Open Thread on Zimmerman Verdict

[styrgwillidar]

Did anyone not connected to Z testify he had abandoned his stalking when the attack happened? How soon after first being instructed to disengage did he obey?

The dispatcher testified that he believed Zimmerman stopped by indicating OK, stating they always get away and then shifting the discussion to meeting the police.

At this same time Martin stated to the girl on the phone with him that he’d lost the guy/no longer saw him. (This is where some say Martin had the opportunity to go home but didn’t. However, there was no legal requirement for Martin to go anywhere).

Some folks believe Zimmerman continued following despite what he told the dispatecher and dispatchers opinion.

 

[Robert_Sock]

How might the jury have come up with a verdict of manslaughter had the case been been persecuted as such? My contention, again, is that GZ was negligent for somebody carrying a gun.

Worship God, not guns!

 

[livingwordunity]

Well for those in denial,to so many racism is still alive and well in America, how can there still be any doubt about that ? Sure there has been progress since the 60‘s, however, we have a long, long way to go here in America.

Racism will never go completely away. But the fact that America has a black man in his second term as POTUS is proof that racism is not what it was. And there is no proof that Zimmerman was a racist. The ones who are trying to make this about race are throwing gasoline on the fire and could incite an all out race war. The ones who keep insisting that GZ is guilty are the real racists since they are the ones who see everything in terms of race. They see racism under every rock and will not accept a world without racism. There are some who would have no relevance if it were not for keeping racism in America alive. If GZ would have been black in the same situation none of us would have ever heard about TM. But they assume that GZ is guilty BECAUSE HE IS WHITE.

 

[styrgwillidar]

Robert Sock,

You keep putting a tag line stating guns are incompatible with love. Again, I ask you the question in another way.

Does love demand you not defend yourself against an attacker?

 

[BroomWagon]

Neighborhood watch members do not wear uniforms. I think you are confusing them with the Guardian Angels who wore red berets and some kind of insignia. The point of Neighborhood Watch is just that, WATCH. Be observant. See something and say something. Report suspicious activity.

There is no evidence that Zimmerman thought he had authority to stop or question Martin. There is no evidence he took the law in his hands and tried to apprehend him. He did what he was supposed to do, called the police. As the behavior was merely suspicious, rather than a crime in progress he called the non-emergency line. He attempted to get the information regarding Martin and his location to the police and arranged to meet them.

None of this comports with a theory of racial profiling, vigilante justice or being trigger happy. He used the gun as a last resort and by his testimony as he thought Martin had seen it and might take it from him. I think it was an act of desperation in the face of aggression.

Lisa

Actually, many Neighborhood Watch volunteers do wear a jacket or something to identify themselves and carrying a gun is not regularly done in Neighborhood watch. I would call a vest or jacket a uniform.

http://bloximages.chicago2.vip.town...e6-5f72d9effdf3/4ceadc90ee40b.preview-300.jpg

yourhoustonnews.com/sugar_land/news/ashford-lakes-forms-neighborhood-watch-program/article_e0e2e7bd-9a1a-5817-90ad-62157e689c3b.html

 

[styrgwillidar]

How might the jury have come up with a verdict of manslaughter had the case been been persecuted as such? My contention, again, is that GZ was negligent for somebody carrying a gun.

Negligent how?

Worship God, not guns!

Don’t know if we cross posted, but I put one scenario above-- get the jury to believe that Zimmerman did not intentionally pull the trigger.

That means that the killing is unintentional, probably negligent since it involves the unintentional discharge of a firearm. And it wouldn’t matter that it occurred under conditions where an intentional shooting would have been justified.

 

[Dawnia]

Don’t know if we cross posted, but I put one scenario above-- get the jury to believe that Zimmerman did not intentionally pull the trigger.

That means that the killing is unintentional, probably negligent since it involves the unintentional discharge of a firearm. And it wouldn’t matter that it occurred under conditions where an intentional shooting would have been justified.

However, the jury instructions specifically state that negligenct rules out manslaughter.

 

[LisaA]

Actually based on Zimmerman’s description of the suspicious person (on drugs, up to no good, several recent break-ins in the area) it was not unreasonable for him to assume the individual was probably dangerous. He was so aware that such an individual could be dangerous that he didn’t want to say his home address out loud on the phone.

