# Zimmerman trial



## ace2000 (Jul 13, 2013)

Interesting trial.  Four possible outcomes... any predictions?


Guilty - Second Degree Murder
Guilty - Manslaughter
Not Guilty
Hung Jury


----------



## presley (Jul 13, 2013)

This thread will go poof in a minute, but my vote is for manslaughter.


----------



## vacationhopeful (Jul 13, 2013)

Question truly should be: 

Has the trial been balanced and fair?


----------



## SueDonJ (Jul 13, 2013)

I predict no good outcome regardless of the verdict.  Just sad, sad, sad.


----------



## ace2000 (Jul 13, 2013)

vacationhopeful said:


> Question truly should be:
> 
> Has the trial been balanced and fair?



The trial or the media coverage?  I think it's basically been a fair trial.


----------



## Passepartout (Jul 13, 2013)

My feeling is for the first option. Because Z. was told to stay in his vehicle and he chose to pursue on foot. When it went bad and he got on the losing side of the altercation and pulled his piece is not the time to cry 'self defense'. He was the aggressor.

I feel that the 'stand your ground' defense has value in a situation when an armed intruder comes into a home and the homeowner uses deadly force. It is not to be used by an aggressor who finds himself overpowered by his 'prey'.

JMO.

Jim


----------



## ampaholic (Jul 13, 2013)

I also think this thread won't last the day.:ignore:

I will let the people of South Florida work it out for themselves - no armchair prosecuting from me.


----------



## rapmarks (Jul 13, 2013)

I read in the fort Myers paper that if he gets manslaughter, it could be a thirty year sentence.
We had a murder in our subdivision.  A woman hired a handyman, he and a friend forced her to write him $25,000 in checks, brought her at gunpoint in the car to cash them, murdered her, buried her, went and lived in her villa and drove her car and walked her dog and had 4 friends there with him.  Told the police for two weeks she was on vacation.  The one, whom most believe is the murdered, plea bargained and got a ten year concurrent sentence with one he was already serving for a felony, so basically got NO sentence.   he had previously gotten off on first degree murder sentence .   That is the florida justice system, so i don't know what to expect for Zimmerman, I expect manslaughter.


----------



## ampaholic (Jul 13, 2013)

Passepartout said:


> I feel that the 'stand your ground' defense has value in a situation when an armed intruder comes into a home and the homeowner uses deadly force. It is not to be used by an aggressor who finds himself overpowered by his 'prey'.
> 
> JMO.
> 
> Jim



I once watched a Bald Eagle "dragged" back into the water by a fish it had grabbed - the fish objected to being carried away and wiggled so hard the young Eagle couldn't gain altitude and as it tired it slipped back into the water and was in danger of being drowned because it appeared to have trouble letting go of the fish. The Eagle finally got away with it's life and a lesson.


----------



## Pat H (Jul 13, 2013)

Hung jury.


----------



## ace2000 (Jul 13, 2013)

Passepartout said:


> I feel that the 'stand your ground' defense has value in a situation when an armed intruder comes into a home and the homeowner uses deadly force. It is not to be used by an aggressor who finds himself overpowered by his 'prey'.
> 
> JMO.
> 
> Jim



The "Stand your ground" defense was never raised by the Zimmerman lawyers throughout the entire case.  However, the media beat that drum over and over again.


----------



## PStreet1 (Jul 13, 2013)

True--Stand Your Ground was never an issue in this trial.

Alan Dershowitz (Harvard Law School prof.) flat out says prosecutors in Zimmerman trial should be disbarred.  He also says there is no reasonable verdict possible except acquittal because of reasonable doubt.
(U-Tube, July 9, 2013)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-k7oRlMbPno


----------



## e.bram (Jul 13, 2013)

One thing there is no DOUBT about. If GZ had not left his car(after being advised not to by SPD) and followed TM he would still be alive today.


----------



## Pat H (Jul 13, 2013)

PStreet1 said:


> True--Stand Your Ground was never an issue in this trial.
> 
> Alan Dershowitz (Harvard Law School prof.) flat out says prosecutors in Zimmerman trial should be disbarred.  He also says there is no reasonable verdict possible except acquittal because of reasonable doubt.
> (U-Tube, July 9, 2013)
> ...



You can never count on what a jury will do. Despite what they are instructed by the judge and what evidence is presented, many of them decide on emotion and their own biases.


----------



## pedro47 (Jul 13, 2013)

Pat H said:


> You can never count on what a jury will do. Despite what they are instructed by the judge and what evidence is presented, many of them decide on emotion and their own biases.



oh what a true statement.


----------



## Smokatoke (Jul 13, 2013)

Manslaughter at most. There was no original intent that Z was going to kill him. He might have "caused" the altercation by following him, but following him isnt illegal and it required M to respond aggressively. Z probably started getting his butt kicked and like anyone with a gun getting beat up is going to use it. Now its really up to the jury to decide whether Z was simply protecting himself in a situation gone bad, or did his provocation of M lead to the events which resulted in Ms death which could have been prevented, otherwise manslaughter.

The media as usual has already convicted this guy, and if he isnt convicted has guarenteed a riot.


