The Official Zimmerman Trial Verdict Thread

[Sunshine]

Now this pisses me off. I grew up with guns hanging on the wall and live in a state where you don't need a special permit to carry a concealed weapon. If you want to conceal your gun, you can. And I like that it's like that here.

What pisses me off is that Zimmerman has presented anti-gun people with some "ammunition" against the right to carry a weapon.

Thanks a lot Zimmerman, you asshole.

This conservative father-in-law I talk about carries a concealed weapon, and back when a permit was required he had a permit. I like being around him. He is the kind of guy you feel really safe being around. You know that if some nutcase comes into the theater or mall where you are and starts shooting that guys like my father-in-law will simply pull out their gun and shoot the sucker. (I think some of them live for the opportunity) : )

But it's one thing to carry a concealed weapon and know when and how to use it if necessary. It's entirely another thing to behave like Zimmerman, following people around in the dark and provoking confrontations whereupon you shoot 17-year-old kids dead.

What part of "Observing suspicious characters was his job in his capacity as a Neighborhood Watch Coordinator" is so hard to grasp?

Where is your outrage when a 17 year old young man attacks a man who's motivation is protecting his neighborhood from crime?

Everyone seems so intent on crucifying Zimmerman but excuses the actions of Martin. Why? because he's been portrayed as a cute 12 year old kid?
In reality, Martin was an angry, antisocial wannabe thug on his 3rd suspension and at the time of the incident, exhibiting either macho bullshit or real racism. He was not 12, but a 5'11". 158 pound young MAN.
Could Zimmerman acted differently so that he wouldn't have provoked Martin? Of course, but the fact remains that Martin had no good reason to attack Mr. Zimmerman and ultimately was responsible for his own death.

If your neighborhood has a watch program it is everyone's duty all the time to be alert to suspicious activity. You don't just blow it off because you are not 'on.'

 

[Sunshine]

[MENTION=42969]jon_berzerk[/MENTION] -can I share that school thing?

maybe wait a few days

i still believe that the state is unaware of it

Where's the decoder ring?

 

[Sallow]

this was not and is not a stand your ground case

This..is why the cops let Zimmerman go in the first place.

And didn't conduct an extensive investigation.

They were confused about the law.

It is the DA, spelled District Attorney, who files the charges. Not the cops. Unlike you, he is a licensed attorney.

Again.

The police let Zimmerman go.

They did not do proper forensics.

And put on display the institutional racism that is still pervasive in Florida.

They did a tox screen on Martin but didn't even bother to ask Zimmerman for a breath test.

There would be NO trial if Sharpton hadn't become involved.

 

[Missourian]

n e g g e d !!!

Had Martin just punched Zimmerman in the nose that would have been the end of it. It was the ground and pound that got him shot.

Bullshit! That murdering racist was going to shoot that kid no matter what. He fantasized about it along with his racist friends and family. Let him go free. Its up to Trayvon's family to get revenge. The justice system doesn't give a shit about Black kids. That's our own fault. Doesn't mean we cant seek our own vengeance.

The FBI has independently determined that racism was NOT a factor in the Martin shooting.

The investigation is concluded, the findings released...

No evidence Trayvon Martin's killer is racist: FBI interviews


July 12, 2012|Kevin Gray and Barbara Liston | Reuters



MIAMI/ORLANDO, Florida (Reuters) - FBI interviews with dozens of friends, coworkers and neighbors of George Zimmerman found no evidence that the accused murderer of Florida teenager Trayvon Martin was a racist, according to new documents released on Thursday [by the FBI].


No evidence Trayvon Martin's killer is racist: FBI interviews - Chicago Tribune
​

 

[Sallow]

I don't care if George Zimmerman danced a jig behind Martin while singing the "Oompaloompa Song". It still doesn't make it acceptable for Martin to assault him, or revoke Zimmerman's right to defend himself when Martin DID assault him. Last time I checked, the law doesn't require anyone to "avoid a confrontation", nor is it illegal to be annoying.

Some states have a provision in the self defense statutes a provision that you must retreat before using deadly force. Florida is not one of them. Neither is the state where I live.

NY has the "duty to retreat" proviso but it applies only if and where the person (i.e. the defendant) is able to do so in complete safety.

And it does not apply in one's own home.

When you have been laid out with a broken nose on your back and your attacker is on top of you and astride you and is raining blows down on you and bashing the back of your head into the concrete, it is pretty fucking difficult to retreat (in complete safety or at all).

