Breaking News! George Zimmerman found not guilty.

People posting stuff like that at this time when things are such a tinderbox should be arrested for enciting a riot...

Originally posted by Happy1
reply to post by litterbaux

 

For the first time - in a very long time - I am proud of my country.

proud of your country???? your nuts. I mean, fair enough there was reasonable doubt. But this idiot in (my opinion) did commit manslaughter.

This is just another OJ or Casey anthony. Those who applauded should remember that!

Originally posted by Grimpachi

Originally posted by Astrocyte
reply to post by Grimpachi

It seems you are suggesting a dangerously callous mentality. Don’t follow suspicious people, look away if you hear cries for help, don’t get involved, mind your own business. That is what you seem to be promoting. At least that is how it comes off to me.

Remind me what law was Martin breaking at the time Zimmerman followed him?

reply to post by DeadSeraph


I know now. Read my earlier reply. We all his fowl balls in our lives.
at least I cleared it up.

reply to post by Phoenix267


A riot is a riot regardless of the time it took place.

My point stands.

Originally posted by bruteforce13
We have a lot of people OBSESSED over guns in this country.

yea right man. We have a lot of people obsessed over shoes and Kim Kardashian's baby. What you call gun obsession is the people aiming to keep or restore their RIGHT to bear arms? Ami correct here?

Originally posted by Galadriel
If Zimmerman did not have a gun (or weapon of any kind) on him, I'd wager -- neighborhood watch dude or not -- that he would not have played bad-ass and gotten out of his car and close to this teenager. He was emboldened likely because he had a weapon.

So you are saying that Zimmerman had cause to be afraid of Martin even BEFORE he got out of his car? I had not heard this before. Or are you saying that we ALL should be afraid and not leave our cars if we see a black teenager walking down the street? Your logic sure seems strange to me.

reply to post by Jaellma


It's possible. Can you post screen pictures or share the links. We can't find anything through rumors.

reply to post by artemisminion

proud of your country???? your nuts. I mean, fair enough there was reasonable doubt. But this idiot in (my opinion) did commit manslaughter.

This is just another OJ or Casey anthony. Those who applauded should remember that!

According to the jury there was no manslaughter.

The jury heard the case…..you only heard the MSM.

The difference between this trial and the OJ/Anthony trials is the jury got it right this time!!!!

Reports of violence can be posted here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

This thread is for discussion of the verdict. Please stay on topic and keep it civil.

reply to post by seabag
To me there is hardly any difference in the OJ case and the Zimmerman/Trayvon case. It didn't matter if OJ did it or not or if Zimmerman executed Trayvon.

In both cases, both cases, neither was proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Cases dismissed.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by Grimpachi

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by DeadSeraph

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
It seems the prosecution asked too much and this ultimately cost them.

If they went for third degree murder, wanting to cause harm but not necessarily kill, then they would have had a much better chance.

Almost like voluntary manslaughter. In fact what is the difference between third degree murder and voluntary manslaughter? "heat of passion" is just one example of wanting to hurt someone(but not necessarly kill them) with no premeditation.

Second degree requires wanting to kill someone with malice.

There is no proof Zimmerman wanted to hurt Martin whatsoever. In fact, the evidence seems to indicate the opposite. You don't call the police and report someone that you plan to assault (or worse, murder), and then go and commit the act. It's obvious Zimmerman had no intention of attacking Martin to everyone with a bit of objectivity.

Not even manslaughter? The kid DID die afterall, heh

Well the kiiiid was trying to KILL George afterall. heh

That is what manslaughter means. Unintentional death. Like passing a red light, slamming into another car and ACCIDENTALY killing someone. If I kill under self defence is it still not killing?

No, manslaughter does not include self defense cases. That is very clear under the law.

reply to post by Grimpachi

Don’t follow suspicious people, look away if you hear cries for help, don’t get involved, mind your own business.

Why are mentioning dissimilar situations? If someone was crying for help - yes, it would be justified to follow the cries and use your gun. But if you have a gun and just decide on following people you find to be "suspicious" (which is plausibly racially motivated) then I think you have entered some murky waters. His not being a police officer also meant that he didn't possess the same authority that a badge and uniform typically projects. He approached a "suspicious" person with a weapon. I think that was a little reckless and unwarranted if you ask me.

Here's another speculation. Do you think Treyvon Martin was on the verge of killing George Zimmerman, or was he just intent on giving him a good ass kicking? Was his life really in danger?

Mind you, I understand the anger Zimmerman must have felt when he was attacked by Treyvon Martin. It would take an ENORMOUS degree of self restraint to not make use of that gun when someone is beating on you.

The reason I am making such a big issue of the origin of this situation is because this seems to be the point where it all took off. When George Zimmerman decided on approaching a plausibly dangerous and violent kid with a weapon on him, he increased the odds that he would be attacked, and that he might use his gun and kill the kid.

Him not being a police officer is also highly relevant. If he had a uniform and a badge the likelihood of Treyvon responding with anything but submission to authority is negligible. Cops know that society emboldens them with power and authority. George Zimmerman on the other hand pretended to believe that a 17 year old black kid would take his "neighborhood watch" status as a legally binding authority.

I think he entered a precarious situation immaturely, without the proper circumspection to know that killing Treyvon Martin was a very likely possibility.

Again, I just want to say that this was an incredibly difficult case. Only from this perspective, from what Zimmerman should have known beforehand, can Zimmerman be regarded guilty of manslaughter. By divorcing this first negligent action of Zimmerman's and taking into regard the immediate fact that Treyvon Martin attacked him, can the self defense argument be invoked with seeming impunity.

how many off topic post are in this one thread? some one should count.

i still dont see why this case is high profile. if it was the other way around, some one with an ethnic back ground shooting a white guy do would it be the same?

reply to post by LadyGreenEyes


So you don't think blacks are profiled more often that whites?

Originally posted by VoidRonin
reply to post by Grimpachi

 

Trayvon was not trying to kill George! Your whole logic is flipped upside down.

So, please inform us as to his intent when he was bashing Zimmerman's head into pavement. Plus, Zimmerman stated that Martin saw the gun, and told him he was going to die that night. If that is true, then he had every reason to believe his life was in danger. The head bashing alone was reason to think his life or well being were threatened. lethal force is justified if a person feels there is a real threat of death or serious injury to their person.