Open Thread on Zimmerman Verdict

[Nimzovik]

Except that we don’t convict people for merely questionable conduct. Rather, we charge and convict relative to actual crimes committed – for example, carrying a gun without a permit; public drunkenness (even if no crime results), battery ™, drug dealing, etc. We don’t convict someone for “following” someone, as the lawyers have already said.

Here’s the thing:
These kinds of trials always tend to revert to emotional accusations of “racism,” merely because two races are involved. And often the families of the victims are exploited for the public profile of the D.A.'s or prosecutor’s office. A responsible D.A. would have met with the family, sympathized with their impulse to charge “fully,” but explained to them how weak the case was against GZ. This is relevant because, had GZ been found guilty of a lesser charge than Murder 2, the Martin family would have been in a better position to collect damages of some kind in a civil suit. A criminal conviction always strengthens a subsequent civil proceeding. Now the family is in a weaker position, with possibly fewer attorneys interested in taking a contingency case with reduced hope of conviction there, as well.

But the D.A. decided to overcharge – whether or not they were pressured by the family to do so is inconsequential. The D.A.'s office should have been the responsible party, exerting the leadership, instead of being led politically. The death of another human being is not a “political” event unless it is expressly so, such as in armed, international conflict or a political retaliation/assassination. The prosecutor should have guided the family to go for a lesser charge, and framed a case around negligence, recklessness, failure to heed law enforcement, etc. There would still have been some issues with that (because of TM’s battery, obviously), but it would have been far less “doomed” as a strategy.

Translation: The real “cowboy” was not GZ but the prosecutor’s office.

Bolding Mine:

Is this entirely true tho? Is it really just because tow races are involved? It appears that the reportage is incredibly different in regard to spin when reporting perceived ‘White’ on’ Black’ crime as opposed to 'Black on ‘White’ crime.

In regard to:

"…These kinds of trials always tend to revert to emotional accusations of “racism,” merely because two races are involved."

It seems to me that the accusations of racism are pretty much a one way street when it is spun by the Media.

Case in point. An obviously racially motivated crime was committed here by Blacks against Caucasians:

I give two links referencing the same event.

usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/05/02/11507850-questions-raised-over-virginia-newspapers-delay-in-report-of-attack-on-reporters?lite

theblaze.com/stories/2012/05/01/media-and-police-ignore-savage-beating-of-two-white-reporters/

Ergo one could reasonably conclude that the ‘professional race baiters’ have indeed successfully created a dominant ‘culture of bias’ against Caucasians. Yes? the vast difference in terms of spin by the media is indeed rather striking in terms of it’s bias against Caucasians, yes? :bigyikes:

 

[LisaA]

LESSONS TO LEARN FROM ZIMMERMAN CASE

=Some people need black to equal innocent and white to equal guilty in order to strike some rough balance against injustices of the past.

This is a curious psychological pathology that suggests that memories of slavery and the Jim Crow era will sting less if we tilt today’s courtroom playing fields against all whites and in favor of all blacks.

This path is doomed, of course, and it damages us along the way, by slowing the progress we are undoubtedly making. ***Whites willing to cast off that last vestige of racism may hit the pause button on their epiphanies at the sight of angry blacks unveiling their own pernicious prejudice-- the belief that Zimmerman (and anyone supporting his acquittal) are acting out of racial hostility.***4. Al Sharpton and his fellow rabble-rousers do not know the meaning of shame.

I am willing to hear and tolerate their assertion that the jury ruled wrongly, that Zimmerman is a racist predator and Trayvon Martin a hero worthy of honor. BUT SHARPTON AND his brethren are Race Profiteers who enrich themselves by inciting a mob mentality. There was actually no hard evidence that GZ profiled or stalked Trayvon-- more likely… the boy got scared and reacted violently… at 5-11 and 158 pounds he overwhelmed the surprised 5-7 inch GZ. It is a mistake and a tragedy; but not Murder 2.

