M
maryjk
Guest
You mean that trustworthy person that lied about her age, location and couldn’t seem to remember what Martin said?
Oh, and according to her, he was being followed by a “creepy a** cracker.” Not a crack freak.
- Status
Oh, and according to her, he was being followed by a “creepy a** cracker.” Not a crack freak.
D
dmelosi
Guest
What is the ample evidence?
*"Overview of Florida Involuntary Manslaughter Laws
When a homicide, the killing of a human being, does not meet the legal definition of murder, Florida state laws allow a prosecutor to consider a manslaughter charge. The state establishes two types of manslaughter: voluntary and involuntary. While voluntary manslaughter describes an intentional act performed during a provocation or heat of passion, involuntary manslaughter does not require an intent to kill or even an intent to perform that act resulting in the victim’s death.
To establish involuntary manslaughter, the prosecutor must show that the defendant acted with “culpable negligence.” Florida statutes define culpable negligence as a disregard for human life while engaging in wanton or reckless behavior. The state may be able to prove involuntary manslaughter by showing the defendant’s recklessness or lack of care when handling a dangerous instrument or weapon, or while engaging in a range of other activities that could lead to death if performed recklessly.
Example: If the defendant handles a loaded gun without any knowledge of whether the gun is loaded, and he later discharges the gun into a group of people, the defendant’s actions likely meet the recklessness requirement for a charge of involuntary manslaughter.
Florida state laws also establish involuntary manslaughter if the prosecutor shows that the defendant used excessive force during self-defense or the defense of another person. The prosecution and defense can look at the facts and circumstances of the killing to determine whether the defendant reasonably believed that self-defense was necessary; if not necessary, the state might proceed with an involuntary manslaughter charge.
Defenses to Involuntary Manslaughter Charges
Justifiable use of deadly force to defend against a felony committed against a person or property
Excusable homicide committed by accident – for this defense in an involuntary manslaughter case, the defendant must show that she acted without recklessness qualifying as culpable negligence."*
E
Elizabeth502
Guest
The unique Stand Your Ground jury law in Florida, which was read into jury instructions, and the mountains of reasonable doubt, and the more persuasive Defense case, will acquit GZ at the very least of murder charges.
D
Debora123
Guest
Lol this “creepy cracker” thing is hilarious, I’m sorry.
R
Robert_Sock
Guest
Sounds like you’re making the killing of an innocent 17 year old boy into a mockery.
S
SwizzleStick
Guest
I’m sure that if both young men had the benefit of hindsight, both would have acted differently that night. But, the evidence at trial supports Zimmerman acting in self-defense against a violent assault by Martin. However, emotion may come into play with the jury and they may decide on manslaughter. That would make a mockery of following the law.
Either way it goes, Zimmerman’s life as he knew it is over. I can’t see how he will ever be safe again.
7
7_Sorrows
Guest
K
kelvinf
Guest
Reasonable Doubt
Such a doubt must not influence you to return a verdict of not guilty if you have an abiding conviction of guilt.
7
7_Sorrows
Guest
as long as the jury doesn’t feel intimidated by what “could happen” if they acquit.
I agree with you though.
7
7_Sorrows
Guest
it took a long time before they decided to bring this case to trial in the first place. there was pressure based on the race card I think. listen, I am very sorry that a 17 year old lost his life. he shouldn’t have confronted Zimmerman. he should have gone straight to his dad’s house. he shouldn’t have punched Zimmerman and knocked his head into the cement. I didn’t know trayvon and don’t know anything about the neighborhood he grew up in or his friends, etc.
Zimmerman was acting in self defense. he did not set out that night to murder anyone.
R
Robert_Sock
Guest
Assumptions throughout.
S
SwizzleStick
Guest
What is good for the goose is good for the gander. You’ve made a few assumptions of your own.
We can all make assumptions. What matters is what the jury finds, having been present during the entire trial, actually seeing and hearing the witnesses, and having all the evidence presented to them. Hopefully, justice will prevail.
D
Debora123
Guest
Lol, I’m not sure how me finding the phrase “creepy cracker” funny translate into me thinking it’s funny that a person got killed. But just to clarify, no, I am not making a mockery out of the killing of an innocent person. Contrary to the majority vote, I did not check off “Martin brought death upon himself” on the poll.