----------



## Holysmoke (Jul 13, 2013)

PStreet1 said:


> True--Stand Your Ground was never an issue in this trial.
> 
> Alan Dershowitz (Harvard Law School prof.) flat out says prosecutors in Zimmerman trial should be disbarred.  He also says there is no reasonable verdict possible except acquittal because of reasonable doubt.
> (U-Tube, July 9, 2013)
> ...



Every prediction that guy makes never comes to pass.  He is a renegade out of touch with the average person called to jury duty.


----------



## PStreet1 (Jul 13, 2013)

Pat H said:


> You can never count on what a jury will do. Despite what they are instructed by the judge and what evidence is presented, many of them decide on emotion and their own biases.



That is 100% accurate.  Nothing else posted on this board or any other is, but that statement says it all.


----------



## e.bram (Jul 13, 2013)

Following can be considered stalking, and that is illegal.


----------



## Laurie (Jul 13, 2013)

Unpredictable... check out what happened last year in FL, when a woman got 20 years sentence for firing a warning shot in self-defense even tho no one was hurt:

http://bigstory.ap.org/content/woman-gets-20-years-firing-warning-shot


----------



## Holysmoke (Jul 13, 2013)

e.bram said:


> Following can be considered stalking, and that is illegal.



the other day at Walmart I had to get to a bathroom.  I walked briskly to the main isle when ahead of me was a woman walking the same direction.  
She peered back for some reason to look at me then began to increase her pace.  We walked past many isles as she continued to look back.  I saw the panic on her face increase as she thought I was stalking her and chasing after her.  When she turned to go down the aisle that led to the bathrooms, I also turned as well to get the relief necessary.  When she saw me turn as well, she looked horrified and darted into the womens restroom.


----------



## ace2000 (Jul 13, 2013)

e.bram said:


> Following can be considered stalking, and that is illegal.



Don't get the point.  Zimmerman followed him because he was doing his duty on neighborhood watch - whether you feel he was right or wrong.  That has nothing to do with the charges at hand, and the fact is the prosecution never brought that up as a charge.


----------



## ampaholic (Jul 13, 2013)

Holysmoke said:


> the other day at Walmart I had to get to a bathroom.  I walked briskly to the main isle when ahead of me was a woman walking the same direction.
> She peered back for some reason to look at me then began to increase her pace.  We walked past many isles as she continued to look back.  I saw the panic on her face increase as she thought I was stalking her and chasing after her.  When she turned to go down the aisle that led to the bathrooms, I also turned as well to get the relief necessary.  When she saw me turn as well, she looked horrified and darted into the womens restroom.



Good thing she didn't jump you - you would have had to shoot her


----------



## am1 (Jul 13, 2013)

I doubt second degree would stand up on a appeal.  I do not think he is guilty of that either.  

It is too bad the proper outcome is unlikely to happen because the lawyers make it out to be winning and losing instead of what is right.


----------



## Ken555 (Jul 13, 2013)

While the issues raised in this trial are important for a number of people, and can be twisted into being important for a great deal more people, I am disheartened by the lack of accurate info given the public (though not surprised).

I also wish the American news reporters would....get back to real news. I am always constantly dumbfounded when cases like this consume prime time (and more) of real news shows...until I remind myself that we are now simply an audience for reality TV (and ratings govern all) and real drama, and people seem to like that. It reminds me how far we have fallen.

And yeah...I'm just counting the minutes until this thread gets locked.


----------



## natasha5687 (Jul 13, 2013)

A CHILD was MURDERED pure and simple!  If it were not for Mr. Zimmerman deciding to ignore the 911 operator this CHILD would be alive today.  I don't believe that Zimmermans intention was to kill him but his actions and choice to not remain in his vehicle are very CLEARLY the cause of this tragedy.  I also believe that the young man was profiled and that Zimmerman is/was a wanna be cop.  I am a member of my own neighborhood watch and Zimmermans actions were clearly not acceptable.  I think the appropriate outcome is Manslaughter.


----------



## ace2000 (Jul 13, 2013)

natasha5687 said:


> A CHILD was MURDERED pure and simple!  If it were not for Mr. Zimmerman deciding to ignore the 911 operator this CHILD would be alive today.



The 17-year old "CHILD" was actually bigger and stronger than George Zimmerman.  He was not the 12 year old football player that was pictured in the media.

If he had not made the choice to attack Zimmerman, he would be alive today.


----------



## brigechols (Jul 13, 2013)

Ken555 said:


> While the issues raised in this trial are important for a number of people, and can be twisted into being important for a great deal more people, I am disheartened by the lack of accurate info given the public (though not surprised).
> 
> I also wish the American news reporters would....get back to real news. I am always constantly dumbfounded when cases like this consume prime time (and more) of real news shows...until I remind myself that we are now simply an audience for reality TV (and ratings govern all) and real drama, and people seem to like that. It reminds me how far we have fallen.
> 
> And yeah...I'm just counting the minutes until this thread gets locked.





ace2000 said:


> The 17-year old "CHILD" was actually bigger and stronger than George Zimmerman.  He was not the 12 year old football player that was pictured in the media.
> 
> If he had not made the choice to attack Zimmerman, he would be alive today.



