Zimmerman found not guilty

Laces_0ut

Apparently he was, if he wasn't then Zimmerman would have been found guilty of at least manslaughter. Both had the right to be there, there is no law saying you cant follow and watch someone. Martin initiated the aggression and Zimmerman defended himself. Like it or not.

the law may be on Zimmerman's side but no real man should KILL a teen because he is losing a fight.

UnwrappingCandy

I never agreed with the 2nd degree murder charge. I felt he should have been charged with manslaughter from the beginning, and I think he would have been found guilty had this been the case. So, not only has the jury failed here, but the prosecution failed even more.

like it or not, florida law says the use of deadly force is allowed if there is a reasonable belief of great bodily harm. nothing in the law says anything about whether or not a situation was brought about by the shooter's actions.

florida law defines manslaughter as an intentional killing that is not justified or excusable.

the law prevents conviction of manslaughter if the jury believes there was reasonable fear.

so, explain to me ... where did the jury fail?

1. It was an intentional killing what was not justifiable or excusable.
2. Zimmerman was not afraid.

Zimmerman saw a black guy who looked out of place, made up his mind immediately that he was a criminal, and pursued him as though he were a criminal. He should have just phoned the police and left Martin alone. Instead he pursued him and killed him after being told not to pursue him by the police. Trayvon had every right to fight the man who came at him, the man who was not a cop, the man who had no authority to pursue him. Zimmerman shot and killed an innocent person. Was it second degree murder? No. Was it manslaughter? Yes. This jury failed. The prosecution failed.

BeachIron

But I wonder if Zimmerman would be alive.

Not playing devil's advocate, just considering the possibilities.

Unless the kid was planning on killing him with a pack of Skittles (the only thing found on his body), I rather think the body count would have been zero.

Didnt he have like a huge part of concrete? Pretty sure they had it as evidence to support the self defense claim

One thing I'm wondering, as I didn't follow the case too closely, is why would the stand your ground laws not be applied to what TM did? He was being followed (read: stalked) by someone, so what if he felt that HIS life was in danger?

TM wasn't charged with a crime. To state the obvious, Zimmerman's being found not guilty does not mean Martin was "guilty." The events that lead to the case were a tragedy, our justice system requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and there will always be cases with grey areas (all of them do). Two men met in the night, one is dead and one was charged and found not guilty. That's really all we know. Pretty much everything else is so much personal bias creating various narratives.

VeinsAndBones

Bye Bye Zimmerman!

Can you get Justin Beiber and 1D too?!

tiffysinc

But I wonder if Zimmerman would be alive.

Not playing devil's advocate, just considering the possibilities.

Unless the kid was planning on killing him with a pack of Skittles (the only thing found on his body), I rather think the body count would have been zero.

Didnt he have like a huge part of concrete? Pretty sure they had it as evidence to support the self defense claim

According to Zimmerman, Trayvon was sitting on top of him and proceeded to slam his head against a concrete sidewalk. I doubt Trayvon would have beat Zimmerman to death considering he initiated the fight in order to get Zimmerman to stop following him.

But pulling out a gun on a 17 year old whose only weapon is the concrete sidewalk underneath him is really pathetic on Zimmerman's part, especially considering the fact that he was more than 10 years Trayvon's senior and (from what I can see) several pounds heavier. That seems like extremely overdone and uncalled for self defense to me.

tsh0ck

I never agreed with the 2nd degree murder charge. I felt he should have been charged with manslaughter from the beginning, and I think he would have been found guilty had this been the case. So, not only has the jury failed here, but the prosecution failed even more.

like it or not, florida law says the use of deadly force is allowed if there is a reasonable belief of great bodily harm. nothing in the law says anything about whether or not a situation was brought about by the shooter's actions.

florida law defines manslaughter as an intentional killing that is not justified or excusable.

the law prevents conviction of manslaughter if the jury believes there was reasonable fear.

so, explain to me ... where did the jury fail?