Great points all around. Those selfish and self important bloviaters like Sharpton do race relations a dreadful disservice. Particularly with respect to the points bolded above. When people are falsely accused of exhibiting evil intent where none exists, they lose feelings of sympathy toward the previously marginalized group. Why bother if your itent is presumed evil or that you cannot be trusted to look at situations in a dispassionate and careful way, focusing on facts not feelings.

Lisa

 

[LisaA]

So you do know gun owners with CCW permits have had felony charges against them dismissed??

I know some Iraq/Afghanistan war veterans who put their lives on the line for this country who can’t readily conceal and carry firearms. Because of psychological counseling at one point.

Thus, we could easily have a case where Zimmerman has been able to play the system and being able to have the CCW.

Gun owners need to be responsible too.

Irrelevant, it is a breakdown in the State laws that allowed him to have this gun.

This is aside from the issue, his conduct has demonstrated his responsibility in owning a gun is very much in question.

Oh please are you still on that totally specious trail? Needing a gun for SELF DEFENSE is one of the major reasons guns are purchased. Zimmerman used his weapon not to prey upon an unarmed teen but to protect his own life when threatened.

You continue to regurgitate the same speculation as if not only being “white” means Zimmerman is de facto guilty of murder but having a gun clinches the case.

One may wonder why he felt the need to carry a gun going to Target and that I think is a valid question about his level of judgment as to the appropriate time to carry a firearm. However some people simply get in the habit of always having their gun. My BIL was a retired cop and a gun was much a part of his wardrobe as a pair of sock. Oh and FWIW although he was undercover, in vice and drugs for many years and patrolled one of the highest crime areas in the city, he never fired his gun. As he said, he was never in a situation requiring he defend himself or others with a firearm, but it was there just in case…just as I have a fire extinguisher and a big box of baking soda in my kitchen

Lisa

 

[maryjk]

So you do know gun owners with CCW permits have had felony charges against them dismissed??

My point is, what difference does it make? If the charges were dismissed, there is no way to prove that person not guilty. And in this country we are innocent until proven guilty.

I know some Iraq/Afghanistan war veterans who put their lives on the line for this country who can’t readily conceal and carry firearms. Because of psychological counseling at one point.

Okay. What does that have to do with this case?

Thus, we could easily have a case where Zimmerman has been able to play the system and being able to have the CCW.

Gun owners need to be responsible too.

And it seems that Zimmerman was responsible.

Irrelevant, it is a breakdown in the State laws that allowed him to have this gun.

There was no breakdown. He was allowed to have a weapon because he passed the background check. He has no felony convictions.

This is aside from the issue, his conduct has demonstrated his responsibility in owning a gun is very much in question.

Actually he has demonstrated great responsibility.

 

[adrift]

I was very saddened by the family’s comments. All along they have been very dignified and not seeming to fall for those using them and their son for their own entertainment if not ratings. Mr Martin said Trayon wouldn’t be dead were he not black which ignores everything they heard over the weeks and months since the shooting. I understand wanting to take their son’s side and mourning his loss. But I think they finally drank the Kool Aid.

Lisa

Their reaction is understandable. They are still in morning. They probably will never be otherwise. When such tragedy befalls someone, logic doesn’t enter into it. You can’t blame the one who has died so you start blaming everyone and everything else. The parents of a boy who drove into a tree and killed his best friend didn’t blame the son for being drunk but the tree for being there. They wanted all the trees cut down. Irrational, ignoring facts, Yes but that is how they were coping with the tragedy. I don’t blame the Martins. It is a coping mechanism no matter how mistaken they are they have the burden of a son that is no longer with them. The mother has the guilt (deserved or not) that he was in the situation because she kicked him out of her house.

 

[BroomWagon]

I believe the issue that has been mentioned about those exploiting this has been made numerous times. It seems Reverend Jackson is saying something outrageous such as “Florida having Apartheid” and this is up at the Drudge Report right now.

Great that SeaGirt’s comments on this in the posts around 2200 are being praised now. Wonder where that praise was before?

Allen West has said how disappointed he is with those exploiting this issue as well:

It depends on what you want to talk about. Do you really want to talk about the issues that are confronting the black community or do you want to talk about the politically manufactured crises that you have these faux leaders and these race-baiters that are out there, you know, promoting it,” West said.

