Zimmerman Trial: Verdict Reached!

[East_TN_Patriot]

When you carry a gun you don't go looking for trouble with a plan to use it when you find it.

I agree with this, but I don't agree that GZ was "looking for trouble". Instead, he was being proactive at combatting crime in his own gated community, one which had been hit with several burglaries including one where a woman was assaulted.  He called the police and followed the person whom he thought was suspicious in order to maintain sight of him until police arrived.  How, exactly, is that "looking for trouble"?  Does that same idea apply to the armed citizen who goes through his home to confront an intruder?  Does that same concept apply to one who goes outside of his/her home to investigate a suspicious noise?  He was observing and reporting like we are all told to do by law enforcement.  His firearm did not come into the scenario until the very end when he used it to end a violent confrontation started by TM that left GZ with a serious broken nose and other injuries. 

 

Again, there is about a minute gap from the time that GZ was told not to follow TM and the shooting occurred.  GZ told the dispatcher he would meet with officers next to his truck, thus suggesting he did disengage and began to walk back to his car.  That he didn't run back to his truck fast enough to satisfy you is not relevant.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_NEIGHBORHOOD_WATCH_JUSTICE_DEPT_?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-07-14-16-02-34
 

 

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Justice Department says it is looking into the shooting death of Trayvon Martin to determine whether federal prosecutors should file criminal civil rights charges now that George Zimmerman has been acquitted in the state case.

The department opened an investigation into Martin's death last year but stepped aside to allow the state prosecution to proceed.

In a statement Sunday, the Justice Department said the criminal section of the civil rights division, the FBI and the U.S. Attorney's office for the Middle District of Florida are continuing to evaluate the evidence generated during the federal probe, in addition to the evidence and testimony from the state trial.

The statement said that, in the government's words, "experienced federal prosecutors will determine whether the evidence reveals a prosecutable violation."

 

 

[knewcomb]

Harry Reid's latest comments regarding:

 

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/07/14/Reid-Zimmerman-not-over

 

New push for gun control as well?

[DaveTN]

Harry Reid's latest comments regarding:
 
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/07/14/Reid-Zimmerman-not-over
 
New push for gun control as well?

On Sunday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) asked for the Justice Department to prosecute George Zimmerman, who was acquitted Saturday night in the killing of Trayvon Martin. “I think the Justice Department is going to take a look at this,” Reid told NBC’s Meet the Press. “This isn’t over with and I think that’s good. That’s our system, it’s gotten better, not worse.”
 
Reid did acknowledge the verdict, stating, “I am a trial lawyer and have [brought] over 100 cases to a jury. I don’t always agree with what the jury does but that’s the system and I support the system.”

I’m confused as to where Reid was on Sunday when he asked the DOJ to prosecute Zimmerman; or who he made this request to?

If they are talking about his remarks on a TV interview, or at least the ones they quoted; I don’t hear him asking anyone for anything. Of course the Justice Department will look at it. That doesn’t mean that they will do anything or that he is asking them to.

Or did I miss something??

[Daniel]

Regardless of anyone's opinion on this case, CNN is correct.  In this, or any other trial, a verdict of "not guity" has no supposition of innocence.  In Scotland, it's actually ruled "not proven".

I guess we are no longer innocent until proven guilty.

[Daniel]

Good advice for youngsters.

For gun owners the take away should be that the dark alley is just as dangerous now as before you started carrying. There is no way in hell that George Zimmerman, a self described pussy, would have gotten out of his truck and pursued a suspicious man down a dark street if he didn't have a firearm on him. He meets the very definition of irresponsible carrier who is emboldened by his weapon.

The bold statement reads to me like "might makes right."

[Daniel]

No, my son would not have run.  And when Zimmerman confronted him I think it would have ended with Zimmerman putting his candy azz back in the truck and waiting on the cops.

Or he could have went back to his car and told the officer's it was a big mistake that after speaking with the individual he determined that he was indeed a resident and there was nothing amiss. 

