George Zimmerman acquitted of murder in Trayvon Martin shooting death

[Kamen Rider]

The one who gets physical first is the one who's at fauilt. They drilled that into my head at my secuirty guard orentiation. If you start an argument with me and I bash your head in with a baseball bat, I'm the one who gets into trouble.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

The one who gets physical first is the one who's at fauilt. They drilled that into my head at my secuirty guard orentiation. If you start an argument with me and I bash your head in with a baseball bat, I'm the one who gets into trouble.

That's fine and good but if I confront you first, you may very well feel that physical violence is necessary because you may feel your life is in danger.  That's my point.  If someone is stalking you and following you around and you feel threatened, you tell me what your options are?  You can either try to get away or you can use violence.  Zimmerman's life was only in danger because he created the confrontation.   That's what is crazy about this.  How does one stand their ground when they pursue a confrontation? 

 

My real issue with this law is that the people that are minding their own business may be labeled as the aggressor when in fact they are the victims.  There apparently is no law that says that stalking a person is not against the law and that's my issue with the law.  SYG is fine but where is protection for those who feel the need to defend themselves against what they feel is a perceived threat by the instigator, which in this case was Zimmerman?  Maybe he didn't start the PHYSICAL confrontation, but he certainly started the initial confrontation, even if it was only verbal.

[realizm]

 

The dude was in a private HOA community, George felt he was suspicious and proceeded to follow him. Remember that this is private property, and George couldn't know if the person was supposed to be there or not. He didn't approach him and start an illegal patdown/bag search without consent as the NYPD does.

Right and that's the real issue I have... You see I would argue that both of them could argue Stand Your Ground based on how the law is written.  I mean Martin had no idea who Zimmerman was or what he was doing, so he could've argued that he felt his life was in danger and so he attacked him.  Once Zimmerman was attacked, well then he could turn around and argue the same thing. I think the law is flawed for the simple fact that anyone can argue that they felt their life was in danger.  There seems to have been several cases with SYG was used. There needs to be exceptions to the rule because it's easy for someone to say my life was in danger but the question is WHY?

 

If someone is stalking another individual or confronting someone who is minding their own business and then gets to turn around and use SYG as a means to justify them killing them then we're opening up a whole can of worms here because essentially I can walk around and harass people for any reason, they can attack me arguing Stand Your Ground and then it's just a matter of who comes out on top.  Really scary when you think about it. Now I certainly think that people should have EVERY right to defend themselves, BUT people also should expect some sort of right in terms of not being harassed. 

 

So there is no question that Zimmerman should've walked based on how the law is written.  I just wonder how many people will be able to use those loophole going forward...

 

 

I can't exactly agree on the notion that Zimmerman should have walked as mentioned in my comment made in post #74, or that the young man was walking "suspiciously" due to certain factors that remain in the unknown. However I will hold off on that debating that point for a second unless someone wisheds to highlight that again, I will discuss..

 

As for how lawyers and prosecutors as well as civilians for that matter can abuse the Stand Your Ground law in court? That is a good question and as you mention it VG8 I can see many scenerios in which this law can be abused:

 

1) It can be a liability to the victim of an abusive spouse in a domestic dispute (Husband or wife, either way). If say a spouse comes in and hits his significant other yet the other responds with deadly force to protect him or herself herself, since the law defines in this case that an invited person "is a resident of the household" if something goes wrong, the victim can be prosecuted, instead of the attacker.

 

2) If a man or woman is assaulted or robbed in the street and defends him or herself, again with the unconscientious loophole, the perp can claim that he or she was also acting out in self defense, and walk out a free man when it was actually the perp that committed the crime.

 

3) If a police officer unjustifiably assaults an innocent man, and the civilian fights back or holds up his hands to resist or protect himself from blows inflicted by the PO, god forbid he does not get shot, prosecutors and lawyers in the PO's defense can take advantage of the same loophole and convict the victim with criminal felony charges.

 

4) In states with SYG laws, In particular, shootings of blacks by whites were likely to go unpunished.and justified despite of whoever initiated the shooting and homocide Studies were done to confirm this with the situation with such incidents in other SYG states. Which is why race factors cannot be ruled out.

