http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/13/justic...html?hpt=hp_t1
He should really go into hiding.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/13/justic...html?hpt=hp_t1
He should really go into hiding.
You guy's dont realize how pineappleing ground breaking that is
I have no words for that jury. Apparently murdering kids is legal in Florida.
Marissa Alexander got 20 years for firing a warning shot in the same state.
race
edit: Fiel is absolutely right, no grounds for comparison.
Would you think the same thing if you learned the exact circumstances under which she fired the gun?
- She was looking away and cringing while firing the gun
- She fired the gun knowing it would miss her husband who was in front of her
- HER TWO CHILDREN WERE BEHIND THE FATHER
- She left the house, grabbed the gun, and then reentered the house to point it at her husband.
This is reckless endangerment. A person who is in general fear for their life will not reenter a house they just left. Read the Stand Your Ground law for Florida. It does not apply in this situation.
In Florida, you have a 10-20-Life rule. If you brandish a weapon, that's 10 years. If you discharge, 20. If you kill someone, that's 25 to life. She discharged, so 20 years.
She was given a plea bargain of 3 years, but she didn't take it because she thought the Stand Your Ground law would apply. Well, if she had tried to read the damned thing it'd be obvious it does not apply.
Please, please tell me how the law was inappropriately applied in that case. I'm dying to know.
This is a day in which people will remember Zimmerman as a free man.
I wonder how the public will react.
I can't say I'm surprised. The prosecution was terrible while Zimmerman's defense team didn't falter. Based solely on what was presented in court, I wouldn't have convicted him either.
Man, 4chan's getting hot right now.
I think I'm the only Black guy on my Facebook who can see this case in a logical perspective.
Everyone is obviously playing the -race- card here instead of looking into the case.
Mmhmm...Originally Posted by Friend
The fact he instigated it makes him guilty for some type of harassment. I wouldn't say second degree murder, and manslaughter is kind of on the line. But he clearly instigated a fight, which, in majority of states gives Trayvon the authority to defend himself. But in Florida, an interaction isn't considering antagonistic until someone gets physical, which allowed him to 'stand his ground'. Although, it seems the entire jury agreed he was innocent, so there is probably a crucial piece of evidence we don't know about.
None the less I have to have faith in the jury and that I'm missing that piece of information.
There was no facts that Zimmerman instigated it, and to be fair there were no facts to say that Trayvon instigated it. It was dark and they both profiled each other, one thinking a creepy person was following them, the other thought a possible criminal was hanging around, in a place where there were previous break-ins. Truth be told it just seems like a misunderstanding gone wrong.
Remember that this case was not going to even be filed in the first place, because the police that investigated it didn't think there was enough to get a guilty; it was political pressure that drove this case into the courts. Regardless of all the facts, like you said, the jury-who were basically cut off from the world to decide this case-made a decision with all the facts they were given and everyone should respect that decision.
I consider the fact that he was following him an instigation, but that's my opinion.
I don't have much of an opinion on the verdict of this case (I wasn't there when it happened, I don't know either of them, and I'm certainly not up to snuff with Florida's laws), but what truly bothers is what I've seen and heard throughout media outlets and social networking sites since the case picked up steam...specifically the racial disparity that rears its ugly head from the minds of the human population. As desensitized as I've become, I don't think I'll ever stop truly being bothered by the hateful garbage that people spew from behind their computer screens.
I don't think it's really correct to see this case as a White/Latino VS Black thing. Seems more like a case of Travyon BEING black rather than anything else. Slight difference.
From what I've seen through the media, Travyon's background was heavily emphasized compared to Zimmerman. The defense basically went and assassinated the dead kid's character with total impunity while deflecting inquiries towards Zimmerman (you know, the one who is actually still alive), and meanwhile the prosecution was unable to prove beyond a reasonable doubt why Zimmerman was deserving of being convicted with a second degree murder charge.
Perhaps the jury ruling on the lack of reasonable doubt is fine, it shows that the system works, at least on the basis of this particular charge. It was the actual stand your ground law that was the problem in the first place. If it was a manslaughter charge, no doubt Zimmerman would be convicted of that.
But in every other aspect, with the way this trial was handled and covered by the media, one would think Trayvon was the one being put on trial instead of Zimmerman.
By the way, did Zimmerman ever testify directly in court? If he did, I missed it. But if he didn't (and it sounds like he didn't), I find it baffling that the one living person (who is also the suspect in this case at that) that knows with absolute certainty what happened that night wasn't forced to take the stand.
Of course. In order to keep Zimmerman innocent you'd have to prove that Trayvon was a shady character who didn't belong where he was that particular evening and that Zimmerman was correct in pursuing Trayvon.
Second degree murder charge includes manslaughter as a possible verdict.Perhaps the jury ruling on the lack of reasonable doubt is fine, it shows that the system works, at least on the basis of this particular charge. It was the actual stand your ground law that was the problem in the first place. If it was a manslaughter charge, no doubt Zimmerman would be convicted of that.
Bringing up the defendant in a case like this is extremely risky. One wrong move and Zimmerman ends up in jail. Also, his every last word and lack of words or facial gesture will be analyzed by the media to prove his innocence or conviction. It's just not worth it.By the way, did Zimmerman ever testify directly in court? If he did, I missed it. But if he didn't (and it sounds like he didn't), I find it baffling that the one living person (who is also the suspect in this case at that) that knows with absolute certainty what happened that night wasn't forced to take the stand.
My perspective is that, based on what was presented in court, Zimmerman didn't do anything illegal or wrong in pursuing Trayvon. What he did was STUPID (ignoring the police advice to cease pursuit), and to a degree provocational (though not necessarily intentional) but not illegal. And there was not enough evidence to prove that the ensuing altercation was anything but what Zimmerman described. I don't view this as groundbreaking, profound, disturbing, or noteworthy at all outside of a young man being shot after physically threatening another man's life.
I'm infinitely more disturbed by the media and public reaction to the case and the enormous focus on race that it's brought. If I see an unfamiliar kid walking around my neighborhood at night I'm going to investigate, especially if there have been a rash of crimes in the area. I've personally reported two such incidents where the police that responded found stolen property (first time) and spray paint cans (second) in their possession (and a third report that was innocent).
Zimmerman was, until getting out of his car, doing something responsible and good. His decision thereafter was stupid, not wrong.
|
Bookmarks