Zimmerman - Guilty of Murder or Self Defense

[IGotWorms 4,059]

 

If you mean looking at all of the available evidence and making a sound decision not based on emotion, but plausibility and common sense?

Then yes, guilty as charged.

 

Of course I'm biased. The evidence keeps coming out suggesting Self Defense.

There's no concrete proof to the contrary.

 

It has nothing to do with race, gender, or that I'm a "self defense expert" (which I am most certainly not), or a gun nut (if you want to use that term).

Dude was watching a suspicious kid. Lost sight of him, lost his awareness (big mistake) and then got the tar beat out of him. To the point where he apparently felt threatened for his life and he shoots the attacker.

 

If you can show me ANY evidence contrary to that, I'm all ears.

Stalking the kid, pissed because these ###### always get away, continued following after being advised to stop, injuries from so-called beating were minor, according to some witnesses was on top of a screaming Travon Martin prior to shooting him dead.

 

Again, it depends on who the jury believes. I agree that there is probably reasonable doubt but the point is you've only picked out the testimony and evidence that suits your beliefs.

[The Moz 69]

I'd like to put forth my rule that any black that wears a hoodie should be shot in the knee just out of principle.

this

 

 

alsonotreally............................. wellmaybe .......................nonotreally................wellmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm..............forgetaboutit

[IGotWorms 4,059]

 

No, those are people who don't work or won't work, but want freeshit.

 

Keep poking. It doesn't bother me. I don't typically bring up personal ######, but if you feel the need to, go ahead.

I just find it hilarious that the sanctimonious blowhards here are usually the same guys collecting unemployment or avoiding their debts. It's fine, if you had to do that then that's what you should have done. I'm not going to judge you for it. But to then go around proclaiming that others are irresponsible or whatever...well, I'm gonna judge the hypocrisy there.

[BLS 314]

Stalking the kid (stalking is not observing, and vice versa) NO PROOF

pissed because these ###### always get away APPARENTLY...HE DID SAY THAT...not sure what it proves though

continued following after being advised to stop NO PROOF

injuries from so-called beating were minor IRRELEVANT

according to some witnesses was on top of a screaming Travon Martin prior to shooting him dead. AGREED, but according to others, he was on the bottom.

 

Again, it depends on who the jury believes. I agree that there is probably reasonable doubt but the point is you've only picked out the testimony and evidence that suits your beliefs.

[BLS 314]

I just find it hilarious that the sanctimonious blowhards here are usually the same guys collecting unemployment or avoiding their debts. It's fine, if you had to do that then that's what you should have done. I'm not going to judge you for it. But to then go around proclaiming that others are irresponsible or whatever...well, I'm gonna judge the hypocrisy there.

 

If it makes you feel better.

[RLLD 4,256]

 

All I am saying is that following him because he was black (which IMO is the most likely reason he did)...made it a racial issue.

And as I said...the evidence of this won't support a conviction of him.

Both are guilty of being complete dumbasses and it sucks that someone had to lose their life over it.

 

If there was anything at all to suggest he was following him because he was black then I would agree, but given the lack of any evidence to make such an assertion, you are simply assuming this notion because of the skin color of the victim, and that is racist in and of itself.

 

There is evidence to support Zimmerman was annoyed, perhaps even angry, that he thought an individual looked suspicious and that someone is always getting away with stuff. If you want to focus on THAT point I think there is substantial merit.

 

The only presence of any racism, and its weak at best, is the kid viewing the man following him as a "cracker" and his response to turn on that "cracker" was the most emphatic presence of a racist response in this entire sequence.

[OldMaid 2,133]

This thread makes me Especially some of the comments by Moz.

 

 

I hear a lot of people basing their opinions on who started what... that's about the equivalent of 3yr old saying: "But he started it!" I really don't care how it started... for me, it only comes down to two questions: Was Zimmerman afraid for his life? And, is there evidence to prove that?

 

Again, I'm only following what has been posted here... but if I was on the jury, I'm not sure I could come to any conclusion, at this point. Yes, Zimmerman had a few superficial wounds, but I still don't think that solidified him being fearful for his life. It's a tough call, as no one but Zimmerman can really know what he was thinking.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

You say this every single day. I think we're looking at an acquittal on murder two and maybe on manslaughter as well. But is it possible, just possible, that you are viewing everything through the angle of confirming your preconceived views on the case?