Wow, really?! Zimmerman introduced a gun into a fist fight with a teenager. Zimmerman is responsible for the death caused by that gun.


----------



## ace2000 (Jul 13, 2013)

brigechols said:


> Wow, really?! Zimmerman introduced a gun into a fist fight with a teenager. Zimmerman is responsible for the death caused by that gun.



Agree.  However, Zimmerman AND Martin were BOTH responsible for what occurred that night.


----------



## Passepartout (Jul 13, 2013)

ace2000 said:


> Agree.  However, Zimmerman AND Martin were BOTH responsible for what occurred that night.



I disagree strongly. Had Zimmerman done what he volunteered and was assigned to do- that is watch the neighborhood, and didn't take it upon himself to pursue Martin on foot as he was advised against, Mr Martin would have passed through the neighborhood with his soda and Skittles and none of this would have occurred. Zimmerman's actions were SINGULARLY responsible for the outcome. I repeat, Zimmerman was the aggressor.


----------



## ace2000 (Jul 13, 2013)

Passepartout said:


> I disagree strongly. Had Zimmerman done what he volunteered and was assigned to do- that is watch the neighborhood, and didn't take it upon himself to pursue Martin on foot as he was advised against, Mr Martin would have passed through the neighborhood with his soda and Skittles and none of this would have occurred. Zimmerman's actions were SINGULARLY responsible for the outcome. I repeat, Zimmerman was the aggressor.



Disagree all you want.  If Martin wouldn't have attacked Zimmerman, then none of it would have happened either.  Both were in the wrong.


----------



## Holysmoke (Jul 13, 2013)

a 17 year old black boy was shot and killed last month in our city by another black.

I am still waiting for Nancy Grace to set up shop here.....

http://wbbh.images.worldnow.com/images/22034204_BG2.jpg


----------



## Passepartout (Jul 13, 2013)

ace2000 said:


> Disagree all you want.  If Martin wouldn't have attacked Zimmerman, then none of it would have happened either.  Both were in the wrong.



Martin wouldn't have attacked Zimmerman if Zimmerman had done what he was told and stayed in his vehicle. It would have been a non-event.


----------



## ace2000 (Jul 13, 2013)

Passepartout said:


> Martin wouldn't have attacked Zimmerman if Zimmerman had done what he was told and stayed in his vehicle. It would have been a non-event.



Sure, if Martin wouldn't have chosen to break Zimmerman's nose and pound his head into the sidewalk, then it would have been a non-event too.  Like I said, BOTH were at fault.


----------



## easyrider (Jul 13, 2013)

Zimmerman did kill Martain but Zimmerman is not guilty of murder or manslaughter. Here is why.

1. Zimmerman was heading to town when he noticed someone acting suspiciously in his neighborhood where there has been criminal activity including home invasions. This is probable cause to investigate.

2. Zimmerman called the event in to police as it happened. Then about 4 minutes latter the fight ensued. According to phone calls to Martains girlfriend, Martain knew someone was watching him. Martain should have gone home as he had plenty of time to do so. Instead Martain confronts Zimmerman and begins to beat him. If Martain was trying to escape he would have hit Zimmerman and ran away but instead he was seen on top of Zimmerman beating him up.

3. Zimmerman was able to end the fight by shooting Martain.

This is self defence. There was no stalking or ill intent on Zimmermans part. The argument that Zimmerman as a neighborhood watch person should not have been armed is not a valid argument as Zimmerman was not on an actual watch but driving elsewhere and did posses a valid conceal carry permit allowing him to legally carry even if he were on watch duty.

The person at fault here is Martain. His actions caused his death.

Bill


----------



## DeniseM (Jul 13, 2013)

What if it were a young *woman* that Zimmerman was following.  What if she was afraid of him because he had been watching her, and now he seemed to be stalking her, so she sprayed him with mace, racked his face with her keys, hit him over the head with her heavy purse and knocked him down, and then did it again to keep him down....  Then he shot her and killed her.

What do you think?


----------



## ace2000 (Jul 13, 2013)

DeniseM said:


> What if it were a young *woman* that Zimmerman was following.  What if she was afraid of him because he had been watching her, and now he seemed to be stalking her, so she sprayed him with mace, racked his face with her keys, hit him over the head with her heavy purse and knocked him down, and then did it again to keep him down....  Then he shot her and killed her.
> 
> What do you think?



The issue in this case is - did Zimmerman believe his life was in danger?  If so, deadly force is allowed in the state of Florida.  So, your hypothetical is not the same.


----------



## brigechols (Jul 13, 2013)

I can imagine the response that some Tuggers would have had to the murder pf Emmit Till. When I read threads like this on TUG, I'm reminded that the only common link with most in this forum is timeshare ownership.

Zimmerman set in motion the chain of events that led to the death of a young, scared kid who had every right to be exactly where he was.


----------



## benyu2010 (Jul 13, 2013)

Nobody knows what really happened. It was a situation could be totally avoided by GZ from very beginning. It it just loss-loss. Now, TM was dead and GZ set himself into this mess and let jury rolling the dice.

