This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
News Articles
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
164232
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Adamsm
I don't see why anyone would believe his recount of events.
Because there is no evidence to suggest anything else.
Well other then the 911 call which shows that Zimmerman instigated this by how he reacted to Martin...but since the actual victim is dead, it sucks that Zimmerman get's to skate on this.
Post by
gnomerdon
Zimmerman, not guilty.
I stand by what the law says, and what the jury did. they did it in with their best intentions, our people. our only supreme standard is hope in the constitution.
Post by
164232
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Gone
I don't see why anyone would believe his recount of events.
Because there is no evidence to suggest anything else.
Well other then the 911 call which shows that Zimmerman instigated this by how he reacted to Martin...but since the actual victim is dead, it sucks that Zimmerman get's to skate on this.
That only shows he instigated the confrontation, not the altercation, and it doesn't prove he's guilty. There's really nothing we can blame in situations like this other than the criminal themselves. Sometimes guilty people go free, but it's ultimately to protect the innocent. As I said, it's the price we pay for having a high standard of proof.
Post by
Nathanyal
I don't see why anyone would believe his recount of events.
Because there is no evidence to suggest anything else.
Well other then the 911 call which shows that Zimmerman instigated this by how he reacted to Martin...but since the actual victim is dead, it sucks that Zimmerman get's to skate on this.
That only shows he instigated the confrontation, not the altercation, and it doesn't prove he's guilty.
And that is what the jurors for the case believed.
Three jurors were in favor of acquittal, two supported manslaughter and one backed second-degree murder.
B37 said some jurors wanted to find Zimmerman guilty of something, but there was just no place to go based on the law.
Post by
Heckler
So you think he should go to jail for 10-20 years for defending himself? Really? I just can't see how anyone is going to come to that conclusion.
Based on his recount of events, he didn't initiate a face-to-face, he left his vehicle to see which way Martin went, and when he couldn't find him, was returning to his vehicle, when he was attacked from behind by Martin.
I will concede that Martin is not able to give his version of events, but based on the above, I just can't see how he gets 10-20 years. Ever.
It's because I think there's sufficient evidence in the 911 calls to determine that Zimmerman had a confrontational attitude about 'these types of people' (and I don't mean that to imply racism -- although maybe it was racism -- Zimmerman's own words on the tape have him profiling Martin in some way; whether that age, familiarity, race, who knows -- but he clearly decided that Trayvon Martin was up to no good; he also said "he's running").
I also don't believe there was enough physical evidence of injury on Zimmerman's body to warrant a lethal force justification. So I think the evidence suggests a most probable series of events somewhere in-line with what Magician described earlier. I think listening to anything Zimmerman himself says on the subject is silly, because he has every motivation to lie and knowledge that there is no way to prove his lie as such.
So yes, I think just the content of the 911 calls, the location of the bullet wound, and the lack of physical injury evidence of a life threatening attack on Zimmerman are enough -- all on their own -- to warrant 10-20 years in prison for manslaughter. It shouldn't matter that Zimmerman's version of events can't be proven false, because out of anyone in the world, he has the strongest motivation to lie about what happened. The jury should have made their decision based on the three facts above, and I believe those three facts point to someone who took a human life recklessly and unnecessarily. We can't really allow our legal system to promote that sort of behavior, by allowing Zimmerman himself to construct the story that gets him off the hook, can we?
And to be clear, I do believe that Zimmerman acted in "self defense," and probably did honestly believe his life was in danger when he pulled the trigger. That doesn't automatically give you authority to kill someone. When the police do it, they face intense scrutiny over exactly how they concluded that lethal force was justified. But Zimmerman was not a cop, and lacked the sort of training, equipment, and experience to make that call himself (Zimmerman's level of injury suggest he made a poor decision). Which is precisely why the dispatcher told him to stay in his car, and precisely what makes the shot a needless and reckless killing that warrants punishment. Not life in prison, and not murder, but certainly something.
Post by
Gone
Being racist isn't a crime. Whether he was justified in suspicion or confronting him out of a predisposition against blacks is irrelevant because nobody has disputed that Zimmerman confronted the kid.
You are misunderstanding the burden of evidence Heckler. The burden isn't on the defendant to prove his innocence, it's on the prosecution to prove guilt. Since there was no evidence to disprove Zimmerman's version of the events, the Jury had to acquit.
Post by
Heckler
You are misunderstanding the burden of evidence Heckler. The burden isn't on the defendant to prove his innocence, it's on the prosecution to prove guilt. Since there was no evidence to disprove Zimmerman's version of the events, the Jury had to acquit.
No, I think you're misunderstanding my frustration (which I have a hard time communicating, because I
am
actually frustrated with the verdict, I just acknowledge that it is misplaced frustration and I'm trying to work around it).
My frustration is at trying to understand some larger picture ideas, and what we take away from these events as a culture. I agree that the state accused Zimmerman of Murder, and therefore they should be required to prove it. I think they failed, and I think the trial and verdict were proper (if oddly handled).
My frustration is that people seem to think there's no way the trial could have been handled that would have resulted in a guilty verdict of any kind, given the evidence at hand. Aggravated assault and manslaughter come to mind, but it shouldn't matter what it is -- I'm just saying that if you start with the assumption that Zimmerman has no reason to tell the truth (if he knows he's guilty), and work only with hard facts, there is clearly evidence that a human life was taken during a conflict with strange origins.
So let me restate -- I believe that Zimmerman committed a crime worthy of many years in prison (25+) because he unfairly assumed that an innocent person was not, and took the role we as a society have given to the police into his own hands, and started a "wild west" situation needlessly that ended with him killing a 17 year old human being. But regardless of my belief, there's not enough evidence to prove this (even without Zimmerman's version) beyond a reasonable doubt. But I do think there's enough to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that something improper took place, and if the law that describes this impropriety doesn't exist then that's my source of frustration. If it does and it was simply misapplied by state, then that's my source.
Post by
Patty
About bloody time.
Post by
Heckler
About bloody time.
Ah, very cool. =)
Post by
Azazel
Equality wins again.
Post by
Patty
Equality wins again.
And again, it would seem.
:)
Post by
164232
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Squishalot
About bloody time.
I'd like to think that we are not to far away from this being the case in Australia as well, sooner rather than later.
Banking on Kevin Rudd winning the election, mind you. We'll be another 5 years off if Tony Abbott takes power.
Post by
164232
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Nathanyal
Tokyo restaurant sells black hot dogs.
Post by
164232
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Nathanyal
Everything is news to somebody. I thought it was interesting that they added a dye to the hotdog and bun.
Would you rather talk about how Detroit is bankrupt?
Post by
164232
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.