Sez the clown who convicted GZ of murder and sentenced him to life in prison based on doctored tapes and a 6 year old pic of lil Trayvon.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

This thread makes me Especially some of the comments by Moz.

 

 

I hear a lot of people basing their opinions on who started what... that's about the equivalent of 3yr old saying: "But he started it!" I really don't care how it started... for me, it only comes down to two questions: Was Zimmerman afraid for his life? And, is there evidence to prove that?

 

Again, I'm only following what has been posted here... but if I was on the jury, I'm not sure I could come to any conclusion, at this point. Yes, Zimmerman had a few superficial wounds, but I still don't think that solidified him being fearful for his life. It's a tough call, as no one but Zimmerman can really know what he was thinking.

The question is whether a reasonable person would have feared for their life. Whether or not Zimmerman subjectively feared for his life is largely irrelevant, though it could certainly sway the jury if there was evidence one way or the other.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

Sez the clown who convicted GZ of murder and sentenced him to life in prison based on doctored tapes and a 6 year old pic of lil Trayvon.

And now that I've heard what has been presented at trial, my opinion is that he will NOT be convicted of murder two. See how that works?

[Recliner Pilot 61]

And now that I've heard what has been presented at trial, my opinion is that he will NOT be convicted of murder two. See how that works?

If you mean jumping to wild-ass conclusions based on no facts and then being shamed into facing reality, yes I see how that works.

[OldMaid 2,133]

The question is whether a reasonable person would have feared for their life. Whether or not Zimmerman subjectively feared for his life is largely irrelevant, though it could certainly sway the jury if there was evidence one way or the other.

So, it really has nothing to do with Zimmerman's frame of mind, at the time? It all comes down to what a reasonable person would think and do?

 

Really? Really, really?

[MDC 7,522]

... for me, it only comes down to two questions: Was Zimmerman afraid for his life? And, is there evidence to prove that? .

Well said and totally agreed.

 

My best guess based on what I know is that Zimmerman was not in any mortal danger, used excessive force and committed what I'd call manslaughter.

 

But given the lack of eyewitnesses and the way the law is written in Florida I think he gets acquitted.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

If you mean jumping to wild-ass conclusions based on no facts and then being shamed into facing reality, yes I see how that works.

It was all about the voice evidence. If the prosecution got in experts saying it was Martin's voice, I think murder two would still be on the table. But they didn't, and hear we are. That's why people usually want to avoid trials through plea deals, because you just can't be sure what is going to happen at trial.

 

That's as to murder two though. Manslaughter does not necessarily depend on the voice evidence IMO.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

So, it really has nothing to do with Zimmerman's frame of mind, at the time? It all comes down to what a reasonable person would think and do?

 

Really? Really, really?

How are we supposed to know precisely what was in Zimmerman's mind at the time of the incident? We can't open up his brain and look. All we can do is judge what a reasonable person would have thought based on the evidence.

[Bert 1,128]

 

How are we supposed to know precisely what was in Zimmerman's mind at the time of the incident? We can't open up his brain and look. All we can do is judge what a reasonable person would have thought based on the evidence.

And what is a "reasonable person"? You? RP? Giants Fan?

[Sho Nuff 720]

Sez the clown who convicted GZ of murder and sentenced him to life in prison based on doctored tapes and a 6 year old pic of lil Trayvon.

 

Says the guy that keeps repeating the same ol idiotic crap over and over about the doctored tapes and 6 year old picture.

But offers nothing of substance anywhere on this board.

[Sho Nuff 720]

If you mean jumping to wild-ass conclusions based on no facts and then being shamed into facing reality, yes I see how that works.

 

He was going based on what was out at the time moron...but you still don't get that do you?

[Recliner Pilot 61]

[slo-N-Nuts] YIP! YIP! YIP! [slo-N-Nuts]

 

[DankNuggs 305]

Well said and totally agreed.

 

My best guess based on what I know is that Zimmerman was not in any mortal danger, used excessive force and committed what I'd call manslaughter.

 

But given the lack of eyewitnesses and the way the law is written in Florida I think he gets acquitted.

Its reasonable to be fearful of grave danger if you are rendered unconscious. One bash into a sidewalk can do that. How many people slip and fall each year and end up as vegetables?