 

There are so many ways that this SYG law in the State of Florida can be misconstrued by people and pervert the process of justice where it comes to violent confrontations and self defense. One of the big problems with this law is that there is no “imminent” danger provision throughout the statute for vicims of assault, IIRC. Instead the provision calls for an imminent danger to property. (i.e the saying "get off my lawn, coined by actor Clint Eastwood).

 

This I believe is that loophole that many can dodge to get away with unjustifiable offenses. It must be revised because it apparently fails to deter crime or wrongful deaths as in this case apparently as none of us will have to assume. The facts in court is not clear as to what really happened according to the testimony presented in court.

 

You know I accepted the verdict for what it was in the end, but even I can't deny the fact that I don't like how someone can start a confrontation with another, a fight breaks out between them and the person shoots and kills the other, then claims self-defense despite starting the confrontation in the first place. Orion, I didn't personally respond to your comment you made at the beginning of this thread like everyone else has, but I will say this. That comment you made will come back to haunt you. Matter of fact it already has with most of the posts made so far. Good luck, cause your going to need it, especially with the way some have already responded around here.

 

Well on my part my apologies to Orion for the jerk reaction. I see where he is coming from now. I misread his intentions behind his posts as apparent as we delved into the discussion further. This is a very tough topic to handle. In fact I will give him a #1 to reverse the initial downvote in the spirit of being a good sport in such hot button topics. He is entitled to his views.

 

@ Kamen Rider: I agree with you 100%. I would retaliate not in kind and disable the attacker if someone tried to assault me which has actually happened to me in self defense, as many would know, out of no other recourse. (See Jenn7Lover's latest thread starter)

 

However VG8 has a point, I believe as well that the only reason Zimmerman ended up in danger is because he actually initiated the confrontation rather than handle it in a more sensible way. saying this again as a supporter of the right for civilians to bear arms as we live in a very violent America where anything can happen and it can mean your life since the police apparently could care less in some cases  are not able to handle disputes quickly in many cases until it's too late.

[SoSpectacular]

All I'm going to say is that, this country's steadily going down into the toilet.

 

I have no faith. 

[Astoria Line]

9 pages in one night? 

 

I think we can all agree that this thread helps us show everyone's true character, whether good or bad.

 

I didn't keep up with the case myself, so I'm not putting much input or am one side. But I am seeing a lot of responses towards it whether on here, some other forums and facebook, and the major consensus is that many people aren't happy about it..

 

I will say this thing:

 

I don't understand the possible idea of riots. I support people being open and passionate about their ideas and stances, I mean we have free speech for a reason, right? But when you resort to threats of rioting over a decision.. that is a rather uneducated idea. It is better to react peacefully and more intelligently. This is why people are looked down upon and not taken seriously because of stupid reactions to things. Nothing is solved when you use violence, which is like this case. This case is a result of violence in itself and look, a kid is dead and a man is now becoming a prisoner in his own skin and is hated by a huge percent of the country.

[MHV9218]

The prosecutor's argument is irrelevant, since he is saying whatever possible to throw George behind bars.

You pretend that you're serious about this case, and then you say that "the prosecutor's argument is irrelevant"? I see you don't understand how our courts work, do you?

[Orion VII 4 Life]

You pretend that you're serious about this case, and then you say that "the prosecutor's argument is irrelevant"? I see you don't understand how our courts work, do you?

Now that he has been proven innocent what the prosecution has to say is not relevant. What both sides had to say was all relevant until that time last night when jury made their decision.

 

Plus, what the prosecution was saying in that instance was outright BS trying to accuse George of being a racist killer with absolutely no evidence of that. Say whatever you want about him being guilty of intentionally killing a human being, but calling him racist for absolutely no reason and without any real proof is nothing short of typical, ignorant liberal BS.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Now that he has been proven innocent what the prosecution has to say is not relevant. What both sides had to say was all relevant until that time last night when jury made their decision.

 

Plus, what the prosecution was saying in that instance was outright BS trying to accuse George of being a racist killer with absolutely no evidence of that. Say whatever you want about him being guilty of intentionally killing a human being, but calling him racist for absolutely no reason and without any real proof is nothing short of typical, ignorant liberal BS.

