The Zimmerman Trial

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
Rachel Jeantel thinks "oh just another fight."

-'Just another fight' says the friend.
-Social media posts showing Martins luv for street fighting and love for illegal drugs.
-Social media posts showing Martins racist comments and pictures of Martin playing with a gun.
-Jeantel says that among Martins last words were 'crazy ass cracker' racial slurs.

And yet ... people think Zimmerman was the aggressor. Okay.

reply to post by Cheesefleas


he wasn't specifically advised not to follow. again ill state this (We dont need you to do that) and (Can you let us know what he's doing?) he was just told that he didn't need to do that. as a watchman in his neighborhood he had every damn right to do so.

reply to post by Cheesefleas


Tell me why he would not be in this predicament if he stayed in his car? Are you saying black people can't xontrol themselves and have to beat up others because it's their nature? That seems kinda racist.

It was self defense, get it right or pay the price (of being called a big ole dummy head).

Originally posted by roadgravel
There are quite a few people here who seem to believe that physical fights are a way of life and a solution

Fighting for purpose is an intrinsic part of nature and it would be wise not to go against your nature.

Ideally nobody would fight because there would be no purpose.
But some people have found purpose in fighting so others such as myself have to learn how to combat them,
thus the solution.

Originally posted by Cheesefleas
He followed TM even though he was advised not to, he was behaving like the police which exactly meets the definition, unless definitions are on trial too??

A vigilante is an individual or group who undertakes law enforcement without legal authority or illegal authority.

Again .... exactly what legal authority or enforcement did he take over from law enforcement?
Answer .. none.

Where exactly did Zimmerman engage in 'legal authority' or 'law enforcement'?
Talking a walk in a neighborhood is NOT engaging in legal authority or law enforcement.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by Cheesefleas
He killed a person with his gun because he was acting like a vigilante

A vigilante (/ˌvɪdʒɪˈlænti/, /ˌvɪdʒɪˈlænteɪ/; Spanish: [bixiˈlante]; Portuguese: [viʒiˈlɐ̃t(ɨ)], [viʒiˈlɐ̃tʃi]) is an individual or group who undertakes law enforcement without legal authority or illegal authority.[1]

Read that carefully. A vigilante is someone who undertakes law enforcement without authority. Exactly what law enforcement was Zimmerman taking over? Answer .. none. He was a neighborhood watchman. He called dispatch and informed them what was happening. They said 'tell us what else he does'. So that is what Zimmerman did.

Everything he did (that we know about) was legal. There was nothing illegal or vigilante about being on neighborhood watch. There is nothing illegal or vigilante about following Martin. There is nothing illegal or vigilante about letting dispatch 'know what else he does'.

Zimmerman killed Martin because Martin was on top of him beating him up.
It's just that simple. Forensics and eye witness testimony backs that up.

Read these words from Zimmermans mouth

"The dispatcher told me not to follow the suspect and that an officer was in route,”

At this point he became a vigilante.

reply to post by Cheesefleas


wow..

again that's wrong. listen to the 911 tapes. that's the real evidence. what GZ said wasn't what the dispatcher said. so you believe GZ now?

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
Rachel Jeantel thinks "oh just another fight."

-'Just another fight' says the friend.
-Social media posts showing Martins luv for street fighting and love for illegal drugs.
-Social media posts showing Martins racist comments and pictures of Martin playing with a gun.
-Jeantel says that among Martins last words were 'crazy ass cracker' racial slurs.

And yet ... people think Zimmerman was the aggressor. Okay.

I understand why the law is the way it is but it sure is sad that jury members don’t get a profile of the people involved in a trial. If the perp was an ex-con….I think that’s important. If the victim was a gang-banger….I think that’s important. If a witness who testified was receiving a break on his/her sentence for testifying….I think that’s important. Our system attempts to strip away every tool we have to judge the character of the actors. Character and history tells us a lot about the type of people we’re dealing with and brings the picture of what happened the night of the incident more into focus,

reply to post by Cheesefleas

vents hinge upon this fact. gonna die tonight" is exactly what a person would say if the hat a 17 year old said the exact string of words that would b be a fabrication, TM could not have uttered a tighter more ased on my experiences. bizzare that GZ, with all his firearm experience did not hav e TM could get within 10 feet of him. meet a person with a concealed permit who didn't practice wareness. ains however, he did not let the police take over vdlænti/, /vdlænte/; Spanish: [bixilante]; Po group who undertakes law enforcement without

Uh.. so you think it's impossible that TM might have said that? What i f he DID say it? Lock up a guy because you think maybe it's not true? Man hope nothing lke this happens to you and people don't believ you when you are telling the truth.

NO I repeat NO civilian is trained to keep their gun drawn. That is insane. You only draw if you are certain you need to use it. He wasn't a cop raiding a house for god' sake. He probably never expected to run into Martin. You have got some bad info my friend.

reply to post by Cheesefleas


And do you have proof he followed after he was told you don't need to ( when he said wha you said it was recollection and he was wrong actually if you hear the tape.)) He had stopped following and was on his way back.

reply to post by seabag


I don't know though. Those high profile verdicts were all innocent. O J probably wrong, but still freed, Casey I think was innocent of murser but maybe it was an accident or neglect and her only crime was disposing the body (probably out of fear of prison) so I think that was a good call.
I really can't see guilty for such an obviously innocent man when you see oj set free, but I am nervous.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
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?

