The Zimmerman Trial

reply to post by Cheesefleas

So was it illegal for TM to walk around the same neighborhood? The fact is GZ decided to bring a gun along, he is RESPONSIBLE for that, it is very pertanent that a gun was involved because it created the outcome.

They both had every right to walk around that neighborhood. My point was it’s not illegal to follow someone and report suspicious activity! That’s what GZ was there to do as a neighborhood watchman!! People who think GZ was a predator should consider that, statistically, people who have a concealed handgun license are FAR LESS LIKELY to commit any crime than the average citizen. These are people who have gone through training on the appropriate use of deadly force and have had extensive backgrounds checks.

Take a look at these results:

The Texas Department of Public Safety published a list of crimes committed in Texas in 2011 by everyone convicted and by those convicted who also held CCL's. The bottom line: Concealed carry permit holders commit less than 1% of the crimes. If you want to be exact, they committed two tenths of one percent of the crimes in 2011. And not all of those involved firearms or violence.

The data show that 63,679 people were convicted of a long list of crimes. Of those 63 thousand, only 120 were CCL holders.

link

The same results can be found in every state that allows concealed carry. The numbers don’t lie!!

The fact is GZ is the only eye witness to the final showdown, the fact is GZ is in jeopardy, you don't mean to tell us that some people fudge the facts when they are facing prison? Not to mention that GZ's stories have morphed slowly which is common psychologically speaking, interesting that his "facts" have evolved to better his defense.

He killed a person with his gun because he is a busy body who brings a gun along. Its his responsibility.

He killed a person with his gun because he was attacked and his gun was about to be used against him.

TM – “You’re gonna die tonight!!”

What you think about GZ and his motives have no bearing on his guilt. He was carrying a gun legally. All that matters is whether or not he feared for his life at the moment he fired. That’s the law.

Originally posted by ugie1028
reply to post by Cheesefleas

 

you obviously have no clue.

the 911 audio tapes. Have you listened to them? have you followed the trial from day one?

I have.

I especially like the part where GZ is advised to let police take over.

That is where he went from being a neighborhood watchman, to a vigalante.

He made a choice, and he is responsible for that gun going off.

Originally posted by Cheesefleas
. GZ started the fiasco, first he decided to bring a gun along, he follow TM, ignored his neighborhood watch guide lines, ignored police dispatchers and ended up killin someone who commited no crime.

You don't know if any of that is true.

1 - The 'fiasco' started when one person attacked the other. We don't know who did the initial attack.
2 - Zimmerman brought a gun along .. he had a concealed permit and was in his legal rights to do so
3 - Zimmerman followed Martin. He was allowed to do so. Lead investigator Sarino said Zimmerman broke no laws in doing so. Dispatch told Zimmerman 'tell us what else he does' (in reference to Martin). So how else was Zimmerman supposed to tell dispatch what else Martin did? He had to follow him to know.
4 - We don't know if Martin committed a crime or not. The crime .... attacking Zimmerman. Martin may or may not have done that.

What we DO know ..... Zimmerman shot Martin when Martin was on top of him, beating the stuff'n out of him. Eyewitness and forensic evidence say this is a fact. Zimmerman was in his legal rights to defend himself in this manner.

Therefore .... not guilty.

reply to post by Cheesefleas


Where is the evidence he went vigilante? what evidence points to that? what hard evidence (Not speculation, not conjecture, not a theory.) but hard evidence... not guesses.

Originally posted by Cheesefleas

Originally posted by ugie1028
reply to post by Cheesefleas

 

you obviously have no clue.

the 911 audio tapes. Have you listened to them? have you followed the trial from day one?

I have.

I especially like the part where GZ is advised to let police take over.

That is where he went from being a neighborhood watchman, to a vigalante.

He made a choice, and he is responsible for that gun going off.

You've made up your mind and you're not going to let the facts detract from your opinion.

It's pointless to try and explain it to you further.

Originally posted by Cheesefleas
I thought the prosecutions case was just fine.

Really?

The prosecution told the jury to use their hearts when making their decision. The prosecution gave absolutely no evidence of Murder 2 or of Manslaughter, and then told the jury to 'use their hearts' (emotions) making their decision. The LAW says to ignore emotions and make a decision based on law. So the prosecution was telling the jury to ignore the law and let emotional 'mob rule' run their decisions.

And you are just fine with that??

Originally posted by ugie1028
reply to post by Cheesefleas

 

he wasn't following him because he thought walking around his neighborhood was illegal. what kind of argument is that?

According to the tapes, he was acting suspicious, looking at/into houses in the rain, at night...

How do you not look at a house as you are walking through a neighborhood????

Seems like people in this thread have judged Trayvon on many things that didn't happen that night and have decided he deserved to die because of those things.

Not a bit of logic being used.

Originally posted by firemonkey

Originally posted by ugie1028
reply to post by Cheesefleas

 

he wasn't following him because he thought walking around his neighborhood was illegal. what kind of argument is that?

According to the tapes, he was acting suspicious, looking at/into houses in the rain, at night...

How do you not look at a house as you are walking through a neighborhood????

