Zimmerman Not Guilty
- Thread starter paullud
- Start date
The jury really had no choice, because the prosecution didn't [or couldn't] prove that the sole witness [that would be the defendant] was a liar.
I wonder if their verdict would have been different if they knew that Zimmerman's wife is going on trial next, after he allowed [if not encouraged] her to commit perjury in a court of law.
The thing is, she WILL be found guilty, and then she can kiss her chances of getting hired as a nurse goodbye, because no hospital or health care facility will hire a convicted perjurer.
The defense said "There are no monsters here", and that's true - just a lot of sad losers.
I wonder if their verdict would have been different if they knew that Zimmerman's wife is going on trial next, after he allowed [if not encouraged] her to commit perjury in a court of law.
The thing is, she WILL be found guilty, and then she can kiss her chances of getting hired as a nurse goodbye, because no hospital or health care facility will hire a convicted perjurer.
The defense said "There are no monsters here", and that's true - just a lot of sad losers.
Martin's parents had very good reason not to trust the Sanford PD to investigate thoroughly: a case in which a homeless black man was assaulted by the son of a Sanford PD [I think it was a Captain, not 100% sure] and no charges were filed, until someone provided a cellphone video that clearly showed the assault to be unprovoked and unjustified.
Ironically, Zimmerman's father said his son was very upset about that case, and printed up flyers demanding justice for the victim, and spent a whole day handing them out - except no one could provide any corroboration of it. And you know the defense would have found it, if there were any. Ditto for the "black kids Zimmerman mentored" according [again] to his father: absolutely no one could verify that it happened anywhere except in Zimmerman's imagination.
This case proved the pd made the right choice from the start.
Sent from my Fisher Price ABC-123.
No intentions of being a vigilante?
What was he doing there in the first place and more importantly what was the self appointed neighbourhood watch captain doing there with a gun?
It's the old saying, if you carry a gun you better be prepared to use it and if you do use it, you better be prepared to suffer the consequences.
Let's say for a moment that zimmerman did kill martin in self defense. Let's say martin jumped him and zimmerman couldn't fight him off and had no choice but to use his gun.
The fact that he was carrying a gun caused him to take liberties that he would not have taken had he not had that backup "insurance" just in case. I don't care who you are, even if your not a cross between barney fife and walter mitty, the fact that you are "carrying" will cause you to investigate further than you should just because you feel protected.
That my friends is just human nature and also one of the follies of the "gun culture".
I would bet you any money that if zimmerman didn't have a gun on him, he wouldn't even have been there following martin in the first place and as a result no confrontation would have taken place.
Even if he did kill martin in self defence I still would have found him guilty of manslaughter for the simple reason that I'm sure he would not have been there otherwise.
I ask again, why was he carrying a gun?
AMonger
Veteran Expediter
He's got money coming in. The news network that edited the audio to paint him as a racist wool be writing him a check, and he will likely get checks from the city and state also.
Slacktide
Seasoned Expediter
Because it was his right to do so. He is one of 1,090,017 active CCW holders in the state of FL. That # is as of May 31 2013.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2
paullud
Veteran Expediter
His lawyers will get most of it. 17 months of legal fees is not cheap. Not sure why the city and state will send him anything. The star will need to pay some of his legal fees but not near all of them.
Sent from my Fisher Price ABC-123.
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
Where do you get he was self-appointed? Moveon.org? He was CHOSEN head of the neighborhood watch by the other members, when they set it up.
I don't know who you're trying to convince here. The prosecution couldn't convince even one of six women on the jury. They had NO evidence... just like you.
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
Same reason you drive.
Actually, Zimmermann was the one who set up the "neighborhood watch" program, and he appointed himself "captain" of the program. The National Neighborhood Watch officials had plenty to say about Zimmerman's uhm, rather unique implementation of his own variation of the program, and the fact that his program not only allowed but encouraged watch "officers" to be armed while on watch, and the fact that Zimmerman's version of the program had militaristic/law enforcement type ranks like Captain, Lieutenant, Sargent, and Patrolman.
Tennesseahawk
Veteran Expediter
Differs from what I've read.
