Zimmerman is a contemptible person, but the jury got it right.

[Nye Bevan]

The prosecution was not even close to proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. They resorted to appealing to the jury's emotions, and were unsuccessful, as they should be.

Without sensible gun control, it's far too easy for a stupid fight to end up with someone being killed.

[NaturalHigh]

1. Yes, Zimmerman is a douchebag...

but the prosecution didn't even get close to making their case.

[KamaAina]

2. Um, your vigilante hero stalked a guy around an apartment complex

simply because he was black, then shot him dead.

This is not manslaughter how, exactly?

[Nye Bevan]

5. He's far from being my "hero". (nt)

[derby378]

12. That's how I would have called it

I think a manslaughter conviction was definitely called for, because Zimmerman chased Martin - this is an undisputed fact - so if Martin did indeed attack Zimmerman, he brought it on himself. Didn't the 911 operator warn Zimmerman not to give chase in the first place?

That said, I think the headache I've been nursing just got that much worse.

[Shrek]

16. Discussed here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023247773

[HiPointDem]

45. +1. it's a travesty.

[Jim Lane]

66. Your post is uncivil.

NyeBevan was fairly restrained in responding to you, but I happen to be in a bad mood today, so I'll point out the facts: NyeBevan called Zimmerman "a contemptible person" and you responded by saying that Zimmerman was NyeBevan's hero.

This kind of gross distortion of what other people say happens far too often on DU. It seems that people choose up sides, and anyone who's on the other side is treated as a free-fire zone. There's apparently no room for nuance. It's a shame.

[cali]

84. Your post is just wrong. Wrong in every way.

The op and I clash frequently, but that she/he doesn't think that the prosecution proved their case, hardly makes her a supporter of Zimmerman's and it's repugnant and dishonest of you to claim that Zimmerman is her/his "vigilante hero".

[Eddie Haskell]

3. Bull

[olddots]

4. NO THEY DIDN'T !

they did not get the verdict right.

[DevonRex]

6. The evidence of guilt was there for all to see no matter how inept the prosecution

was at presenting their case. Anyone of average intelligence and unbiased mind could have and would have found him guilty.

[Honeycombe8]

20. That's not true. The jurors were able to be objective, something that many people are not

regarding this case.

I was shocked at the posters in this forum who declared GZ guilty without even knowing some of the basic evidence. They declared GZ racist...when it was TM who used racial epithets. You and others might disagree with that...but the jurors heard the fact that TM called GZ racial epithets, but GZ, even when cussing and unaware he was being recorded, never once used a racial epithet regarding TM. And so on.

It was proven that TM hit GZ first. Posters will still argue about that. But the prosecutor more or less conceded the defense's version of how the confrontation happened.

All the jurors had to decide, really, was whether TM hitting on GZ was enough for GZ to fear great bodily harm, so that he could shoot TM. I don't know that I would've ended up deciding that, but I can see how some might. It's not a slam dunk.

[DevonRex]

24. My comment stands as is. nt

[backwoodsbob]

68. of course

facts be damned..your opinion should decide murder cases.I hope you never sit on a jury

[DevonRex]

73. And you'd let that racist murderer go free, just like this jury did. nt

[EOTE]

36. Yeah, how dare Trayvon call the psychotic stalker who would in minutes kill him

a creepy cracker. I mean, he was clearly looking to get shot, right?

i don't give a fuck if this is hidden. Zimmerman apologists are idiotic, racist assholes. Full stop.

[yardwork]

90. I second your rant.

[Little Star]

33. BINGO!

[flvegan]

7. Oh, you're gonna get flamed BIG time for this.

[chelsea0011]

8. I hope to hear from the jury because I want to hear what I didn't hear.

[johnnyrocket]

9. That's absurd. Where's the PROOF Zimmerman acted in self defense?

[Shrek]

13. According to the law, none is needed

The state has to prove that it wasn't.

[Nye Bevan]

17. And prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. (nt)

[johnnyrocket]

22. So the law is: go shoot up a black kid at will. Claim self defense. Walk.

Sickening.

[treestar]

53. with that law, the state can expect a lot of killings

defense lawyers in that state are going to claim "self defense" in every case they possibly can.

[Lizzie Poppet]

19. That's not where the burden of proof lay.

The prosecution had to prove he didn't act in self-defense. They failed to do that.