Seems like people in this thread have judged Trayvon on many things that didn't happen that night and have decided he deserved to die because of those things.

Not a bit of logic being used.

No, he died because he unjustly assaulted a man with a gun and tried to kill him!

GZ had a right to preserve his own life. Period.

reply to post by Cheesefleas


I wouldn't jump you, or anyone, but if you thought I was going to kill you, you would be justified.

Also the 911 dispatch REPEATEDLY asked GZ what the suspect was doing now, which may have led Heorge to get out of his truck. So he could report. The dispatch didn't say we don't need you to do that after he was already out. So e stopped.

reply to post by FlyersFan

What we DO know ..... Zimmerman shot Martin when Martin was on top of him, beating the stuff'n out of him. Eyewitness and forensic evidence say this is a fact. Zimmerman was in his legal rights to defend himself in this manner.

Not if he started the fight, which you already admitted we don't know who started the fight. Starting the fight doesn't have to be throwing the first punch...it can be as little as grabbing someone's arm, or putting your hand on someone's chest to attempt to hold them back.

We don't know who started the fight, so the "self defense" argument is out the window.

Originally posted by Cheesefleas

Originally posted by ugie1028
reply to post by Cheesefleas

 

you obviously have no clue.

the 911 audio tapes. Have you listened to them? have you followed the trial from day one?

I have.

I especially like the part where GZ is advised to let police take over.

That is where he went from being a neighborhood watchman, to a vigalante.

He made a choice, and he is responsible for that gun going off.

(Another person who clearly has not watched the trial ...)

How do you figure the 'took over' the police's job?

He called them, more than once that night, to come and take charge of the situation. All he did was attempted to keep the person in sight for them.

He NEVER confronted him.

He NEVER chased him.

He was in his truck when he followed. Trayvon noticed this and started to run. Zimmerman parked near the T-Section, got out to get the street name and called 911. Trayvon made it to the house, but never went in. Instead, he DOUBLEBACKED to the T-Section and waited on Zimmerman. He confronted him THERE, as corraborated by the state's witness Rachel Jeantel. He asks/ confronts Zimmerman and throws not only the 1st punch, but ALL the punches.

reply to post by FlyersFan


How do you turn a 15 minute walk to a store into an hour long walk through a neighborhood and end up past theplace you were staying?

reply to post by seabag

No, he died because he unjustly assaulted a man with a gun and tried to kill him!

Really???

Where are the facts/evidence that prove this?

Originally posted by muse7
A 17 year old is dead because he was wrongly profiled as a "F%#%ng punk" and a "God-damned a**-hole"

A 17 year old is dead because that 17 year old thug-wanna be who loved getting into street fights, decided to jump someone in the dark and got himself shot in the process. Martin had 4 1/2 minutes to get himself back home (to his fathers' mistress' home) .. which was only a footballs throw away from the incident. OBVIOUSLY Martin didn't bother to go home .. he went to pounce on the 'crazy ass cracker'.

apparently it's illegal to be a young black teenager wearing a hoodie and walking through a neighborhood. It's so illegal that you can be killed for it and the other person can claim he did it in self defense.

Straw man AND reductio ad absurdum
Congrats .. you hit both in one posting.

reply to post by FlyersFan


We actually DO know who initiated the attack.

Trayvon.

Not only did Rachel Jeantel verify this, but the medical evidence that Trayon was NEVER attacked.

Originally posted by firemonkey
reply to post by seabag

 

No, he died because he unjustly assaulted a man with a gun and tried to kill him!

Really???

Where are the facts/evidence that prove this?

One witness who had by far the clearest view, Jonathan Good, was only 15 to 20 feet away immediately before the shot was fired. His testimony on the color of the men's clothes and skin confirmed that Martin was on top of Zimmerman, straddling and pummeling him.

www.foxnews.com...

Originally posted by Cheesefleas

Originally posted by ugie1028
reply to post by Cheesefleas

 

you obviously have no clue.

the 911 audio tapes. Have you listened to them? have you followed the trial from day one?

I have.

I especially like the part where GZ is advised to let police take over.


That is where he went from being a neighborhood watchman, to a vigalante.

He made a choice, and he is responsible for that gun going off.

I guess he should have just let Trayvon contiue t beat his brains in until the cops showed. I gess that's what you would hav done huh?

Originally posted by Cheesefleas
GZ had plenty of time to sit in his car and wait for the police.

So what? Irrelevant. Lead detective on the case Serino stated under oath on the stand that Zimmerman had ever right to follow Martin in the neighborhood. If you are saying that Zimmerman should go to jail for 30 years because he followed Martin in the neighborhood ... which was his right to do ... then I just have to say ...

The 'perp' in this case is which ever person attacked the other.
We do not know if Martin attacked Zimmerman or if Zimmerman attacked Martin.

reply to post by firemonkey

We don't know who started the fight, so the "self defense" argument is out the window

That is not true. That is much like saying we don't know all the facts in a trial so there can be no trial because a law could not have been broken.

reply to post by FlyersFan


Once again, we DO know who started the 'attack'.

Trayvon.

Not only did Rachel Jeantel verify this, but the medical evidence that Trayon was NEVER attacked.