Well I don't know if anyone can say for sure that there isn't any evidence of it nor can you claim that just because he's half Latino that he can't be racist because that simply isn't true.  It is very evident that he profiled Martin because he saw a young male in a hoodie, so he automatically assumed that he was up to no good.  At the very least the argument could be made that he made assumptions with no evidence of him being dangerous.  Now it seems as if the media has gone to great depths to edit the audio of the phone call in which he is supposedly heard making racial epithets and making comments like "they always get away", but that's up for discussion.  I think this isn't the end of this situation.  People will push for a civil rights investigation and they will dig into his background to look at any past incidents of how he handled situations when he was a vigilante because there have been accusations of him being overaggressive and trying to play cop, which he is not.

[Orion VII 4 Life]

The loving, tolerant liberal media "telling the truth" as usual, smh... Please with George the best of luck in this lawsuit, regardless of how you feel about him and the verdict.

 

ZIMMERMAN'S LAWYER GOING AFTER NBC NEWS 'ASAP'  

Now that the trial to determine whether or not he was guilty of a malicious murder is over, George Zimmerman's lawyers are stepping up their lawsuit against NBC News for airing edited audio that allegedly made their client look like a racist.

Last December, Zimmerman filed the lawsuit against NBC for airing what many outlets described as deceptively edited audio on the March 27 broadcast of the Today show.

On the morning show, NBC spliced together two lines spoken by Zimmerman as he talked to a 911 operator to report Trayvon Martin as a suspicious character wandering his neighborhood.

On the NBC version of the call, Zimmerman is heard to say: "This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black."

This makes Zimmerman seem to find Martin suspicious because of his race. However, the full audio showed Zimmerman described the teen's behavior as "up to no good," and he did not mention race until asked about it by a dispatcher.

Breitbart News first reported the edit, leading to an outcry from conservative media and even criticism fro progressive news outlet Mother Jones. Then-NBC News PresidentSteve Capus called the edit "a mistake and not a deliberate act to misrepresent the phone call" in April of 2012. Almost a year later, Capus left the company.

Zimmerman: 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.

Dispatcher: OK, and this guy, is he black, white or Hispanic?

Zimmerman: He looks black.

In December, Zimmerman's lawyers said that NBC created a "false and defamatory misimpression using the oldest form of yellow journalism: manipulating Zimmerman's own words, splicing together disparate parts of the recording to create the illusion of statements that Zimmerman never actually made."

The lawsuit was help up pending the outcome of the murder trial. Now that a Florida jury has decided that Zimmerman is not guilty of all charges, the neighborhood watcher is surging ahead with his lawsuit against the network.

The Washington Post reports that Zimmerman lawyer James Beasley is ready to go forward against NBC—and as soon as possible, at that.

"This verdict of not guilty is just that, and shows that at least this jury didn’t believe that George was a racist, profiling, or anything that the press accused George of being," Beasley said. "That probably doesn’t get you that much but it’s simply time for us to start the case and hold accountable anyone who was irresponsible in their journalism."

Read more at http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/07/14/Zimmerman-s-Lawyer-Going-After-NBC-News-ASAP

[LTA1992]

You know whats funny?


Out of the 279,384 African Americans murdered between 1976 and 2011. Guess how many were done by other blacks........262,621. Sooooo much "racism" in the air.

As an African American, that statistic right there makes me not give a damn. Because when you think about it, African Americans show more hate than anyone else. And its sad.

[MHV9218]

The loving, tolerant liberal media "telling the truth" as usual, smh... Please with George the best of luck in this lawsuit, regardless of how you feel about him and the verdict.

Read more at http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/07/14/Zimmerman-s-Lawyer-Going-After-NBC-News-ASAP

 

1) NBC is not liberal. 

2) There is no liberal media.

3) I don't wish that racist, murdering bastard anything.

4) They may have misrepresented things that he said, but it's better than outright lying to the jury. 

 

You know whats funny?

 

 

Out of the 279,384 African Americans murdered between 1976 and 2011. Guess how many were done by other blacks........262,621. Sooooo much "racism" in the air.

 

As an African American, that statistic right there makes me not give a damn. Because when you think about it, African Americans show more hate than anyone else. And its sad.

