Troubling news for the Trayvon Martin camp

[eRay]

There is defininately a double standard in this country. If Zimmerman had been black and Martin had been white, none of us would have ever heard of this case.

[RichardR]

There is defininately a double standard in this country. If Zimmerman had been black and Martin had been white, none of us would have ever heard of this case.

Agreed & if we had, we wouldn't be threatening mass violence across the country if we didn't get the verdict we wanted either.

[RobertNashville]

All I can hope for at this point is that Zimmerman get's a fair & impartial trial, if he does than he will probably walk out of the court room as a free man.

After which I hope that some of my *cough* fellow Americans *cough* can refrain from attacking innocent people based on the color of their skin in some sort of twisted sense of retaliation.

I am very sad to say but the looting of stores & the burning of property has been pretty much gauranteed by the folks who have declared their intent to do so if they do not get a guilty verdict, but I really hope no-one else is injured or killed because of an out-of-control teen thug foolishly & brutally attacked an armed family man.

I suspect they'll loot and burn regardless of the verdict; if Zimmerman is found not guilt they'll do so out of anger, if he's found guilty they'll do so to "celebrate".

 

After all, nothing celebrates a "win" like burning down your neighborhood!  :)

[TMF]

There is defininately a double standard in this country. If Zimmerman had been black and Martin had been white, none of us would have ever heard of this case.

You're probably right, but I don't think that a reversing of the races would change my opinion. If Martin were white I'd have the same opinion. I do believe that Zimmerman profiled him, but I don't think that in it of itself is wrong. I suppose if Martin was white Zman may have called the police simply based on his age, time and place unless it was common to see white teenagers walking around after dark in the complex.

I think race here is what is affecting people's interpretation of events, on both sides.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Y'all just bunch of Master-debaters..  :rofl:  :rofl:  :hat:  Thank you thank you, I'll be here all week

Stick around. You ain't seen nothing. We have beaten the Budweiser Clydesdales past death and into the vats

in St. Louis.

[RichardR]

I think race here is what is affecting people's interpretation of events, on both sides.

Meh, the main factor in formating my opinion that it was "self-defense on Zimmerman's part" was the fact that Trayvon was sitting on top of Zimmerman, pinning Zimmerman down while he was repeatingly bashing Zimmerman's head against the cement sidewalk when Zimmerman discharged his weapon.

[TMF]

Meh, the main factor in formating my opinion that it was "self-defense on Zimmerman's part" was the fact that Trayvon was sitting on top of Zimmerman, pinning Zimmerman down while he was repeatingly bashing Zimmerman's head against the cement sidewalk when Zimmerman discharged his weapon.

Okay, how 'bout the case where a guy in Texas (who was legally carrying) was getting beat down by three dudes and used his pistol, killing one of them. Guess where he is right now.

What matters in these cases isn't just what happened when a person shoots, it also matters what happened leading up to the shooting. I can't for the life of me figure out why so many people with HCPs can't grasp that.

[eRay]

Based on the strong opinions expressed on this forum, I am predicting a hung jury.

[Patton]

Our justice system was pretty much broken from its inception. It is so hard to convict by getting all 12 jurors to come to the same decision, especially to convict. There are way to many questions in this case for him to be convicted.
I personally can't come to a decision in this case. I understand why each party involved did everything they did. While there was some mistakes nothing illegal was committed, assuming Zimmerman shot Martin believing his head getting pounded into the ground was a deadly act.

Note to everyone: never underestimate someone by their age, weight, or sex. I have seen some bad dudes finally get their ass handed to them by a teenager.

[mikegideon]

In this case, there will only be six jurors. Florida law... since the death penalty is off the table, a jury of 12 isn't required.

[Patton]

In this case, there will only be six jurors. Florida law... since the death penalty is off the table, a jury of 12 isn't required.

Makes sense, I actually heard there was 6 but thought I heard wrong or they were mistaken.

[RobertNashville]

Okay, how 'bout the case where a guy in Texas (who was legally carrying) was getting beat down by three dudes and used his pistol, killing one of them. Guess where he is right now.

What matters in these cases isn't just what happened when a person shoots, it also matters what happened leading up to the shooting. I can't for the life of me figure out why so many people with HCPs can't grasp that.

I think we grasp it perfectly well.

 

Even if Zimmerman's actions were stupid and/or Ill-advised, many of us simply don't believe that those actions (what "lead up to the shooting)", justifies Martin's thuggish reaction of, apparently, attacking Zimmerman. That unnecessary and unjustified attack (in my opinion) presented a legitimate and imminent threat of death or serious injury which justifies Zimmerman's use of deadly force.

