I think the message a lot of people got from this trial is if you are forced to
shoot someone to defend yourself you should disappear after. The law can't
be counted on to be fair or to treat you wit common sense.
Dear UtahBlueDevil,Trayon Martin was not "in his own
neighborhood" the night he was shot. After he was suspended from school, his
father drove him the 245 miles from his home in Miami to Sanford so he
wouldn't be spending 10 unsupervised days with his hoodlum friends. As many people have pointed out, Zimmerman was never instructed not to
get out of his truck or to follow Martin. The police dispatcher merely made an
observation--"We don't need you to do that." But even if the
dispatcher had ordered him not to follow Martin, it makes no difference since
there is no evidence that after talking to the dispatcher that Zimmerman did
There are several errors regarding Stand Your Ground Laws, in the piece and the
comments. •It is false to claim Stand Your Ground is a local
problem. At the behest of the National Rifle Assn., STG laws have been passed
in 20 states. Two of the STG cases about to be tried in Florida have victims
and facts similar to Florida vs. Zimmerman. These laws are licenses to kill,
particularly if the victim is black. The white killer merely says he feared for
his life and the white jury believes him, regardless of the circumstances, if
the victim is black. •The jury in State vs. Zimmerman
received STG as part of its instructions and used the statute in reaching their
decision, so it is part of the case.•Stand Your Ground laws do
not reduce violence. In fact, they increase the number of homicides and the
number of killings deemed justified. Stand Your Ground laws are not
beneficial and should be repealed.
Let's clear up some disinformation and face some realities.•A trial is meant to be a search for truth. What we got in Florida vs.
Zimmerman was instead a coverup of the culpability of an armed vigilante who
profiled, stalked and killed an unarmed boy talking on a cell phone as he walked
home from a convenience store. The criminal justice system failed.•The jury system has usually failed African-Americans, leaving them at
the mercy of an often hostile white majority. •Conservatives
do not seem to be learning any useful lesson from the tragic death of Trayvon
Martin. Instead, they are using the situation as an opportunity to taunt
African-Americans and affirm their contempt for the group.
Many excellent comments, so, in that respect, the article was useful. However,
it was not an even handed article, and it was disappointing in that it made no
attempt to connect points of evidence. What is the evidence that " . .
Zimmerman confronted . . . Trayvon Martin .. ?" (as claimed) What is the
evidence that Zimmerman started the altercation? (as claimed - unless you
consider following someone as starting an altercation). My impression is that
Zimmerman was following a person of suspicion - suspicion based on prior
burglaries in the neighborhood and descriptions of the perpetrators. It is
probable that Zimmerman did not overtake and punch that person, because the
prosecution did not introduce any evidence to that effect. It is probable that
at some point the two came into physical proximity and and that Trayvon punched
Zimmerman, since I think it's near impossible to break one's own nose
with a punch. As to Zimmerman deciding to lay down on the pavement and bang his
head against it - really?
This case was a shining example of how the media forms a lot of peoples opinions
and that they dont pay as much attention to the facts as they do to the media
personalities that feed their own beliefs. Fact one: Stand your ground
law, This was never used in the trial even though all the popular pundits keep
blaming it for the travesty of Zimmerman going free. Fact two: The police
ordered him to stay in his car, The police never did that, search the 911
transcripts and the closest that the operator came to saying that was "Ok,
we don't need you to do that." which is more of a 'now you cant
sue me' answer then an order that the call center operator probably
couldn't legally give anyway. When you look at the way those 2 facts
are presented along with cherry picked photos and edited transcripts then you
have to find that some media reporters are going more for sensationalism then
the hard truth.
The lessons learned from Zimmerman trial"What should be learned
from this trial is if race goes away as an issue then the Al Sharptons will be
out of a job and income. There many who fan the race issue to prevent it from
becoming of no importance.This case was not tried under the "stand
your ground" law but under the self defense law. Erick Holder's FBI
investigated Zimmerman and determined it was not race biased. But Obama and
Holder will have to try to manufacturer evidence so that Zimmerman can be tried
again. If Zimmerman lives long enough I think Obama and Holder will have to try
Zimmerman again just to satisfy the black (not PC) community.
