F
Fairwinds
Guest
the only opinion that matters is the jury’s. if they say he’s guilty he’s guilty. if they say he’s not guilty, he’s not guilty.
announcing what “should” be done is why there are going to to riots.
- Status
announcing what “should” be done is why there are going to to riots.
M
MaryT777
Guest
We can pray there will be no riots; and I agree we need to abide by the opinion of the jury.
Mary.
7
7_Sorrows
Guest
it has been really sad watching CNN, HLN and Nancy Grace and Jane Velez Mitchell put their own spin on this trial. it is all up to the jury and I am glad they were sequestered although I am not sure they can be 100% sure they aren’t getting information somehow from the outside that could sway their opinion.
when the case first happened, I didn’t have sympathy for trayvon martin or George Zimmerman, but as more information came out, I realized how the race card was being played once again instead of hearing the facts and George Zimmerman was painted as the bad guy. I think both George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin could have done things differently that night to avoid the confrontation. but once the confrontation began it became a matter of self defense. I think both trayvon and George Zimmerman were afraid that night. trayvon was a tall teenager and obviously strong. even though George Zimmerman was older, he was smaller. none of us were there, but what matters is that that justice be done - and by that I don’t mean social justice. George Zimmerman has a right to defend himself. I lived in a big city before and in a neighborhood were sadly, a majority of the crimes were committed by black individuals or Hispanics. in order to survive, you have to learn to be suspicious and be aware. otherwise, you will become a victim of a crime.
unfortunately, this is what life has become in the inner cities or in crime ridden neighborhoods. it is reality. so all of the criminals whether they are black, Hispanic, white only make it worse for the honest citizens.
when the case first happened, I didn’t have sympathy for trayvon martin or George Zimmerman, but as more information came out, I realized how the race card was being played once again instead of hearing the facts and George Zimmerman was painted as the bad guy. I think both George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin could have done things differently that night to avoid the confrontation. but once the confrontation began it became a matter of self defense. I think both trayvon and George Zimmerman were afraid that night. trayvon was a tall teenager and obviously strong. even though George Zimmerman was older, he was smaller. none of us were there, but what matters is that that justice be done - and by that I don’t mean social justice. George Zimmerman has a right to defend himself. I lived in a big city before and in a neighborhood were sadly, a majority of the crimes were committed by black individuals or Hispanics. in order to survive, you have to learn to be suspicious and be aware. otherwise, you will become a victim of a crime.
unfortunately, this is what life has become in the inner cities or in crime ridden neighborhoods. it is reality. so all of the criminals whether they are black, Hispanic, white only make it worse for the honest citizens.
R
Robert_Sock
Guest
I fear that a Zimmerman acquittal would send the wrong message to people bent on taking the law into their own hands. People everywhere with guns is definitely not the type of society I want to live in. Trayvon Martin did nothing wrong that dreadful night, but was merely defending himself from the plight of what he perceived to be a stalker. If Zimmerman was acting in self defense, how much more so was Trayvon Martin?
M
MaryT777
Guest
M
MaryT777
Guest
That should not make Martin a “suspect.” It’s not illegal to walk in the rain with skittles and an iced tea.
M
MaryT777
Guest
I think Z’s classes and knowledge of the law was an indictment against him only in the terms of credibility. He claimed he had no knowledge of the self defense laws yet received an A in the class where it was discussed.
S
Seamus_L
Guest
And it wasn’t illegal either for Zimmerman to think Martin was up to no good. A conviction here sends the message, If you think someone may be following you, do not go home and or call the police, but instead, return and violently assault them.
J
Julian_Bashir
Guest
You don’t convict to send a message, you do so because the law says so. That’s what discretionary sentencing is for.
The kind of society you want to live in is irrelevant, and frankly, it is selfish to hope someone gets convicted of murder only so you can send a message to gun owners.
J
Julian_Bashir
Guest
People simply want a conviction because someone died. The rule of law (unless it applies to them) doesn’t matter.
Most people commenting are simply “out for blood.”
R
Robert_Sock
Guest
But I’m also saying that Trayvon Martin acted in self defense. Gun slingers (I’m not implicating law abiding gun owners in any way) need to be judged based on the law. I sense that a just jury will convict Zimmerman of manslaughter.