1. It was an intentional killing what was not justifiable or excusable.
2. Zimmerman was not afraid.

Zimmerman saw a black guy who looked out of place, made up his mind immediately that he was a criminal, and pursued him as though he were a criminal. He should have just phoned the police and left Martin alone. Instead he pursued him and killed him after being told not to pursue him by the police. Trayvon had every right to fight the man who came at him, the man who was not a cop, the man who had no authority to pursue him. Zimmerman shot and killed an innocent person. Was it second degree murder? No. Was it manslaughter? Yes. This jury failed. The prosecution failed.

again, doesn't matter if zimmerman started the sequence of events. not according to the law. he was getting his head bashed into the concrete repeatedly. this allows him to defend himself with deadly force under florida law. hate the law all you want. that's valid. but the jury is required to follow that law.

_Waffle_

Not guilty. Just like O.J.

Wait, there were gloves involved in this case?

Casey Anthony then? Did she have gloves?

Jennyflies

I never agreed with the 2nd degree murder charge. I felt he should have been charged with manslaughter from the beginning, and I think he would have been found guilty had this been the case. So, not only has the jury failed here, but the prosecution failed even more.

like it or not, florida law says the use of deadly force is allowed if there is a reasonable belief of great bodily harm. nothing in the law says anything about whether or not a situation was brought about by the shooter's actions.

florida law defines manslaughter as an intentional killing that is not justified or excusable.

the law prevents conviction of manslaughter if the jury believes there was reasonable fear.

so, explain to me ... where did the jury fail?

1. It was an intentional killing what was not justifiable or excusable.
2. Zimmerman was not afraid.

Zimmerman saw a black guy who looked out of place, made up his mind immediately that he was a criminal, and pursued him as though he were a criminal. He should have just phoned the police and left Martin alone. Instead he pursued him and killed him after being told not to pursue him by the police. Trayvon had every right to fight the man who came at him, the man who was not a cop, the man who had no authority to pursue him. Zimmerman shot and killed an innocent person. Was it second degree murder? No. Was it manslaughter? Yes. This jury failed. The prosecution failed.

1.If it were intentional, he would have been convicted. Zimmerman did not wake up and think "hey im gonna go shoot some kid in a hoodie" So saying it was an intentional killing is completly wrong

2. If Zimmerman was not afraid why was he screaming?

3. Yes he sould have not followed him. However, that doesnt give TM the right to attack someone.

The main thing here is that a young life was lost and another was ruined. Its sad how it happened, it shouldnt have happened but it did.

Trueray

Bye Bye Zimmerman!

Can you get Justin Beiber and 1D too?!

Stewie said he will handle it.

mustang289

Didnt he have like a huge part of concrete? Pretty sure they had it as evidence to support the self defense claim

The defense attorney brought in a sample piece of a concrete sidewalk. He was pointing out to the jury the concrete under Zimmerman's head was like a weapon, in that Martin was allegedly hitting Zimmerman's head on the sidewalk.

UnwrappingCandy

I never agreed with the 2nd degree murder charge. I felt he should have been charged with manslaughter from the beginning, and I think he would have been found guilty had this been the case. So, not only has the jury failed here, but the prosecution failed even more.

like it or not, florida law says the use of deadly force is allowed if there is a reasonable belief of great bodily harm. nothing in the law says anything about whether or not a situation was brought about by the shooter's actions.

florida law defines manslaughter as an intentional killing that is not justified or excusable.

the law prevents conviction of manslaughter if the jury believes there was reasonable fear.

so, explain to me ... where did the jury fail?

1. It was an intentional killing what was not justifiable or excusable.
2. Zimmerman was not afraid.

Zimmerman saw a black guy who looked out of place, made up his mind immediately that he was a criminal, and pursued him as though he were a criminal. He should have just phoned the police and left Martin alone. Instead he pursued him and killed him after being told not to pursue him by the police. Trayvon had every right to fight the man who came at him, the man who was not a cop, the man who had no authority to pursue him. Zimmerman shot and killed an innocent person. Was it second degree murder? No. Was it manslaughter? Yes. This jury failed. The prosecution failed.

again, doesn't matter if zimmerman started the sequence of events. not according to the law. he was getting his head bashed into the concrete repeatedly. this allows him to defend himself with deadly force under florida law. hate the law all you want. that's valid. but the jury is required to follow that law.

Martin was defending himself against Zimmerman. Martin was afraid, and reasonably so. Maybe Martin should have beat Zimmerman's head into the concrete a bit harder until he killed him? Would you be standing up for Martin if this had been the case?