Citing unemployment, the breakdown of the family and education as important issues, West said the media focus on the trial is a distraction.

“If we want to have these media frenzy-created crises, or someone like an Al Sharpton running around all over the country like a charlatan that he is, then we’re not talking about the real issues and we’re not having the real conversations about race,” West said. “We’re never going to have an honest conversation when you have someone like Attorney General Eric Holder that stands up in front of the NAACP and basically says, you know, we’re going to manipulate the law to give you your quote-unquote social justice.”

Read more: politico.com/story/2013/07/trayvon-martin-allen-west-94345.html#ixzz2ZVECI0tZ

Still, let’s not forget his original comments:

I have sat back and allowed myself time to assess the current episode revealing itself in Sanford, Florida involving the shooting of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin. First of all, if all that has been reported is accurate, the Sanford Police Chief should be relieved of his duties due to what appears to be a mishandling of this shooting in its early stages. The US Navy SEALS identified Osama Bin Laden within hours, while this young man laid on a morgue slab for three days. The shooter, Mr Zimmerman, should have been held in custody and certainly should not be walking free, still having a concealed weapons carry permit. From my reading, it seems this young man was pursued and there was no probable cause to engage him, certainly not pursue and shoot him…. against the direction of the 911 responder. Let’s all be appalled at this instance not because of race, but because a young American man has lost his life, seemingly, for no reason. I have signed a letter supporting a DOJ investigation. I am not heading to Sanford to shout and scream, because we need the responsible entities and agencies to handle this situation from this point without media bias or undue political influences. This is an outrage.

frontpagemag.com/2013/frontpagemag-com/allen-west-on-goerge-zimmerman-and-trayvon-martin/

Rick Santorum’s original take:

“Well, you know, obviously, I’m not privy to what’s going on in someone’s mind,” Santorum said. “Obviously, in my opinion, someone … has a very sick mind who would pursue someone like this. This is clearly a heinous act. You know, there are a lot of people who have a lot of distorted views of reality. It’s a tragic, tragic case.”

“And my heart goes out to the parents, too. I can’t imagine what they’re suffering, losing their son in such a horrific way. All I would say is that, whatever the motive is, it was a malicious one, and a very, very tragic one.”

Santorum suggested the politics weren’t as important as the need to “be supportive” of Martin’s family in the wake of his tragic death.

“All I can say is that, again, there are a lot of people who have very perverted views of reality and obviously have, as we see, people who do horrible things for seemingly senseless reasons,” Santorum said.

news.yahoo.com/santorum-zimmerman-very-sick-mind-motive-malicious-one-162845818.html

Charles Barkley, former NBA star:

Well, I agreed with the verdict. I feel sorry that young kid got killed. But they didn’t have enough evidence to charge him. Something clearly went wrong that night. Clearly something went wrong. I feel bad for anybody who loses a kid, but if you looked at the case and you don’t make it – there was some racial profiling, no question about it. But something happened that changed the dynamic of that night, and I know – that’s probably not a popular opinion among most people but just looking at the evidence I agreed with the verdict.

…

And let me tell you, Mr. Zimmerman was wrong to pursue – he was racial profiling. I think Trayvon Martin, God rest his soul, I think he did flip the switch and started beating the hell out of Mr. Zimmerman. But it was just a bad situation. And like I said, the main thing I feel bad for, it gives every black and white person who is racist a platform to vent their ignorance.

realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/07/18/charles_barkley_on_zimmerman_trial_i_agree_with_the_verdict.html

 

[BroomWagon]

My point is, what difference does it make? If the charges were dismissed, there is no way to prove that person not guilty. And in this country we are innocent until proven guilty.Okay. What does that have to do with this case?And it seems that Zimmerman was responsible. There was no breakdown. He was allowed to have a weapon because he passed the background check. He has no felony convictions.
Actually he has demonstrated great responsibility.

So you are saying, so what? Someone died. Got it.

George Zimmernan was irresponsible, someone who had 2 felonies dismissed against him that would have nullified having CCW killed someone.

He had no felony convictions, a father who was in the legal system and probably knew the law well.