L
LisaA
Guest
Honestly Robert lose the “gunslinger” meme OK? It does not advance your argument. You and several others continue to maintain that GZ was the AGRESSOR when the evidence states otherwise.
Now maybe GZ planned it all out…he threw himself on the ground, banged his head and when Martin came up to see if he were injured, shot him in cold blood…except there is not a scintilla of evidence that this is the case.
That GZ noticed Martin, that he reported him, or even that he got out of his car to see which way he were going to give the police the information does not make him the agressor. It’s all in who initiated the confrontation, not the entire incident. One could go backwards and say well if not for GZ needing to go to Target, it never would have happened. But that is irrelevant.
The only relevant issues are who started the fight and if we conclude Martin (based on evidence not speculation) then the only thing we have to decide is whether or not Zimmerman was afraid of death or serious bodily harm. The reality is that if he were justifiably afraid he would not have to have so much as a scratch.
Lisa
D
dmelosi
Guest
Interesting read on the facts…
*1) How old was Trayvon Martin and how much size difference was there between him and Zimmerman? Initially, old photos of Trayvon Martin were shown in the media that made him appear to be about twelve years of age and Zimmerman’s weight has fluctuated dramatically. This has given many people the erroneous impression that a grown man was fighting a child. In actuality at the time of the incident, Trayvon Martin was a 17 year old, 6’2, 160 pound football player while according to his friend Joe Oliver, Zimmerman was 5’8 and 170 pounds. In other words, Martin was younger, 6 inches taller, more athletic and the more imposing of the two men.
Lee has since added,
The police department needed to do a job, and there was some influence — outside influence and inside influence — that forced a change in the course of the normal criminal justice process.
In other words, had this case not become a political hot potato, Martin’s death would have been considered self-defense and Zimmerman would have likely never gone to trial.
*
*1) How old was Trayvon Martin and how much size difference was there between him and Zimmerman? Initially, old photos of Trayvon Martin were shown in the media that made him appear to be about twelve years of age and Zimmerman’s weight has fluctuated dramatically. This has given many people the erroneous impression that a grown man was fighting a child. In actuality at the time of the incident, Trayvon Martin was a 17 year old, 6’2, 160 pound football player while according to his friend Joe Oliver, Zimmerman was 5’8 and 170 pounds. In other words, Martin was younger, 6 inches taller, more athletic and the more imposing of the two men.
- Why was George Zimmerman not initially arrested?: According to the Sanford Police Chief at the time, Bill Lee, who has since lost his job over this case,
Lee has since added,
The police department needed to do a job, and there was some influence — outside influence and inside influence — that forced a change in the course of the normal criminal justice process.
In other words, had this case not become a political hot potato, Martin’s death would have been considered self-defense and Zimmerman would have likely never gone to trial.
- Did George Zimmerman use a racial slur to refer to Trayvon Martin?: George Zimmerman muttered something under his breath when he was talking to the 911 dispatcher that some people initially said were the words, “Fing coons." Although the audio is difficult to hear, the words Zimmerman used are now generally believed to be, "Fing punks,” although it may have also been “F***ing goons,” which is slang for gang members in that part of Florida. In any case, the FBI concluded more than a year ago that race wasn’t a factor in the shooting.
- Did George Zimmerman continue to follow Trayvon Martin after a police dispatcher told him not to do so? Keep in mind that George Zimmerman was a neighborhood watch captain and there had been 8 burglaries there in the preceding 14 months. Additionally, most of those crimes were committed by young black males. Furthermore, while there are no indications that Martin was doing anything illegal when he ran into Zimmerman, it’s worth noting he had been suspended from school for possession of a “‘burglary tool’ and a bag full of women’s jewelry.” Given all of that, it doesn’t seem remarkable that Zimmerman may have initially followed Martin.
- Could Trayvon Martin have gotten away? Since Martin was being followed by someone he didn’t know, it would be perfectly understandable if he was alarmed by that and worried about his safety. Given that, while he was not legally obligated to flee, it should be noted that Martin had at least two opportunities to do so. In fact, his friend Rachel Jeantel, who famously noted that Martin referred to Zimmerman as a “creepy *** cracker,” admitted that she suggested he run away. Had he done so or had he even just walked home, he would have made it before Zimmerman ever arrived at the spot where they had their final confrontation.