Was this justice? No, in my opinion, and I'm heartsick. But it was correct according to the law...

[Chan790]

10. Bullshit! n/t

[OwnedByCats]

11. If the jury went by the law

they made the right decision. It may not be what the masses wanted, but the prosecution did not prove their case. Blame them.

[johnnyrocket]

25. Proof: dead kid at the hand of Zimmerman.

[OwnedByCats]

31. Dead kid at the hands of Casey Anthony

She walked because the jury didn't feel there was enough evidence either. I didn't agree, but this is our system. The prosecution fucked this up big time. I blame them, not the jury.

[Logical]

14. LOL, you really decided to post this tonight? Wow. n-t

[Nye Bevan]

18. As opposed to yesterday? (nt)

[99Forever]

15. Horseshit.

[David Zephyr]

21. Yeah, just like the "jury" in Simi Valley "got it right"

Tell Travon's mom and dad the "jury got it right".

[lynne]

23. You won't get flamed from me as you're right -

- I felt it would go this way when ballistics testified that Zimmerman was on the bottom when the shot was fired. All reasonable doubt went out the window at that very moment.

It should never be about emotion. I feel for that jury as they had a really difficult job in separating emotion from the laws as they currently stand.

[hatrack]

26. Wow, you're saying they APPEALED to the JURY'S EMOTIONS?!?!?

Amazing! That's never happened in a courtroom before, IIRC.

[rollin74]

27. the prosecution did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman committed a crime

I understand that a lot of people are emotionally wrapped up in this case but the evidence just didn't support a conviction imo

this verdict isn't surprising

[Ilsa]

28. Go open your champagne and put your mouse down for the night.

People here are shocked and outraged. Give it a day.
If you're still around, which I doubt.

[Nye Bevan]

29. The last thing I would do is celebrate anything to do with this tragedy.

The only good thing that could possibly come out of this is pressure for sane gun control laws.

[kpete]

30. not tonight

please,
not tonight

too much sorrow...'
he was just a kid
mho,kp

[ryan_cats]

32. He may be not guilty but his hands are covered in blood.

He may be not guilty but his hands are covered in blood.

I don't think he killed Travon because he was black. Normally I don't claim to know what goes through someone's mind but in this case I do. Z had a gun so in his mind, he was unbeatable. If he didn't have the weapon, he would have had to gauge his odds against his adversary and he doesn't look like Chuck Norris to me. However, with a gun, that goes out the window and in his mind he was the baddest guy on the block who picked a fight he would have lost had he not had the gun. More precisely, I don't think he would have picked the fight without have a dose of 9mm courage.

He may be innocent in the eyes of the law but some day he'll have to answer to God.

His hands and soul are bloody.

I wouldn't want that on my conscience. If he shot someone raping someone, yes, he would be legally and morally justified, but that's not what happened.

[golfguru]

34. This was a simple case of bumbling by the prosecutors

The defense lawyers were better than the prosecutor lawyers.
Simple as that. Same reason OJ was found innocent. Better lawyers.

[Apophis]

35. Fuck the jury.

They got this one wrong.

[mzmolly]

37. Bullshit.

He pursued a kid with a loaded gun and lied his ass off about the murder. Manslaughter, at the very least should have been the verdict.

[Punkingal]

38. He is guilty....He should have kept his fat butt in his truck.

[golfguru]

39. Are you implying it is against the law to get out of your truck?

Actually GZ should never have volunteered for neighborhood watch.
He is not psychologically or physically the right person for that job.
But that is not illegal either.

In the end we all must note that the court of law is not meant to be
a social or moral justice institution. It has only one duty...follow the law.

[HiPointDem]

46. no, it's against the law to stalk someone so you can shoot them.

[golfguru]

51. The charge against GZ was not stalking

irrelevant point.

[HiPointDem]

54. it should have been one of the charges. the pedophile got off. maybe he'll get jail for molesting

that 10 year old.

a pedophile, a racist and a murderer. little two-bit bullyboy.

[golfguru]

55. I agree, GZ could have been found guilty for stalking against

police instructions. The prosecutors charged GZ for 2nd degree murder which they could not prove in court beyond a reasonable doubt.

[Punkingal]

47. Yes I am..

It is illegal to stalk someone.

