Will George Zimmerman be innocent or guilty for the death of Treyvon Martin?

And personally I feel that if it is a hang jury, it will be an injustice. a man that kills an unarmed teenager deserves to pay for it in some way.

Trayvon Martin had MORE reason to "stand his ground" or to claim self defense than Zimmerman. He was obviously in more danger than Zimmerman.

And the "injuries" on Zimmerman's heads are so minor to be almost non-existent, amd there is still that pesky little issue of explaining how the kid could have been responsible for those "injuries" and not get any of Zimmerman's blood or dna of any kind on his hands!

The devil is in details!

 

No Sadanie, my point is if we are going to ''assume'' we can assume anything. This is the problem I see for Travon, many people just guessing to help his case, when what we really have are basic facts. George called the Cops,,, Two men had a fight, one had a gun.

If George wanted to shoot this kid, why call the Cops? He called them because he had no intentions of shooting anybody, until he was attacked. The proof is right there, George called the cops, George had the injuries, anything else is pure fabrication.


I'm tired,,nice debate Sadanie,,,good night dear...

 

I have never said that Zimmerman intended to kill the kid from the moment he saw him.

What ai am saying is that he used the extreme measure to shot him without cause. I just watched again the video of Zimmerman's walk through with the cop, and his story doesn't hold water in many places, including the fact that he tells the cop TWICEthat the place where they were standing was exactly where he "stumbled" after "being hit on the nose" butthe sruggle took place atleast40 feetfurther down that alley. He also says that Trayvon was beating his head on the concreteAND putting BOTH his hands on his mouth and nose. . .how many hands did the kid have. . . .and none of those hands had blood on it!

Hesays that someone came out BEHIND him, utifhe wasin the position he describes, it wouldn't have been BEHINd him, but in front of him.

He says that, after he shot the kid, he stood over him and spread his arms out. . . But the police found the kid with his arms UNDER his body.

There are just too many inconsistencies to take any of Zimmerman's story as factual.

But we will see how gullible the jury will be. One thing I very much believe is this: if Zimmerman gets off without any prison sentence, sooner or later his karma will catch up with him. There will be a day where he will face justice, whether it is through the courts, or. . . Who knows. But such an unwarranted killing of a young life will not remain unpunished.

 

Yes he was , no one is disputing this.

More playing about with words. Martin was certainly not allowed to physically attack someone who appears to be following him or even someone who challenged him. Martin would only be allowed to attack if Zimmerman had already attacked him first. If what Zimmerman claims is true then Martin had no legal right whatsoever to attack him. Martin could have i) Run to the place of safety that was seconds away.ii) called out 'who are you and why are you following me?', these are perfectly normal and legal responses. Ambushing

And now we have it...Thank you.... No more plausible.. Defence has not got to prove anything , the prosecution must prove that the defence case is IMPLAUSABLE and you have just admitted that there are a number of plausable scenarios. You have just demonstrated the defence's case. This is not a civil action where the court looks at which scenario is more likley they can only look to see if the defence account is plausable and it is BY YOUR ADMISSION when you said it was no more plausible than the proecution's case

You have not demonstrated an illegal action.

I did not imply that you were in jail at all. You claim that Zimmerman is stupid and therefore guilty. I said that if stupidity was an imprisonable offence then a great number of people would be in jail. Since stupidity is not an imprisonable offence in the US you obviously haven't been imprisoned for it. Obviously you do not possess the capabilities to understand arguments of this level of complexity

That means what exactly

 

I am aware you never said it was premeditated, but many of the folks here seem to think this thing was just fine by George. I do not believe that for a moment, and that's a huge difference between the two camps. One is painting him as calculating, racist and cruel. The other sees him as a victim of circumstance.

 

The problem is that George has told so many different stories. I think he will be convicted on his inconsistencies.

I also think that George was hell bent to "catch" Trayvon... because George had already decided in an instant that Trayvon was a criminal .. on dope etc. Vigilantes cannot be allowed to serve as law enforcement, judge, jury and executioner... without regard for the rights of other people.

