George Zimmerman not guilty in murder of Trayvon Martin

[CSK Fan]

If i remember correctly , atleast 3 times i posted you 'assume' too much.Dont be a judge. how do you know he was scared , he may have been angry. Why should a guy kill a scared 17 year old ? that also after calling police & giving them his details.

1) Because common sense tells me ANYONE in that situation will be scared. When you are going against common sense, you are the one assuming. If I know that anyone in a dark street, particularly 17 year old, will be scared that is more likely than assuming he won't be scared 2) Because the coward was scared of getting beaten, had a gun and used it. No one is denying the altercation, but getting beaten up is no excuse for taking a life. Otherwise half of the world population would be dead

[Crookbond]

Then that shows the loopholes in the system' date= doesn't it Anyways, even without comparison, it's a poor society which allows the death of an unarmed kid to go unpunished. A Life was taken, a very young life

I do not quite understand what you mean by a "loop hole" because the verdict in a case is decided by the merits of the evidences presented by the plaintiffs and defendants. I am not too sure why it should be related to past cases of similar nature.

[Swing_n_Speed]

How did you deduce this?

Easy really. There are a few who have made up their minds watching sensationalist prime-time news whilst not really seeking facts! There is nothing, absolutely nothing to suggest that Martin was the slightest bit afraid.

[bulbul]

1) Because common sense tells me ANYONE in that situation will be scared. When you are going against common sense, you are the one assuming. If I know that anyone in a dark street, particularly 17 year old, will be scared that is more likely than assuming he won't be scared 2) Because the coward was scared of getting beaten, had a gun and used it. No one is denying the altercation, but getting beaten up is no excuse for taking a life. Otherwise half of the world population would be dead

1) You can't apply your common sense to this issue. 16/17 year kids , especially the black ones , will be bit thick headed.Doubt they can easily scared by 1 white guy. end of day its your assumption vs my assumption. 2)Another assumption. I think we should remove courts/judges/lawyers and just go with 'common sense' when dealing with issues.

[bulbul]

What si the applied stand your ground thing? What do you think a judge's role in the court is? Do you know judges instruct juries on which laws applies and which doesn't? An appellant does not need to apply for anything If I murder tomorrow in the US, can I apply for my case to be tried under pick-pocket charges? There was no ruckus, because no one got hurt. The bit of ruckus happened after the sentencing But no one got away with murder in that case, or else there would have been a huge ruckus

That law is speicfic in Florida and some other states , it is wrong but it is there , so people can use it. It's not judges who apply law , its lawyers who ask to take the trial under those law. No ruckus because no one hurt ? Lol , she went to jail 20 years and no one have problem with that , what is your comoon sense says in this case?

[punjabi_khota]

However' date=' I was lucky enough to born in a country where a) people are not allowed to carry guns just like that and b) [b']people don't allow you to get away with murder just because someone started a physical altercation

:hysterical::hysterical: Dude you were born in a country where if you are rich, you don't have to go to jail at all, no matter how many you kill. How lucky of you.

[ganeshran]

@Swing n Speed, I will reply to the rest of your post after getting home, but prove that Zimmerman returned back to his truck after initiating the 9/11 call which was your bone of contention. Your post does not contain any evidence that says Zimmerman didnt follow Martin at any point of time. You disregard CNN which says Zimmermann followed Trayvon Martin. http://edition.cnn.com/2013/06/05/us/trayvon-martin-shooting-fast-facts

Finally your last paragraph is utter nonsense. There was no threat. He ambushed Zimmerman and attacked him. At no point did it seem like Martin was ever in fear.

And your basis of saying this is? He is a teenage boy being followed by a middle aged man in the dark of the night. Anyone would construe that as a threat.

What do you mean no eye-witnesses corroborated? The forensic expert, Jonathan Good or the lacerations at the back of Zimmerman's head? The only bone of contention was the voice heard during the 911 call...which no one could prove. If you heard Zimmerman talk, you'd very well say it was Zimmerman crying for help.