EDIT: I won't be responding to this thread again. I am already becoming emotional over it and my responses are too likely to be completely irrational. So I am leaving now. I hope everyone continues to respond to the verdict peacefully and that there isn't any violence caused by it.

Cheers,

Candace

mustang289

One thing I'm wondering, as I didn't follow the case too closely, is why would the stand your ground laws not be applied to what TM did? He was being followed (read: stalked) by someone, so what if he felt that HIS life was in danger?

I think it was explained this way; Stand Your Ground would apply if you had the ability to escape from the situation. Since they presented it as Zimmerman being pinned on the ground, he didn't at that time have the option to back away from the altercation, so it would have to be termed as Self Defense instead of Stand Your Ground. I guess if they were both standing and Zimmerman could have run away but chose not to, then they would have done Stand Your Ground.
Legal mumbo-jumbo.

Markguns

But I wonder if Zimmerman would be alive.

Not playing devil's advocate, just considering the possibilities.

Unless the kid was planning on killing him with a pack of Skittles (the only thing found on his body), I rather think the body count would have been zero.

Didnt he have like a huge part of concrete? Pretty sure they had it as evidence to support the self defense claim

One thing I'm wondering, as I didn't follow the case too closely, is why would the stand your ground laws not be applied to what TM did? He was being followed (read: stalked) by someone, so what if he felt that HIS life was in danger?

TM wasn't charged with a crime. To state the obvious, Zimmerman's being found not guilty does not mean Martin was "guilty." The events that lead to the case were a tragedy, our justice system requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and there will always be cases with grey areas (all of them do). Two men met in the night, one is dead and one was charged and found not guilty. That's really all we know. Pretty much everything else is so much personal bias creating various narratives.

You are correct the Prosecution Failed to Prove their case. REASONABLE DOUBT EXISTS, simple. The charge doesn't matter; the prosecution could not disprove Self Defense.... Zimmerman is the defendant he doesn't have to prove anything. Not Guilty.

BondBomb

What if it was your kid?
I may not be male but when I was 17 if a man followed me I would be scared to death. Grown men should not be out stalking 'suspicious looking children'. Or anyone if they aren't a police officer.
How can anyone think that this behavior is ok? Of course I would tell my son to run..to fight back.
It's so heartbreaking.

tsh0ck

I never agreed with the 2nd degree murder charge. I felt he should have been charged with manslaughter from the beginning, and I think he would have been found guilty had this been the case. So, not only has the jury failed here, but the prosecution failed even more.

like it or not, florida law says the use of deadly force is allowed if there is a reasonable belief of great bodily harm. nothing in the law says anything about whether or not a situation was brought about by the shooter's actions.

florida law defines manslaughter as an intentional killing that is not justified or excusable.

the law prevents conviction of manslaughter if the jury believes there was reasonable fear.

so, explain to me ... where did the jury fail?

1. It was an intentional killing what was not justifiable or excusable.
2. Zimmerman was not afraid.

Zimmerman saw a black guy who looked out of place, made up his mind immediately that he was a criminal, and pursued him as though he were a criminal. He should have just phoned the police and left Martin alone. Instead he pursued him and killed him after being told not to pursue him by the police. Trayvon had every right to fight the man who came at him, the man who was not a cop, the man who had no authority to pursue him. Zimmerman shot and killed an innocent person. Was it second degree murder? No. Was it manslaughter? Yes. This jury failed. The prosecution failed.

again, doesn't matter if zimmerman started the sequence of events. not according to the law. he was getting his head bashed into the concrete repeatedly. this allows him to defend himself with deadly force under florida law. hate the law all you want. that's valid. but the jury is required to follow that law.

Martin was defending himself against Zimmerman. Martin was afraid, and reasonably so. Maybe Martin should have beat Zimmerman's head into the concrete a bit harder until he killed him? Would you be standing up for Martin if this had been the case?

yikes.