[Daniel]

He did that! And Zimmerman chased him down. Fight or flight. If Zimmerman had not chased him down; it would have been over. (And that’s a lot more logical to me than Martin should have run home). We don’t know if Martins fears caused him to turn from flight to flight. We can’t ask him; he’s dead.

But I agree with you; Zimmerman had a gun so he won. Doesn’t matter what Martins rights were, all he had to defend himself with was his fists; and it cost him his life.

GZ did not chase TM down. He lost sight of him almost immediately, a full 90 seconds after the dispatcher informed him that he did not have to follow TM he ended his call stating that he was walking to his vehicle to meet the police. While enroute to said vehicle TM reappears and engages GZ.  To your second paragraph I don't understand how you come to the conclusion that he was "defending" himself. Seemed to be on the offensive to me.

Edited July 14, 2013 by Daniel

[Daniel]

Correct. Duty to retreat on the part of an innocent person that had a right to be there? Should have run home, should have called 911, and should have done anything but engage his attacker?
However… I concede. A jury of his peers put their stamp of approval on what he did. All I asked for was that he get a fair trial; that happened.

So how do we jump to calling GZ an attacker?

[Daniel]

I find it interesting that people want to convict GZ for wrongdoing because he originally followed TM while talking to the 911 dispatcher even though he stopped following him after being told to do so and told the dispatcher that he would meet the police next to his truck, but these same people don't place any blame on TM who did not call the police even though he had a cell phone in his hand and didn't continue to run to the home where he was staying upon seeing a "creepy ass cracker" following him.  Instead, he approached GZ from behind as he walked back to his car, started a confrontation, and struck GZ in the face breaking his nose.  Even then, TM did not disengage, but stayed on the offensive while GZ was on the ground and started beating his head onto the concrete.  With all of that, people want to blame GZ for choosing not to stay in his truck and say that is the whole reason this happened.  TM had multiple opportunities to avoid this confrontation, but he chose to go on the offensive as a man walked away from him.  Whether GZ's original suspicion was reasonable or not, whether his effort to keep TM in view while the police responded was wise or not, neither of these are justification for being attacked from behind, or attacked at all.  

If you would instantaneously go on the offensive with an aggressive physical attack just because someone is following you, then you are likely to find yourself dead or in the defendant's seat following the incident.

For interested folks, here is the blog post I wrote about the verdict:

The Zimmerman Verdict: Has Justice Been Served?

You beat me to a lot of my beefs.

[DaveS]

They should release it immediately... but we all know that won't happen. I'd expect to see on one of the gun auction site once he does get it back though. lol

Can you imagine how much his little KelTek would bring at auction? OMG!!!!!

 

Dave Seyr

Edited July 15, 2013 by DaveS

[DaveS]

I'm outta here Guys, Gals and those that are confused. It's been fun, been a good run...but more important things are calling!

 

Dave Seyr

[leroy]

As a matter of florida law (...and law everywhere else, for that matter...); i wuz puzzled at how a state's prosecutor could bring criminal charges without going to the Grand Jury for a True Bill.  This is what i found:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bennett-l-gershman/george-zimmerman-grand-jury_b_1445714.html

 

Another reason to believe the political pandering thing.  Way too much leeway given to the state's prosecutor and his, her, it's buddies i think.

 

leroy

[Guest Aces&8s]

Gays are wonderful people and if they want to get married they should be allowed to do so...I mean, if they want to be a miserable as heterosexuals why should we deny them???  ;)

 

This public service announcement brought to you by Divorce Attorneys for Gay Marriage and the Ad Council...

[Caster]

Well, at least the guy is getting his property back. He is gonna need it.

http://gma.yahoo.com/george-zimmerman-gun-back-204024289--abc-news-topstories.html

[Oh Shoot]

Well, at least the guy is getting his property back. He is gonna need it.

http://gma.yahoo.com/george-zimmerman-gun-back-204024289--abc-news-topstories.html

 

""I don't think he can work. I don't think anyone can hire him... George is a pariah," his lawyer said."

