Zimmerman Trial

[EdC]

I've never understood why dispatchers always tell people to not follow someone. If you are reporting a suspicious person then wouldn't you want someone to keep a visual tab on them until the cops get there? If Zimmerman had made it back to his vehicle and drove off then Martin could have disappeared into the night and who knows what would have happened at that point. Cops aren't magicians, they can't just majically know who the suspect is. Wouldn't you be ticked off if you found out that some potential killer or rapist was on the prowl and someone had a visual on him, but the 911 operator told them to "go home"? I feel Zimmerman was justified in his actions and should be found not guilty.

My understanding is that dispatchers never give direct orders, but speak in more general terms, because then they may be held responsible.

If a dispatcher orders someone not to follow a suspect, and the SHTF, dispatcher will be blamed, and vice versa. Therefore "We don't need you to do that" and "try to keep an eye on the suspicious person, sir".

Wiggle room.

 

[Fargo]

Seems strange to me there is only six jurors. Is that a Florida thing?
A lot easier to get six to agree than 12!

Yeah, Florida is kinda funny on that although there are other states. Indiana is 6 on misdemeanors and D felonies. 12 on C felony and above. I believe the only 12 person juries in Florida are on potential death penalty cases.

Best,


Joe

 

[Gunslinger45]

Whoa.... Somebody who actually looks at the situation from both perspectives.

Well, I'm trying to because I just don't the whole story to a T, nor was I there. I'm basing everything off of what I personally have seen and heard.

IDK, my whole opinion or what not is watch you six. Stuff like this goes south fast. I understand the suspicion and what not with burglaries, but I honestly don't know if I would jump right in so to speak. Personally I'm more of a "assess, decide, respond" type of person. Not saying I don't have gut feelings or act on impulse, but I would be more apt to double check a triple check before calling the police and deciding on my own to follow further.

One thing is certain, there is a CONSIDERABLE amount of variables in the case that are very vital to the outcome. Again

 

[TRWXXA]

He was never told by the police to stop following Martin. He told a dispatcher he was following Martin and the dispatcher only said something to the extent of "We don't need you to do that."

I have noticed that it's always flaming liberal talking heads that bring up the point that the "police told Zimmerman not to follow." on all the news shows. And nobody ever challenges them with the fact that dispatchers are not law enforcement officers (unless Farva has been to Dimpus Burger again), and what they tell you does not constitute a lawful order.

I theorize that this is because of the basic liberal belief that all government is king. Low level government toadies can hassle your 501(c)3 organization, and that's okay. Government hacks can data mine the nation's electronic communication, and that's fair dinkum. Why shouldn't you be required to follow the instructions of a minimum wage .gov employee like an edict from the Burning Bush?

The same liberatards also staunchly tout Martin's right to walk wherever he wanted, but come down with a case of hysterical blindness on the point that Z has that right too.

Has anyone else noticed that the news channel, defense attorney talking heads, who have never ever met a criminal that they thought was actually guilty, are suddenly ready to stick a needle in Z's arm on this one? I guess in the leftie mind it's perfectly justifiable to use a firearm in a crime, but a heinous act to defend yourself with one.

 

[JLL101]

I have tried to follow this case, mostly on FoxNews.com. There was an excellent lengthy article yesterday summarizing the case to date. As you may recall, the local police initially ruled that Zimmerman shot Martin in self defense. It was only after Martin's family got national black leaders involved did the national media focus on the case. The Martin family alleged it was race that lead to the local police to not pursue the matter. Even the President weighed in on the matter, and in my opinion, inappropriately.

The Governor of Florida selected a special prosecutor to investigate the matter, apparently because of the national media. The Special Prosecutor chose NOT to assemble a grand jury to review the evidence but instead indited Zimmerman in a very short time frame. Why not utilize a grand jury? So far, the Prosecution's "evidence" seems to vindicate Zimmerman's actions. The Prosecution's star witness who apparently was on the phone with Martin just prior to the incident provided no details showing Zimmerman provoked the actual attack. Another witness stated he saw Martin on top of Zimmerman hitting him with both fists. Apparently Zimmerman's nose was bloodied and he had blood streaming down the back of his head from probably be slammed against the concrete. One witness thought it was Zimmerman who was screaming for help. Literally every piece of evidence so far matches Zimmerman's statement of events. When the police arrived, Zimmerman was very cooperative and walked them through the events. This walk through, which Zimmerman did was without attorney advice. None of Zimmerman's comments that night have been shown to be inaccurate, so far.

The trial is not over and as others have said, who knows what the outcome will be, but it sure appears to me that Zimmerman acted properly based on disclosed evidence to date and he did fear for his life as the kid was much larger the Zimmerman and was hammering him good. I think I would have shot if I was in such a situation.

My real question is why is Zimmerman being prosecuted? Is the Prosecution anti-gun? Did the individuals making the prosecution decisions think this was racially motivated shooting? Why prosecute what, to date, appears to be a very clear self defence situation?