If Zimmerman's account is accurate, it wouldn't even matter if Florida did have the "duty to retreat" on its law books for justification. The law never imposes a duty to do the impossible.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfD7agP1yxw]Danzig getting knocked out - YouTube[/ame]

Danzig's next move should have been what?

Headshot with a 9mm?

 

[Sunshine]

Thanks for illustrating my point.

You obviously are unfamiliar with what happens when an SUV hits a motorcycle from behind at 105 miles per hour. The man was trying to kill me with no provocation. I would have been well within my rights to use deadly force to end the threat.

You obviously have no idea about the visibility in an SUV. Bike are hard to see when you are in a car. And most bikers just love to weave in and out of traffic or between lanes.

And what state has a legal speed limit of 105?

Seems like you were breaking the law.

Pedestrians are even harder to see. That doesn't give you the right to run over them.

 

[legaleagle_45]

I would be very interested in how you would go about defending Trayvon...lets here the other side. Help! lol.

First and foremost, I would not use a knock-knock joke in opening argument. Other than that, the defense is doing a decent job.

To explain defense strategy is extremely difficult at this point because it is fluid. You must be able to make decisions on the fly regarding cross examination. It is only when the prosecution rests that you really employ strategy and that is based upon what the prosecution has actually presented. So you adjust your strategy based upon what the prosecution has accomplished. Which, up to this point is not that much IMHO. I would expect something much better when forensics evidence is proffered and the evidence of the autopsy is discussed. If the Prosecution has a chance to prevail it is because of something they will reveal there...

 

[Sallow]

You obviously are unfamiliar with what happens when an SUV hits a motorcycle from behind at 105 miles per hour. The man was trying to kill me with no provocation. I would have been well within my rights to use deadly force to end the threat.

You obviously have no idea about the visibility in an SUV. Bike are hard to see when you are in a car. And most bikers just love to weave in and out of traffic or between lanes.

And what state has a legal speed limit of 105?

Seems like you were breaking the law.

Pedestrians are even harder to see. That doesn't give you the right to run over them.

Pedestrians are casually walking around on the highways?

Since when?

 

[Zona]

This..is why the cops let Zimmerman go in the first place.

And didn't conduct an extensive investigation.

They were confused about the law.

It is the DA, spelled District Attorney, who files the charges. Not the cops. Unlike you, he is a licensed attorney.

Again.

The police let Zimmerman go.

They did not do proper forensics.

And put on display the institutional racism that is still pervasive in Florida.

They did a tox screen on Martin but didn't even bother to ask Zimmerman for a breath test.

There would be NO trial if Sharpton hadn't become involved.

Sharpton is annoying but thank God he stepped in here. Hopefully this sheads light on situations like this in America.

Oh and zimmerman defenders, what happened to the top cop who let Zimmerman go intially? Did he quit in shame? Doesnt that tell you something?

 

[25Caliber]

it is still the crime of assault to punch someone in the face

Think a little deeper...hes a minor being followed in the dark by a man who when confronted went reaching in the direction of his gun. Ill take that case all day and win 100 out of 100 times.

Here's were things don't jive...

IF Martin is worried about Zimmerman's gun...wouldn't he be trying to control Zimmerman's hands? NOT punching him in the face and head?

Where are your hands when you are trying to fend off blows to your head? Protecting your face and not reaching for your gun. Reach for your gun? I hit you in the face...oops here comes the hand to protect the head again. Trayvon may have figured that as soon as I stop throwing blows, the leverage goes back to GZ and the gun. So he just keeps punching.

I have no idea what the thought process was, but I can assume that based on GZs own account of the situation that during the struggle his gun was exposed and we know that GZ was going for it...and we do know that Trayvon was punching him in the face. So two and two together and I can consider certain thoughts that could have been going through Trayvons.

 

[Sunshine]

I don't care if George Zimmerman danced a jig behind Martin while singing the "Oompaloompa Song". It still doesn't make it acceptable for Martin to assault him, or revoke Zimmerman's right to defend himself when Martin DID assault him. Last time I checked, the law doesn't require anyone to "avoid a confrontation", nor is it illegal to be annoying.

Some states have a provision in the self defense statutes a provision that you must retreat before using deadly force. Florida is not one of them. Neither is the state where I live.

NY has the "duty to retreat" proviso but it applies only if and where the person (i.e. the defendant) is able to do so in complete safety.

And it does not apply in one's own home.