No eyewitnesses said that they saw Martin bashing Zimmerman's head in the sidewalk. This was a key point in Zimmerman's defense. One eyewitnesses heard Martin's cries for help during the conflict. These are his injuries. This is not the photo of a guy whose head was repeatedly bashed into the sidewalk. These are injuries from a minor scuffle.

[Raghav_12]

How on earth you are equating physically assaulting someone with killing a 17 year old kid is beyond me. In the end the victim was Martin. He was just a 17 year old who paid the price because a vigilante, with no official power stalked him. At that age hormones are running high, I have myself picked fights for the flimsiest of reasons because that's how teenagers behave. However, I was lucky enough to born in a country where a) people are not allowed to carry guns just like that and b) people don't allow you to get away with murder just because someone started a physical altercation Street fights happen every day, everywhere in the world. How many people get killed in a 1 on 1 fight? Zimmerman's life was never under threat. Yet he took a life and got away scott free. Shows how cheap a life is in the US. There is no defense fr taking a life in such circumstances. Being beaten up is not enough reason to get away with murder, other wise half of the teenage population will be killed BTW, do you have an explanation for the black woman getting 20 years just for a warning shot in self-defense in Florida itself?

My guess is she had witness to give testimony. If husband had got killed and if there were not enough circumstantial evidences to suggest that what she is saying is untrue, her story would have been believed and might have got walk free. In any case it's very difficult to compare cases like this unless you know all the facts objectively and you know what was presented as pat of case you can't really comment. Also there is a reason for which lawyers are so expensive commodity. For two identical cases two lawyers may achieve different verdicts. You can't always put it to partisan attitude, at times you have to give it to lawyers. In any case, there are just not enough evidence to suggest that Zimmerman would have had any motive to kill Martin. Only possibility is hate crime but there is nothing to suggest that. I think most of the judiciaries in wors in world would have come to same verdict. You can not punish somebody for a crime unless you can establish why that crime would have been commited nor you have any witness or evidence to suggest what actually happened.

[The Outsider]

Which encapsulates why the State should've charged GZ with negligent homicide or illegal discharge of a weapon or some other charge smaller than murder ... and ensured a guilty verdict. But' date=' nossir, they wanted to hit it out of the park with beer evidence and champagne charges.[/quote'] What I don't understand is why were simultaenous charges not brought in by the prosecution. I am no expert, and I assume murder and manslaughter cannot be brought in together, but is it not possible to bring in illegal discharge of a weapon simultaneously with murder. I do agree with you that going for murder charges in this case was an overkill and feel that the same jury would have convicted him of something like negligent homicide etc. If I was in the jury, I would not have given a guilty verdict on murder either based on what I know. The responsibility of the botch up lies with the prosecution, IMO.

[beetle]

Alone at night,being followed ,any 17 yr old would go home and lock the door.If you choose to turn back and beat up a guy in a country where people are allowed to carry guns...you are just looking for big trouble. Being 17 is not a license to beat up people...nor does it guarantee a free pass to violence. When the president to the country chooses to take sides..I say good the underdog won.He shouldn't have shot the kid but he was the one getting his head pounded on the ground...it was his call to make.

[suraj]

Alone at night,being followed ,any 17 yr old would go home and lock the door.If you choose to turn back and beat up a guy in a country where people are allowed to carry guns...you are just looking for big trouble. Being 17 is not a license to beat up people...nor does it guarantee a free pass to violence. When the president to the country chooses to take sides..I say good the underdog won.He shouldn't have shot the kid but he was the one getting his head pounded on the ground...it was his call to make.

You are making comments without knowing the facts- if you meet some of these gun toting psuedo macho American men then you'll know that it was all Zimmerman's idiotic mindset that led to this. Bloody cowards overestimate their power and role because of the gun they are carrying; he had no business trying to apprehend TM.