Alternatively, if GZ was dead and TM was the one survived the fight, is it gonna be manslaughter or murder charge? Probably not as the circumstance was a minor (how big and muscular belongs to another topic) defended himself against an armed stalker whom pursued him against the suggestion of 911 operator w/ motive and bias subject to literal interpretation of his own recorded phone calls. TZ would had every right to stand ground.

Verdict is the decision at hands of jurors in court of law...you can render your public opinion of ______(fill in yourself) on GZ...


----------



## DeniseM (Jul 13, 2013)

Off topic:  Has there been any comment about all the weight that Zimmerman has put on since the incident?  (Sorry if this has been discussed - I haven't followed this trial.)


----------



## easyrider (Jul 13, 2013)

DeniseM said:


> What if it were a young *woman* that Zimmerman was following.  What if she was afraid of him because he had been watching her, and now he seemed to be stalking her, so she sprayed him with mace, racked his face with her keys, hit him over the head with her heavy purse and knocked him down, and then did it again to keep him down....  Then he shot her and killed her.
> 
> What do you think?



If were going with if's and substituting Martain for a young woman then lets also substitute Zimmerman with with a young woman. I think this type of comparison  is ridiculous.

Nothing Zimmerman did was illegal. Martains assault on Zimmerman was illegal and the continued assault was deadly. Would it have been better if Zimmerman died ?

There are over 2000 kids actually murdered each year in the USA with no attention by the media like the attention this case is getting. These types of cases should not play out in public, imo, as all it does it cause racial tension that can spur violence. This case is being used by the media for ratings and by politicians for votes.

Bill


----------



## benyu2010 (Jul 13, 2013)

DeniseM said:


> Off topic:  Has there been any comment about all the weight that Zimmerman has put on since the incident?  (Sorry if this has been discussed - I haven't followed this trial.)




People need to stop sending him money...he overeats and his head looks like a melon compared to his mugshot...Obviously, he is under tremendous stress which was possible cause of sudden gain of weight.


----------



## Holysmoke (Jul 13, 2013)

benyu2010 said:


> People need to stop sending him money...he overeats and his head looks like a melon compared to his mugshot...Obviously, he is under tremendous stress which was possible cause of sudden gain of weight.



I am sure he is on antidepressants/anxiety meds to deal with the stress.  The Rx causing weight gain?
'


----------



## benyu2010 (Jul 13, 2013)

Holysmoke said:


> I am sure he is on antidepressants/anxiety meds to deal with the stress.  The Rx causing weight gain?
> '



It is a chicken/egg question. Both might be contributing factors, in addition to his lack of movement in cell.


----------



## EileenL (Jul 13, 2013)

Perhaps Martin was Standing His Ground against a STALKER - this is cut and dry - GZ murdered a person and then lied about everything - if GZ had followed DIRECTIONS to let the police handle it - he would not be sitting there while another human being is dead

IF we allow this BS of Stand Your Ground in this case - watch all the killings be called Stand your Ground

IF GZ is set free - he will kill again - mark my words

Anyone who thinks it was ok what GZ did after stalking someone - is  out of their mind


----------



## EileenL (Jul 13, 2013)

Not fair or balanced - the slick lawyer continues to only want evidence that frees the guilty man and it showed on the lead up to the trial and in his actions since. I would hate to be a lawyer who has to defend criminals and GZ is a criminal


----------



## natasha5687 (Jul 13, 2013)

easyrider said:


> If were going with if's and substituting Martain for a young woman then lets also substitute Zimmerman with with a young woman. I think this type of comparison  is ridiculous.
> 
> Nothing Zimmerman did was illegal. Martains assault on Zimmerman was illegal and the continued assault was deadly. Would it have been better if Zimmerman died ?
> 
> ...



Purely my opinion but had the roles been reversed and it was Zimmerman who had been shot Martin would have been arrested on the spot and convicted by now.  People want to avoid the "race" card but it seems that race contribiuted a part in this.  I think that Denise has a valid argument.  This young man WAS BEING STALKED and had every right to fear for his safety.  You want to say he threw the first punch and had time to retreat to his home but at the end of the day he did not know if he was going to follow him all the way there.  As an aside, they did not try to introduce stand your ground at trial but did seek a hearing to have the charges dismissed based on stand your ground prior to trial.  I wonder how different your opinion would be if this were your child.  My oldest 2 children are 3rd degree brown belts and have been trained that their only weapons are their hands.  They will only fight if in danger.  Clearly this young man felt his life was in danger but you make no mention of him defending himself from a stalker.


----------



## benyu2010 (Jul 13, 2013)

easyrider said:


> These types of cases should not play out in public, imo, as all it does it cause racial tension that can spur violence. This case is being used by the media for ratings and by politicians for votes.
> 
> Bill



Both sides (of legal team) set this one up with all female jurors of all white except one Hispanic. There is no way we live in a color blind society if media keeps injecting race/color into every important issue in daily life. The outcome seems be either manslaughter or hang jury.  And a juror or two write a book...