When you have been laid out with a broken nose on your back and your attacker is on top of you and astride you and is raining blows down on you and bashing the back of your head into the concrete, it is pretty fucking difficult to retreat (in complete safety or at all).

If Zimmerman's account is accurate, it wouldn't even matter if Florida did have the "duty to retreat" on its law books for justification. The law never imposes a duty to do the impossible.

And there are other situations when 'detached reflection' is not required.

Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. declared in Brown v. United States (1921) (256 U.S. 335, 343 (16 May 1921)), a case that upheld the "no duty to retreat" maxim, that "detached reflection cannot be demanded in the presence of an uplifted knife".[4]

Stand-your-ground law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am thinking that if you are being sat upon and getting your head beaten into the concrete, the courts would not require 'detached reflection' nor hold you to a 'duty to retreat.'

 

[Amelia]

Never...aka zero percent.

Post any credible links that states that Trayvon attacked the killer Zimmerman.

You do make things up. I hoped you might give me a greater than 0% answer. That would have added to your credibility. But c'est la vie.


Post a credible link? How am I expected to do that? You won't find Zimmerman's account credible, and that's the only one I know of from someone who was there.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

That's the funniest shat I ever heard. Post it if you can or concede that you don't have jack shat.

You people are too funny.

Have you or have you not read that Zimmerman said Martin attacked him. If you have not, then where have you been? If you have, then you obviously don't consider that credible, so what would good would posting the link do?

But here is a link:

Shooting of Trayvon Martin

When police arrived on the scene, Zimmerman told them that Martin had attacked him and that he had shot Martin in self-defense.

 

[Ernie S.]

Well Ernie, I am no gun nut, but I know a little bit. Been around guns since the age of seven..and I pretty much have decided I don't like them.

I see almost no need for citizens to be carrying them around, wild west style, to settle scores, like not being able to stop robberies from occurring in "their complexes" and making sure the "asshole" doesn't get away this time.

And I know enough that people like you, who can't handle themselves in the street and walk around with a chip on their shoulders, you know, like Zimmerman..should not being carrying guns.

Hopefully you don't lose it and shoot someone.

I've been around guns my whole life, Sallow and I've never shot anyone.

As close as I've gotten is once, in 1971, racking a round into the chamber of a pump shotgun to convince a man that he really didn't want to rape my wife and a second time 19 years later I showed my weapon to a crack addict that was about to rob me at knife point.
In neither case did I fire and in the second case, my .44 magnum never left my shoulder holster. The intimidation factor was sufficient to deter 2 would be dead guys.

No. I doubt I will ever "lose it" and shoot someone, but I am prepared to do so, should it become necessary.

Why didn't GZ use the gun in the way you used your weapons has been the root of my questioning GZ's actions. I applaud your choice to let them live.

If my (former) wife's attacker had completed breaking down my door, I would have killed him. Had the man with the knife been closer to me when I indicated I was armed, HE would have died. In both cases, I had an alternative that didn't include killing someone. George Zimmerman had called out for help. He was even refused help from a man that opted to call 911 instead. He was getting pounded, punched in the face and with each punch, his head was driven into the ground. He was fresh out of options. He unholstered his weapon and fired as a last resort.

 

[Sallow]

I am "implying" that the restraining order would have barred Zimmerman from owning a handgun in New York, much less being able to carry it in the streets.

Things wrong with your assertions:

1.) The existence of a current civil domestic restraining order is a disqualifier to own any gun under federal law, New York Law and Florida Law.

2.) The existence of a lapsed civil restraining order is not a disqualifier to own a gun under federal law, New York Law and Florida Law. Source for NY law: New York State Penal Law Sections 265 and 400; New York General Business Law 39 - DD; #9 - DDD

3.) At the time Zimmerman received his concealed weapons permit, there was no current civil domestic restraining order in place.

4.) In connection with obtaining his concealed weapons permit, Zimmerman was required to undergo a full FBI fingerprint background check, which is much more extensive than the New York background check requirements to purchase a firearm.

5.) Zimmerman passed the full FBI fingerprint background check.

6.) Zimmerman would have also passed the NY background check and be eligible to purchase a gun under New York law if he were a resident of the state at the time as New York State Law merely requires a NICS background check which is not as extensive as a full FBI fingerprint background check.

7.) You obviously do not know what you are talking about.

If you think Zimmerman would have been able to get a gun license in New York, let alone a carry permit..

I've got a couple of good deals for you.