Since it is hard to believe Martin said something as we might see in a movie “Tonight you are going to die”, I think there is a good chance, Zimmernan was coached on this answer to strengthen his case of Self Defense.

This is no different than the police who allow someone who doesn’t have a driver’s license to continue to go home, don’t book him and the driver kills someone.

Zimmerman never should have had right to have a gun and someone is dead because of it. I’m a gun-ownder, I know there are responsibilities too.

 

[fix]

Manning told a hypothetical story about going to a sketchy part of New York City and getting stuck on an elevator with a 17-year-old black boy with a hoodie on.

“Tell me, what do you think?” he asked his congregation.

“Has it been proven over and over again that these hoodie boys rob, rape, murder and maim?! Are you afraid of him?” he added, now hollering. “You have suspicions because of that hoodie and because of the color of his skin. Ain’t no telling what’s going to happen to you on that elevator – and you know it’s true!”

Manning proceeded to criticize his audience because, according to him, they refuse to give Zimmerman the same benefit of the doubt because they are black.

“You’re not saved, you don’t know nothing about Jesus and you are full of hate,” the pastor added.

Towards the end of his message, Manning talked about how pot tends to make individuals “paranoid.” It was at this point that the sermon took a turn to the comical and somewhat bizarre in terms of the pastor’s theatrics.

“When you smoke pot, you go to 7-11. I get some munchies. I get some Skittles, I get something to drink, ’cause I got the munchies. I been smoking dope, I got the munchies,” Manning said theatrically, referring to Martin’s apparent drug use and trip to buy those items the night he was shot.

He also demonstrated how marijuana can also make a person paranoid. “Someone is following me,” the pastor said, acting out his words.

Lightning Rod NYC Pastor’s Stunningly Confrontational Sermon on Trayvon Martin: ‘You See the World Through Your Black Eyes’

 

[lcburgundy]

So you are saying, so what? Someone died. Got it.

George Zimmernan was irresponsible, someone who had 2 felonies dismissed against him that would have nullified having CCW killed someone.

Yes but he was not convicted. What part of that do you not understand? We do not determine guilt from an indictment or an accusation in this country, and I’m sorry you don’t believe in that. If you were ever the target of an unjust or trumped up accusation, you might understand that.

He had no felony convictions, a father who was in the legal system and probably knew the law well.

And, once again, familiarity with the law is spun as something sinister. I thought citizens were obligated to know and follow laws, silly me. Most states obligate training on self-defense law to get a CCW license.

Since it is hard to believe Martin said something as we might see in a movie “Tonight you are going to die”, I think there is a good chance, Zimmernan was coached on this answer to strengthen his case of Self Defense.

Again, with zero evidence you allege nefarious doings here. You are just speculating about someone you don’t know and have never met. He gave police statements without legal counsel present (which is highly inadvisable). You can even watch a recorded video one on YouTube. You would know, if you reviewed the statement, that that statement was made by TM after GZ believes TM became aware that he was carrying a gun.

And why is it incredible that a boastful teen who fancied himself an amateur gangster and fighter would use a hammy movie line? Teens love to quote movies and pop culture stuff. I’m sure TM saw all kinds of movies with that kind of content.

This is no different than the police who allow someone who doesn’t have a driver’s license to continue to go home, don’t book him and the driver kills someone.

Zimmerman never should have had right to have a gun and someone is dead because of it. I’m a gun-ownder, I know there are responsibilities too.

Broom, either the self-defense claim was valid or it was not. All I can figure is you don’t think he should have been able to defend himself. I have no idea why you think this. Your license analogy makes zero sense. Just zero. You don’t have any evidence, not one shred, he ever used, stored, or carried a gun irresponsibly. You clearly have nothing and it’s really starting to get embarrassing. GZ actually stopped an attack in a condo/apartment complex with one bullet, and did not hit or maim anyone else with uncontrolled fire. Too many trained police officers can’t say that.

 

[maryjk]

So you are saying, so what? Someone died. Got it.

That is a leap. Not one I am surprised you took. But it is still a leap.