L
LisaA
Guest
You clearly have an anti-gun agenda. “Gun slingers…” OH PUH-LEASE. Please re-read the excellent post where carrying a gun is justified for self defense and for defense of the innocent. Mass shootings have been stopped by someone with a concealed carry including one in a mall near my home. I am HAPPY to know that in certain places there are trained and armed citizens.
If GZ were truly out to catch a bad guy, why did, in all of the time he carried a gun, did he not take an opportunity to pull it out and shoot someone? Or stop them at gun point? He has a history of contacting authorities if he sees something suspicious. You might fault him for being overzealous in contacting police in an area where there have been multiple break-ins, including “hot” break ins where the occupants were home. But you can’t say he’s been violent or pulled out his gun without reason.
Did you know that gun crimes by those with concealed carry permits are at a lower percentage than law enforcement officers?
I truly do not understand the anti-gun mentality. I believe it has to do with most such prejudices and that is a lack of understanding of the facts.
The evidence supports GZ’s case, that Trayvon was the initial aggressor. It is NOT illegal to observe or report suspicious activity. That GZ had NOT been previously engaged in a confrontation during his tenure as Neighborhood Watch indicates that he was not likely the one who cornered Martin and instigated the fight.
Lisa
R
Robert_Sock
Guest
I agree entirely that it’s not illegal to observe or report suspicious activity, but Zimmerman went beyond the bounds of the law by confronting an innocent 17 year old who mistook Zimmerman as a stalker. Again, if Zimmerman acted in self defense, how much more so did Trayvon Martin? Gun slingers need to be held accountable for their actions just as much as criminals.
D
dmelosi
Guest
So is it you do not believe Zimmerman and you know something different about what happened?
*"The Orlando Sentinel reported that George Zimmerman told police he lost 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in the neighborhood he regularly patrolled and was walking back to his vehicle last month when the youth approached him from behind.
The two exchanged words, Zimmerman said, and Martin then punched him, jumped on top of him and began banging his head on a sidewalk. Zimmerman said he began crying for help; Martin’s family thinks it was their son who was crying out. Witness accounts differ and 911 tapes in which the voices are heard are not clear.
A statement from Sanford police said the newspaper story was “consistent” with evidence turned over to prosecutors."*
S
St_Francis
Guest
What evidence is there that Zimmerman confronted Martin? What evidence is there that Martin needed to defend himself?
And why didn’t you report this evidence to the police, who knew nothing of it?
J
Jeanne_S
Guest
The important thing to remember is that the jury ,based the the evidence has to be able to convict GZ beyond a reasonable doubt.I don’t see it happening,the proof just isn’t there that GZ killed TM for any other reason than to save his own life.
D
Dawnia
Guest
It is not self-defense to attack someone following you.
It is not self-defense to hold someone down and pummel them.
It is self-defense to stop someone from beating the snot out of you and/or trying to take your gun from you and shoot you.
M
maryjk
Guest
It didn’t take long for someone, once again, to claim to have knowledge that no one else has.
You do not know that Zimmerman confronted Martin.
R
Robert_Sock
Guest
Based on the evidence of one of the witnesses who was on the phone with Trayvon Martin and was told by Martin that he was being stalked (I believe Martin said he was being followed by a crack freak). The whole incident was the result of Zimmerman wanting to confront Martin. This was the entire bases of bringing this case to trial. Zimmerman ought to have stayed in his car after the police dispatcher told him not to follow Martin. Refusing this order directly led to the confrontation and subsequent death of an innocent 17 year old boy. Again, my contention is that Zimmerman is guilty of manslaughter, based on the evidence presented in court.
R
Robert_Sock
Guest
Again, this was the entire bases of bringing the case to trial in the first place. Of course I do not know for sure, I was not present at the time. And neither do you know that Martin started the confrontation. Talk about assumptions!It didn’t take long for someone, once again, to claim to have knowledge that no one else has.
You do not know that Zimmerman confronted Martin.
I do not believe that there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman is guilty of second degree murder, but I think there is ample evidence for his being convicted of manslaughter.
- Status