Item 1 - A bridge in Brooklyn. (Cheap)

Item 2 - Swamp Land in Florida. (Good for a Gator Farm)

PM me.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Geodon is for bipolar disorder, and celexa is for severe depression. Given some of his posts, I'm not surprised the man has issues.

Why anyone thinks someone like that should be able to get a gun is the crazy part.

Now, frankly before anyone thinks "You just don't understand", I've had some really bad stuff happen in my life, too. But I've held it together without chemical aid, thanks.

You have shown your ignorance. Geodon is not 'for bipolar disorder.' In psychiatry we don't treat a disease. We treat symptoms. Geodon is used to treat symptoms, including adjunct therapy for depression, and psychosis. It can be used for other mood symptoms like mood swings if they aren't too bad.

And next time you decide to quote someone you might try not altering the post.

At the top of the page, the guy pretty much admits he's a basket case. Which is fine, I get that.

What I don't get is why you people think folks like him should have guns.

Care to cite when I ever used said weapons in an unlawful way? I am 55 and have owned or had access to firearms my entire life. Never shot anyone, never threatened anyone, never did anything illegal with said firearms.

I spent almost 16 years in the Marine Corps. I have served this country as a Marine and you question my ability and my rights? You are beyond stupid.

 

[25Caliber]

I would be very interested in how you would go about defending Trayvon...lets here the other side. Help! lol.

First and foremost, I would not use a knock-knock joke in opening argument. Other than that, the defense is doing a decent job.

To explain defense strategy is extremely difficult at this point because it is fluid. You must be able to make decisions on the fly regarding cross examination. It is only when the prosecution rests that you really employ strategy and that is based upon what the prosecution has actually presented. So you adjust your strategy based upon what the prosecution has accomplished. Which, up to this point is not that much IMHO. I would expect something much better when forensics evidence is proffered and the evidence of the autopsy is discussed. If the Prosecution has a chance to prevail it is because of something they will reveal there...

LOL...omg...no knock knock jokes for sure.

I guess what I am asking for is objectivity...how would you go about making the case that Trayvon could have been acting in self defense and that GZ could have been considered the aggressor at least in Trayvons eyes in that moment.

I think its easy to empathize with GZ...we have his words and all of his information now...but what about the guy who isnt here to give his side? One who didnt have all the information that night that we have today

 

[Sunshine]

Thanks. The thing is...to me there is something desperately wrong on both sides. In the interest of being objective...because frankly, its not much fun taking one side...lol. One side? Booooorinnng. There are mistakes and bad judgment on both sides why not show both?

To me...Tray was being followed in a way that pissed him off...he felt threatened. On the other hand I dont buy the counter argument that Tray was running away scared either. It seems that both sides would love it if that were true...I mean it hits their narrative right on the head.

GZ makes it sound like he was just taking a stroll thru his residency and then a casual stroll up a sidewalk. Nope doesnt make sense, otherwise Tray wouldnt have felt threatened or have been pissed and would have just went back to his house and watched the damn all star game. I dont think Tray was seeking him out initially, I think he thought some strange creep was following him (later with a flashlight in the dark) and it pissed him off...cant say I blame him especially considering the fact that GZ never identified himself or his intentions or suspicions and he had numerous opportunities to do so.

Neither of these scenarios make sense, but I cant get the bias of each side to give an inch and help me figure it out...lol. .

It seems most find it easy to put themselves in GZs position, but what if you are trayvon and you have committed no crime, you are in a strange neighborhood being followed by a strange person you have never met or even seen before? What about what was going through trayvons mind?...What would be going thru your childs mind? Hell, I would have been a little pissed too. Then later he appears to be following you in the direction of where you are staying and using a flashlight in the dark? Pretty creepy if you ask me.

To me, GZ made it obvious that he knew Trayvon thought he was being followed when he told the dispatch "he is running away". That right there is his first indicator that he may not want to pursue any further...after all you have observed no crime and now you have to go up the sidewalk looking with the aid of a flashlight in the dark. You are asking to be surprised...I mean who wants to be followed by someone with a flashlight in the dark? At the very least, GZ should have realized that he had not identified himself and that this strange person running away did not know who he was or why he was being followed. Big mistake...why is that so difficult to see? Nope, all i get is that it wasnt illegal to walk up a sidewalk...lol.

I never know which wall you're going to bounce off of.

Thank you...thats because I look very deeply into both sides...constantly. Im not swayed by obvious biased posters from either side...I think for myself. Like you and your gangsta profiling. I know i know...your 25 yrs of working with the youth allows you to spot a teen in a hoodie in the dark and rain as a gangster a mile away...lol.