Edited June 12, 2013 by RobertNashville

[RobertNashville]

Makes sense, I actually heard there was 6 but thought I heard wrong or they were mistaken.

There are six, 2ND Degree Murder doesn't require a 12 person jury in FL.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I think we grasp it perfectly well.

 

Even if Zimmerman's actions were stupid and/or Ill-advised, many of us simply don't believe that those actions (what "lead up to the shooting)", justifies Martin's thuggish reaction of, apparently, attacking Zimmerman. That unnecessary and unjustified attack (in my opinion) presented a legitimate and imminent threat of death or serious injury which justifies Zimmerman's use of deadly force.

And I trust you meant to say that stupid doesn't necessarily mean illegal, also? The chain of events leads me to believe

he did do some stupid things, one of which was covering his back, if it is correct that TM ambushed him. Another would

have been to maintain a safe enough distance. We haven't legislated stupid out of our code of existence, and I hope we

never do, or we would all be in jail.

 

I haven't heard enough of a compelling argument or evidence that can convict Zimmerman, so all I expect is acquittal,

just like the jury will be instructed to do.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

There's also something called reasonable doubt. There is so much reasonable doubt against conviction, I think

they couldn't convict him of jaywalking. The state has to bring a compelling case, not a street mob, to convict.

Nothing the state has is compelling, regardless of all the emotions and bias in this situation.

 

You can't just say "because he was black" or "because he was white" and build a case.

Edited June 12, 2013 by 6.8 AR

[RobertNashville]

And I trust you meant to say that stupid doesn't necessarily mean illegal, also? The chain of events leads me to believe

he did do some stupid things, one of which was covering his back, if it is correct that TM ambushed him. Another would

have been to maintain a safe enough distance. We haven't legislated stupid out of our code of existence, and I hope we

never do, or we would all be in jail.

 

I haven't heard enough of a compelling argument or evidence that can convict Zimmerman, so all I expect is acquittal,

just like the jury will be instructed to do.

Absolutely; stupid doesn't mean illegal or anything close to it.

 

As best I can tell from what I know of the events that night, it's my opinion the Zimmerman did nothing sufficient to justify Martin's attack on him...Martin decided to engage rather than walk away; maybe because he was a stupid teenager..maybe because he had a thuggish mindset...or whatever; we'll never know what Martin's thought processes were that night.

 

It further appears that Martin's attack was vicious enough that Zimmerman was had legal cause to use deadly force to stop the attack.

[Worriedman]

Okay, how 'bout the case where a guy in Texas (who was legally carrying) was getting beat down by three dudes and used his pistol, killing one of them. Guess where he is right now.

What matters in these cases isn't just what happened when a person shoots, it also matters what happened leading up to the shooting. I can't for the life of me figure out why so many people with HCPs can't grasp that.

Texas is a different place.

How about the case in Texas Nov. 14, 2007 where the 61 year old shot and killed two burglars in the back as they were leaving his neighbor's home, with a detective watching while he did it?  (Joe Horn) He was on the phone with LE, them telling him to stand down, a plain clothed detective in an unmarked car at the curb watching and waiting for back up when Mr. Horn ordered the two men to halt and then proceeded to kill them when they refused.  http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=5278638&page=2

Mr. Horn was "No Billed" by the Grand Jury.

[Patton]

Absolutely; stupid doesn't mean illegal or anything close to it.

As best I can tell from what I know of the events that night, it's my opinion the Zimmerman did nothing sufficient to justify Martin's attack on him...Martin decided to engage rather than walk away; maybe because he was a stupid teenager..maybe because he had a thuggish mindset...or whatever; we'll never know what Martin's thought processes were that night.

It further appears that Martin's attack was vicious enough that Zimmerman was had legal cause to use deadly force to stop the attack.

[Cruel Hand Luke]

IF Zimmerman approached and accosted Martin with gun in hand and did not ID himself and Martin tried to defend himself then Zimmerman should likely get convicted....

 

IF Zimmerman approached , ID'd himself and asked what Martin was doing and then was in the process of leaving when Martin attacked him from behind then Zimmerman should be acquitted....

 

It largely hinges on WHY Martin ended up in a scuffle with Zman. If it was in order to defend himself from a stranger pointing a gun at him then that is one thing.....if it was in order to " teach him a lesson" then that is something entirely different. 

 

From the evidence seen so far and knowing what I DO know about physical confrontation at 5 feet and less, the head wounds on the BACK of Zimmermans head , and the grass stains on the BACK of Zimmerman's clothing are pretty consistent with him being attacked and knocked down or taken to the ground and then mounted.

 

If Martin was in the process of working the ol' "ground and pound" the Zman would have been reasonably in fear of his life. Unfortunately Zman did not have better hand to hand skills because if he did he possibly could have bettered his position and either reversed it or escaped without ever going for the gun.I'll bet Z would give everything he has ever had to have spent more time working on hand to hand skills before that night......