[The Outsider]

Alone at night,being followed ,any 17 yr old would go home and lock the door.If you choose to turn back and beat up a guy in a country where people are allowed to carry guns...you are just looking for big trouble. Being 17 is not a license to beat up people...nor does it guarantee a free pass to violence. When the president to the country chooses to take sides..I say good the underdog won.He shouldn't have shot the kid but he was the one getting his head pounded on the ground...it was his call to make.

Think you are exaggerating here. There doesn't seem to be any conclusive evidence that Martin was pounding his head into the ground. His photographs and medical examination after the incident are more of someone who suffered from injuries in a street fight, rather than someone who was in mortal danger for his use of a firearm to be justified in self defense. It might not have been murder, but Zimmerman certainly appeared guilty of manslaughter and is lucky to have got away with it.

[coffee_rules]

What I don't understand is why were simultaenous charges not brought in by the prosecution. I am no expert, and I assume murder and manslaughter cannot be brought in together, but is it not possible to bring in illegal discharge of a weapon simultaneously with murder. I do agree with you that going for murder charges in this case was an overkill and feel that the same jury would have convicted him of something like negligent homicide etc. If I was in the jury, I would not have given a guilty verdict on murder either based on what I know. The responsibility of the botch up lies with the prosecution, IMO.

Now, there is talk about a civil suit (probably they can't have a criminal case on him anymore) on these grounds you guys mention. That might be a measure to pacify the crowd who is protesting on the street now.

[Swing_n_Speed]

Alone at night,being followed ,any 17 yr old would go home and lock the door.If you choose to turn back and beat up a guy in a country where people are allowed to carry guns...you are just looking for big trouble. Being 17 is not a license to beat up people...nor does it guarantee a free pass to violence. When the president to the country chooses to take sides..I say good the underdog won.He shouldn't have shot the kid but he was the one getting his head pounded on the ground...it was his call to make.

+1 It's pointless, some here absolutely refuse to look at facts anymore. The minute they hear the words 'follow', 'pursue' they portray Zimmerman as guilty. If they would just take the time to look at the re-enactment video, they would comprehend the situation better. But many won't. And yes Zimmerman was victimized here. When the President of America takes a stand against you before the trial, then that's disgusting.

[Swing_n_Speed]

@Swing n Speed, I will reply to the rest of your post after getting home, but prove that Zimmerman returned back to his truck after initiating the 9/11 call which was your bone of contention. Your post does not contain any evidence that says Zimmerman didnt follow Martin at any point of time.

Watch the re-enactment video. Zimmerman was returning to his truck when Martin ambushed him! http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/05/16/new-report-details-george-zimmermans-injuries/ 'A medical report compiled by the family physician of accused Trayvon Martin murderer George Zimmerman and obtained exclusively by ABC News found that Zimmerman was diagnosed with a “closed fracture” of his nose, a pair of black eyes, two lacerations to the back of his head and a minor back injury the day after he fatally shot Martin during an alleged altercation. [...] The two lacerations on the back of his head, one of them nearly an inch long, the other about a quarter-inch long, were first revealed in photos obtained exclusively by ABC News last month. But the report also shows Zimmerman declined hospitalization the night of the shooting, and then declined the advice of his doctor to make a follow-up appointment with an ear nose and throat doctor.'

[ganeshran]

Watch the re-enactment video. Zimmerman was returning to his truck when Martin ambushed him!

Dude, the re-enactment video is Zimmerman's version of events stated in his defense. Why on earth would he paint a picture where he ends up looking like the bad guy? Too bad Martin is not alive to give his side of the story. All news sources have unequivocally reported that Zimmerman followed Martin yet you claim that there was no active pursual by him. Put up a reliable news source which contradicts this or accept other sources which say otherwise

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/05/16/new-report-details-george-zimmermans-injuries/ 'A medical report compiled by the family physician of accused Trayvon Martin murderer George Zimmerman and obtained exclusively by ABC News found that Zimmerman was diagnosed with a “closed fracture” of his nose, a pair of black eyes, two lacerations to the back of his head and a minor back injury the day after he fatally shot Martin during an alleged altercation. The two lacerations on the back of his head, one of them nearly an inch long, the other about a quarter-inch long, were first revealed in photos obtained exclusively by ABC News last month. But the report also shows Zimmerman declined hospitalization the night of the shooting, and then declined the advice of his doctor to make a follow-up appointment with an ear nose and throat doctor.'