I might give logical reasoning and thought for Zimmerman later today...stay tuned.

With all of your supposed expertise I would expect you to be able to do the same...havnt seen it yet.

Its not easy being me...you have to hold no bias, you see no color, you think outside of the box, you look deep into the entire situation from both sides of the conflict...you can usually get to the truth and begin proper problem solving...it works really good for me.

I know the prevailing laws. So far, based on having command of the law, I haven't seen anything that suggests that Zimmerman was guilty. And if you notice the others here who have legal backgrounds are also not claiming he is guilty. I realize that people who have no legal background may be struggling with this case. But those of us who know the laws of this country are not struggling with this case, nor are we obligated to do so in order to pass some internet poster's personal objectivity test.

 

[Sallow]

It's called "menacing".

Menacing Law & Legal Definition

Perhaps you should contact Angela Corey and explain to her how she messed up by not including a menacing charge against Zimmerman? Maybe they can still amend the charging instrument to include "menacing". You can drop her a line at:

Courthouse Annex
220 East Bay Street
Jacksonville, Florida, 32202

I am sure she will be so impressed with your credentials as legal wiz extraordinaire on the US Message Boards that she will hire you at once.

Pretty sure she's sorta botched this..

Murder 2 is probably overcharging..and I think it's deliberate.

In any case..if Florida gets this wrong..the Feds will probably get it right.

He's not walking.

 

[25Caliber]

I never know which wall you're going to bounce off of.

Thank you...thats because I look very deeply into both sides...constantly. Im not swayed by obvious biased posters from either side...I think for myself. Like you and your gangsta profiling. I know i know...your 25 yrs of working with the youth allows you to spot a teen in a hoodie in the dark and rain as a gangster a mile away...lol.

I might give logical reasoning and thought for Zimmerman later today...stay tuned.

With all of your supposed expertise I would expect you to be able to do the same...havnt seen it yet.

Its not easy being me...you have to hold no bias, you see no color, you think outside of the box, you look deep into the entire situation from both sides of the conflict...you can usually get to the truth and begin proper problem solving...it works really good for me.

I know the prevailing laws. So far, based on having command of the law, I haven't seen anything that suggests that Zimmerman was guilty. And if you notice the others here who have legal backgrounds are also not claiming he is guilty. I realize that people who have no legal background may be struggling with this case. But those of us who know the laws of this country are not struggling with this case, nor are we obligated to do so in order to pass some internet poster's personal objectivity test.

I know...I know...you are 65 years old and know and experienced everything...this case isnt rocket science and you dont need a law degree to know what applies here. You are not a lawyer in this case and you are not a juror...you are just another posting braggart without an objective bone in your body as I see it.

Your 65 years of experience has appears to have developed a bias and a whole lot of bitterness. Just my take...If my grandmother talked like you I'd wash HER mouth out with soap....lol. Your language is vulgar, your bias is thick, your compassion is slim and your ego is bigger than the blimp.

I really dont have much interest in your opinion...and I dont believe I asked for it either. You seem to be seeking me out...try to resist.

BTW, your neg reps dont bother me...the truth hurts.

 

[Missourian]

Think a little deeper...hes a minor being followed in the dark by a man who when confronted went reaching in the direction of his gun. Ill take that case all day and win 100 out of 100 times.

Here's were things don't jive...

IF Martin is worried about Zimmerman's gun...wouldn't he be trying to control Zimmerman's hands? NOT punching him in the face and head?

Where are your hands when you are trying to fend off blows to your head? Protecting your face and not reaching for your gun. Reach for your gun? I hit you in the face...oops here comes the hand to protect the head again. Trayvon may have figured that as soon as I stop throwing blows, the leverage goes back to GZ and the gun. So he just keeps punching.

I have no idea what the thought process was, but I can assume that based on GZs own account of the situation that during the struggle his gun was exposed and we know that GZ was going for it...and we do know that Trayvon was punching him in the face. So two and two together and I can consider certain thoughts that could have been going through Trayvons.

I think you are reaching here.

Play it through in your minds eye.

You are in fear of being shot.

Fistfight or wrestle?

The LAST thing I'm going to do is straddle the guy and hit in the face exposing my chest...

I want to be BEHIND him locking his arms and hands in a hold that prevents him from reaching that gun...and be screaming "HE'S GOT A GUN, CALL 911"

The MMA style beat down to the head doesn't jive with a fear of being shot by a gun.