[golfguru]

52. The charge was not stalking, it was 2nd degree murder

that is why the prosecution lost. Prosecution may have won if they charged stalking.

[dionysus]

40. all the heat-packers rejoice...

[Nye Bevan]

41. I am actually totally pro-gun control. (nt)

[dionysus]

42. my sincere apologies then. i misunderstood.

[Nye Bevan]

43. No problem.

To me the main message of this whole thing is that we need gun control. There will always be stupid arguments and misunderstandings, but without guns, bruises and black eyes are the most likely outcome.

[dionysus]

44. ok, we're on the same page then.

[2ndAmForComputers]

48. The President of the United States is STILL a black man.

Choke on that.

[Nye Bevan]

50. Bit of a non-sequitur there.

Especially as I have always supported Obama here.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021572450

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=413895

[mstinamotorcity2]

49. America is full of Zimmermans

Children of color will not find safety in America. The justice system isn't designed for our children. It is designed against them.

[golfguru]

56. In cities like Chicago 500 blacks are murdered every year

by other blacks. And we never hear about it. Why there is no
outrage against the massacre of young blacks in Chicago?
I don't care what race kills a young person, we should be outraged
against all killings.

[mstinamotorcity2]

61. That is not true!!!!!

The violence in Chicago is being addressed. You have quite a few community leaders who are working diligently to curb the violence. there is black on black, white on white and any other race against each other when it comes to crime. If you live in a predominately white neighborhood chances are if crime is committed it will be a white person on white person. Same in a Black, Latino, Asian community those crimes will usually be committed on each other. That is a product of surroundings. The infiltration of guns, drugs, and lack of economic opportunities help fuel anger in minority communities. Throw in a liquor store on every other corner and the only people who gets satisfied is weapon manufacturers. The business of killing is very lucrative.

[golfguru]

63. My point is where is the outrage over 500 murders in Chicago?

That is every year there are 500 murders in Chicago, mostly by
gun violence and overwhelming victims are black.

I hear Chicago has strict gun laws. But law breakers
do not seem to abide by gun laws. By the way I spent over 30
years of my life in Chicago and never had a problem but I left
Chicago area in 1997.

[mstinamotorcity2]

64. There is outrage.

But as you say it is black on black the only people who have been outraged the last 20 years is Blacks. But I check out Chicago Tv and go about 3 times a year. They really do have a lot of well known community leaders who are really putting forth a strong effort to change the mindset of our youth and all who tired of the gun violence. Must change laws that work with the people not against them.

[tiny elvis]

57. right

the reluctant prosecutor did not do well

the smart thing for people feeling threatened by the verdict to do is
arm themselves, as the state has demonstrated that might is right

[sadbear]

58. What did the prosecution have to prove?

Zimmerman admitted that he shot and killed Trayvon Martin. What, did the prosecution have to prove that Trayvon didn't deserve it, too?

[Nye Bevan]

59. From the jury instructions:

"At issue in this case is whether George Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It is a defense to the crime of Second Degree Murder, and the lesser included offense of Manslaughter, if the death of Trayvon Martin resulted from the justifiable use of deadly force.

'Deadly force' means force likely to cause death or great bodily harm.

A person is justified in using deadly force if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself.

In deciding whether George Zimmerman was justified in the use of deadly force, you must judge him by the circumstances by which he was surrounded at the time the force was used. The danger facing George Zimmerman need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, George Zimmerman must have actually believed that the danger was real.

If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

In considering the issue of self-defense, you may take into account the relative physical abilities and capacities of George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin.

If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether George Zimmerman was justified in the use of deadly force, you should find George Zimmerman not guilty.

However, if from the evidence you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that George Zimmerman was not justified in the use of deadly force, you should find him guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved."

[sadbear]

60. I supposed with no reliable witnesses...

one could assault another person (with only the threat of bodily harm) and not be engaged in an unlawful activity. Yeah, I suppose it's hearsay to suppose that, but Trayvon Martin couldn't take the stand, could he? Hell, Zimmerman didn't even take the stand. Besides, with that last paragraph, it doesn't seem like the jury followed their instructions.