And my question .... a 15 minute walk to the store .... and the father - Tracy 'Juice" Martin - didn't know his son was missing until the next morning? He didn't even notice? I guess his 'mistress' was keeping him too busy to notice that his teenage son wasn't in the house.

Does it matter? Can someone not just go out for a walk? He wasn't breaking curfew, he wasn't doing anything illegal that anyone knows of. And can two adults not have sex because a 17 year old has went out to the store?

Very judgmental people here...and all irrelevant...just to trash Trayvon and his family...pretty sad.

reply to post by firemonkey


What are you talking about two adults? And it's not irrelevant because he was percieved as suspicious, but no crime comitted against him. The only crime was him beating Zimmerman. If the cps had gotten there sooner Marti would be facing jail for assault, and possible attempted murder. If the cops showed up late and zimmerman didn't have a fun or trayvon got it then Traycon might be on trial for murder.

I think you sir or in denial about this case.

reply to post by fluffysanta


Thanks, it has been brought up, but not with your evidence. There are aso a few things that indicate that he was a crip gang member at sometime. There is no doubt he is an unsavory character. Scope the thread that shows it was him messagin his son about buying and selling guns.

Anyone know if Tracy has a record?

reply to post by fluffysanta


I had to check that site out to see the age of the domain. from what ive found, it was made in 2009 and has really sparked my interest. (the mason page)

this is interesting. I'm not sure of its relevance, but still interesting.

Originally posted by seabag

Originally posted by FlyersFan
TV NEWS REPORTING ..... the jury is working through lunch.
I would imagine lunch is being brought in and they are eating while they work.

(I kinda' figured they would)

I think we'll have a verdict today. They seem to be close if they're working through lunch.

Let the fireworks begin!!!!

I don't hold out much hope for GZ after some of the high-profile verdicts that were outrageous (OJ, Casey Anthony, etc). Based on many responses in this thread, I think I would rather have trial by judge rather than trial by jury. At least the judge understands how to separate facts from emotion and understands the burden of proof. There are far too many morons in society to leave my fate in their hands.

This is exactly what I've been having in my mind lately.

This is an acquittal for sure. Its a really simple case but I'd hate to leave my life in the hands of people who can't distinguish facts from emotion.

I have seen more emotional driven distortions of fact than any logical person should be exposed to in an entire lifetime, confined to just this thread. For any one to take this case with any credit one must first come to the realization that this is a case between a man and the state. It is the burden of the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that in fact the man did not act in self defense. It is not the sates job to discredit the man's story with their own story, it is their job to provide evidence, tangible in nature, to disprove the story line. If there is a possibility , even slight, that a series of events occured differently than how the state has posed them, then you are not legally allowed to convict.

I am tired of people trying to turn this into race, it is totally irrelevent to the case and to the actions of those involved. Anyone who says different is only trying to find an excuse for their anger or inadequacies they percieve about themselves. It seems to be a cultural thing to perpetuate a racial divide, but rather then doing their own part to remove it, they would much rather hold onto the negativity and spread it like a virus.

The race card is played out, most americans do not differentiate based on ethnicity. I myself will not allow with my silence, any person to do as such either. If people would make themselves exemplory examples of scociety rather than be comabative towards other ethnicities then the idea of a racial divide goes away. It is within each comunities responsiblity to teach it's youth how to interact with all ethnic groups, which is not being done. Become a teacher of equallity by not blaming ethnicity for holding you back. If you are not where you want to be in life then do something about it, do not blame others.

My whole family lived in a homeless shelter when I was 9 years old. I now own 3 cars, 2 houses, my own business, and am quite financially secure, my my efforts, not because of ethnicity or favor.

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Cheesefleas

 

Tell me why he would not be in this predicament if he stayed in his car? Are you saying black people can't xontrol themselves and have to beat up others because it's their nature? That seems kinda racist.

It was self defense, get it right or pay the price (of being called a big ole dummy head).

Thanks for bringing that up.

I stated this yesterday: all the "he shouldn't have gotten out of his car" comments by family and friends lately is diving me crazy!! This means absolutely what you said is true:

that they feel that 'Trayvon's" are to be considered hostile and dangerous, and to come in any contact with them will result in your harm/death.

Well, this is interesting. It appears testifying to the truth and with concern for accurate relation of facts is not a good idea in the Prosecutors office around this trial. In fact, it's a fatal career move, it would seem.

The special prosecutor in the George Zimmerman case has fired her information technology director, who last month testified that he found evidence on Trayvon Martin's cell phone that Zimmerman's lawyers say the state never turned over, according to a Jacksonville.com report.

According to the report, Ben Kruidbos received a scathing letter from State Attorney Angela Corey's office Friday morning, calling him untrustworthy and adding he "can never again be trusted to step foot in this office."

Source

Now why is the IT guy being canned when it sounds like the prosecutor should be sanctioned if not brought up on full Bar proceedings for Prosecutorial misconduct? Don't be a whistle blower, it seems the lesson is here. Don't even think it....or the system will destroy you when you arent' blowing the right whistle for their liking.