 

What's the point of this? Yeah, it's sad. Yeah, it's a problem. But African Americans don't "show more hate" in general, and this still has nothing to do with the random murder of Trayvon Martin.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

What's the point of this? Yeah, it's sad. Yeah, it's a problem. But African Americans don't "show more hate" in general, and this still has nothing to do with the random murder of Trayvon Martin.

It does because if a Black person had killed Martin it wouldn't even be news.

[DaTransitMan4608]

Tonight I heard a radio host talking about how people should protest Zimmerman's acquittal by boycotting mass transit. I'm not gonna go along with that boycott and I doubt anyone else will since most people need it.

 

This whole thread has been one of arguments so I'll try bring some humor into it. Here's a video of a kid getting really mad at Modern Warfare 2.

Warning: The following video contains language of a harsh nature. 

 

 

[MHV9218]

It does because if a Black person had killed Martin it wouldn't even be news.

 

Probably true, but that's a different thing from what he was talking about. 

[QM1to6Ave]

Here's an interesting question I've been pondering: From the legal analysts on the case and in the media, it seems that Stand Your Ground, in Florida, means that regardless of who started a fight, even if you are the instigator, once you feel threatened in your own mind, you are allowed to legally use lethal force to stop that threat. Now, if Trayvon Martin had also had a weapon that evening and had shot and killed George Zimmerman, how would this case have played out in the media? Woud he have also been acquitted (I'd imagine so, since he was not even the instigator)? Would this case have even made as big of a national splash? It's so interesting to me how these things get picked up by the media and the national audience. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Here's an interesting question I've been pondering: From the legal analysts on the case and in the media, it seems that Stand Your Ground, in Florida, means that regardless of who started a fight, even if you are the instigator, once you feel threatened in your own mind, you are allowed to legally use lethal force to stop that threat. Now, if Trayvon Martin had also had a weapon that evening and had shot and killed George Zimmerman, how would this case have played out in the media? Woud he have also been acquitted (I'd imagine so, since he was not even the instigator)? Would this case have even made as big of a national splash? It's so interesting to me how these things get picked up by the media and the national audience. 

That's been my point the whole time... It's like the wild wild West down there and that's why I have an issue with this law.  Anyone can basically say that they felt threatened and claim self-defense even if they instigated the whole thing.  It's absurd.

[Trainmaster5]

I can't ignore the tone of the first post in this thread which I found personally disgusting. I do think that Realizm and especially VG8 have come closest to my feelings on the whole case. Whether GZ is/was racist in his actions misses the point IMO. The SYG law, as written and applied in Florida, is one of the broadest, stupid laws passed by any legislature in this country. Simply put, I can provoke a confrontation with another person for any reason my mind thinks up, and injure or kill the other person when that person objects to my actions. When the furor over this case dies down it wouldn't surprise me to see the same scenario played out against GZ or his loved ones. Emotion aside, IMO the verdict was the only one possible under the SYG law. If this happened almost anywhere else in the US the outcome would probably be different. For all those pro gun second amendment advocates who hail the verdict I'd counter that GZ is the last example of a person I'd be praising. There are better examples to champion your cause. He ain't no Paul Kersey. I'd go so far as to label him a punk who carries. Just my opinion. Carry on.

[LTA1992]

 

What's the point of this? Yeah, it's sad. Yeah, it's a problem. But African Americans don't "show more hate" in general, and this still has nothing to do with the random murder of Trayvon Martin.

Apparently the death threats and the (unfulfilled) threats of rioting were just ignored, huh?

 

The point is:

 

1: The Prosecution utterly sucked. And you know they sucked when Zimmerman didn't even have to testify.

2: The Witnesses. Most of them could not tell who was who, neither by voice or by visual. Even the girlfriend has lied several times.

3: The Defense had a point, If he was black, this trial wouldn't have made a blip on anyone's radar.

 

 

They even ran a test to see if he had any hate for cerain groups of people and he passed that test with flying colors.

 

People act like this hasn't happened before.

 

OJ walked due to a combination of tampered evidence and Johnny Cochran as a defense.

There was an abysmal amount of evidence to put Casey Anthony away.

 

Lastly, 90%  percent of the people getting heated, more than likely did not follow the trial and are just repeating what they heard on facebook.

 

The jury (6 women who had no knowledge of the case) did their jobs. Weigh their decision based on the evidence shown.