I'm not standing up for either of them. merely pointing out the law. and the fact that the jury followed that law. so to malign those six people is wrong.

fatfrost

I never agreed with the 2nd degree murder charge. I felt he should have been charged with manslaughter from the beginning, and I think he would have been found guilty had this been the case. So, not only has the jury failed here, but the prosecution failed even more.

like it or not, florida law says the use of deadly force is allowed if there is a reasonable belief of great bodily harm. nothing in the law says anything about whether or not a situation was brought about by the shooter's actions.

florida law defines manslaughter as an intentional killing that is not justified or excusable.

the law prevents conviction of manslaughter if the jury believes there was reasonable fear.

so, explain to me ... where did the jury fail?

1. It was an intentional killing what was not justifiable or excusable.
2. Zimmerman was not afraid.

Zimmerman saw a black guy who looked out of place, made up his mind immediately that he was a criminal, and pursued him as though he were a criminal. He should have just phoned the police and left Martin alone. Instead he pursued him and killed him after being told not to pursue him by the police. Trayvon had every right to fight the man who came at him, the man who was not a cop, the man who had no authority to pursue him. Zimmerman shot and killed an innocent person. Was it second degree murder? No. Was it manslaughter? Yes. This jury failed. The prosecution failed.

again, doesn't matter if zimmerman started the sequence of events. not according to the law. he was getting his head bashed into the concrete repeatedly. this allows him to defend himself with deadly force under florida law. hate the law all you want. that's valid. but the jury is required to follow that law.

I think it goes to what's reasonable. Was it reasonable for him to be in fear of his life after he initiated a situation and was dealing with someone who was unarmed? Would it reasonable for me to go to a KKK rally, follow someone to their car and then shoot them when reacted angrily to my pursuit? But the reality is that this all semantics. At the end of the day, the prosecution job was cause the jury to identify with Trayvon as if he were their kid and the defense's job was to get the jury to identify with Zimmerman as if he was their husband/son. Looks like the defense did a better job.

ladymiseryali

What if it was your kid?
I may not be male but when I was 17 if a man followed me I would be scared to death. Grown men should not be out stalking 'suspicious looking children'. Or anyone if they aren't a police officer.
How can anyone think that this behavior is ok? Of course I would tell my son to run..to fight back.
It's so heartbreaking.

People here seem to believe Zimmerman's version, that Trayvon was a thug who was beating his head into the concrete, even though evidence seems to point to his head NOT being bashed several times.

This just shows me that people see only what they want to see.

onedayatatime12

Jury wasn't diverse enough in my opinion. But karma's a b!tch. So if Zimmerman's guilty he'll get it (not that I wish this upon him).

BeachIron

What if it was your kid?
I may not be male but when I was 17 if a man followed me I would be scared to death. Grown men should not be out stalking 'suspicious looking children'. Or anyone if they aren't a police officer.
How can anyone think that this behavior is ok? Of course I would tell my son to run..to fight back.
It's so heartbreaking.

People here seem to believe Zimmerman's version, that Trayvon was a thug who was beating his head into the concrete, even though evidence seems to point to his head NOT being bashed several times.

This just shows me that people see only what they want to see.

Not trying to push your buttons here, but you also seem to have a very definite narrative in your mind of what happened. I think that you are forgetting that the obligation of the prosecution is to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That easily leaves a situation where the jury is undecided on the facts but finds Zimmerman not guilty.

ladymiseryali

What if it was your kid?
I may not be male but when I was 17 if a man followed me I would be scared to death. Grown men should not be out stalking 'suspicious looking children'. Or anyone if they aren't a police officer.
How can anyone think that this behavior is ok? Of course I would tell my son to run..to fight back.
It's so heartbreaking.

People here seem to believe Zimmerman's version, that Trayvon was a thug who was beating his head into the concrete, even though evidence seems to point to his head NOT being bashed several times.

This just shows me that people see only what they want to see.

Not trying to push your buttons here, but you also seem to have a very definite narrative in your mind of what happened. I think that you are forgetting that the obligation of the prosecution is to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That easily leaves a situation where the jury is undecided on the facts but finds Zimmerman not guilty.

I went by what I saw, which was two small abrasions on the back of his head, which indicated that his head may have met with concrete, but not in the way he claimed. I'm not seeing what I want to see. I'm seeing what was presented and it didn't fit Zimmerman's narrative. But what's done is done. Florida is on my list of places never to visit nor move to.