Zimmerman Found Not Guilty!

[LoAmmi]

Problem is we don't know who in fact traded blows first. Had Zimmerman initiated contact first, maybe the case turns out differently...maybe.

Yeah, I don't know who started things and there's only two people who would know and one of them isn't around to tell the story.

 

[Davidnic]

I think the events leading up to the confrontation should be a consideration. In my opinion, you forfeit your right to a self-defense defense were you the instigator of the violence. In other words, the guy that came up and punched me without provocation does not get to claim self-defense later because I should be the one able to claim self-defense.

The law doesn't really agree with me, but it's just what I view.

I can see that. I mean that was always the rule in school and the one my dad and grandmother used. "Did you punch first?"

The law is, in my mind, correct about being more complex. A punch does not mean retaliation with a knife is immediately allowable unless the beating reaches the level of deadly force..no matter who instigated it.

Of course now we are talking about the law, not the case. As we both said we do not know who acted physically first in this specific case.

 

[Miss Shelby]

Sir, I don't know you personally. I said your words were offensive to me, and you come off as semi-racist. Again, I don't know you so I can't call you a racist. However, your words are telling me that it's a possibility.

The fact that you discount how I feel is enough for me. I ignored you when you insulted my intelligence in your earlier rant because I don't care anymore.

May God bless you and keep you!

Are you sure you didn't ignore him because you knew he was right?

 

[BBCath]

May God Bless you richly for your example of patience here. You were not out-of-line to make the observation you did, others agreed with you (and I did too, fwiw). The poster you're addressing has a habit of reacting to criticisms in just the way he's demonstrated here. Don't let him get you down

Thanks Mike! I appreciate it.

 

[BBCath]

Are you sure you didn't ignore him because you knew he was right?

(I sense some condescension in your question, but I'll humor you anyway.)

Absolutely not. I ignored him because his rant was way off base. So why continue to discuss this.

If I say something was offensive to me, and you write 4 paragraphs on why I'm supposedly wrong, you're not listening and you also do not care how I feel - you're just trying to protect yourself.

So I will send you on your merry way and pray that God continues to bless you.

 

[Tallguy88]

May God Bless you richly for your example of patience here. You were not out-of-line to make the observation you did, others agreed with you (and I did too, fwiw). The poster you're addressing has a habit of reacting to criticisms in just the way he's demonstrated here. Don't let him get you down

Seconded.

 

[Fantine]

What doe "not guilty" really mean? It means that high-paid defense attorneys (Zimmerman never disclosed who contributed to his defense fund--my guess is Smith and Wesson and the NRA in equal amounts) strung together sequences of highly improbable what-if's and six jurors mistook "quantity" for "quality."

Personally, highly improbable "what if's" don't equate to reasonable doubt for me--just a bunch of highly improbable what if's.

The best what if's Smith and Wesson and the NRA could buy.

 

[LoAmmi]

According to the Texas Penal Code, self-defense cannot be used as a justification when:
(4) if the actor provoked the other's use or attempted
use of unlawful force, unless:
(A) the actor abandons the encounter, or clearly
communicates to the other his intent to do so reasonably believing
he cannot safely abandon the encounter; and
(B) the other nevertheless continues or attempts
to use unlawful force against the actor;


Interesting.

 

[Root of Jesse]

This seems the most likely scenario and I don't like it.



Bu-bu-bu-bu...Texas is soooo pro-life!

Yeah. These kinds of laws do this to the credibility of pro-lifers, especially when the so-called pro-lifers call for laws that allow this kind of travesty.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-s8iie0zZ-g

Being pro-life in no way precludes defending yourself.

It looks to me like Zimmerman confronted Martin, then backed off, but Martin was offended, and decided to use his hot-head and retaliate.

At any rate, it wasn't murder in any degree. It wasn't race-instigated either. Zimmerman will never have a normal life, unless he moves to Timbuktu or 3.

 

[Root of Jesse]

What doe "not guilty" really mean? It means that high-paid defense attorneys (Zimmerman never disclosed who contributed to his defense fund--my guess is Smith and Wesson and the NRA in equal amounts) strung together sequences of highly improbable what-if's and six jurors mistook "quantity" for "quality."