 

Did I mention our traitorous took this as a perfect opportunity to attack the 2nd Amendment?

[Turbo19]

Apparently the death threats and the (unfulfilled) threats of rioting were just ignored, huh?

 

The point is:

 

1: The Prosecution utterly sucked. And you know they sucked when Zimmerman didn't even have to testify.

2: The Witnesses. Most of them could not tell who was who, neither by voice or by visual. Even the girlfriend has lied several times.

3: The Defense had a point, If he was black, this trial wouldn't have made a blip on anyone's radar.

 

 

They even ran a test to see if he had any hate for cerain groups of people and he passed that test with flying colors.

 

People act like this hasn't happened before.

 

OJ walked due to a combination of tampered evidence and Johnny Cochran as a defense.

There was an abysmal amount of evidence to put Casey Anthony away.

 

Lastly, 90%  percent of the people getting heated, more than likely did not follow the trial and are just repeating what they heard on facebook.

 

The jury (6 women who had no knowledge of the case) did their jobs. Weigh their decision based on the evidence shown.

 

Did I mention our traitorous took this as a perfect opportunity to attack the 2nd Amendment?

Ignoring all your redundant crap I ask you one question, what's traitorous of disputing the relevance and execution of the Second amendment? Are we as people just expected to not question anything in regard to the United States Constitution?

[MHV9218]

3: The Defense had a point, If he was black, this trial wouldn't have made a blip on anyone's radar.

 

 

Whoa whoa whoa. That is NOWHERE NEAR what the defense said. Mark O'Mara, idiot that he is, said that "if George Zimmerman was [sic] black, he would never have been charged with a crime." That was some harebrained statement intended to claim there is black privilege in the legal system or something, not an intelligent point about the level of black on black violence there is. 

[Orion VII 4 Life]

1) NBC is not liberal.

2) There is no liberal media.

3) I don't wish that racist, murdering bastard anything.

4) They may have misrepresented things that he said, but it's better than outright lying to the jury.

 

1. BWAHAHAHAHAHA OMG I AM DYING LAUGHING. You can't be serious....

2. You just contradicted your first "point".

[MHV9218]

Unless you live in some Ann Coulter-Andrew Breitbart wet dream fantasy world, it's pretty clear that NBC is a decidedly centrist and at times center-right network.

[Andrew]

It does because if a Black person had killed Martin it wouldn't even be news.

That's the irony of this whole case.If Trayvon Martin was shot dead by a black ghetto drug dealer who mistook him for someone else,there would not have been a peep in the media and blacks in general would have said "the drug dealer was a knucklehead" or "The drug dealer was stupid" There would be no outrage,no protests,nothing.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

That's the irony of this whole case.If Trayvon Martin was shot dead by a black ghetto drug dealer who mistook him for someone else,there would not have been a peep in the media and blacks in general would have said "the drug dealer was a knucklehead" or "The drug dealer was stupid" There would be no outrage,no protests,nothing.

I was actually startled out of a nap on the express bus tonight on the BxM1... Some jerks banging on the side of the bus on the Upper East Side nonetheless marching....  I thought they were contained to Times Square... In any event I hope these knuckleheads don't go around backing up traffic with these marches.

[Fan Railer]

1. BWAHAHAHAHAHA OMG I AM DYING LAUGHING. You can't be serious....

2. You just contradicted your first "point".

If you really think there is true mainstream liberal media, you really live in a self-dug hole of ignorance. All mainstream corporations are large business with a LOT of money. Now I can't imagine anything that fits in that category as being truly liberal. Sure, they can be more center leaning and moderate, but nothing so far left as I would define as liberal. It just so happens that we have networks such as FOX that are unashamed to place themselves firmly in the right, that it makes the more moderate networks like CNN look liberal in comparison. But down in their core, all our major news networks are moderate leaning to right leaning. I mean, all of their stories focus on profit motive and catering to the American masses, and NOT actual new reporting. How often do you see these major news networks reporting on poverty, hunger, and disease in third world countries? They don't because it would lose them viewers, and sponsors, and money. There is no truly liberal mainstream news outlet here in the States. We only have networks that cater to the comfortable lifestyle that we are blessed with here in America.