Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
docyabut2

Zimmerman trial

1,450 posts in this topic

http://www.hlntv.com/article/2013/04/26/critical-hearing-next-week-zimmerman-case

Lets hope this case is settle and does not divide people. I see it as Zimmwerman had no busiess chasing Trayvon ,but it does depend in who attacked who frist in this crime.Block watchers should be wearing something to identity who they are to a person.Trayvon didn`t know who this guy was chasing him and may have decided to fight like most people would do. I just hope there is a fair justice for Trayvon`s family and Zimmwerman.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am nearly 100% sure this trial WILL divide people; the death of Trayvon has already divided people, rather starkly, so I can't think why the trial would not amplify the divide. It does seem as though the majority of public opinion is sympathetic to the dead teenager and his family, and do believe Zimmerman ought to do some jail time. But Zimmerman has his supporters, no question about it, and many of them feel quite passionate. I think Zimmerman's biggest problem is that 911 tape that records him being told by the 911 operator the police don't want him following the unidentified person, but wait for LE to get there. Then, against explicit instructions, he follows Trayvon in his vehicle, then gets out of the vehicle to confront (assault?) Trayvon. A violent scuffle ensues and results in Trayvon getting shot to death. Zimmerman says he didn't know Tray was unarmed, but lots of people, including me, suspect he's not being truthful. If GZ really thought Trayvon likely had a gun, I seriously doubt he would have done something so bold as to confront TM face-to-face, especially knowing the police were on the way. I think it's much more likely that GZ was emboldened by a high degree of confidence that TM was NOT armed. His self-defense claim seems very flimsy. Yes, he got scrapes or cuts on his head that bled plenty... But that shouldn't be a surprise since he engaged in a scuffle with TM. It's hard to get around the known fact that GZ followed TM in his truck (after being instructed NOT to do so), stopped the car, got out and approached TM with a weapon on his person. I would say most people see GZ as the aggressor. That's a big problem for him IMO.

7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just hope that it's a fair, honest trial on both sides: defense and prosecution. Make it as clinical as possible. Deliver the facts in an objective way, as they've been contaminated by a dishonest media (agenda-driven personalities, doctoring of cell phone messages, outdated photographs, unconfirmed portrayals of both individuals). I suppose that it's too much to wish for a trial that's not hijacked by ideologues of all stripes.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jury selection begins today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the jury is empanelled in Sanford then I think Z has no chance. If it is done anywhere else and there are more than half blacks sitting then it will be hung. I think the question here is not whether T would be alive today but for choices Z made. The question is whether the laws of the state of Florida can justly settle this issue. Z is NOT guilty of murder 2. Maybe he is guilty of manslaughter, maybe. So if a jury convicts him of murder 2 I will be shocked - and sickened - that a man can be convicted by the press now.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the jury is empanelled in Sanford then I think Z has no chance. If it is done anywhere else and there are more than half blacks sitting then it will be hung. I think the question here is not whether T would be alive today but for choices Z made. The question is whether the laws of the state of Florida can justly settle this issue. Z is NOT guilty of murder 2. Maybe he is guilty of manslaughter, maybe. So if a jury convicts him of murder 2 I will be shocked - and sickened - that a man can be convicted by the press now.

I think he'll get done for aggravated manslaughter (is that such a thing?) - basically he's guilty of putting himself in a position where he had to choose whether or not to kill T at the risk of his own life. If he'd had followed instructions there's IMO (and based on the media reports) a good chance of noone being dead today.

However, you're right he's being tried (and found guilty) by the media.

I'd not be surprised by him being found guilty of Murder 2 if I were you, America is a media-nation right now, people live, breathe and think media.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My prediction is that he will be railroaded for reasons of political correctness.

Wait for it.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I read the complex had many break ins and robberies, Z as a block watch person had called the cops many times in the past, but he said by the time the cops get there they always get away. He was trying to detain what he thought was a suspicious person. We have the same problem in our neighberhood letters warnings us of the many car and house break ins.One women was driving by her house when she saw some hooded kids black and white breaking into her other car, she yell at them and they dragged her out of her car, beat the hell out of her and got away, It was dark and she couldn`t identify them very well.She warned the neigherhood not to do what she did and don`t comfront them. It is sad that any inoccent kids or people black or white can`t walk the streets at night with out being under a suspicion.What Z did was wrong in trying to detain T and he should get the manslaughter charge, even though he may have been defending himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Typically this would mean engaging in a highly reckless act that presents a substantial likelihood of causing death without regard for the consequences, but lack of actual intent to kill.

The "Depraved Mind" meaning behind the charge according to case law... Basically Murder in the 2nd degree is where you act reckless and someone dies... That's about as close of a description of what happened as you're going to get. An adults recklessly followed a teen around with a gun on himself and put himself in a situation where he had to use that gun on that teen.. People saying that the media has slammed the case shut on this man are ignoring the fact that he has admitted from his own mouth that he did this... The media isn't spinning what came out of his mouth.. He said he followed a teen, he said he confronted the teen, he said the teen asked what his problem was, he said "I don't have a problem" while reaching for his pocket, he said that lead to the teen striking him, he said he then shot the teen.... The media didn't make that up.... It came right from his mouth, with his lawyer sitting right next to him, in a live interview.. lol

I don't understand why people keep thinking he's innocent, when he has admitted to what he has done.. He's just trying to provide an excuse for his being reckless and killing someone's son.