[golfguru]

67. The only injury Trayvon Martin had was his knuckles

George Zimmerman had nose broken, back of head bleeding in 3 places and contusions on side of his head. If my head was being bashed into concrete 3 times, I know I would be in panic, regardless if who had initiated the fight.

There is a 4 minute gap between the first phone call and the time of shot.
Looks to me like Trayvon Martin had enough time to run away. Instead he chose to linger in the area which turned out to be sad & fatal mistake.

[sadbear]

70. I suppose lingering is punishable by death, huh?

And the medical examiner said GZ's injuries were insignificant and GZ himself refused medical treatment. Something in your post just doesn't add up.

Of course, even if you were correct, there's no reason why GZ should walk scott free. He was the initiator, the aggressor.

[golfguru]

72. Only if you try to bash someone's head on to concrete. n/t

[sadbear]

75. Doesn't look like he was trying very hard.

Again, GV refused medical treatment, medical examiner said injuries were insignificant.

So I guess no, huh?

[golfguru]

76. AT the instant when your head is being bashed onto concrete,

you are in panic mode, not rational thinking mode.
And you take reflexive action, which is not always the best action,
as it turned out in this case by Zimmerman.

Have someone bash your head onto concrete until you start bleeding
and see if you can act rationally. 99 out of 100 people will be in fear of
serious injury. They will not wait to see if injuries are not life threatening.

[sadbear]

78. Bullshit.

Again, it wasn't even that hard.

GZ did not experience the kind of bashing you suggest.

[golfguru]

89. Try it on your head before using rude adjectives.

Try bashing your head on concrete with LESS bleeding than GZ photographs taken by police show. Then try posting again without the profanities. You can rest assured my response will not use any profanities or rude adjectives.

[sadbear]

91. Fuck that shit.

Go bang your own goddamned head. Zimmerman is a fucking pussy that needs to be called out for lying his ass off about fearing for his racist life. And I'll use any fucking language I damn well please.

[Sparkly]

88. I still see an obvious case of murder -- manslaughter at the least.

"A person is justified in using deadly force if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself."

"Reasonably believes." His wounds, as testified, were minimal -- more in line with falling than having his head "bashed." Throughout, four little words -- "I have a gun" -- would have be enough. He had no reason to think Trayvon Martin had a gun, was a black belt in some martial art, or anything else. He had no reason to think he was about to die or have great bodily harm done -- not when he could simply SAY, "I have a gun."

"In deciding whether George Zimmerman was justified in the use of deadly force, you must judge him by the circumstances by which he was surrounded at the time the force was used. The danger facing George Zimmerman need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, George Zimmerman must have actually believed that the danger was real."

So what were these appearances? What was the big danger? Would a "reasonably cautious and prudent person" have confronted Trayvon and then decided his/her life was in danger? Why? The closest they come to that is that Martin was losing a fight. Why would the person holding a loaded gun believe his life was in danger??

'If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity" (is pursuing somebody with a loaded gun lawful? maybe...)

"and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be," (Did he have a right to harass Trayvon Martin? maybe..)

"he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."

"Meet force with force" suggests he was jumped in an alley or something. Who started the "force?" Force began with him going after this boy, for no reason at all.

Again: Why would the person holding a loaded gun believe his life was in danger?? This passes the test of "reasonable?"

[Cha]

62. "Contemptible"?.. zimmerman is a murderous stalking asshole.

fixed it for ya.

[akbacchus_BC]

65. I am at a loss at your Op. The jury got it all wrong.

How on earth could Zimmerman be not found guilty. He stalked that child and eventually killed him. Justice in America is pathetic when it relates to black people. How those jurors found Zimmerman not responsible for killing a child is beyond comprehension. Those six women of the jury are probably not mothers. Justice in this case was not served! A killer gets to walk and the parents will forever mourn that their son is forever gone.

[Cali_Democrat]

69. A few DUers are doing a happy dance after the verdict

It's interesting. The very people I knew would do the happy dance are doing the happy dance.

I have a good intuition.

Fuck Zimmerman and his defenders.

[Nye Bevan]

71. Nobody should be doing a "happy dance" over this horrible tragedy.

There are no winners here.

[Scootaloo]

81. Well, you seem pretty pleased with the outcome

And you'll note that very few people in this thread are surprised by that.

