Trayvon Martin broke no laws. If Mr. Zimmerman, in his overzealous,
racial-profiling and stalking activities, would have complied with Law
Enforcement and NOT followed this young man, he would be alive today.Zimmerman is directly responsible for creating the situation in which Trayvon
feared for his own safety; Zimmerman is responsible for killing this young man.
And he did it primarily because the boy was black and Zimmerman equated the
color of his skin with malicious intent.Zimmerman must go to jail.
What "speaks volumes" is the overt racism in many of these comments.
There is tons of "reasonable doubt" in this case. No justification for
a conviction of even manslaugter. I only hope that the defense was allowed to
tell the jury that a manslaughter conviction can carry almost as much time as a
2nd degree does. If these ladies of the jury don't know that they may go
in and think it is a slap on the wrist conviction and give it to him just
because the PC powers were convicting Zimmerman before the trial even began.
It's over now, and reasonable doubt is obviously the only just result. The
prosecution did not make the case. Plain and simple.
Interesting that law enforcement is prepping for rioting if Zimmerman is
acquitted.And yet there are thousands in Florida who support that
acquittal.So two groups, both passionate about who they support.And yet police believe only one group will begin rioting and acts of
violence if the verdict isn't what they like.Speaks volumes
doesn't it?Yep.I am proud to be part of the
peaceful group who will not riot, regardless of the outcome.
@I am LDS,Please give us the quote where he "disobeyed law
enforcement instructions"And please learn about what the word
"instructions" means as you do.Fact:Zimmerman
had the RIGHT to follow this suspicious person, who as it turns out was on drugs
at the time.Interesting since on the call to police he even said
"this guy looks like he's on drugs or something"He was
on drugs and had it in his system.FACT:Treyvon had 4
minutes free where he could have called police AND/OR run home(a distance of
several dozen yards no more)He didn't call police.He didn't go home.He planned his attack and on Zimmerman.Zimmerman did everything within his legal right.Treyvon did
not.Zimmerman did the right thing and called police.He
is a hero for watching out for his community.
@patriot"Man slaughter and murder have the same burden of proof from
the prosecution"Murder requires a degree of pre-planning
involved. Manslaughter can be more like a case of using overwhelming force in
response, which is the argument the prosecution has used. He can be innocent of
murder two (not sure why you keep saying one) and guilty of manslaughter if
it's believed that he didn't go into this thinking he'd kill
Treyvon, but ended up doing so unnecessarily. "However it was
NOT a crime for George to get out and pursue a suspicious character in a crime
filled area. "You'd be fine with someone stalking a child
of yours if the stalker arbitrarily decided they were somehow suspicious?
re:atl134Man slaughter and murder have the same burden of proof from
the prosecution - that is that Zimmerman was NOT in fear of his life and
therefore the self defense clause in Florida would not protect him. The
prosecution knew Zimmerman DID INDEED fear for his life and therefore they
couldn't get the murder one charge so they played the little game of trying
to shame the jury into at least putting the man behind bars....after all a black
man was killed by a white man and that is all the proof that our PC society
needs today. Zimmerman - by Florida law - is innocent. If he is innocent of
murder one then he is likewise innocent of man slaughter ...because he did fear
for his life and was acting in self defense. Should George have just stayed in
his car and waited for police to arrive? Probably. However it was NOT a crime
for George to get out and pursue a suspicious character in a crime filled area.
Had this 17 year old not gone crazy with rage and jumped on top of Zimmerman
bashing his head into the ground both we be alive today.
NedGrimley,"LDS: I didn't know you were a juror.
Aren't you supposed to be sequestered until after the trial?"That's OK. There are probably a lot of things you don't know.
this is nothing short of a KKK race linching ...reversed. Yes this time the KKK
is the media and the black community along with the PC crowd of judges,
politicians and lawyers. Recall in the classic "To Kill a Mocking Bird"
Gregory Peck tries to counsel the jury members to be fair and to NOT base their
opinions on skin color but that is EXACTLY what happened. In that case a black
man was wrongfully convicted because he was black. Today we are upside down in
this country and have flip flopped to the opposite extreme of discrimination.
Today a White Hispanic will be convicted on Man Slaughter simply because he is
white and he killed a black man. Really that simple. This is a red flag
indicator of where our PC culture has taken us to. Wrong is wrong whether it be
the old KKK or the equivalent Black Panther party of today with their associated
liberal sympathizers. America is in a really bad place today.
LDS: I didn't know you were a juror. Aren't you supposed to be
sequestered until after the trial?
@Say No to BO --"Can they suddenly inject a menu of
charges?"Read the article, people (not just you, Say No).As the article clearly states, this is common practice under FL state
law. Some states allow it, some don't.I've said from the
beginning that I thought Zimmerman was likely to get convicted of manslaughter.
That looks even more likely now. Whether or not he *racially*
profiled Martin, it was Zimmerman who started the whole encounter. Therefore its
outcome is his responsibility.
Zimmerman stalked, provoked, and disobeyed law enforcement instructions, before
assaulting this kid then killing him.The fact that the kid fought
back is incidental.Zimmerman needs to be locked up. He is as guilty
Not sure how the judge can instruct the Jury to consider a lesser charge. The
fact that the accused was not allowed to call witnesses on his behalf for the
manslaughter(the crime has different elements than 2nd degree Murder) violates
his constitutional rights with regards to the compulsory clause of the 6th
amendment. At this stage in the game, the prosecution should have to re file
amending to the charge of manslaughter, Zimmerman allowed to enter a plea and
then defend himself against the Manslaughter charge while the prosecution is
responsible for proving beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed the crime.
However, 6th amendment aside, the prosecution did not show
negligence. According to state law, if a person is not engaged in illegal
activity(Prosecution did not prove Zimmerman did anything illegal before the
fight) that person has the right to meet force with force, even deadly force.
If my head were being slammed against the concrete, I would not wait to see if
the end result was life threatening. Any reasonable person would believe that
serious bodily injury is imminent. If you say otherwise, you are not being
Excuse me, a young boy is dead. Show some respect, please.
They are really trying for something. When manslaughter doesn't work, they
will try operating a multi-level marketing operation, jay walking, or using loud
equipment before 7 am.
Can they suddenly inject a menu of charges?One would think new charges
need to be filed and the process begin again. Shouldn't Zimmerman be
allowed to enter a plea to the new charges? Can the judge and jury just assume
he would plead not guilty?And at what point is this considered double
jeopardy?One thing is for sure; the prosecution is inept and the judge is
allowing them to play games.
Manslaughter is what made sense to pursue from the start anyway.
Manslaughter works for me.
While I do not believe Zimmerman was justified in his actions, I have to admit
this was a low move by the prosecution. This should have been filed much
earlier than after the defense had rested.