One lesson to be learned here is to take away prosecution decisions from people
who are subject to political pressure.
Criminal justice is not nor has it ever been perfect. And in criminal cases,
the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt rests with the prosecution - with
reasonable doubt left in the hands of a jury. If anyone has a better idea,
please, let's hear it.None of us were "there" when the
Zimmerman/Martin confrontation took place. And yet, a number of us (on both
sides of the argument) were quick to become armchair jurors. Be honest with
yourself ... did you already have a verdict in mind before the jury came down
with its verdict?When O.J. Simpson was found not guilty of murdering
Ronald Goldman and Nicole Simpson, there were no protests in the streets. And
the Department of Justice didn't even lift a finger to prosecute O.J. for
violating Ronald's and Nicole's "civil rights." I'm
assuming for a moment that they DID have civil rights. Bottom line? Everyone
(including the government) accepted the jury verdict insofar as the criminal
charges were concerned -- and moved on with their lives. Why should it be any
different with the Zimmerman case?
TopgunThank you for your open mindedness and your insights, given in
a NON-inflammatory way. How completely refreshing!I too am concerned
about all the suppositions of how the Martin and Zimmerman met, which are being
treated and published as facts, when they are just guesses. Admittedly, up until
I read your comment, I was more distressed about those who claim that Zimmerman
set out to kill Martin, or that he initiated the confrontation, as this article
suggests. But really, all are guesses, and tend to be dangerous assumptions.Regarding profiling, you are right on there too. We all do it, but I
don't think it means we are all haters. Hate and fear are not the same
thing. Hate must be conquered from within. If hate is absent, fear can be
overcome by building bridges through noninflammatory communication, such as
yours. Only those who don't hate, can reach across those racial lines of
society and heal the divide. Those who seek to divide us, are always
driven by hate. It would be tragedy after tragedy to let haters win.
@LDS LiberalWhat reason would you have to:go out to West
Valley,with a gun,and follow someone suspicious?Has
anyone in West Valley asked you to help protect them from a spate of burglaries,
as that Sanford community asked of GZ? If not, why would you go to West Valley
and follow someone suspicious, as GZ was expected to do by his fellow community
citizens? Are you trying to suggest your hypothetical random bizarre excursion
to West Valley would be the same as what GZ did? That's a rather illogical
comparison.Do you have a legal right to carry a concealed weapon, as
GZ did?While walking in your own neighborhood, as you have every right to
do, has someone broken your nose and pounded your head on the cement? If they
did, were you foolish enough to allow it to continue unchallenged to its
potentially lethal conclusion without fighting back? If you fought back, even
if it resulted in the death of your attacker, I would hope you could mount a
solid self-defense claim, as GZ was able to do, and rightfully so.
Someone clarify why everyone states, as if it's a fact, that Trayvon
punched Zimmerman first? I was under the impression that this was according to
Zimmerman's testimony. I'm quite sure I will say that I was attacked
first when trying to prove I acted in self-defense.Disclaimer, I'm a
black male. I do understand that Trayvon was profiled (don't have much of
a problem with that, i profile all races and looks of people too). Anybody that
disagrees that he was profiled is in denial or just plain lives in a bubble. I don't have a problem with the jury because they did their job given the
evidence they were given. No one was present at the time of the altercation. 2
differing accounts were given about who was on top of the other. Can everyone
stop jumping to conclusion that Trayvon attacked Zimmerman first because
we'll never know what happened (reasonable doubt for the jury).About
the argument that most violent crimes being committed by blacks. I'll like
to see the socio-economic status of the criminals. I believe there will be a
correlation but hey what do I know.
So, If I go out to West Valley, with a gun, and follow
someone suspicious, and a fight ensues, and I shoot them, I
would be not guilty?