Personally, highly improbable "what if's" don't equate to reasonable doubt for me--just a bunch of highly improbable what if's.

The best what if's Smith and Wesson and the NRA could buy.

I don't know, let's ask OJ Simpson...

There were 'what-if's on both sides, and the prosecution didn't really have a case. They were politically pressured into putting Zimmerman on trial.

The jurors did the juror thing. They heard the evidence and shook their heads all together. And apparently they were split, originally. If the evidence was so strong against Zimmerman, why did three of them change their minds? Conversely, if the evidence had been strong enough, the changed minds would have been the other way, and you'd be parading in the streets.

I was impressed that Zimmerman didn't do a happy-dance or fist pump when the verdict was read. That says a lot to me.

 

[Michie]

I don't know, let's ask OJ Simpson...

There were 'what-if's on both sides, and the prosecution didn't really have a case. They were politically pressured into putting Zimmerman on trial.

The jurors did the juror thing. They heard the evidence and shook their heads all together. And apparently they were split, originally. If the evidence was so strong against Zimmerman, why did three of them change their minds? Conversely, if the evidence had been strong enough, the changed minds would have been the other way, and you'd be parading in the streets.

I was impressed that Zimmerman didn't do a happy-dance or fist pump when the verdict was read. That says a lot to me.

He was very subdued.

 

[Tigg]

Wow! What a thread. IMO charges should never have been filed and only were because of public and political pressure. When prosecution witneses testify and come out mainly for the defense, ya got a problem. Anyhow, I congrats to the jury as they made the right decision. Now we have those still wanting Zimmerman's head. Caring not a bit for the facts. Sad day when people in the street try to rule. If they don't like the law, then change it. Not run amuck like total lawles chaotic nuts.

Again my kudo's to the jury.

 

[Michie]

Wow! What a thread. IMO charges should never have been filed and only were because of public and political pressure. When prosecution witneses testify and come out mainly for the defense, ya got a problem. Anyhow, I congrats to the jury as they made the right decision. Now we have those still wanting Zimmerman's head. Caring not a bit for the facts. Sad day when people in the street try to rule. If they don't like the law, then change it. Not run amuck like total lawles chaotic nuts.

Again my kudo's to the jury.

They (the powers that be) aren't finished yet.

Did you see the interview with one of the jurors on Anderson Cooper last night?

 

[Miss Shelby]

I didn't see the interview but what are the jurors going to say other than what we already know? poorly presented case?

 

[Gwendolyn]

Why shouldn't charges have been filed? He killed a man. Unless self-defense is glaringly obvious, the right thing to do is go to trial.

 

[Miss Shelby]

how about this for a change of pace?

Jocelyn Rojas rescued by Temar Boggs in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, teens chase kidnapping suspect on bikes

 

[Michie]

I didn't see the interview but what are the jurors going to say other than what we already know? poorly presented case?

Not only that but evidence that the public did not know about. Like when George was being interviewed by the police giving his version of how things unfolded & the police were trying to trip him up. They said, we have a video George & he said...oh thank God! Trayvon was walking behind houses & lingering. He wasn't walking the sidewalk. There was a robbery earlier & the suspect was black. Tons of stuff.

He was thin during the shooting, shorter than Trayvon, etc. We have been fed an image the jury has not.

The media & the pressure from that forced a trial that should have never happened. The public is disappointed because the public has been fed a distorted image.

 

[LoAmmi]

Not only that but evidence that the public did not know about. Like when George was being interviewed by the police giving his version f how things unfolded & the police were trying to trip him up. They said, we have a video George & he said...oh thank God!

I'm not being sarcastic. That's good police work right there.

 

[Miss Shelby]

Really? Did he weigh more than Mike's t-bones, I wonder?

 

[Michie]

how about this for a change of pace?

Jocelyn Rojas rescued by Temar Boggs in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, teens chase kidnapping suspect on bikes

Saw that yesterday. Heros!