Breaking News! George Zimmerman found not guilty.

reply to post by shells4u


Empty threats is the answer to your question. Just as I see racist comments from Caucasian people on twitter/facebook/youtube towards African Americans and Hispanics. Monkeys in a cage metaphor was used poorly in your part

As I've said before, I don't understand how anyone can see this case and come to anything other than a manslaughter charge.

Too much was made of personalities here, that's irrelevant. I don't care what the media have said, nor what Obama has said, a grown man pursued a child because he was black, there was a confrontation, which would be justifiable on the part of the young man, the one being chased/stalked, and that grown man shot him dead.

In any civilized nation that would be manslaughter, but in the confused and irrational USA where it seems the loudest media voices decide a case like this, the guy is found innocent?

There are some facts here that cannot be denied, he shot an unarmed kid after chasing him. End of discussion, no more debate needed, the kid is dead because a grown man "suspected" him of something without any evidence and without any cause to pursue him.

That court has just freed a vigilante guilty of manslaughter in my opinion.

And no, I'm not interested in what someone said a year ago on Facebook, or what Zimmerman said to a cop, or what someone thinks they heard in the scuffle. Those things are completely inconsequential to the basic fact that an armed man killed a teenager after chasing him down. It was manslaughter.

George Zipperhead has no life ahead of him. His life was crap as soon as he shot that kid while playing Batman and getting his ass kicked as a result of his "bad guy" not being hip to the dress-up delusion he was engaged in. But then George has since proven himself to be an idiot, so it was probably inevitable that he'd blow his life up regardless of how he went about doing so anyway. Any fool that's running across rooftops as the "Fist of Goodness" eventually falls into a dinner party, and this one deserves the messed up rest of his life that awaits him. He's not going to die from natural causes. He's not a murderer, but he is a complete moron with the need to be in charge. I pity his wife. She really blew it when she decided to let that boob call the shots in her life. Her hell on Earth has just gotten started.

reply to post by greydaze


All of what you said is 100% correct. Innocence is easily paid off while the rest of us are SOL.

I'm just glad GZ's lawyer has given the rest of us a "good" excuse to claim self defense.
If the other guy looks menacing and we are afraid of recieving bodily injury, we can just blow them away. No questions ask. Not even the "loss of a single drop of blood from our little finger" and it's all over for them.

SELF DEFENSE !!!

By all means we should openly lower the bar for being responsible for our actions regardless the cost to others.

reply to post by Rocker2013

As I've said before, I don't understand how anyone can see this case and come to anything other than a manslaughter charge.

Because it could not be ruled out that Travyon initiated the confrontation (and no, approaching someone is not a confrontation). In that case, ruling this a manslaughter would send an innocent man into prison. And we cant have that, better rule on the side of caution.

Originally posted by Dekard1138
reply to post by Onslaught2996

 

Zimmerman didnt profile Treyvon.....there was a few break ins in the community wear men in hooded sweatshirts did the crimes!! and Treyvon had 4 minutes to run from Zimmerman, instead of confronting him...Treyvon could have called the cops over being followed by an unknown man!!!

Very good points....

and IF Zimmerman's intent WAS to 'kill' somebody, He would have done so from further away.

I wonder if 'Treyvon' was involved in burglaries in that area before ?

That community doesn't have a neighborhood watch for nothing.

Zimmerman was doing what he was supposed to do.

reply to post by shells4u


Let me be the one tell you this... you are diminishing the credibility of your own opinions on various subjects by pushing the race issue in this thread and being so flippant about the death of an innocent child.

It's pretty shameful, and shows that there is something wrong with your rationalization of this case.

It's hard to take someone seriously on anything when they are so clearly disrespectful and seemingly intent to encourage the racial issue.

Originally posted by Rocker2013
~snip~

In any civilized nation that would be manslaughter, but in the confused and irrational USA where it seems the loudest media voices decide a case like this, the guy is found innocent?

~snip~

Strange, because from what I witnessed, the loudest media voices, the Florida court system, the judge, Hollywood, the DOJ, and even the President were all rooting for Martin.

Seems to me that there was plenty enough heavy hitters behind the prosecution to have brought it home, if there were even the slightest case to be made against Z.

But hey, please continue to backhand all Americans with your "civilized" opinions, after all, it's quite en vogue these days to hate on all of us in the USofA for the perceived injustices brought about by generally small numbers of asinine individuals.

Crazy cowboys, that's all we are, every last one.

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by shell69

 

I agree, but remember how politicized this case was thanks to the media circus and our own President, so sadly every where Mr. Zimmerman goes he will have to face the fact that he will be recognized.