George Zimmernan was irresponsible, someone who had 2 felonies dismissed against him that would have nullified having CCW killed someone.

Actually, it would have only changed who died.

He had no felony convictions, a father who was in the legal system and probably knew the law well.

How is that a bad thing? You think it is better to be a thug?

Since it is hard to believe Martin said something as we might see in a movie “Tonight you are going to die”, I think there is a good chance, Zimmernan was coached on this answer to strengthen his case of Self Defense.

Are you saying Zimmerman lied on the stand? Oh, wait. Zimmerman didn’t take the stand.

This is no different than the police who allow someone who doesn’t have a driver’s license to continue to go home, don’t book him and the driver kills someone.

Zimmerman never should have had right to have a gun and someone is dead because of it. I’m a gun-ownder, I know there are responsibilities too.

Yes, and one responsibility is to have a license, which he did.

Another is to not fire your weapon unless needed, which he did.

And, another is to hit what you are aiming at, he did that too.

Zimmerman is a man with no felony convictions. There is no indication that he profiled or followed Martin. He had every right to have a weapon. And he had every right, when attacked to use that weapon.

 

[BroomWagon]

Zimmerman has not gotten his gun back and likely, he may have his Conceal and Carry permit revoked. This should serve as after the fact confirmation, his responsibility and conduct as a gun owner is very much in question.

 

[adrift]

Great that SeaGirt’s comments on this in the posts around 2200 are being praised now. Wonder where that praise was before?

I really don’t understand this comment.
SeaGirt’s comments were made at 7:50 this morning post 2228. Lisa A commented on it 43 minutes and 12 post later 2240 and you made this comment 17 minutes later.post 2244.

What do you mean by now? There wasn’t much time involved or post so why the comment

 

[Cider]

Personally, as a woman I was offended at all the media stereotyping of the jury as if we can’t understand the facts. Especially the comments about how Martin’s mothers testimony was supposed to be so powerful and play on our poor little hearts. She had no evidence to testify to though. She wasn’t a witness even second hand. I’m sorry her son is dead, but she had no true evidence to testify to. To me the forensic evidence was most compelling and I didn’t think the case hung on who was screaming. I doubt she had ever heard her child scream in the that kind of situation before anyway, so as to make an accurate comparison. I hope none of ever do.

 

[lcburgundy]

Zimmerman has not gotten his gun back and likely, he may have his Conceal and Carry permit revoked. This should serve as after the fact confirmation, his responsibility and conduct as a gun owner is very much in question.

Uh huh, all I could find in news searches was some silly petition to remove his rights. Good thing we don’t have a mechanism to petition government in this country to eliminate individual citizen’s rights. The subject gun is apparently still being held in evidence but everything I’ve seen indicates he could buy another if he hasn’t already.

This is all richly ironic considering now he has a very much heightened need for a self-defense weapon.

 

[BroomWagon]

That is a leap. Not one I am surprised you took. But it is still a leap.Actually, it would have only changed who died. How is that a bad thing? You think it is better to be a thug?Are you saying Zimmerman lied on the stand? Oh, wait. Zimmerman didn’t take the stand.

Maybe if Zimmerman did not have a gun, he would not have engaged in this to begin with. Neighborhood Watch volunteers often have “bear spray” and are usually required to have someone else with them.

Yes, and one responsibility is to have a license, which he did.

And he may well have circumvented the system, just like his testimony that Trayvon Martin says “Tonight you will die”, that is a reach to believe in. So, he may well have “played the system” as to why he had a gun and someone got killed in an incident he was involved in. I don’t see how it can be clearer.

But not surprising that you don’t acknowledge this.

Another is to not fire your weapon unless needed, which he did.

To a kid walking home to his parent’s house.

And, another is to hit what you are aiming at, he did that too.

Yes, and he will have to live with that the rest of his life, though people should not threaten his life, it should not be forgotten what he has been involved in and it doesn’t look innocent at all.

Zimmerman is a man with no felony convictions. There is no indication that he profiled or followed Martin. He had every right to have a weapon. And he had every right, when attacked to use that weapon.

Zimmerman is the odd-case of someone with 2 dismissed felony charges.

