiar with police procedures. It is probably best to follow their advice. A person in charge of the neighborhood watch program should be familiar with police procedures and know their limits. I never claimed that following somebody is illegal. It is aggressive and puts the person being followed on the defensive. If he did not follow Martin, nothing would have happened. He would not have been beaten up.

2) I will refrain from using that phrase.

Edited July 16, 2013 by RAGEMASTER5000

KRAM1 · July 16, 2013

now that's how you debate.

You don't really think this thread represents a debate....do you?

UNTflyer · July 16, 2013

I expect we will all come to an mutual consensus if this thread can go just a few more pages.

THOR · July 16, 2013

I expect we will all come to an mutual consensus if this thread can go just a few more pages.

But what fun is that...

FirefightnRick · July 16, 2013

CNN: Juror Speaks, Martin Threw First Punch.

http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/15/justice/zimmerman-juror-book/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Rick

Edited July 16, 2013 by FirefightnRick

UNTLifer · July 16, 2013

Why was this case even big news to start with? Someone, anyone, please explain that.

UNT Five&Dime · July 16, 2013

CNN: Juror Speaks, Martin Threw First Punch.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/15/justice/zimmerman-juror-book/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
Rick

The article clearly states she BELIEVES Martin threw the first punch. And she THINKS he got mad and attacked. Nothing definitive like your recap suggests.

She also said she believes Martin threw the first punch in the confrontation that followed.

"I think George got in a little bit too deep, which he shouldn't have been there. But Trayvon decided that he wasn't going to let him scare him ... and I think Trayvon got mad and attacked him," she said.

The only thing we all know for certain is George Zimmerman is a dumbass, a giant female genitalia and a coward. The trial simply showed he was legally allowed to be so.

Censored by Laurie · July 16, 2013

Why was this case even big news to start with? Someone, anyone, please explain that.

No pretty, blonde white girl has been kidnapped/killed/gone missing in a foreign country for a while?

Censored by Laurie · July 16, 2013

The only thing we all know for certain is George Zimmerman is a dumbass, a giant female genitalia and a coward. The trial simply showed he was legally allowed to be so.

Haven't seen it summed up any better.

RAGEMASTER5000 · July 16, 2013

I'd throw the first punch too.

KRAM1 · July 16, 2013

What I like in reading this post thread is how many experts we have who "know" this and that...including the charater of both Zimmerman and martin who were no closer than several hundred miles from the scene, never set foot in courtroom, never met either of the two individuals, are not lawyers or judges, do not live in Florida or anywhere near the neighborhood in questioon...yet still somehow KNOW as facts everthing there is to know about the people involved and the case law. Man, we got some smart folks here!

You know, because the media always protrays this stuff correctly and never ever has any sort of agenda.....everyone is welcome to their own opinions, but you don't actually KNOW.

But, some very interesting and varied opinions here for sure.

UNT90 · July 16, 2013

Interesting that many supposed to know that evil was in George Zimmermam's soul, yet never bother to question what was in Treyvon Martin's soul.

Wonder why that is?

Censored by Laurie · July 16, 2013

Interesting that many supposed to know that evil was in George Zimmermam's soul, yet never bother to question what was in Treyvon Martin's soul.
Wonder why that is?

One is dead?

RAGEMASTER5000 · July 16, 2013

Interesting that many supposed to know that evil was in George Zimmermam's soul, yet never bother to question what was in Treyvon Martin's soul.
Wonder why that is?

I do not think he had evil in his soul. I think he had stupid in his soul. He should have never been anywhere near Martin. He should have waited for the police.

UNT90 · July 16, 2013

One is dead?

So if you die, you get a pass on your own responsibility in what caused your death?

I guess.

Army of Dad · July 16, 2013

I do not think he had evil in his soul. I think he had stupid in his soul. He should have never been anywhere near Martin. He should have waited for the police.

do you think Martin should have run away, or is your avoidance stratagem only applied to Zimmerman?