 

[churchmouse]

I have tried to follow this case, mostly on FoxNews.com. There was an excellent lengthy article yesterday summarizing the case to date. As you may recall, the local police initially ruled that Zimmerman shot Martin in self defense. It was only after Martin's family got national black leaders involved did the national media focus on the case. The Martin family alleged it was race that lead to the local police to not pursue the matter. Even the President weighed in on the matter, and in my opinion, inappropriately.

The Governor of Florida selected a special prosecutor to investigate the matter, apparently because of the national media. The Special Prosecutor chose NOT to assemble a grand jury to review the evidence but instead indited Zimmerman in a very short time frame. Why not utilize a grand jury? So far, the Prosecution's "evidence" seems to vindicate Zimmerman's actions. The Prosecution's star witness who apparently was on the phone with Martin just prior to the incident provided no details showing Zimmerman provoked the actual attack. Another witness stated he saw Martin on top of Zimmerman hitting him with both fists. Apparently Zimmerman's nose was bloodied and he had blood streaming down the back of his head from probably be slammed against the concrete. One witness thought it was Zimmerman who was screaming for help. Literally every piece of evidence so far matches Zimmerman's statement of events. When the police arrived, Zimmerman was very cooperative and walked them through the events. This walk through, which Zimmerman did was without attorney advice. None of Zimmerman's comments that night have been shown to be inaccurate, so far.

The trial is not over and as others have said, who knows what the outcome will be, but it sure appears to me that Zimmerman acted properly based on disclosed evidence to date and he did fear for his life as the kid was much larger the Zimmerman and was hammering him good. I think I would have shot if I was in such a situation.

My real question is why is Zimmerman being prosecuted? Is the Prosecution anti-gun? Did the individuals making the prosecution decisions think this was racially motivated shooting? Why prosecute what, to date, appears to be a very clear self defence situation?

You answered this in your post....The president and all the Black leaders pushed all the buttons and backed the prosecutors into a corner. Remember all the marches....we had some here locally. Trial forced by media. As you stated, the LEO let him go. Jesse and Barry got involved to push an agenda....why do not more people see this.

 

[netsecurity]

Zimmerman is being prosecuted because his mother wanted her day in court. I believe that is all there is to it. I don't think Zimmerman would've been prosecuted with this little evidence, and that Trayvon's mother forced the states hand. To be clear, I don't blame her for wanting the trial and moving heaven and earth to make it happen, and neither should you. I just think she will be hurt twice as bad when she learns the truth and Zimmerman walks. All in all, what happened was a terrible tragedy, but Trayvon should not have attacked Zimmerman the way he did.

 

[Dirtebiker]

If Z is found not guilty or his sentence seems light, will there be riots?

Why can they use Z's previous 911 calls to show that he was over zealous, but they can't show M's Facebook showing him with his "gang signs" and his alleged problems with fighting, and drug use, and gang affiliation to show HIS propensity(sp?) for violence?

It seems they are still trying to portray M as a sweet little kid, and Z as an evil racist.

 

[Kutnupe14]

If Z is found not guilty or his sentence seems light, will there be riots?

Why can they use Z's previous 911 calls to show that he was over zealous, but they can't show M's Facebook showing him with his "gang signs" and his alleged problems with fighting, and drug use, and gang affiliation to show HIS propensity(sp?) for violence?

It seems they are still trying to portray M as a sweet little kid, and Z as an evil racist.

Because that will open the door to look at Zimmerman in the same way.

 

[Dirtebiker]

Because that will open the door to look at Zimmerman in the same way.

Same way as what?

 

[SmithGuy]

I've never understood why dispatchers always tell people to not follow someone. If you are reporting a suspicious person then wouldn't you want someone to keep a visual tab on them until the cops get there? If Zimmerman had made it back to his vehicle and drove off then Martin could have disappeared into the night and who knows what would have happened at that point. Cops aren't magicians, they can't just majically know who the suspect is. Wouldn't you be ticked off if you found out that some potential killer or rapist was on the prowl and someone had a visual on him, but the 911 operator told them to "go home"? I feel Zimmerman was justified in his actions and should be found not guilty.

I am not an expert on the matter, but I believe the reason dispatchers tell people not to follow suspicious people is that technically both the pursuer and the suspicious person have the same right to walk on a public street. The suspicious person may feel threatened if they see someone running at them for unknown reasons.

If I were walking down the street and someone ran up to me and started making me justify why I was there, I would tell them to go to hell and to mind their own business. If he put his hands on me, I would kindly remove his hands from my body and tell him not to touch me again. If he touched me again, then he would regret ever touching me.

One thing I rarely hear in discussions about this case are Trayvon Martin's rights. Let's say Martin was armed and Zimmerman was not, and during the scuffle Zimmerman was shot and killed by Martin. A lot of the arguments I have heard justifying Zimmerman's actions could also justify Martin's actions if the roles were reversed.

In the end, I think it will come down to who was the aggressor because both guys had the right to be there, and both were involved in a scuffle. Since Zimmerman pursued and confronted Martin (and not the other way around) I predict Zimmerman will be convicted.