----------



## easyrider (Jul 13, 2013)

EileenL said:


> Perhaps Martin was Standing His Ground against a STALKER - this is cut and dry - GZ murdered a person and then lied about everything - if GZ had followed DIRECTIONS to let the police handle it - he would not be sitting there while another human being is dead
> 
> IF we allow this BS of Stand Your Ground in this case - watch all the killings be called Stand your Ground
> 
> ...



Since when is getting out of your car to give police a location or description of a suspicious person ever been a crime ? The only criminal act committed was Martains assault on Zimmerman. 

How was this stalking ?

While everyone has examined Zimmermans past activties which are not stellar no one until recently has turned attention to Martain being a suspended from school, drug dealer in a gang with a history of violence. Im just saying Martains past is far from stellar.

Bill


----------



## normab (Jul 13, 2013)

Wow.  The very assured opinions on this thread demonstrate exactly how a jury works.  People make up their minds based on partial data sets and what they have experienced in their lives.  

I have sat on 3 juries--2 criminal and 1 civil.  Pretty much there you never get all the facts, so you have to make some judgment calls and assumptions, which are colored by your own belief systems.

I have listened to more than I want to hear about this trial, and from what I heard, we will never know what happened.  We can only guess.

And either way, it doesn't change the tragic outcome.


----------



## Holysmoke (Jul 13, 2013)

Manslaughter question from jury.


----------



## Holysmoke (Jul 13, 2013)

Rumblings of ‘lynchings’ over Trayvon verdict

‘Threats that some supporters are making are absolutely chilling’

More than a year ago, noted Republican commentator Pat Buchanan warned that the outcome of the Trayvon Martin case, in which neighborhood watchman George Zimmerman is on trial for murder, could provoke rioting.

“The public mind has been so poisoned that an acquittal of George Zimmerman could ignite a reaction similar to that, 20 years ago, when the Simi Valley jury acquitted the LAPD cops in the Rodney King beating case,” he warned.

It seems he may have been right.

WND reported earlier in the week that police in Sanford, Fla., where the trial is being held, already were going door-to-door, apparently trying to prevent any violent reaction to the jury verdict when it is reached.

But a number of bloggers and watchers say there are not-so-subtle rumblings of violence developing.

On the Mr. Conservative blog, Twitter threats were reproduced in abundance.

“If Zimmerman don’t go to jail ill kill him for $20,” said one.

“Gimme me tha pistol ill kill Zimmerman myself,” said another.

*“If George Zimmerman win I’m gonna kill a fat white boy dat look lik George Zimmerman I swear,” said a third.*

“This is despicable and seriously frightening,” wrote blogger Kristin Tate. “There is no way this would be tolerated if the threats from whites were against a black man.”

Zimmerman is on trial for the shooting death of Martin, a teen he said attacked him and pinned him to the ground, delivering blows to his head. Zimmerman said he pulled his weapon and fired at Martin, killing him, in self-defense.

The blog reported thousands were threatening to riot should Zimmerman not be determined guilty by a jury.

“In addition to hundreds of racist, disturbing tweets, there are several Facebook pages dedicated to promoting the murder of George Zimmerman,” Tate wrote. “One of those pages even urges riots if he is not found guilty for the murder of Trayvon Martin.

One of the postings states: “Let’s flex our muscle!. What, you scared?”

The online sentiment follows a video report that showed Sanford officers were going door-to-door

Police say they fear a backlash from the community when the verdict is delivered. Los Angeles had days of rioting when the Rodney King verdict came down.

So Sanford Police Chief Cecile Smith confirmed officers are going door-to-door talking to people.

“Our worst fear is that we’d have people from outside the community coming in and stirring up … violence,” he said.

At The American Dream, commentator Michael Snyder wrote; “Should we take the thousands of people that are threatening to riot if George Zimmerman is found not guilty seriously? After all, people make idle threats online all the time. Sometimes people say things on Twitter or on Facebook that they don’t actually mean and would never actually do in real life.”

Snyder said the justice system “has got to be able to function without having to be concerned about threats of violence if the ‘wrong result’ is reached.”

“George Zimmerman deserves a fair trial just like everyone else does,” he said. “If he is actually guilty of a crime, then let him be found guilty. If he is not guilty of a crime, then let him be found not guilty.”

Snyder said the notion “that he must be found guilty ‘for the good of society’ is complete and utter nonsense.”

“If we start allowing public opinion and threats of violence to determine the outcome of court cases, our legal system will lose all remaining credibility,” he wrote.

Paul Joseph Watson, author of “Order Out Of Chaos,” wrote at Infowars.com that authorities in Sanford already have enlisted the help of pastors as “observers” who will report to their congregations.

At Crimefilenews.com was the flat-out prediction of rioting.

“The George Zimmerman trial here has thousands of African-Americans getting ready for some serious bloodletting. I don’t want to make idle and dire predictions but this nation has never been so divided and racially sensitive. … Our African-
American president took sides on this case at the very beginning. That ratified a George Zimmerman guilty verdict in the minds of millions.”

Obama, himself, weighed in on the case long before it went to trial, saying that if he had had a son, he would look like Trayvon Martin.