From what I read the complex had many break ins and robberies, Z as a block watch person had called the cops many times in the past, but he said by the time the cops get there they always get away. He was trying to detain what he thought was a suspicious person. We have the same problem in our neighberhood letters warnings us of the many car and house break ins.One women was driving by her house when she saw some hooded kids black and white breaking into her other car, she yell at them and they dragged her out of her car, beat the hell out of her and got away, It was dark and she couldn`t identify them very well.She warned the neigherhood not to do what she did and don`t comfront them. It is sad that any inoccent kids or people black or white can`t walk the streets at night with out being under a suspicion.What Z did was wrong in trying to detain T and he should get the manslaughter charge, even though he may have been defending himself.

In the State of Florida you can't detain anyone under citizen's arrest for anything less than a Felony. You also can't use physical force, they have to surrender... Now an Officer can do all those things... but not a citizen...

Edited by xFelix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Zimmerman's biggest problem is that 911 tape that records him being told by the 911 operator the police don't want him following the unidentified person, but wait for LE to get there. Then, against explicit instructions, the known fact that GZ followed TM in his truck (after being instructed NOT to do so), stopped the car, got out and approached TM with a weapon on his person. I would say most people see GZ as the aggressor. That's a big problem for him IMO.

You should research before posting false information.

When the operator said "we don't need you to do that", it is not the same as what you said - "the police don't want him following the unidentified person". Then you called them "explicit instructions". (def.fully revealed or expressed without vagueness, implication, or ambiguity : leaving no question). After hearing the tape, the operator did not seem to instruct with authority at all.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Regardless of what the operator indicated to Zimmerman, Zimmerman had already followed. He admitted as much, and we know he did, anyway.

The point is, he exited his vehicle. That's not what I consider reasonable given the circumstances that Zimmerman himself provided. He'd reported that Martin was "real suspicious"... that he was "on drugs or something"..."coming to check me out". He implied that Martin might have a weapon, and yet he still exited his vehicle to follow.

Edited by regi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of what the operator indicated to Zimmerman, Zimmerman had already followed. He admitted as much, and we know he did, anyway.

The point is, he exited his vehicle. That's not what I consider reasonable given the circumstances that Zimmerman himself provided. He'd reported that Martin was "real suspicious"... that he was "on drugs or something"..."coming to check me out". He implied that Martin might have a weapon, and yet he still exited his vehicle to follow.

I would have done the same thing. It seems Trayvon decided to attack George.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have done the same thing.

(I think it's more productive to focus on one point at a time.)

Despite your apparent knowledge that you "would have done the same thing", I don't find it to be a reasonable action for anyone other than law enforcement.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(I think it's more productive to focus on one point at a time.)

Despite your apparent knowledge that you "would have done the same thing", I don't find it to be a reasonable action for anyone other than law enforcement.

I disagree because of the word "reasonable". If my neighborhood had been having a rash of robberies by young black men, and they have been getting away before the cops show up, I think it is reasonable that a neighborhood watch person would follow a strange young black man who is walking between houses and acting suspicious. He also called the cops to report it. Maybe not the most wise decision to follow, but it seams reasonable to me.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't feel a need to challenge any of your sadly revealing remarks, Myles. You make your bias and attitude crystal clear. Actually, I'm glad you shared your views--as nauseating as they are--because you prove in bold type my original observation that this crime has already starkly divided people in this country. Tragically, the divide is along racial lines of course. White racists will undoubtedly get behind the argument of self-defense...will even embrace George Zimmerman as a hero. The rest of the population can see how wrong and ill-advised Zimmerman's series of choices and actions were the night Martin died. Most of this sector is fairly confident of the motive, too. Racism. You can parse words with me, Myles, if you choose. It doesn't make your attitude more solvent or any less transparent. I won't concern myself with the opinions of an ignorant racist (and that includes all of them).

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't feel a need to challenge any of your sadly revealing remarks, Myles. You make your bias and attitude crystal clear. Actually, I'm glad you shared your views--as nauseating as they are--because you prove in bold type my original observation that this crime has already starkly divided people in this country. Tragically, the divide is along racial lines of course. White racists will undoubtedly get behind the argument of self-defense...will even embrace George Zimmerman as a hero. The rest of the population can see how wrong and ill-advised Zimmerman's series of choices and actions were the night Martin died. Most of this sector is fairly confident of the motive, too. Racism. You can parse words with me, Myles, if you choose. It doesn't make your attitude more solvent or any less transparent. I won't concern myself with the opinions of an ignorant racist (and that includes all of them).