Further, George was so menacing that he NEVER told Trayvon who he was.. He had a gun AND an obligation to diffuse the situation.

I think he will get 30 years.

Remember how he bounced up the stairs at SPD the day after he killed TM? He was eager to tell his story to his "fellow cops".. He thought he was a hero.

We'll see what "God's Plan" is for George.

 

What this "george and Trayvon' Thing do you know these people?

 

Do you want to call them A and B? Silly criticism.

Trayvon was still more boy than man... and IF he had been a "thug", he would have waited in ambush with a brick or a grill tool or a rock.

 

I call them Zimmerman and Martin.

I have not called him a thug. I am not emoptive about this issue unlike most people. I find the hysterical responses of the pro and anti Zimmerman factions absurd.

Not in his ability to fight. I certainly would have difficulty taking on a 17 year old.

 

Nor am I emotional.. Trayvon would NOT have been any threat to me.. Nor was he a threat to George.. If he were he would have found a grill tool, or brick or a flower pot and waited.

I don't think you read teens very well. .. you seem to be focused on "taking" a 158 pound skinny bean as opposed to defusing the situation.

 

The American usage of 'taking' does not equate to the British usage of 'taking on'.

Taking on implies a burden thrust upon you eg." Because her house was flooded we had to take on Grandma for the rest of the year".

Taking in the US sense implies an active attempt at siezing or vanquishing someone.

Hope this helps.

 

You are absolutely correct! George (yes, I will call him George if I choose!) had NO INTENTION to defuse the situation. . .he wanted to be the "strong guy," the "wannabe cop" and didn't want to be told anything by the kid. It is obvious that it would not have taken much to defuse the situation, even introducing himself as a "neighborhood watch" and asking the kid if he could help him find his way to wherever he was going in the neighborhood would have defused the situation.

In fact, this is what our TRAINED, UNIFORMED, BOUNDED security guard in our private community are requested to do: If they see someone or a car they do not recognize, they are to approach the car (or the person) in a friendly, helpful manner, and ask if they can HELP the people find an address in our community. Then they will offer to preceed them to that address or at least they will know where the people go. And we have had NO incidents in the last 10 years.

And, although "George" had a licence to carry, he was not suppose to be armed when playing his role as "the neighborhood watch."

By the way, I would say that anyone talking 20mg of Alldal twice a day is NOT a good risk to be given a permit to carry in any case!

 

You get it in spades.. Real security don't behave like idiots.. They are prepared to deal with any threat, but friendly. George is a sociopath.. This killing was about George.. Why is it that good men are falling for this crap? This is NOT about sober, responsible men. George is NOT like them.

 

Travon was the sociopath. George feared for his life and did the right thing. I also think he prevented all the trouble Travon would have brought to the world had he lived on. Travon was no humble, obedient, and respectful teen, he was an arrogant thug in the making. JMHO

 

That would have been a sensible option. I think that Zimmerman probably is a wannabe cop and wannabe strong guy. He does seem to be the sort of person who likes uniforms and badges. personally I see it as a sign of an inferiority complex. I don;t admire Zimmerman. In the UK we would call his type ' a bit of a (*)(*)(*)(*)'.

A 'Hello are you lost?' Would have been the sensible option.

Indeed it does seem what a professional person would do.

You are right that Neighbourhood watch requests that patrol members do not carry weapons HOWEVER he was not 'on patrol' at the time.

Do you mean Haldol? Personally I don't think any private citizen should ever be in possession of a handgun and having to use an anti psychotic is certainly a strong indication that even in places where handguns are allowed this person should be refused. I hate guns myself.

I don;t see the grounds for such a diagnoses. You would need at least 12 correspondences on Hares list for such a diagnoses. I don't see it. Psychotic and sociopathic are not synonyms.