Crimefilenews also noted the Twitter campaigns, with statements including:

    “Hell is gonna break loose!”
    “Let the riots begin.”
    “Somebody in this great st of FL gone lynch his a**.”
    “If George Zimmerman walks he better be in hiding for the rest of his life.”

Buchanan’s warning a year ago said that should violence erupt, those who “fanned the flames, and those who did nothing to douse them” should be held accountable.

Wrote Snyder at The American Dream: “The threats that some of the supporters of Trayvon Martin are making are absolutely chilling.’


----------



## benyu2010 (Jul 13, 2013)

normab said:


> And either way, it doesn't change the tragic outcome.



It was sad that one was dead and the other ain't bright...


----------



## Passepartout (Jul 13, 2013)

easyrider said:


> Since when is getting out of your car to give police a location or description of a suspicious person ever been a crime ? The only criminal act committed was Martains assault on Zimmerman.



Bill, we are going to disagree, it may be technically legal to step out of a vehicle to give police a location. But if the policeman (or other authority being are reported to) says "Mr. Zimmerman, stay in your vehicle, units are responding. We'll handle it."  Then the (suspicious?) person reports on his cell phone that he is being 'followed', no other assumption can be made than Mr. Martin, felt threatened and took action such as he was capable of. Mr Zimmerman had left his vehicle and pursued the soon-to-be victim who jumped him. 

While it is legal for two people to travel in the same direction on the same sidewalk, if one feels threatened, he is within his right to use whatever force is at his disposal- in this case a well toned body. If anyone could claim to be defending himself, it's Mr. Martin. Problem is, as it turned out, he brought fists to a gun fight.

As has been correctly said, there is no winner in this case.

Jim


----------



## Pat H (Jul 13, 2013)

Martin was being followed not stalked. The defintion of stalking is criminal activity consisting of the *repeated* following and harassing of another person. Did Martin ask before he hit Zimmerman why he was following him or did he just hit him? I am not excusing Zimmerman or Martin but it certainly wasn't murder. It's very obvious that those emotions/biases I mentioned earlier are evident in several of the posts.


----------



## PStreet1 (Jul 13, 2013)

EileenL said:


> Perhaps Martin was Standing His GroundThe Stand your ground basis was not a part of this case.  Had the prosecution thought they could do anything with it, they would have. against a STALKER - this is cut and dry - GZ murdered a person and then lied about everythingBut witnesses said he wasn't lying; the cuts on the back of his head--serious or not--show he was on the bottom.  It really doesn't appear that he was lying.  And the cuts on his head and the witnesses supporting him should at least cast "reasonable doubt" on the witnesses who said Zimmerman was on top--and remember it is the prosecution's job to PROVE the charges:  "innocent until proven guilty." - if GZ had followed DIRECTIONS to let the police handle it - he would not be sitting there while another human being is deadThat's true, getting out of the car, and even confronting Marin, is not a crime.
> 
> IF we allow this BS of Stand Your Ground in this case - watch all the killings be called Stand your GroundAgain, not a part of this case--never introduced by either side.  Not a prosecution point; not a defense point.
> 
> ...



Any case that makes it to a court room is supposed to be tried on the evidence presented ("innocent until PROVEN guilty") not on some mumbo jumbo a juror might bring with him.

That, of course, doesn't mean that is what will happen.  The jury may rule on mumbo jumbo and emotion or it may rule on the facts presented.


----------



## Pat H (Jul 13, 2013)

I have a question. If Zimmerman had died from a fatal injury from having his head banged on the ground bu Martin, would you consider that murder? I'd like to hear from all that have posted so far.


----------



## Holysmoke (Jul 13, 2013)

Nancy Grace just said the F bomb on tv, she did not bleep it out.

She said Zimmerman called the kid a F'ing Coon

I don't remember that, and if so, that was not cool.


----------



## easyrider (Jul 13, 2013)

Passepartout said:


> Bill, we are going to disagree,
> Yes we do !!
> 
> it may be technically legal to step out of a vehicle to give police a location.
> ...



Even though I totally disagree with people who are not looking at all the evidence and coming up with the conclusion that Martain is a sweet kid and Zimmerman is some kind of bully I do respect your right to think so for what ever your reasons are.

Bill


----------



## StevenTing (Jul 13, 2013)

^^^^ That.  Just saved me a bunch of typing.  


--
Sent using Tapatalk


----------



## TUGBrian (Jul 13, 2013)

lots of misinformation in this thread for sure...folks believe what they want to believe at this point...I dont believe for one second that the folks on the jury hadnt heard of the case before they were selected...or during the trial...and also have their preconceived notions.


----------



## dwojo (Jul 13, 2013)

I would vote not guilty. From what I have seen and heard about the case a reasonable doubt exists. I feel Mr. Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter, but the prosecution did not prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jul 13, 2013)

ace2000 said:


> Agree.  However, Zimmerman AND Martin were BOTH responsible for what occurred that night.



This is the correct answer.


----------



## rapmarks (Jul 13, 2013)

is there a charge of negligent homicide?   I think that fits the situation better than manslaughter.