 

The people who convicted GZ based on media hysteria before the evidence was laid out are basing it on evidence that doesn't exist... The scenario very well could have happened, but there is no evidence at all of it.

 

Their best hope is to drag out this trial until Willy Wonka has to bring GZ to the blueberry juicer... Then justice will be served.....Cold.... in a delightful smoothie.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

 

 

And what is a "reasonable person"? You? RP? Giants Fan?

 

If your point is that the "reasonable person" standard is somewhat nebulous, you are surely correct. There have been plenty of articles written on it and judicial opinions discussing that point. However, it is the best we have.

 

When using the reasonable person standard, you typically consider the facts and circumstance that faced the person at the time. But you don't consider subjective characteristics like they are particularly predisposed to be fearful or whatever. (There is an exception for disabilities--so, for example, in Pistorious' case we would consider a reasonable person with no legs). I assume Florida's rule follows this general standard.

 

 

The reasonable person (historically reasonable man) is one of many tools for explaining the law to a jury.^[1] The "reasonable person" is an emergent concept of common law.^[2] While there is (loose) consensus in black letter law, there is no universally accepted, technical definition. As a legal fiction,^[2] the "reasonable person" is not an average person or a typical person. Instead, the "reasonable person" is a composite of a relevant community's judgment as to how a typical member of said community should behave in situations that might pose a threat of harm (through action or inaction) to the public.^[3]

The standard also holds that each person owes a duty to behave as a reasonable person would under the same or similar circumstances.^[4][5] While the specific circumstances of each case will require varying kinds of conduct and degrees of care, the reasonable person standard undergoes no variation itself.^[6][7]

The "reasonable person" construct can be found applied in many areas of the law. The standard performs a crucial role in determining negligence in both criminal law—that is, criminal negligence—and tort law.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_person

[Reality 3,121]

But is it possible, just possible, that you are viewing everything through the angle of confirming your preconceived views on the case?

Hilarious, considering the source.

[mahan day 4]

do we have an over/under on property damage post verdict yet?

[The Moz 69]

I do wonder if People are able to sue the Media for any property damage done in riots. This case would never of been really heard of other than maybe a Posty link if the Media didn't latch onto this.

[Bert 1,128]

 

If your point is that the "reasonable person" standard is somewhat nebulous, you are surely correct. There have been plenty of articles written on it and judicial opinions discussing that point. However, it is the best we have.

 

When using the reasonable person standard, you typically consider the facts and circumstance that faced the person at the time. But you don't consider subjective characteristics like they are particularly predisposed to be fearful or whatever. (There is an exception for disabilities--so, for example, in Pistorious' case we would consider a reasonable person with no legs). I assume Florida's rule follows this general standard.

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_person

It is my point.

 

I understand the theory. Theory is great if you have professors on the jury. Theory quickly breaks down in practical application.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

 

 

It is my point.

 

I understand the theory. Theory is great if you have professors on the jury. Theory quickly breaks down in practicle application.

What would you propose instead?

[Bert 1,128]

 

What would you propose instead?

A three judge jury.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

 

 

A three judge jury.

So you're against the entire idea of trial by a jury of your peers?

 

I suppose an argument can be made to do something different--I believe many European countries do exactly what you are proposing here.

 

Personally I think it kind of seems like a plutocracy--like these judges are so learned they can determine whether you violated society's norms better than society itself can.

 

And we already do give the judge some role there, at sentencing and in the ability to enter a directed verdict if the jury got it so dead wrong no reasonable jury could've found that way.

 

But regardless of the merits, trial by jury is a bedrock principle of our justice system so I don't see it going away anytime soon.

[MDC 7,522]

Its reasonable to be fearful of grave danger if you are rendered unconscious. One bash into a sidewalk can do that. How many people slip and fall each year and end up as vegetables?

 

The people who convicted GZ based on media hysteria before the evidence was laid out are basing it on evidence that doesn't exist... The scenario very well could have happened, but there is no evidence at all of it.

 

Their best hope is to drag out this trial until Willy Wonka has to bring GZ to the blueberry juicer... Then justice will be served.....Cold.... in a delightful smoothie.