None of these things makes Zimmerman guilty. he could be all of those things, a psychotic wannabe with an inferiority complex wanting to play the big man and still have been ambushhed by Martin.

What is despicable is to assume someones guilt because he exhibits traits that you dislike. Thankfully in the west we have a protection in the form of a well developed legal system.

 

Man, again an awful lot of guessing and assumption on a person you never met. Heck if not for this unfortunate situation you may have met George and liked him, we just do not know.
I would love to see no assuming or guess work on any of the posts, I wonder how they would look? Dont get me wrong I'm as guilty as many I imagine. Although you have to admit some of this stuff is pure imagination on all of our parts. It's like we are making a club sandwich, a little of this, a little of that and a heavy dose of spices, and dont hold the HOT SAUCE...LOL

You yourself know he will never see thirty years, never. Lets put it this way, putting both our opinions aside on guilt or innocence take a look at the poll above...^ ^ ^, that's what will happen with that jury.
And THAT is not good for the Travon people...........Think as you may, this thing will never go 100% Travon.

 

Now, if we are allowed to stereotype and assume many things about Travon as well what would he look like? This is the problem with many of these opinions. This is also why this guy will walk, the bare facts just do not warrant a verdict against him. If a deal is struck [With the hope of easing Race relations] than perhaps a small sentence may be imposed [Should George want it ended and not want to take the chance].

That's not a win for Travon in my book, in fact it would be a shame, for all of us.

 

As soon as George called NEN, he was Neighborhood Watch. You may be unaware that George was trained in NW protocols.. and since he was a one man show he chose to ignore the rules. A coward with a gun is VERY dangerous.

- - - Updated - - -

Have you followed this case.. George has given 6 different versions of his story. He also claims that he was mentoring Sunday afternoon.. he wasn't. He claims that he was screaming, but Trayvon was whispering.

 

Please PROVE your case that he became a NW member immediately on Calling the police? Not you ropinion- evidence please.

You have just resorted to ranting.

Unless the prosecution can prove that Zimmermans account is implausable -and I don;t see whow they will do it then Zimmerman walks.

 

No offense Margot, but I think I will take the direct court case transcripts to determine what was actually said and ''proved'' to be true or false. I believe there is a lot of innuendo, and assumptions tossed around, and way to much drama. More than anything I think the press and media have been trying to hold court, and manipulate public opinion.

Admittedly I have not followed this case nearly as close as you and some others, I believe I am the better for that. I am positive you believe the things you say to be truthful, I just do not know how truthful those things were originally meant to be. I do not believe there have been any ''Bombshells'' as of late, or at least none that have been documented as fact. I think when it gets back to court many things thought to be brought out by many, wont.
I could be wrong...

 

I agree, I think he will walk free. The standard of guilt is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. I think there is a reasonable doubt to his guilt. Now, if they had gone for manslaughter, instead of 2nd degree murder, I think he would have been convicted.

That said, his chance at a normal life is all but ruined.

 

Florida only has a six man jury.

I predict that O’Mara and West are going to withdraw when this latest effort to troll for dollars fails miserably.

George has gained 105 pounds.

 

Yeah, some fanatics think that you have to have evidence to either convict someone or call him a murderer, while we intellectuals can appreciate what we really know happened without having to resort to Stone Age ideas like evidence. It's really very much like divining when a fertilized egg becomes a baby; you just have to be brilliant enough to know.

 

Florida may have 6 person juries, but I don't think that they are for murder cases. twelve person juries are usual for murder cases, and I know that a murder case in November in Tampa was tried to a 12 person jury. I think that it is like Louisiana: 6 person juries hear cases that can result in sentences with or without hard labor, but if the sentence is mandatory hard labor, a 12 person jury is required.

 

Forget media............. and that would NOT be grounds for an appeal.

What a dumb strategy that would be anyway.. 80% of appeals fail.

- - - Updated - - -

I read something about that just the other day.. The Defense has to ask for a 12 man jury.