 

He just needs to put out a notice for job offers on his home page and make sure it gets posted on all the gun forums -- probably be flooded with offers.

 

Or maybe Kel-Tec would consider making him a sales rep or something -- that would show some real cojones on their part, eh?

 

- OS

Edited July 15, 2013 by Oh Shoot

[RobertNashville]

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_NEIGHBORHOOD_WATCH_JUSTICE_DEPT_?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-07-14-16-02-34
 

I guess the feds may as well wast more of our tax payer money - it's not worth anything anyway.

 

One of the things we now know with certainty is that Zimmerman's life has shown he is anything but a racist...trying to prove he acted to negate Martin's civil rights will be a fool's errand unless they pack the jury with race haters who won't let themselves be confused by the facts.  That's one of the reasons the prosecution didn't want that information about Zimmerman introduced at trial because they knew that if it was there is no way a jury could believe that Zimmerman "racially profiled" Martin.

Edited July 15, 2013 by RobertNashville

[Guest Lester Weevils]

I guess the feds may as well wast more of our tax payer money - it's not worth anything anyway.

 

One of the things we now know with certainty is that Zimmerman's life has shown he is anything but a racist...trying to prove he acted to negate Martin's civil rights will be a fool's errand unless they pack the jury with race haters who won't let themselves be confused by the facts.  That's one of the reasons the prosecution didn't want that information about Zimmerman introduced at trial because they knew that if it was there is no way a jury could believe that Zimmerman "racially profiled" Martin.

 

Tonite on drudge is this article, which claims the FBI investigation would hinder a civil rights federal prosecution, but who knows? Where there is a will there's a way, maybe. I hope they stay out of it.

 

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2012/07/12/155918/more-evidence-released-in-trayvon.html#.UeM9mT7DVoY

 

Opening paragraphs--

FBI records: agents found no evidence that Zimmerman was racist

 

 

Frances Robles and Scott Hiaason | Miami Herald

After interviewing nearly three dozen people in the George Zimmerman murder case, the FBI found no evidence that racial bias was a motivating factor in the shooting of Trayvon Martin, records released Thursday show.

Even the lead detective in the case, Sanford Det. Chris Serino, told agents that he thought Zimmerman profiled Trayvon because of his attire and the circumstances — but not his race.

Serino saw Zimmerman as “having little hero complex, but not as a racist.”

The Duval County State Attorney released another collection of evidence in the Zimmerman murder case Thursday, including reports from FBI agents who investigated whether any racial bias was involved in Trayvon’s Feb. 26 killing.

[TMF]

The bold statement reads to me like "might makes right."

I'm not sure what you mean by that or if you misunderstood what I was trying to say. What I was explaining is that if GZ had not been armed he would not have gotten out of his truck. If your decision to do or not do something risky is swayed by whether or not you're armed then chances are you're making a bad decision. GZ's defense team described him as being weak and a pussy. If he was so then he would have not pursued a suspicious man "acting like he is on drugs" down a dark street. He just wouldn't have done it, which should lead anyone to the logical conclusion that he was emboldened by his carry weapon which is a bad, bad, bad, bad, bad bad thing and should not be how our community is represented. It is the exact thing liberals accuse HCP holders of and I hear 99% of folks here arguing that's not true.

[TMF]

I agree with this, but I don't agree that GZ was "looking for trouble". Instead, he was being proactive at combatting crime in his own gated community, one which had been hit with several burglaries including one where a woman was assaulted. He called the police and followed the person whom he thought was suspicious in order to maintain sight of him until police arrived. How, exactly, is that "looking for trouble"? Does that same idea apply to the armed citizen who goes through his home to confront an intruder? Does that same concept apply to one who goes outside of his/her home to investigate a suspicious noise? He was observing and reporting like we are all told to do by law enforcement. His firearm did not come into the scenario until the very end when he used it to end a violent confrontation started by TM that left GZ with a serious broken nose and other injuries.