 

[KG1]

I am not an expert on the matter, but I believe the reason dispatchers tell people not to follow suspicious people is that technically both the pursuer and the suspicious person have the same right to walk on a public street. The suspicious person may feel threatened if they see someone running at them for unknown reasons.

If I were walking down the street and someone ran up to me and started making me justify why I was there, I would tell them to go to hell and to mind their own business. If he put his hands on me, I would kindly remove his hands from my body and tell him not to touch me again. If he touched me again, then he would regret ever touching me.

One thing I rarely hear in discussions about this case are Trayvon Martin's rights. Let's say Martin was armed and Zimmerman was not, and during the scuffle Zimmerman was shot and killed by Martin. A lot of the arguments I have heard justifying Zimmerman's actions could also justify Martin's actions if the roles were reversed.

In the end, I think it will come down to who was the aggressor because both guys had the right to be there, and both were involved in a scuffle. Since Zimmerman pursued and confronted Martin (and not the other way around) I predict Zimmerman will be convicted.

You sure about that first part?

 

[STEEL CORE]

It aint over till its over Remember OJ 1?!? Who knows how an influenced jury will act. Hope nobody gets hurt after the aquittal. Witness protection program for GZ after this, maybe he should change his name to Jesus Gonzales or something.

 

[femurphy77]

Well it sure is funny how when Zimmermas was thought to be on top this was "damning evidence". Now that the most credible witness practically in the history of witnesses says it was the other way around, suddenly "who was on top means nothing, they could've been rolling around".

So someone who was carrying on a converstion over the phone with a racist, hears some noises and then the phone hangs up, a person with a definite prejudice in the fact that TM was a friend, someone that didn't SEE anything and is undoubtedly filling in the blanks with opionion, is "the most credible witness practially in the history of witnesses???

Really???

You've seen too many episodes of Perry Mason.

And the "racist" statement I just had to throw in based on HER testimony that TM told her that some wise ass "cracker" was following her. Yeah I know, "People of color CAN'T be racist, only white people"!

 

[Mgderf]

And the "racist" statement I just had to throw in based on HER testimony that TM told her that some wise ass "cracker" was following her. Yeah I know, "People of color CAN'T be racist, only white people"!

So, I saw an interview the other day with a colored girl that supposedly went to school with Trayvon Martin and the "star witness" for the prosecution.
I believe the interview was with PMSNBC.

Anyway, a question regarding racism was posed to the girl being interviewed. Her reply just FLOORED me, especially since it was not challenged.

This girl actually stated on national television that, "...oh I can't be racist, I'm from London, not here".

How do you argue with such stupidity.

 

[churchmouse]

So, I saw an interview the other day with a colored girl that supposedly went to school with Trayvon Martin and the "star witness" for the prosecution.
I believe the interview was with PMSNBC.

Anyway, a question regarding racism was posed to the girl being interviewed. Her reply just FLOORED me, especially since it was not challenged.

This girl actually stated on national television that, "...oh I can't be racist, I'm from London, not here".

How do you argue with such stupidity.

You can not do battle with stupid people. They have limitless stupidity and we grow tired trying to make any sense at all to them.

 

[Gunslinger45]

Dang, very interesting stuff going on. First of all thanks for the clarification on the dispatchers....I never thought of them as being unattached to the police, meaning no authority. That definitely brings some questions into light though on the legality of Z's actions. I'm still very hung up on the fact of pursuing him, that's my main issue with this whole case...That and YES I do believe there is a large race component behind this trial. Everyone want's racism to stop, but when the roles are reversed it's untouchable. It's sickening to think too that due to that fact alone a person could be convicted.

 

[M67]

And the "racist" statement I just had to throw in based on HER testimony that TM told her that some wise ass "cracker" was following her. Yeah I know, "People of color CAN'T be racist, only white people"!

Yesss sssir. Cracker is not a racist slur.

Yesss sssir

Noo sssir

Noo ssir

Yess Ssir

................ the most painful witness in history to watch

The whole trial is BS and of course they made it about race. If a white guy was walking around in the hood and got shot, it wouldn't be race motivated, it would be "dumb white guy", oh, sorry, "dumb cracker".

Zimmerman should get off, he was acting in self defense, but he's going to get burned, and everyone is going to know it was a sham trial.

 

[cordex]

I'm still very hung up on the fact of pursuing him, that's my main issue with this whole case.

Zimmerman's claim is that he was not pursuing Martin but got out of his truck to look for a street sign and address to communicate to the police. As he was going back to his truck, he claims Martin accosted him. Even if he got out to try to observe from a distance, there is nothing illegal about that. Given the location of the fight and the times involved, it seems impossible that Zimmerman "caught" Martin. Rather, Martin either stayed put and let Zimmerman come to him so he could confront the "creepy a** cracker" or he came back to confront him. Either way, I don't see how he could have been run down and attacked by Zimmerman as the Martin side has tried to claim.

We will probably never know what really happened, but I have yet to see evidence or consistent testimony that in any significant way contradicts Zimmerman's story.

 

[STEEL CORE]

I thought she was PRECIOUS?!?