Something should be put to rest. The 911 dispatcher who spoke to Zimmerman
didn’t tell him to stay in his car. Zimmerman said he was following a
suspicious person, and the dispatcher told him, "We don't need you to
do that." That's it. No command, even if the dispatcher could do such
a thing. Zimmerman lost sight of Martin, so he got out of his car. He had as
much right to be there as Martin.But even if he was stalking TM,
Zimmerman a right to defend himself once Martin was pounding his head on the
concrete. Zimmerman held off 45 seconds before pulling his weapon. If you
don't understand how long that is, take a look at the clock in a cage fight
Thank you, editor, for a good opinion, an insightful opinion. My assessment is
similar to yours. The event was and is race based, although Zimmerman may be a
tolerant, not racist person, the event as it unfolded over the past year was and
is racially prejudiced. The press talked it up from day one. Now after a year
and after a trial, there are complaints, demonstrations, and violence.
Justifiable or not by you or me, it's happening, and I for one don't
fault the african american community for any non violent demonstrations,
they've been hurt. About the stand your ground law, I'm with Eric
Holder because he states my strong opinion, this kind of law legalizes an
overboard response to a street fight up to including murder. Zimmerman
over-reacted, period. That law protected him, and that law in fact was a
criteria from the judge to the jury, and that law and laws like it need to be
toned down. If deadly force is used, the user must demonstrate the need, and in
Zimmerman's case he would've had a headache. No justification for
shooting a gun.
I get the distinct impression that some here have some deep-seated need to be
told what to do and think that others should also. Zimmerman was under NO legal
obligation to take the police dispatchers advice. They cannot order someone to
do anything. I heard in another comment board that the dispatchers asked him if
he could still see the suspicious person, and when Mr Z could not, then exited
his car. I wasn't in the courtroom so I don't have first hand
knowledge, and I would venture a guess to say that most on this board
weren't in the courtroom so they don't have first-hand knowledge
either.Don't project your need to be ordered to act or not to
act on me or anyone else. You are welcome to your needs, but I don't share
I can relate to this story in many ways, as a victim of crime, as a witness to a
potential crime as an alert neighbor, as a jury member and as a parent of sons.
But I've never ever had to worry that the color of my son's skin or
the clothes they wore put them at higher risk for being a victim of others. I'm not making a judgement about whether Trayvon was a victim of
racial prejudice or just the unfortunate victim of Zimmerman's
overzealousness. Racism is alive and well in this country, despite the progress
that has been made. I was appalled by what George Zimmerman's brother said
after the verdict. I was also disturbed by the jury member who seemed to put
Trayvon and Zimmerman as equal victims. Sorry, no. Trayvon lost his life. But I think we need to open our hearts and our minds and listen, do some
soul-searching and work to make things better.
Zimmerman engaged in poor judgment, when against the advise of the 911 operators
he left his car to continue following Martin.
Oh good grief. If I hear one more invariably rightwing justification for
pointless murder, I might seriously vomit.Everything about this case
is designed to throw up a smokescreen in a murder with no nearby witnesses...and
none of it relevant. The races of the people involved are not relevant. What
they were wearing...is not relevant. Their school record, whether they've
ever smoked pot, what their mothers think of them...are not relevant. Who was
yelling was not relevant. How the media portrayed it is definitely not relevant.
How the black community responds - is not relevant. It's ALL a smokescreen,
and the prosecution fell into the trap of even debating it.Let's talk about what is relevant. Zimmerman followed this kid around,
got out of his car, an altercation ensued - we don't know who started it,
but if it wasn't Zimmerman, Martin wouldn't have been entirely
unjustified after being followed by this weirdo. So then Zimmerman shot him. The
entire incident was Zimmerman's fault, and he walked.Absolutely
pathetic... and so is every single person trying to justify this kid's
death by a thousand extenuating, irrelevant circumstances. There is no excuse.
If Trayvon had kept his fists in his hoodie and not tried to turn Mr.
Zimmerman's head into jelly, he would be alive today. He jumped the wrong
guy and paid with his life.
Florida's Stand your Ground law might be a bad law -- or not -- but come on
Nightshade, do your homework -- that law was *not* invoked in this case and had
nothing whatsoever to do with the case or its outcome.
I feel that George Zimmerman should be investigated by the Justice Department
for possible civil rights violations.
If George Zimmerman had profiled, followed, and murdered a black teenage girl,
would the Jury have ruled in the same way?Would Zimmerman's past
criminal history, then been introduced into this case and the following
The jury system is very good law and it has spoken. FLA's Stand Your Ground
law is very bad law--and it has also spoken. So we take the good with the bad.