This points to the possibility he should not have had CCW. He had CCW and coincidentally, someone is dead. I don’t see how much clearer it could be.

All you can rely on for your logic, is the State okayed him to own a gun. He had a number of run ins with the law showing aggression.

The State system may have broken down but he is hardly blameless.

 

[BroomWagon]

Uh huh, all I could find in news searches was some silly petition to remove his rights. Good thing we don’t have a mechanism to petition government in this country to eliminate individual citizen’s rights. The subject gun is apparently still being held in evidence but everything I’ve seen indicates he could buy another if he hasn’t already.

There may be a silly petition out. We also know that if a Certified Public Accountant, if a Lawyer, if a Barber or Hair Stylist practice their trade, state-given licenses in ways deemed improper, they can have their licenses suspended or revoked by public action as well.

Good thing we have a mechanism to petition government in this country to those who abuse their citizen’s rights.

This is all richly ironic considering now he has a very much heightened need for a self-defense weapon.

I hope he stays safe but it does bring to mind, one reaps what they sow.

 

[Cider]

Zimmerman has not gotten his gun back and likely, he may have his Conceal and Carry permit revoked. This should serve as after the fact confirmation, his responsibility and conduct as a gun owner is very much in question.

Silliness as usual. He hasn’t gotten it back yet, because there is still possible pending charges from DOJ so it would be evidence in that case. Once it’s decided that those cases won’t go through, he can get his gun back as it’s no longer evidence and since he was found not guilty legally he would have the right to have it returned.

 

[Cider]

I hope he stays safe but it does bring to mind, one reaps what they sow.

Really? Do you feel the same about Martin reaping what he’d sown in pounding Zimmerman’s head into the concrete? I hope you are at least consistent.

BTW that quote is from BroomWagon

 

[lcburgundy]

Maybe if Zimmerman did not have a gun, he would not have engaged in this to begin with. Neighborhood Watch volunteers often have “bear spray” and are usually required to have someone else with them.

And bear spray can severely injure someone and may not even be legal to use in some jurisdictions. It’s not actually permitted where I live. Carrying it concealed or using it as a weapon on a human is actually illegal.

GZ was legally allowed to be where he was. That’s all that matters.

And he may well have circumvented the system, just like his testimony that Trayvon Martin says “Tonight you will die”, that is a reach to believe in. So, he may well have “played the system” as to why he had a gun and someone got killed in an incident he was involved in. I don’t see how it can be clearer.

But not surprising that you don’t acknowledge this.

This is gibberish. I literally don’t know what you’re talking about. There was not even an allegation he was carrying illegally in the case.

To a kid walking home to his parent’s house.

Oh, geez, not this again. I refuse to engage in any further discussion with someone who is so brazenly dishonest to throw this kind of stale, disproven poor innocent baby Tray meme out there. I would expect people who self-identify as Catholic to have a better grasp on things like truth and honesty, but wow, can’t count on that.

 

[BroomWagon]

Silliness as usual. He hasn’t gotten it back yet, because there is still possible pending charges from DOJ so it would be evidence in that case. Once it’s decided that those cases won’t go through, he can get his gun back as it’s no longer evidence and since he was found not guilty legally he would have the right to have it returned.

Silliness as usual??

**Are you the one who stated it has been said a million times, it doesn’t matter who started a fight in personal defense?? So that means that was wrong a million times. ** You do acknowledge this? I don’t find I have to hurl a personal attack at someone in making an argument.

self-de·fense
[self-di-fens, self-] Show IPA
noun

1. the act of defending one’s person when physically attacked, as by countering blows or overcoming an assailant: the art of self-defense.
2. a claim or plea that the use of force or injuring or killing another was necessary in defending one’s own person from physical attack: He shot the man who was trying to stab him and pleaded self-defense at the murder trial.
3. an act or instance of defending or protecting one’s own interests, property, ideas, etc., as by argument or strategy.
   Also, especially British, self-de·fence.

dictionary.reference.com/browse/Self-defense

If you want to debate, that is one thing. If you want to make personal insults, I don’t think Catholic Answers Forums are for that purpose.