MANSLAUGHTER
To prove the crime of Manslaughter, the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
1. Trayvon Martin is dead.
2. George Zimmerman intentionally committed an act or acts that caused the death of Trayvon Martin.

George  Zimmerman cannot be guilty of manslaughter by committing a merely  negligent act or if the killing was either justifiable or excusable  homicide: 
Each of us has a duty to act reasonably toward others. If  there is a violation of that duty, without any conscious intention to  harm, that violation is negligence.
The killing of a human being is  justifiable homicide and lawful if necessarily done while resisting an  attempt to murder or commit a felony upon George Zimmerman, or to commit  a felony in any dwelling house in which George Zimmerman was at the  time of the killing.

The killing of a human being is excusable, and therefore lawful, under any one of the following three circumstances:
1.  When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune in doing any  lawful act by lawful means with usual ordinary caution and without any  unlawful intent, or
2. When the killing occurs by accident and misfortune in the heat of passion, upon any sudden and sufficient provocation, or
3.  When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune resulting from  a sudden combat, if a dangerous weapon is not used and the killing is  not done in a cruel or unusual manner.

In order to convict of  manslaughter by act, it is not necessary for the State to prove that  George Zimmerman had an intent to cause death, only an intent to commit  an act that was not merely negligent, justified, or excusable and which  caused death. 

If you find George Zimmerman committed  Manslaughter, and you also find beyond a reasonable doubt that during  the commission of the Manslaughter, George Zimmerman carried, displayed,  used, threatened to use, or attempted to use a firearm, you should  check the appropriate box on the verdict form which I will discuss with  you later in these instructions.


----------



## TUGBrian (Jul 13, 2013)

lots of things I "feel" about the case...

sadly none of which matters in a court of law.

both mens lives were/are ruined no matter the outcome.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jul 13, 2013)

brigechols said:


> I can imagine the response that some Tuggers would have had to the murder pf Emmit Till. When I read threads like this on TUG, I'm reminded that the only common link with most in this forum is timeshare ownership.
> 
> Zimmerman set in motion the chain of events that led to the death of a young, scared kid who had every right to be exactly where he was.



wrong.  Martin could have simply run away when he determined he was being followed.  That is what any of my kids would have done.   Both are equally at fault for poor judgement.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jul 13, 2013)

Passepartout said:


> Bill, we are going to disagree, it may be technically legal to step out of a vehicle to give police a location. But if the policeman (or other authority being are reported to) says "Mr. Zimmerman, stay in your vehicle, units are responding. We'll handle it."  Then the (suspicious?) person reports on his cell phone that he is being 'followed', no other assumption can be made than Mr. Martin, felt threatened and took action such as he was capable of. Mr Zimmerman had left his vehicle and pursued the soon-to-be victim who jumped him.
> 
> While it is legal for two people to travel in the same direction on the same sidewalk, if one feels threatened, he is within his right to use whatever force is at his disposal- in this case a well toned body. If anyone could claim to be defending himself, it's Mr. Martin. Problem is, as it turned out, he brought fists to a gun fight.
> 
> ...



Easyrider is correct.   Your logic fails.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jul 13, 2013)

ace2000 said:


> Interesting trial.  Four possible outcomes... any predictions?
> 
> 
> Guilty - Second Degree Murder
> ...



Hard to say what the verdict will be.  It will certainly not be second degree murder.

Based on the evidence presented, the verdict should be not guilty because there is reasonable doubt that Zimmerman acted in self defense.

I give it a 40/60 chance that he will be convicted of manslaughter because despite the laws and the evidence, Trayvon Martin is dead and Zimmerman killed him.   The jury may feel compelled to punish someone.


----------



## Passepartout (Jul 13, 2013)

BocaBum99 said:


> Easyrider is correct.   Your logic fails.



We'll see what the jury says. I can abide it either way. How ever it comes out, a faction will feel that justice was not served.

Jim


----------



## ace2000 (Jul 13, 2013)

The verdict is in!


----------



## brigechols (Jul 13, 2013)

BocaBum99 said:


> wrong.  Martin could have simply run away when he determined he was being followed.  That is what any of my kids would have done.   Both are equally at fault for poor judgement.



Zimmerman got out of his car and set in motion a sequence of events that led to the death of Trayvon Martin. No reason to run away from a neighborhood watch person sitting in a car.


----------



## ace2000 (Jul 13, 2013)

Not guilty!


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jul 13, 2013)

Verdict is in.  Not guilty.


----------



## Pat H (Jul 13, 2013)

Not guilty. I'm surprised. Figured it would be either hung or manslaughter.


----------



## BocaBum99 (Jul 13, 2013)

brigechols said:


> Zimmerman got out of his car and set in motion a sequence of events that led to the death of Trayvon Martin. No reason to run away from a neighborhood watch person sitting in a car.



You couldn't be more wrong.  In fact, the verdict is in and Zimmerman is NOT GUILTY.


----------



## ace2000 (Jul 13, 2013)

Pat H said:


> Not guilty. I'm surprised. Figured it would be either hung or manslaughter.



Not surprised.  Reasonable doubt was the issue.


----------



## Passepartout (Jul 13, 2013)

And so it goes with the American justice system.