Someone may have gotten away with murder; he won't be the first or the
last. Sometimes we can win, sometimes not. We don't really know what
happened that night--and the prosecution failed to prove anything beyond a
reasonable doubt. Time to move on.
The jury system is a very good one and it has spoken. Florida's Stand Your
Ground is very bad law and it has spoken. I guess we have to accept the good
with the bad and move on. Maybe Zimmerman got away with murder but he won't
be the first or the last. I don't see it as a racist decision. The jury did
the best it could with what it was given. The prosecution couldn't prove
their case beyond a reasonable doubt.
Edgar, You assume a fact not in evidence, which is that Zimmerman provoked the
incident. Unless you consider following someone a provacation, which I
don't. Evidence indicated that it may have been Martin who instigated the
first physical action against Zimmerman. In any case, this case, unlike O.J. is
lacking in much evidence, (but has lots of supposition). Supposition is not
strong enough in any court for a conviction beyond reasonalble doubt.
@UtahBlueDevilThree weeks prior to this Zimmerman had witnessed a
similar black male peering into windows in the neighborhood. A few days later a
home was robbed. Witnesses said they saw two black males in the area at the
time of the robbery and a black male was later arrested after police discovered
the items in his backpack. Within just a year prior to the Zimmerman incident
the police had been called over 400 times to that neighborhood. There had also
been nearly 20 thefts and burglaries, a shooting, and several attempted
break-ins. You ask me what I would have done? Well at that point I would have
been pretty suspicious that this was another criminal in the neighborhood
looking to rob someone and I was going to do everything I could to make sure the
cops could nab the guy; whether that be following him on foot or yelling at him
to stop running.
@UtahBlueDevilFirst of all, your argument has nothing to do with the
subject of the article which is "Profiling". I was making the argument
that it wasn't because Trayvon was black that Zimmerman decided he was a
suspicious person. He fit the description that witnesses had given of the
burglars that had been seen three weeks before and he was walking right next to
homes instead of the sidewalk which is rather suspicious all by itself.Second, Zimmerman was never given a "police order". He was talking to
a dispatcher who has no authority over any possible crime situation AND
Zimmerman had every right to get out of his vehicle to talk to whomever he wants
or to see wherever it was Trayvon had ran to.
What's wrong with profiling? Happens all the time, and we all do it. I
for one look skeptically at a person of Arab decent every time I get on an
airplane. Profiling? Yes. Racist, no. I am realistic to the fact that
persons of Arab decent hijacked planes and flew them into the twin towers and
Pentagon. Do I look at them as criminals? No. Just a little more skeptically
than normal.When this editorial says that there is doubt about
Zimmerman's story, it shows a tendency to bend the news. There is not
doubt that the injuries on Zimmerman's face and back of his head were a
result of the beating given to him by Travon Martin. That is not in dispute.Next time the learned editorial staff of the D News gets together and
concocts and editorial such as this, maybe it will re-write it until it makes
I have read in on this string that wearing a hoodie makes you suspicious. In
the Autumn chill here in New England, I often wear a hoodie. Does this make me,
a 69 year lod white female, a possible suspect? What you wear does not make you
a suspect. What you do does. Zimmerman was not a suitable candidate for being
a member, let alone being the only member, of a community patrol. This whole
community patrol thing needs to be looked at closely, and strictly regulated.
DEAinATL,I wasn't glued to the trial and I don't know
exactly what evidence came in and what didn't. I do know the prosecution
offered Zimmerman's interview with Hannity. I do know that Zimmerman has
claimed somewhere along the line that Martin asked him if he (GZ) had a problem
and then said well you do now and then threw a punch. But above and beyond that
we do have the circumstantial evidence-- that Zimmerman's head was bloodied
on both sides and Martin's knuckles were injured. And we do have 45
minutes worth of screams that ended with the gunshot and the testimony that
Martin was straddling Zimmerman MMA style. Sure sounds like Martin was the
aggressor. It goes without saying that it's a tragedy a young man died,
but we don't know for certain that GZ did anything wrong.