This entire post is an Ad Hominem attack. It's uncalled for and out of line, and you should be ashamed of posting.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm not! Sorry to disappoint you.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't feel a need to challenge any of your sadly revealing remarks, Myles. You make your bias and attitude crystal clear. Actually, I'm glad you shared your views--as nauseating as they are--because you prove in bold type my original observation that this crime has already starkly divided people in this country. Tragically, the divide is along racial lines of course. White racists will undoubtedly get behind the argument of self-defense...will even embrace George Zimmerman as a hero. The rest of the population can see how wrong and ill-advised Zimmerman's series of choices and actions were the night Martin died. Most of this sector is fairly confident of the motive, too. Racism. You can parse words with me, Myles, if you choose. It doesn't make your attitude more solvent or any less transparent. I won't concern myself with the opinions of an ignorant racist (and that includes all of them).

You are so far off base Aaronsmom. Obvioulsy you are one who likes to throw the race card out there at any time.

I agree there are some white racists who are on the side of George. You failed to point out the black racists on the side of Trayvon. Very convenient.

I won't apologize for pointing out untrue statements that you use.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I'm not! Sorry to disappoint you.

By the way, can you explain where I gave you a racist impression? Siding with George is not racist.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Hey, Aaronsmom, I look forward to your thoughts/insights of the court proceedings and the evidence as it's presented during the trial.

I always find your posts to be very comprehensive, well thought-out, and no doubt about it, courteous. :nw:

I forgot to mention...considerate. :tu:

I want to add that I hope the discussion can progress on topic.

Edited by regi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regi I understand what you're saying. I know people don't like to see posters on forums to get contentious or personal. Ordinarily, I abhor such behavior and I make every good-faith effort to stay away from that kind of thing, even when I disagree with someone vehemently. But I draw the line when it comes to trolls. An example of a troll is one who comes on an Internet discussion board and makes highly provocative, controversial, offensive and/or inflammatory comments, then jumps in aggressively to fight everyone who challenges anything he or she says. I don't feel I owe a troll respect or courtesy. I can assure you, though, I have no intention of continuing hostilities, fanning flames, responding further to the person in question, and I am happy to stay on topic as the matter concerns all other users.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regi I understand what you're saying. I know people don't like to see posters on forums to get contentious or personal. Ordinarily, I abhor such behavior and I make every good-faith effort to stay away from that kind of thing, even when I disagree with someone vehemently. But I draw the line when it comes to trolls. An example of a troll is one who comes on an Internet discussion board and makes highly provocative, controversial, offensive and/or inflammatory comments, then jumps in aggressively to fight everyone who challenges anything he or she says. I don't feel I owe a troll respect or courtesy. I can assure you, though, I have no intention of continuing hostilities, fanning flames, responding further to the person in question, and I am happy to stay on topic as the matter concerns all other users.

Interesting how you contradict yourself in the bolded print.

Here are some of your comments about me where I had not personally attacked you at all (if I had, please show me).

"I'm glad you shared your views--as nauseating as they are"

" You can parse words with me, Myles, if you choose. It doesn't make your attitude more solvent or any less transparent. I won't concern myself with the opinions of an ignorant racist"

Trolling at it's worst - by you.

Then you say you have no intentions of continuing hostilities or fanning flames after you do. That's like the people who say "I wish you were dead, no disrespect intended". Pure hogwash.

This is the last reply I will have to your racist and hostile posts.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Ordinarily, I abhor such behavior and I make every good-faith effort to stay away from that kind of thing, even when I disagree with someone vehemently.

I can assure you, though, I have no intention of continuing hostilities, fanning flames, responding further to the person in question, and I am happy to stay on topic as the matter concerns all other users.

Oh, I know you are! I know you post with consideration of others foremost! Your posts are always on topic, deeply thoughtful... tactful.

I respect your opinion because of all of those things. :yes:

Back on topic, I'd like to make a point. Zimmerman lied about why he exited his vehicle. (He said it was to look for a street sign, but we know it was to follow.)

That's huge to me. Apart from showing a consciousness of guilt, the fact that he lied tells us that we can't believe anything else he says, especially if it's to his benefit. (That should sound familiar!)

Anyway, it tells us we'll have to rely on other evidence.

Edited by regi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, that's the biggest problem he has that I can see. Maybe you could say he followed Trayvon in his car to see where he was going and what he might do, but that doesn't explain why he got out of the car and approached Trayvon. I don't care if Trayvon realized Zimmerman was following and mouthed off to Zimmerman. I don't care if he used every profanity there is and/or called him a really bad name. That's not a crime and that doesn't put someone in danger where he would feel the need to defend himself. The minute he put the car in park and went up to Trayvon, Zimmerman crossed the line of defendable behavior and became an unauthorized aggressor. Had he stayed in the car, even if he continued to follow the teenager, there wouldn't have been a confrontation and the young man would not have died, or even been harmed. It's as simple as that. I'm not saying it's a slam-dunk...I don't know how the jury will see it. I just know that's how it looks to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmmm well I think he is guilty personally. First off: the kid didn't have a weapon, unless you call ice tea and skittles as one. Second: He was on the phone with his girlfriend. Third: Treavon was shot in the back.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.