I don't think a bloody nose or even a bash to the head necessitates lethal force. I also really doubt the unrealistic scenario Zimmerman described. But like I said the lack of any witnesses and the way the law is written in FL make it unlikely he's convicted. I just personally think he's being "creative."

[wiffleball 4,790]

why does cnn feel compelled to cover the entire trial on both networks

[OldMaid 2,133]

Its reasonable to be fearful of grave danger if you are rendered unconscious. One bash into a sidewalk can do that. How many people slip and fall each year and end up as vegetables?

 

The people who convicted GZ based on media hysteria before the evidence was laid out are basing it on evidence that doesn't exist... The scenario very well could have happened, but there is no evidence at all of it.

 

Their best hope is to drag out this trial until Willy Wonka has to bring GZ to the blueberry juicer... Then justice will be served.....Cold.... in a delightful smoothie.

Is there any evidence to him getting his head bashed on the concrete? I saw some mild abrasions... but I would think he'd have a knot or something if what he says is true.

A three judge jury.

This.

 

It's sad we leave the decisions to the people who aren't even smart enough to get out of jury duty.

[Bert 1,128]

 

So you're against the entire idea of trial by a jury of your peers?

 

I suppose an argument can be made to do something different--I believe many European countries do exactly what you are proposing here.

 

But nonetheless trial by jury is a bedrock principle of our justice system so I don't see it going away anytime soon.

I can guarantee Judges would be closer to my peers than the people that end up in the jury box. I believe the average person is not that bright and is very easily influenced by non-facts. Further complicating the issue is that our laws have become so damn convoluted. I’ll put this way; if I was arrested for murder and I did commit murder I sure as hell want a jury of my idiot “peers”. If I had not committed murder I would want a three judge jury.

[Recliner Pilot 61]

why does cnn feel compelled to cover the entire trial on both networks

They finally found something people will watch on their craptastic channel.

[wiffleball 4,790]

I don't think a bloody nose or even a bash to the head necessitates lethal force. I also really doubt the unrealistic scenario Zimmerman described. But like I said the lack of any witnesses and the way the law is written in FL make it unlikely he's convicted. I just personally think he's being "creative."

ive said this before. you dont need to prove lethal force. cops fear for their lives thout ever being touched and massively outgunning the other guy.

[IGotWorms 4,059]

 

 

I can guarantee Judges would be closer to my peers than the people that end up in the jury box. I believe the average person is not that bright and is very easily influenced by non-facts. Further complicating the issue is that our laws have become so damn convoluted. Ill put this way; if I was arrested for murder and I did commit murder I sure as hell want a jury of my idiot peers. If I had not committed murder I would want a three judge jury.

I think that's a pretty conceited view. I do understand where you are coming from, but I've actually been pretty impressed with the juries I've seen. People want to do the right thing in those situations so they generally work hard to understand the evidence and apply the instructions given to them.

[MDC 7,522]

ive said this before. you dont need to prove lethal force. cops fear for their lives thout ever being touched and massively outgunning the other guy.

That's why he won't get convicted. But my guess is he didn't need to shoot Martin and did it out of recklessness or anger anyway.

[Bert 1,128]

 

I think that's a pretty conceited view. I do understand where you are coming from, but I've actually been pretty impressed with the juries I've seen. People want to do the right thing in those situations so they generally work hard to understand the evidence and apply the instructions given to them.

It is also a cynical view but I do not believe in managing to the lowest common denominator. I have been on a jury in a murder case. Most people understood the evidence but 4 of the 12 could not fill out an application for a library card. Then there is sentencing. Choosing the right thing, in this situation giving someone life, is too hard for some people emotionally.

[wiffleball 4,790]

I think that's a pretty conceited view. I do understand where you are coming from, but I've actually been pretty impressed with the juries I've seen. People want to do the right thing in those situations so they generally work hard to understand the evidence and apply the instructions given to them.

casey anthony and oj agree

[The Moz 69]

If a Judge can be impartial He makes the perfect juror. As he knows the law and will judge based on the law not on Emotions.

[The Moz 69]

ive said this before. you dont need to prove lethal force. cops fear for their lives thout ever being touched and massively outgunning the other guy.

Dear God had Zimmerman been a Cop............................. Every Major city's Ghetto would be set a blaze after a Not Guilty verdict. With Zimmerman it might be limited to - LA, Miami/Dade, and Atlanta