At the time the homeowners association decided to organize a neighborhood watch, Zimmerman was the only volunteer.(37) He was then chosen as the neighborhood watch coordinator by his neighbors, according to Wendy Dorival, who organizes Neighborhood Watch for the Sanford Police Department.(39) The February 2012 homeowner association newsletter requested that crime victims "call our captain, George Zimmerman" after calling the police.(9) “He (Zimmerman) once caught a thief and an arrest was made,” said Cynthia Wibker, secretary of the homeowners association.(37)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin
Last edited:
It's not hard to be chosen as the coordinator when you're the only volunteer. <snort>
Dorival also testified that at the initial meeting to set up the program, Zimmerman told her he was there as the neighborhood watch coordinator, a role he said had been assigned him by the president of the homeowners' association.
The president of the homeowner's association had a slightly different version is his testimony...
Donald O'Brien, the president of the homeowners association for the community where the shooting took place, testified that he didn't think a neighborhood watch program was needed and that Zimmerman was in charge of the community's program from the very beginning. He stressed that the homeowners association had nothing to do with the neighborhood watch program but that he did attend a meeting to start it.
Trial turns to Zimmerman's neighborhood-watch role
Rules for neighborhood watch discussed in George Zimmerman trial - latimes.com
Dorival also testified that at the initial meeting to set up the program, Zimmerman told her he was there as the neighborhood watch coordinator, a role he said had been assigned him by the president of the homeowners' association.
The president of the homeowner's association had a slightly different version is his testimony...
Donald O'Brien, the president of the homeowners association for the community where the shooting took place, testified that he didn't think a neighborhood watch program was needed and that Zimmerman was in charge of the community's program from the very beginning. He stressed that the homeowners association had nothing to do with the neighborhood watch program but that he did attend a meeting to start it.
Trial turns to Zimmerman's neighborhood-watch role
Rules for neighborhood watch discussed in George Zimmerman trial - latimes.com
dieseldiva
Veteran Expediter
None of the above arguments matter to the case. These are just opinions of who or what people think George Zimmerman is/was. The bottom line is whether or not Zimmerman's actions met the requirements of the law which is that he acted out of fear of serious physical injury or death. Like it or not, those requirements were met, end of story.
You are correct, however this is the soapbox and opinions are what this forum is here for.
He may have very well acted out of fear of serious physical injury or death but IMO it was initiated by his own actions.
For that reason, I would have convicted him of manslaughter.
Like I said, I have seen his type before, and not only was he a wannabe, he wasn't even a good wannabe, and his type are more dangerous than the criminals he claims to be protecting us from.
paullud
Veteran Expediter
Wow, it is amazing just how bad the media did.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using EO Forums mobile app
Actually, those requirements weren't met. The prosecution failed to prove otherwise. There's a difference.
Additionally...
To which Paul replied...
But that wasn't established. Not guilty isn't the same thing as establishing it was in self defense. The prosecution failed to prove their case that it wasn't self defense. There's a difference. If self defense could have been established in any way, then Zimmerman would not have had to waive his right to the "stand your ground" hearing before a judge which would have thrown out the case on that merit. If he had gone through with the hearing and the judge didn't find enough evidence to support self-defense, it would have meant an almost certain guilty verdict at trial. So, he left it up to the prosecution to prove that it wasn't self defense, and they failed to do that.
I believe more or less what the prosecution asserted, that Zimmerman is a cop wannabe who unnecessarily pursued and then confronted Martin, and then Martin attacked Zimmerman out of fear of his own life, and then Zimmerman shot Martin in self defense. I don't believe that Martin was trying to burglarize any homes or rob anyone. If Zimmerman hadn't pursued and confronted Martin then Martin would be alive.
But that's a hard thing to prove, and as Dave noted, it should have never gone to trial unless there was proof of what exactly happened. The prosecution didn't have that. At all.
As every lawyer knows, and every citizen should, it's not about what you believe, or about what you think, or even about the truth, it's about what you can prove. And the prosecution didn't.
Just like the OJ Simpson trial, if I were a juror on the Zimmerman trial, I've have voted not guilty, too.