*
D
dmelosi
Guest
continued
*6) Who was yelling for help? Given the conflicting testimony from experts, along with the friends and family of Martin and Zimmerman, it’s probably not possible to say with 100% certainty who was yelling for help. That being said, given that the back of Zimmerman’s head was lacerated, he claimed Martin was slamming the back of his head into the cement, and the best eyewitness, John Good, said Martin was on top of Zimmerman attacking him “ground and pound” style, it seems much more likely Zimmerman was the one calling for help.
“…had at least six injuries after his clash with Martin - including two on the back of his head that appeared to indicate impacts with concrete - one on each temple, one on his forehead and one on his nose.
…Lacerations to Zimmerman’s head suggested the use of ‘severe force,’ he said, lending credence to his claim that Martin slammed Zimmerman’s head into a concrete walkway after knocking him to the ground with a punch that broke his nose.”
Dimao also noted that the trajectory of the bullet was, “consistent with somebody leaning over the person doing the shooting,” which also buttresses Zimmerman’s claims.
In other words, Zimmerman’s testimony is consistent with the facts and entirely plausible, although of course, Trayvon Martin isn’t around to give his side of the story.
Conclusion: It’s sad that this case has become polluted with politics, racial grievances and wild speculation in the media because the evidence in this case overwhelmingly suggests that it should be considered a tragedy, not a crime.*
*6) Who was yelling for help? Given the conflicting testimony from experts, along with the friends and family of Martin and Zimmerman, it’s probably not possible to say with 100% certainty who was yelling for help. That being said, given that the back of Zimmerman’s head was lacerated, he claimed Martin was slamming the back of his head into the cement, and the best eyewitness, John Good, said Martin was on top of Zimmerman attacking him “ground and pound” style, it seems much more likely Zimmerman was the one calling for help.
- Why did Zimmerman shoot Trayvon Martin? By the time the final gunshot was fired, John Good had gone back inside to call 911; so no one saw what happened. According to Zimmerman, Martin attacked him, was beating him and hammering the back of his head into the concrete. Then, Martin saw the gun that Zimmerman had, said “You’re going to die tonight,” and reached for the gun. At that point, Zimmerman feared for his life, shot up at Martin and killed him. John Good has already testified that Martin was on top of Zimmerman striking down at him, which verifies that part of his story.
“…had at least six injuries after his clash with Martin - including two on the back of his head that appeared to indicate impacts with concrete - one on each temple, one on his forehead and one on his nose.
…Lacerations to Zimmerman’s head suggested the use of ‘severe force,’ he said, lending credence to his claim that Martin slammed Zimmerman’s head into a concrete walkway after knocking him to the ground with a punch that broke his nose.”
Dimao also noted that the trajectory of the bullet was, “consistent with somebody leaning over the person doing the shooting,” which also buttresses Zimmerman’s claims.
In other words, Zimmerman’s testimony is consistent with the facts and entirely plausible, although of course, Trayvon Martin isn’t around to give his side of the story.
Conclusion: It’s sad that this case has become polluted with politics, racial grievances and wild speculation in the media because the evidence in this case overwhelmingly suggests that it should be considered a tragedy, not a crime.*
S
SwizzleStick
Guest
Decided to go through the post and look for the “assumptions throughout.”
Fact, not assumption.
Fact, not assumption. There were demonstrations and protests and Obama weighed in to apply pressure, the media stirred with inaccurate reporting (indicated Zimmerman was not at all injured, showed grainy video on television reports so injuries were less visible), as well as outright changing of evidence (changed 911 call tape to make Zimmerman appear to be racist).
Fact as stated by 7 Sorrows, not assumption.
Prosecution did not prove that Martin did not confront Zimmerman.
Fact, defense proved Martin had ample time to just go home and Jeantel testified he was there, “Because – he said no because he was right by his father house.”
Fact, as supported by Zimmerman’s injuries and witness statements. Martin injured Zimmerman.
Fact, as stated by 7 Sorrows.
Evidence supports this.
Assumption, but it is a reasonable one, based on the evidence.
F
Fairwinds
Guest
but so what? that’s business as usual.
S
saintjohnxxiii
Guest
I apologise if this has been mentioned but its a long thread, but did George Zimmerman get out of his car before or after he spoke to the 911 operator? If it was after, what was his reason for doing so?
D
dmelosi
Guest
Yes and isn’t that a shame?
- Status