Again, there is about a minute gap from the time that GZ was told not to follow TM and the shooting occurred. GZ told the dispatcher he would meet with officers next to his truck, thus suggesting he did disengage and began to walk back to his car. That he didn't run back to his truck fast enough to satisfy you is not relevant.

Well the first problem with the whole thing is that Martin wasn't breaking the law. If he was breaking into cars or booting in someone's door then my opinion would be different. When Martin ran away (GZ's words) that would make any common sense individual believe that if a crime was going to be committed it sure isn't now, and just wait on the damn police.

In regards to the long time gap, folks keep saying he didn't chase Martin, although you can hear that George is out of breath after hearing him get out of the truck and wind rushing over the mic of the phone. I'm no Sherlock, but that sounds like running to me. But lets just saying he was only walking. In the amount of time he took to "walk" from his truck to follow Martin (GZ's own words) he wouldn't have been more than 20 yards away from his truck, which would take even a porky man less than a minute to return to his truck. So how did he end up so far away from his truck if he A. Didnt run, B. wasn't following Martin even after saying he wasn't, or C. Said that he was returning to his truck? Doesn't pass the sniff test for me. Edited July 15, 2013 by TMF

[Daniel]

Im taking this from a post I made somewhere else....

 

 

LOL. He was not told to do anything. He was asked by the non emergency operator, that he called to report a suspicious individual who matched descriptions of people who had been making repeated break ins in his neighborhood, if he was following the individual. When he said that he was, the operator (not a police officer) who has no authority, stated that he did not have to do that.

 

Zimmerman:

We’ve had some break-ins in my neighborhood and there’s a real suspicious guy. It’s Retreat View Circle. The best address I can give you is 111 Retreat View Circle.

This guy looks like he’s up to no good or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around looking about. [00:25]

911 dispatcher:

OK, is he White, Black, or Hispanic?

Zimmerman:

He looks black.

911 dispatcher:

Did you see what he was wearing?

Zimmerman:

Yeah, a dark hoodie like a gray hoodie. He wore jeans or sweat pants and white tennis shoes. He’s here now … he’s just staring. [00:42]

911 dispatcher:

He’s just walking around the area, the houses? OK.

Zimmerman:

Now he’s staring at me. [00:48]

911 dispatcher:

OK, you said that’s 1111 Retreat View or 111?

Zimmerman:

That’s the clubhouse.

911 dispatcher:

He’s near the clubhouse now?

Zimmerman:

Yeah, now he’s coming toward me. He’s got his hands in his waist band.

And he’s a black male.[1:03]

911 dispatcher:

How old would you say he is?

Zimmerman:

He’s got something on his shirt. About like his late teens.

911 dispatcher:

Late teens?

Zimmerman:

Uh, huh.

Something’s wrong with him. Yep, he’s coming to check me out.

He’s got something in his hands. I don’t know what his deal is. [01:20]

911 dispatcher:

Let me know if he does anything, OK?

Zimmerman:

OK.

911 dispatcher:

We’ve got him on the wire. Just let me know if this guy does anything else.

Zimmerman:

OK.

These @!$%#s. They always get away.

When you come to the clubhouse, you come straight in and you go left. Actually, you would go past the clubhouse. [1:39]

911 dispatcher:

OK, so it’s on the left hand side of the clubhouse?

Zimmerman:

Yeah. You go in straight through the entrance and then you would go left. You go straight in, don’t turn and make a left.

He’s running. [2:08]

911 dispatcher:

He’s running? Which way is he running?

Zimmerman:

Down toward the other entrance of the neighborhood. [2:14]

911 dispatcher:

OK, which entrance is that he’s headed towards?

Zimmerman:

The back entrance.