I don't have any idea what's going on in your head Nye, what sort of message you think you're sending. Maybe you think you're being illuminating and fair-minded, I don't really know. But when a lot of people - and it's a lot of people, that I've seen - say they think you're carrying water for Zimmerman, rushing to have his back, and coming out swinging towards Trayvon and those who speak for him - literally in the case of your amazingly ill-advised insults towards Jeantelle for her dialect - maybe some sort of self-examination is in order? Ask yourself, "okay, why are so many people getting this from the stuff I post?"

[Nye Bevan]

82. Stating that the jury correctly followed their instructions is not the same as being "pleased".

And as you know, I post how I see it, not to court popularity. If I wanted to be popular here I would post another of those "Fuck those racist Paula Deens on the jury for endorsing the cold-blooded murder of a child!!!!!" type threads.

Also, none of my posts regarding the Zimmerman case have ever been hidden by a DU jury. So I guess they are not that offensive. Moreover, not to brag, but this thread is currently on the DU Greatest Page.

[Scootaloo]

85. I wonder why you need to state it though?

Really, it's a lot like the people who kept thumping on about hte presumption of innocence. It might surprise you but we know already. There is no need for you to "enlighten" us, as if you're a pith-helmeted missionary bringing the Word to a cannibal tribe (and yes, the simile is entirely intentional.)

You see people upset by this verdict. And while you claim to understand and maybe even agree with those people, you still apparently have this compulsive need to "correct" us, to talk down, to sniff about how dumb and emotional we are, and then pat yourself on the ass about how much greater your "understanding" is. We know how the jury system works in this country - some of us even comprehend how it doesn't. You're not delivering grand revelations, you're just making yourself look like a smug asshole.

What I'm saying is, maybe give some consideration to why people think this stuff about your posts. I can promise you it's not because we're all just stupid and jealous of your superior brain, so if that's hte conclusion you reach, try again.

[Nye Bevan]

86. If you think I'm a "smug asshole", find my posts offensive, and feel like I talk down to people...

I would suggest that you take advantage of the Ignore feature, as opposed to repeatedly kicking my threads to the top of GD by replying to them.

[golfguru]

74. There is nothing happy about this case!

It was a tragedy all around no matter what the verdict was.

What we learn from this episode is avoid confrontations with strangers.
Just walk away from conflict and fights.
If every one does that there will lot fewer tragedies.
Even if one party initiates confrontation or takes the first swing,
just swallow your pride, and make a hasty retreat if possible.
Or do what Gandhi used to do, turn other cheek. It always worked
for Gandhi. The aggressor was in shock at Gandhi's attitude and
stopped the aggression.
Do not linger for 4 minutes in the area.

[Jackpine Radical]

77. Blame the law, not the jury.

Traditionally, anyone pleading self-defense had the burden of proof. By FL SYG law, as I understand it, the burden is reversed & the prosecution has to show that it wasn't self-defense.

This is an evil law, but the jury was constrained by it.

[unapatriciated]

79. Zimmerman is an obvious liar with no credibilty...

The jury could have chosen to not be taken in by his phony story

[Nye Bevan]

87. Did you find Jonathan Good to be a credible witness?

Or was he also an obvious liar?

[matt819]

80. I didn't follow the trial

But from what I read, it was pretty clear that Z was guilty.

That said, someone I know told me about a jury he served on earlier this year. Most on the jury believed the defendant was guilty. However, the prosecution didn't make its case. There was no other verdict to reach other than not guilty. I'm guessing this happens every day across the country. And it may be no one's fault at all. It's not ineptness. It's not a grand conspiracy. It's not racism. It just happens.

As others have observed, as shitty as this is, Zimmerman's life is not going to be an easy one, and, in fact, conviction and a jail sentence might have been better for him all around.

[Nye Bevan]

83. I said pretty much from the beginning, a plea-bargain with some jail time would probably have been

the best outcome for everyone. Given probable guilt, but terrible witnesses and a weak case making it hard to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, at least Zimmerman would have received some punishment.

[davidpdx]

92. I think you can disagree with the verdict

as I certainly do, and at the same time see that the prosecution didn't put on a strong enough case. I also have to wonder if the amount of time that passed between the night the murder happened and when Zimmerman was arrested whether the extra time would have mattered. Also if the audio tape hadn't had all the damn noise in it I think it would have been more conclusive what he said.