He didn’t have to be prescient, it was basic common sense based on the situation as he perceived it…

I don’t know what ZImmerman’s reluctance to give his address to the dispatcher had to do with his conclusions about Martin. I think his conclusion that Martin was “up to no good” indicates he thought Martin might be considering a break in or casing for a future break in, not that he was going to engage in an assault. That being said, what did Zimmerman do…run after Martin, confront him, tell him to “stick’em up”? Based on his continued and relatively lengthy discussion after Martin disappeared from sight, he didn’t seem to be interested in pursuit or in confronting Martin.

Zimmerman’s story makes sense. You can say he should have never left the car and I bet Zimmerman himself agrees with that as well. But it sounds from the 911 call that he left the car to get a better location in order to guide the police to his truck. He may have also looked to see if Martin were still in the area. All of the testimony indicates he was returning to the car, complying with the dispatcher, willing to wait for police when confronted by Martin.

So again we can second guess Zimmerman’s actions but what caused the altercation? Zimmerman getting out of his car or Martin confronting him and striking him? The fight didn’t have to occur. Martin could have gone home, called 911, hidden until Zimmerman left. He had many alternative actions but once he hit Zimmerman, Zimmerman did not have any alternatives other than be injured or killed if he didn’t try to defend himself. He couldn’t retreat, he couldn’t call 911, he couldn’t run home. Martin had many viable and safer alternatives to confronting Zimmerman.

The decision by Martin to engage in a fight is the proximate cause of Martin’s death, not Zimmerman’s actions in getting out of his car.

Lisa

 

[SwizzleStick]

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 supported Zimmerman acting in self-defense against a violent assault by Martin. So, the jury found him not guilty. That is the bottom line.

 

[Robert_Sock]

However, the jury instructions specifically state that negligenct rules out manslaughter.

That’s a crime in and of itself. How do people pass such laws?

LOVE, not guns!

 

[SamH]

Some folks believe Zimmerman continued following despite what he told the dispatecher and dispatchers opinion.

If the other posts on here on correct that doesn’t make much sense if the confrontation only took place 160 feet away from Zimmerman’s truck. That’s only about 2/3s of a block.

 

[styrgwillidar]

However, the jury instructions specifically state that negligenct rules out manslaughter.

Sorry, not familiar with Florida law so I don’t know how they would treat it specifically and how the unintentional/negligent definitions relate. I do know that police departments have been sued and lost under these conditions. A shooting which would be considered justifiable self-defense becoming manslaughter because a jury decides the officer didn’t really mean to pull the trigger when he did.

Its why some departments have shifted to dual action only and/or increased the trigger pull on their weapons. The testimony, if I remember correctly, indicated the trigger pull on Zimmermans weapon was ~5 lbs for every pull of the trigger. NYC for example, requires their officers weapons to have a 12 lb trigger pull for every pull of the trigger. Accuracy suffers greatly (unless officer does a lot of shooting on their personal time) but the risk of negligent discharges, inadvertant trigger pull is diminished.

 

[Polita612]

Unfortunately, our “leaders” (contrary to their sworn oaths of office) have no interest in promoting the rule of law, the Constitution, or the jury trial system…or they would promote respect for those organs of our civilization.

Instead, it seems they wish to promote “mob rule,” increased chaos and violence in America’s streets, etc.

Why? Because social chaos and turmoil will promote their covert agenda to create a totalitarian state.

They don’t want the law to work, folks!

 

[LisaA]

Actually, many Neighborhood Watch volunteers do wear a jacket or something to identify themselves and carrying a gun is not regularly done in Neighborhood watch. I would call a vest or jacket a uniform.

http://bloximages.chicago2.vip.town...e6-5f72d9effdf3/4ceadc90ee40b.preview-300.jpg

yourhoustonnews.com/sugar_land/news/ashford-lakes-forms-neighborhood-watch-program/article_e0e2e7bd-9a1a-5817-90ad-62157e689c3b.html

Perhaps but remember Zimmerman was not “on duty” or patrolling, he was on his way to Target to go grocery shopping. Carrying a gun may have been routine for him. Honestly, I’ve been surprised to find out people who are routinely wearing a gun in everyday life. I don’t see the need for it but it’s not really my business.

Lisa

 

[Cider]

Unfortunately, our “leaders” (contrary to their sworn oaths of office) have no interest in promoting the rule of law, the Constitution, or the jury trial system…or they would promote respect for those organs of our civilization.