This verdict is a wakeup call for all of us. There needs to be a strict
competency and examination of citizen patrol candidates. Zimmerman should never
have been out there, let alone armed. I seriously question his motivation for
wanting to be there. I think he is a bully and a coward, hiding behind the
legitimacy of the citizen patrol to cover his need to dominate and beat down
anyone who would not have enough credibility to stand against him. There are many Zimmerman’s out there, too many. Someone’s
eagerness to serve should show a need to question why they would want to put
them in that situation. More so, they need to prove that they have the
training, knowledge of the law and martial arts skills to take care of
themselves. I do not think they should be armed. Communities need to really
think it through before they even hint that they are in favor of such a
patrol.Black brothers and sister, I think this whole situation in
outrageous and beyond what this white woman is will accept as a part of life.
I'm on your side.
Gives new meaning to "An eye for an eye." Because someone pokes your
eye, that gives you the right to gouge their eyes out and kill them?"
Revenge to the ultimate finality.
"The only evidence we have is that Martin started the altercation and
pummeled Zimmerman while on top of him on the sidewalk. Zimmerman endured the
beating for 45 seconds, an eternity in that kind of situation, before using his
weapon."There was in fact no evidence as to how the
confrontation started, other than Martin's cell phone exclamation "get
off me." Zimmerman didn't testify; the hearsay recitals of his
self-serving statements to investigators aren't "evidence." No
witness testified to any version of how the confrontation started.I
don't know what happened that night, I wasn't there. But to justify
or vilify the verdict as if arguing a referee's call is beknighted. Martin
would be alive if Zimmerman hadn't mistakenly suspected him of wrongdoing
and put into play the series of events - after that, nobody knows what happened
except Zimmerman, and he declined to testify.
The self defense rules used in this trial were the same as those used in any
other state (the more unique "stand your ground" Florida law was *not*
used in this trial). The author is full of it. The community
involved had recently suffered 8 break in burgleries and formed a neighborhood
watch as a result of insufficient law enforcement protection. As the prosecution
admitted, "most" of the 8 were perpetrated by young black men (they
could not point to any of the eight that were not). Common sense suggests that
the neighborhood watch (and the police) should be looking in particular for
young black burglers (or are we so PC that we skip common sense?). There was no
evidence or reason to believe that Zimmerman started the physical altercation
but maybe Martin did (he referred to Z as a "creepy a$$ cracker") and Z
took some shots to the face before he found his head bouncing off the concrete.
The police did not initially arrest Z because the evidence supported self
defense. Only after Al Sharpton and the media got vocally involved did political
pressure (not facts) result in an arrest. Al (Tawana Brawley) Sharpton is the
I think this is a good article that succinctly covers the important points.
There wasn't evidence that Zimmerman was guilty of a crime, and thus had to
be found not guilty. That's how the justice system works.I can
understand why Zimmerman did what he did. There had been break-ins in the
neighborhood. Seeing someone wandering the neighborhood alone, at night, is
enough to make him suspicious. I get that.On the other hand, Martin
had every reason to be scared too. He was approached by a stranger who had been
following him, on a dark street, in the rain. If he saw that Zimmerman was
armed, that would be enough to make him feel like his life was in imminent
danger. It's easy to imagine that Martin was acting in self-defense
also.If the law says it's better to let a guilty person go,
rather than punish an innocent, shouldn't Zimmerman have given Martin the
One of the worst DN editorials I've read. There was absolutely no evidence
that Zimmerman had a racist bone in his body. He is the product of a mixed race
marriage, he had dated at least one black woman, he had mentored black children,
he mounted a campaign to demand justice for a black victim of a crime.
"Stand Your Ground" played no part in this case; it was a simple case of
justifiable homicide for self-defense. The true lessons that we should have
learned in this case:1. Don't attack somebody who follows you
in a strange neighborhood.2. Don't assume that your victim
(Zimmerman in this case) is unarmed.3. Don't assume that reports
from news media are accurate, especially from media outlets that have proven
they are not objective, hide the truth when it doesn't suit their purposes
and edit news to promote their view.4. Vote against anybody who overrules
an investigation for political purposes.5. Realize that racial profiteers
such as Sharpton and shameful politicians such as Obama will seize every
opportunity to promote themselves.6. Be thankful that there are still
some jurors who will rule on facts and the law.6.