Is still the wrongful death law sue that the family of Treyvon can file against him, he still can be held accountable, now please if I am wrong somebody can explain better if wrongful death will apply in this case or not.

Yes they can still move forward with the wrongful death suit. And unlike this trial Mr. Zimmerman will be forced to take the stand.

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by Rocker2013

 

As I've said before, I don't understand how anyone can see this case and come to anything other than a manslaughter charge.

Because it could not be ruled out that Travyon initiated the confrontation (and no, approaching someone is not a confrontation). In that case, ruling this a manslaughter would send an innocent man into prison. And we cant have that, better rule on the side of caution.

It was threatening behaviour, and there was a confrontation. Zimmerman was the armed person in this case, therefore making him the clear aggressor in my opinion. What was Martin going to do, throw Skittles at him?

You haven't changed my opinion one bit. A grown man chose to pursue an innocent and unarmed child through a neighborhood - this is not under doubt - and this resulted in a confrontation. Martin was within his rights to protect himself from a strange man following him. Zimmerman was the one armed, and he killed the boy.

Case closed, manslaughter.

reply to post by NotAnAspie

Is that supposed to make white people look rational?

No. It's supposed to make irrational people think twice before hurting others that had no control over the verdict. Irrationality is an equal opportunity emotion. All we have to do is look at Muslim nations to see that irrationality is not exclusive to any race, sex, or age.

deleted - please excuse.

Does anyone know how a neighborhood watch works? The watch person patrols the street and alerts police of any/all suspicious persons. Anyone else notice that there were no other eyewitnesses that were just walking along, or groups loitering on the corner? This is because in most decent communities, at night, people are in their houses, not hanging out in the street. Treyvon was the ONLY person out in that community, why would this not draw the attention of the neighborhood watch? It had nothing to do with his skin complexion, and there is no way to prove it did, so stop repeating the mantra.

Many of you are jumping on the "if someone is following you, you can assault them" bandwagon. Do you realize the group that came up with this logical approach also believes you can kill/assault someone for: scuffing their new shoes, looking at them, talking about their mother, bumping into them in a crowded room, using the n word, or simply living in a neighborhood a block away. All of these activities are legal, your parents should have taught you at the age of 2 that you don't hit other people because they piss you off.

Now for the self defense. I remember people claiming his injuries weren't that bad. He looked like crap to me, and the pictures were taken hours after the attack. A person can die or be paralyzed from being punched it he face. There is a guy in a coma in Baltimore that if he could talk would testify to this. I believe GZ acted in self defense. Something that no one else pointed out was that Treyvon was shot only once. If GZ "hated" blacks like many of you claim, don't you think he would have emptied his magazine like our fine police men/women do on a person that isn't even a threat to him/her?

I am glad it's over. Most will forget this case and swallow the next manufactured scandal and get emotionally attached once again. Time to get back to the real world, where the economy sucks, the middle east is about to implode, and our govt. is more interested in our activities than the terrorists.

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
reply to post by bruteforce13

 

There would be some sort of evidence if Zimmerman had attacked. Bruises, cuts, scrapes, ect. There were no physical injuries on Martin other than the gunshot. There were numerous injuries on Zimmerman.

Had Zimmerman attacked at all, there would have been something on Martin showing this. We have no evidence at all that Zimmerman attacked Martin in the first place. We have plenty of evidence that Martin attacked Zimmerman.

It's not Zimmerman's word that swayed the jury, it was the physical evidence. The injuries. The 911 phone call that did it.

That's 100% untrue. If Zimmerman so much as lay a hand on Trayvons shoulder that is assault right there at which point Trayvon would've been justified in using whatever force necessary to protect himself. That wouldn't leave any marks on Trayvon and Zimmerman can conviniently claim self defense when he is the only one talking.

reply to post by Rocker2013

Zimmerman was the armed person in this case, therefore making him the clear aggressor in my opinion.

Agressor is someone who attacks others. Being armed does not make you an aggressor, nor does following someone.

In the end, this case suffers from a serious lack of evidence, even for a manslaughter charge. And that means the correct thing to do is rule not guilty. There is no arguing with this fact, regardless of what actually happened.

Originally posted by kingofmd
This is because in most decent communities, at night, people are in their houses, not hanging out in the street. Treyvon was the ONLY person out in that community, why would this not draw the attention of the neighborhood watch?

So, with that logic, just being outside at night is now justification for being deemed a criminal and gives permission for an armed vigilante to pursue you?

What utter stupidity.

reply to post by Rocker2013


Here, a quote from your signature:

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

This certainly applies to someone being proclaimed guilty. And the amount of evidence in this case is insufficient to prove much.