Instead, it seems they wish to promote “mob rule,” increased chaos and violence in America’s streets, etc.

Why? Because social chaos and turmoil will promote their covert agenda to create a totalitarian state.

They don’t want the law to work, folks!

It’s not just leaders, but also the a certain faction of the public that thinks mob rule and emotionalism should win out of the law.

 

[fix]

No, my contention is the GZ should never have been following him in the first place. Why can’t people on this thread see that? The dispatcher clearly told him not to follow. Because GZ was negligent, and choose to take matters into his own hands, an innocent 17 year old boy is dead.

Worship God, not guns!

Blame the victim? Outrageous.

 

[LisaA]

Sorry, not familiar with Florida law so I don’t know how they would treat it specifically and how the unintentional/negligent definitions relate. I do know that police departments have been sued and lost under these conditions. A shooting which would be considered justifiable self-defense becoming manslaughter because a jury decides the officer didn’t really mean to pull the trigger when he did.

Its why some departments have shifted to dual action only and/or increased the trigger pull on their weapons. The testimony, if I remember correctly, indicated the trigger pull on Zimmermans weapon was ~5 lbs for every pull of the trigger. NYC for example, requires their officers weapons to have a 12 lb trigger pull for every pull of the trigger. Accuracy suffers greatly (unless officer does a lot of shooting on their personal time) but the risk of negligent discharges, inadvertant trigger pull is diminished.

Thank you this is very interesting.

 

[maryjk]

Perhaps but remember Zimmerman was not “on duty” or patrolling, he was on his way to Target to go grocery shopping. Carrying a gun may have been routine for him. Honestly, I’ve been surprised to find out people who are routinely wearing a gun in everyday life. I don’t see the need for it but it’s not really my business.

Lisa

I have a bumper sticker, that I don’t have on my bumper.

It says:

It is better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.

 

[Carlan]

Just thougt you all might be interested in this…

commentary on the state of race relations and the battle over gun rights in America today.
Op-Ed New York Times.

Certainly it is about race — ask any black man, up to and including President Obama, and he will tell you at least a few stories that sound eerily like what happened that rainy winter night in Sanford, Fla.
While Mr. Zimmerman’s conviction might have provided an emotional catharsis, we would still be a country plagued by racism, which persists in ever more insidious forms despite the Supreme Court’s sanguine assessment that “things have changed dramatically,” as it said in last month’s ruling striking down the heart of the Voting Rights Act. (The Justice Department is right to continue its investigation into whether Mr. Zimmerman may still be prosecuted under federal civil rights laws.)
The jury reached its verdict after having been asked to consider Mr. Zimmerman’s actions in light of Florida’s now-notorious Stand Your Ground statute. Under that law, versions of which are on the books in two dozen states, a person may use deadly force if he or she “reasonably believes” it is necessary to prevent death or great bodily harm — a low bar that the prosecutors in this case fought in vain to overcome.
These laws sound intuitive: who would argue that you may not protect yourself against great harm? But of course, the concept of “reasonable belief” is transformed into something deadly dangerous when firearms are involved. And when the Stand Your Ground laws intersect with lax concealed-carry laws, it works essentially to self-deputize anyone with a Kel-Tec 9 millimeter and a grudge.
It has been a bad year so far for gun control. But if anything, cases like this should be as troubling as the mass killings that always prompt a national outcry and promises of legislative remedy. We were heartened that President Obama, in his statement after the verdict was issued, took the opportunity to denounce once again “the tide of gun violence” sweeping the country.
In the end, what is most frightening is that there are so many people with guns who are like George Zimmerman. Fear and racism may never be fully eliminated by legislative or judicial order, but neither should our laws allow and even facilitate their most deadly expression. Trayvon Martin was an unarmed boy walking home from the convenience store. If only Florida could give him back his life as easily as it is giving back George Zimmerman’s gun

 

[Cider]

First SPLC and now the NYT

um ok. Yes both sources known to be fair and balanced.

Seriously, that writer doesn’t even know what he is talking about SYG didn’t apply. There is no way to take that writer seriously when he gets the facts to obviously wrong.

What so frightening is the amount of people that are given a public forum like the NYT to air their uninformed views when they clearly didn’t even follow the trial.