 â€˜F-ing (inaudible) at 2:22]

911 dispatcher:

Are you following him? [2:24]

Zimmerman:

Yeah. [2:25]

911 dispatcher:

OK.

We don’t need you to do that. [2:26]

Zimmerman:

OK. [2:28]

911 dispatcher:

Alright, sir, what is your name? [2:34]

Zimmerman:

George. He ran.

911 dispatcher:

Alright, George, what’s your last name?

Zimmerman:

Zimmerman.

911 dispatcher:

What’s the phone number you’re calling from?

Zimmerman:

(redacted)

911 dispatcher:

Alright, George, we do have them on the way. Do you want to meet with the officer when they get out there?

Zimmerman:

Yeah.

911 dispatcher:

Alright, where are you going to meet with them at?

Zimmerman:

Um, if they come in through the gate, tell them to go straight past the clubhouse and, uh, straight past the clubhouse and make a left and then go past the mailboxes you’ll see my truck. [3:10]

911 dispatcher:

Alright, what address are you parked in front of? [3:21]

Zimmerman:

Um, I don’t know. It’s a cut-through so I don’t know the address. [3:25]

911 dispatcher:

OK, do you live in the area?

Zimmerman:

Yeah, yeah, I live here.

911 dispatcher:

OK, what’s your apartment number?

Zimmerman:

It’s a home. It’s 1950 – oh, crap, I don’t want to give it out – I don’t know where this kid is [inaudible] [3:40]

911 dispatcher:

OK, do you just want to meet with them at the mailboxes then? [3:42]

Zimmerman:

Yeah, that’s fine. [3:43]

911 dispatcher:

Alright, George, I’ll let them know you’ll meet them at …

Zimmerman:

Could you have them call me and I’ll tell them where I’m at? [3:49]

911 dispatcher:

OK, that’s no problem.

Zimmerman:

My number … you’ve got it?

911 dispatcher:

Yeah, I’ve got it. 

Zimmerman:

Yeah, you got it.

911 dispatcher:

OK, no problem. I’ll let them know to call you when they’re in the area. [4:02]

Zimmerman:

Thanks.

911 dispatcher:

You’re welcome.

Call ends 4:07

 

 

The man was a neighborhood watch leader. He did exactly what he was supposed to do. He also felt he could be a better witness if he reported where the individual went. He followed him and lost sight of him. After he was told that he did not have to follow him 90 seconds goes by while he has still not regained sight of TM and was returning to his vehicle to await the police. Sometime after he hung up with the police TM approached and attacked him.

 

Edited July 15, 2013 by Daniel

[Daniel]

The dialogue alone tells me he had no intention of killing this kid. He called the police to come to the scene. He was making arrangements to meet with them. He asked for them to call him as soon as they arrived.

[TMF]

The dialogue alone tells me he had no intention of killing this kid. He called the police to come to the scene. He was making arrangements to meet with them. He asked for them to call him as soon as they arrived.

I don't believe his intent was to kill anyone that night either, I believe his intent was to pursue for the reasons you mention with the intention of using his weapon in the event of an altercation. I don't believe he would have pursued Martin if he was unarmed, which leads me to believe that was always in the back of his head, "if this goes south the I get to shoot one of these punks."

[tnhawk]

I guess we are no longer innocent until proven guilty.

That was just one one of those outdated ideas the founders of our Country had.

[Worriedman]

I don't believe his intent was to kill anyone that night either, I believe his intent was to pursue for the reasons you mention with the intention of using his weapon in the event of an altercation.."

Is that not the reason any person seeks to obtain a permit, to be able to protect themselves in case of an altercation?

 

 

I don't believe he would have pursued Martin if he was unarmed, which leads me to believe that was always in the back of his head, "if this goes south the I get to shoot one of these punks."

Wonder how long Zimmerman has had his permit?  Has he ever chased anybody else down before?  Seems that if he had a pattern of such activity, it would have come out at the trial.

Edited July 15, 2013 by Worriedman