 

So what happened and WHY is that important?

 

Did Z approach Martin with gun in hand yelling at him? Or did Z approach and ID himself as neighborhood watch and calmly and politely ask who Martin was and where he was going? 

 

Did Martin ID himself and Z apologize and turn to go? 

 

Did Martin ID himself but then start berating Z who began to back away?

 

Did Martin tell Z to go "F" himself and when he turned to get away Martin attacked him? 

 

Did Z  pull his gun during the "interview" stage and then Martin was offended/insulted enough to try to take it away?

 

Did Martin SEE Z's gun and was offended/insulted/enraged enough to try to take it from him?

 

 Did Martin rush Zman and take him down and Z then pulled his gun as he was going down? 

 

Did Zman try to disengage and while backing away did Martin knock Zman down , stun him, mount Zman and start punching him causing Z to pull his pistol to respond before he was knocked unconscious?

 

Did Zman turn to leave and Martin hit Zman from behind, knock Zman down , stun him, mount Zman and start punching him causing Z to pull his pistol to respond before he was knocked unconscious?

 

 

Or did Martin knock him down, mount him and then feel the gun and try to take the gun from Zman?

 

We may never know for SURE, but we will probably see from the evidence that this was not a case of Zman running up and just "gunning down" Martin like many are trying to portray this. 

 

If Z was waving his gun around and Martin was in fear of injury or death and then closed with Z and tried to disarm him then I'm good with Z being convicted. 

 

If Z was trying to disengage and was rushed (and especially if he was hit from behind) , then mounted and beaten then a REASONABLE person would be in LEGITIMATE fear of crippling injury or death. If THAT is what happened then Z should be acquitted. A 17 year old can beat you to death just as easy as an 18 year old......and dead is dead...no matter what the age of the assailant. 

 

So depending on EXACTLY what happened you could get different verdicts...and if the evidence supports the verdict...I'm OK which ever way it goes. 

Edited June 12, 2013 by Cruel Hand Luke

[Guest nra37922]

NO justice for Trayvon.  Gunned down in the prime, breeding years, of his life by a half-white, got to flag the flames, racist.  Someone please tell the Sanford Best Buys and HH Gregg to stock up on 52" flat screens as there maybe a 'run' on them real soon.  And if y'all tell the stores to stock up on beer and liquor it would be appreciated as the FL summer sun is hot and lugging around a TV or two gets one thirsty.

 

 

[TMF]

[

Texas is a different place.


.

You missed the point of my post completely.

[TMF]

[

Even if Zimmerman's actions were stupid and/or Ill-advised, many of us simply don't believe that those actions (what "lead up to the shooting)", justifies Martin's thuggish reaction of, apparently, attacking Zimmerman.

The case I referenced in Texas the guy was doing nothing illegal. In fact, he was on the phone with a 911 operator saying "I'm standing my ground" just before he was attacked. He was absolutely in a place where he had a legal right to be. The other guys broke the law by assaulting him, yet this guy is behind bars. Care to guess why?

[DaveS]

Folks, Zman's  injuries to his head is not consistent with what he says happened. Thirteen years as an MP/Game Warden, 26 years as FireFighter/EMT, and the past couple years in LE, tells me his head DID NOT get beat off the sidewalk multiple times as he claims. The evidence and injuries are not there. I'm sorry my opinion don't fit your needs or agendas. Just my opinion and how I see things. Look at his "melon". What do you see? Where are the cuts? Does it at all show where his skull was smashed against the sidewalk? Show me the blood smears and show me the abrasions consistent with that type of injury? You can't. You see a cut where he bounced his head off the sidewalk when TM knocked him out, and one maybe from being kicked or hit in the head. You can't show me nothing else! Zman is a liar, and he has to pay! That's my OPINION, and mine alone! I left Sanford on Monday as I did not like what I seen. Oh well.....I stand by my guns on this! If you stand by yours, put your money where your mouth is, and donate to Zman...he needs it!!

 

Honorably signed....

 

Dave S

[DaveTN]

The case I referenced in Texas the guy was doing nothing illegal. In fact, he was on the phone with a 911 operator saying "I'm standing my ground" just before he was attacked. He was absolutely in a place where he had a legal right to be. The other guys broke the law by assaulting him, yet this guy is behind bars. Care to guess why?

I’ll play….. Because you can’t provoke the attacker or be engaged in criminal behavior.

[DaveS]

If you were Zman or LEO, where is your probable cause to stalk, pursue, or even question TM' when he was not committing any crime? Where is it?

 

Dave S