----------



## PStreet1 (Jul 13, 2013)

Given the evidence, the prosecution did not PROVE Zimmerson guilty; there was reasonable doubt.  Therefore, not guilty was, in my opinion, the only ruling that could be made on the case presented.  I'm not surprised for that reason.  However, I feared the jury would decide the case on things other than the facts presented in the courtroom--that should be the only basis for a verdict, but it often is not.


----------



## benyu2010 (Jul 13, 2013)

BocaBum99 said:


> You couldn't be more wrong.  In fact, the verdict is in and Zimmerman is NOT GUILTY.



Verdict is just a verdict..as you said 40/60..near a flip of coin..


----------



## brigechols (Jul 13, 2013)

BocaBum99 said:


> You couldn't be more wrong.  In fact, the verdict is in and Zimmerman is NOT GUILTY.


Every word in my post was accurate.


----------



## EileenL (Jul 13, 2013)

*Protect your children - no nights dress in white no hoodies*

wow They have given a license to all the nuts to go out and kill - And mark my words GZ will kill again - Protect your children from any gun toting nut who decides to stalk and kill your child and then act surprised they tried to defend themselves from the stalker

Ridiculous


----------



## StevenTing (Jul 13, 2013)

I think it's time to lock this thread or I will really start to post my "feelings". 


--
Sent using Tapatalk


----------



## Beaglemom3 (Jul 13, 2013)

StevenTing said:


> I think it's time to lock this thread or I will really start to post my "feelings".
> 
> 
> --
> Sent using Tapatalk



  I'm with you Steve.
  The jury has spoken.


----------



## Pat H (Jul 13, 2013)

EileenL said:


> wow They have given a license to all the nuts to go out and kill - And mark my words GZ will kill again - Protect your children from any gun toting nut who decides to stalk and kill your child and then act surprised they tried to defend themselves from the stalker
> 
> Ridiculous



Wow, your post is ridiculous!


----------



## Beaglemom3 (Jul 13, 2013)

Pat H said:


> Wow, your post is ridiculous!



  Pat, you took the words right out of my mouth.
  Over the top.
  Probably time to wind this thread down & out.


----------



## benyu2010 (Jul 13, 2013)

True. It shall end after the verdict, regardless. Civil case is coming up soon...


----------



## ace2000 (Jul 13, 2013)

I've got an idea... why don't we let the moderators decide when it's time to lock the thread?   This thread is full of deputy wannabe moderators.


----------



## StevenTing (Jul 13, 2013)

There will be no civil case.  He is exempt from it.  It was determined that his use of force is justified and I those cases, the person shot/killed and his next of kin are not allowed to sue.  It will get dismissed.  

Many states have this exception in order to protect those that are found not guilty.  


--
Sent using Tapatalk


----------



## ricoba (Jul 13, 2013)

Now that the jury has spoken, people are sharing their feelings here about the case and Zimmerman....not sure, but perhaps this thread has now started to go against posting guidelines.  

Just my two cents.


----------



## benyu2010 (Jul 13, 2013)

StevenTing said:


> There will be no civil case.  He is exempt from it.  It was determined that his use of force is justified and I those cases, the person shot/killed and his next of kin are not allowed to sue.  It will get dismissed.
> 
> Many states have this exception in order to protect those that are found not guilty.
> 
> ...



The verdict simply means prosecution could not prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. It does not necessarily mean his action was justified.

Is FL one of those states?  What happened to OJ and Ray Lewis's civil cases.

This case would only settle after all legal options exhausted, just my 'feeling'...


----------



## StevenTing (Jul 13, 2013)

Florida is one of those states.  I've had this discussion on a gun forum.  


--
Sent using Tapatalk


----------



## ace2000 (Jul 13, 2013)

I think the verdict coming on late Saturday evening, of all nights, has to be the worst possible timing for potential riots and havoc.  Let's all pray for peace tonight.


----------



## StevenTing (Jul 13, 2013)

ace2000 said:


> I think the verdict coming on late Saturday evening, of all nights, has to be the worst possible timing for potential riots and havoc.  Let's all pray for peace tonight.



I disagree.  Most of the people that would riot, based on stereotype, are probably not paying attention to the news.  They're probably out partying. 


--
Sent using Tapatalk


----------



## StevenTing (Jul 13, 2013)

776.032Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—

(1)A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

(2)A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.

(3)The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).


--
Sent using Tapatalk


----------



## StevenTing (Jul 13, 2013)

So since he was found not guilty, he was justified in his use of force. 


--
Sent using Tapatalk


----------



## benyu2010 (Jul 13, 2013)

Thank you, Steve.

I hope this was the end of the story.....


----------



## StevenTing (Jul 13, 2013)

The story, unfortunately, will never end. As a society, we hope that people will respect the law as well as the results of the application of the law.  People will continue to protest and others will do dumb things. 

Worst case scenario is that people will riot and threaten someone else which could lead to further loss of life.  

Best case, Zimmerman just has to watch his back for the rest of his life. 


--
Sent using Tapatalk


----------



## TUGBrian (Jul 14, 2013)

and its over...no more discussion needed.


----------