% kanak.attack...."Bingo! Of course he calls the cops and of
course he has to get out of his vehicle to get the address of where Trayvon is
hanging out. Case closed." Exactly... he did these things
against police orders. He was told to stay away. You can't just skip that
part. What, we get to cherry pick parts of the story that suit our desired
version of the truth. Trayon did have a contributory role in this... he should
have simple told Martin that he lived there... which he did. But he decided
to confront the guy who was following him through his own neighborhood.You have a tough guy sounding name.... someone starts following you around
your neighborhood and how... what would you have done? Called the police....
he probably should have.... But lets be clear, Trayvon was just as legally
right to confront the person who was following him through his own neighborhood.
Stupid.... but it was within his rights.A kid was killed when two
people did two really stupid things. What exactly would you do if someone
started following your kid in your neighborhood..? He was told to stay away...
The author of this article ought to get his/her facts about the
"backdrop" correct. The claim that "this case must be viewed against
the backdrop of Florida's unique "stand your ground" law allowing
the use of deadly force when someone feels in imminent danger." is false on
many levels. Florida's law is not unique. During the last couple of
decades, more than thirty states have used statute and case law to expand the
"castle doctrine", thus legalizing the use of deadly force while
defending oneself from attack outside the home. Additionally, deadly force is,
and has always been, legally justified where no retreat is possible and you are
defending a threat to your life. Being pinned to the ground by an assailant
precludes retreat. Having ones heat slammed into the pavement is life
threatening. If Zimmerman's account of events is true, then the use of
deadly force would have been justified in all fifty states. There are no laws
other than the death penalty that require a person to submit their life to an
assailant. All jurisdictions allow defense as needed to avoid serious bodily
harm that may result in death.
The real lesson that should be learned is that you need to be conscious of when
you might look suspicious. Trayvon should have been aware of how he might come
across that night. It would have been so easy to diffuse a bad situation by
either avoiding it or saying something in a friendly way. It's possible
TM was fully aware of how he came across and was just looking for trouble. If I
happen to be walking somewhere late at night I try to avoid any kind of
situation that might cause someone else some fear and if I believe someone might
be apprehensive I'll say something.Right after 9-11 my wife and
I flew to NYC from Orange County. My wife looks like she could be from the
Middle East. It didn't offend us in the least that she was given a little
extra scrutiny boarding the plane. In fact I found it comforting. I understand
this might be a sore spot with Blacks, but, as has been stated, unfortunately a
disproportionate amount of crime is committed by young Black males. There needs
to be more understanding on everyone's part and less offence taken.
Several facts have gotten lost in the discussion of the Zimmerman/Martin
trial:1. Zimmerman's organization was not a real neighborhood
watch sanctioned by the national organization. If it had been a group
sanctioned by the national organization, the carrying of a weapon would have
been prohibited.2. Had Zimmerman, as requested by the police dispatcher,
stayed in his car, there would have been no confrontation.3. Zimmerman, by
his own admission, never identified himself as a neighborhood watch person nor
as anything else. In other words, Zimmerman himself was a suspicious person.
I read this newspaper all the time and I must say that I am really disappointed
in this article. The jury gave it's verdict, what right does this person
have to say that all of these jurors are incompetent to come up with the correct
decision? When OJ was not convicted we had the same stuff.When ever
there is black vs white or white vs black then it always seems that the jury got
it wrong!It is like saying "alright well, this is a black young man vs
a white(?) Latino so the black young man must be not guilty! Facts don't
matter into the equation at all. If Zimmerman was also black, or TM white there
would be no story here!