Look at the photos. Do you really believe those are the kind of injuries a guy would incur had his head been repeatedly bashed into the sidewalk. This was a key component in Zimmerman's defense in citing self defense. NO eyewitness confirmed this and his injuries are inconsistent with his stance. Maybe a minor scuffle where there were a few punches thrown about, but not a full blown assault by Travyon where Zimmerman's life was actively in danger.

[ganeshran]

Which encapsulates why the State should've charged GZ with negligent homicide or illegal discharge of a weapon or some other charge smaller than murder ... and ensured a guilty verdict. But' date=' nossir, they wanted to hit it out of the park with beer evidence and champagne charges.[/quote'] They should have gone for some lower charges than murder. The key was to negate his self defense story and he would have got 20 to life for simply firing the weapon with intent to injure

[ganeshran]

You are making comments without knowing the facts- if you meet some of these gun toting psuedo macho American men then you'll know that it was all Zimmerman's idiotic mindset that led to this. Bloody cowards overestimate their power and role because of the gun they are carrying; he had no business trying to apprehend TM.

Yeah, it is called Neighbourhood watch for a reason. Had Zimmerman spotted Martin, called 911 from his car and returned home, Martin would be alive today. Instead he decides to be all wannabe cop and follow Martin who construes a much older man following him in the night as a threat (just as any sensible human being would.) A confrontation happens and at the first sight of a punch, Zimmerman loses his resolve and takes out the gun and shoots Martin at close range. Very brave that..

[Swing_n_Speed]

Dude, the re-enactment video is Zimmerman's version of events stated in his defense. Why on earth would he paint a picture where he ends up looking like the bad guy? Too bad Martin is not alive to give his side of the story. All news sources have unequivocally reported that Zimmerman followed Martin yet you claim that there was no active pursual by him. Put up a reliable news source which contradicts this or accept other sources which say otherwise Look at the photos. Do you really believe those are the kind of injuries a guy would incur had his head been repeatedly bashed into the sidewalk. This was a key component in Zimmerman's defense in citing self defense. NO eyewitness confirmed this and his injuries are inconsistent with his stance. Maybe a minor scuffle where there were a few punches thrown about, but not a full blown assault by Travyon where Zimmerman's life was actively in danger.

New sources have been ambiguous dude. You know better than to take everything they say at face value. Especially the American media. As far as the pics go I've never ever been in a fight so I dnt know. But I would certainly be very afraid if I was pinned down and someone was bashing my head against the ground. Not afraid enough to take someone's life though. But heck Zimmerman argued his case within the preamble of the laws. Anyways I'm done with this case, I see no reason to change what I believe and have stated in this thread. Off-course this is not to suggest that you were wrong or anything. We just have differing opinions and as such this case being a grey area, we can leave it at that. Cheers :two_thumbs_up::icflove:

[Swing_n_Speed]

Ok so is this why Trayvon was buying Skittles and Arizona? The media clearly tries to conceal the Arizona instead saying he was buying ice tea. From the he looks of it Trayvon was out to prepare a drug....Ha whadyaknow! http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2012/05/24/update-26-part-2-trayvon-martin-shooting-a-year-of-drug-use-culminates-in-predictable-violence/ http://nomorecocktails.com/post/2013/07/20/The-media-lies-about-drink-Trayvon-was-buying;-watermelon-fruit-juice-cocktail-Skittles-used-to-make-Lean.aspx