I'm sorry but whoever wrote this article is listening to the wrong
talking-heads on t.v and in our government. Not to mention is disregarding some
very important facts of this case that caused Zimmerman to be suspicious of
Trayvon. First of all, profiling is something we do everyday and is
needed for any intelligent person to make an educated decision on how to act in
situations. The lies that have been told about profiling being wrong is just
plain ridiculous. If a police officer is told that a suspect has white-skinned
male with brown hair and is wearing a black jacket does he go looking for a
brown-skinned female with black hair wearing a dress??? No! The same goes for
Zimmerman who was acting as neighborhood watch. Several burglaries had happened
in his gated community and witnesses had described the suspect as dark-skinned,
wearing a hoodie. Well lo' and behold who does Zimmerman find wandering
the neighborhood late at night? Bingo! Of course he calls the cops and of
course he has to get out of his vehicle to get the address of where Trayvon is
hanging out. Case closed.
Exactly! This is what everyone is so upset about. Even though both sides
unnecessarily escalated things resulting in a tragic death, the fact remains
that it feels like this all started because a black teen was considered
suspicious despite just walking through a neighborhood carrying a phone and
convenience store items.
Another lesson to learn: Do not buy Skittles at 7-11 and walk home--if you are
black. As Justice Holmes said, "I do not do justice; I enforce
the law. They are not the same thing." The law prevailed, but not justice.
A large number of citizens in America appreciate this opinion piece written by
the Deseret News.It shows a perspective on this situation which many
people, for whatever reasons, tend to overlook.As time goes by, documented
legal facts that are no longer controlled and hidden in the Florida courtroom by
George Zimmerman's attorneys, will be published for the public to study and
explore. America will see the truth about George Zimmerman, a man who has had
numerous negative encounters with law enforcement. And........ a man with
extremely questionable skills in telling the truth.
Deseret News shouldn't have an editorial like this unless its writer has
legal background. First, stand your ground wasn't an issue in the case at
all. Second, no evidence was presented at trial of racial profiling.
Evidence was presented that Mr. Martin was profiled because of attributes of
recent criminals in the neighborhood, but not his race.Third,
(significant) evidence was presented that Mr. Martin committed a felony assault
against Mr. Zimmerman.Fourth, the case was likely won on account of
Florida's unusually high burden of beyond a reasonable doubt placed upon
the prosecution to rebut defense evidence of self defense. If the case had gone
the other way, an appellate court would have been forced to reverse because the
prosecution did not meet this burden. Zimmerman will likely prevail in a suit
against the SA's office as well for this reason.It is
understandable that the Deseretnews wanted to push a politically correct angle
on this. However, it is irresponsible in light of the black-on-hispanic and
white assaults that have occurred as a result of this verdict already.
The Chief Persecutor I mean Prosecutor was indicted by a criminal Grand Jury for
falsifying the Affidavit for the arrest warrant. If there wasn't enough
evidence for an arrest warrant, you are naive to expect a conviction.
DN, I believe this is the first time I've been disappointed in one of your
editorials. This case deserves an honest assessment of the facts not political
correctness.Where is the evidence that Zimmerman
"confronted" Martin rather than just observed him? Where is the
evidence he was guilty of "poor judgment"? Zimmerman thought Martin
looked and acted suspiciously and that was probably a reasonable conclusion
under the circumstances. It's reasonable to observe someone and/or call
the cops if you believe someone is up to something, especially if you're
part of neighborhood watch program. The only evidence we have is
that Martin started the altercation and pummeled Zimmerman while on top of him
on the sidewalk. Zimmerman endured the beating for 45 seconds, an eternity in
that kind of situation, before using his weapon.
"Lady Justice" wears a blindfold as she holds the scales of justice.
Using race does not serve justice unless race was the factor that caused the
death.Testimony showed that Martin was walking close to houses in an
area that had had criminal activity. Zimmerman was serving on a neighborhood
watch. He was obligated to watch everyone in his neighborhood. He did not
recognize Martin as someone from the neighborhood. Was the "profiling"
generated because Martin was black or was it generated because Martin was
walking somewhere that didn't fit the neighborhood, i.e., he was not using
the sidewalk. Yes, it was raining and some think that Martin was just trying to
stay dry. We'll never know.Where is the outrage when Zimmerman
has been called a "white Latino"? If the race of Martin should have
played no part, then why is it appropriate to use Zimmerman's race, and
then to call him a "white Latino"?Zimmerman was found not
guilty. Everyone involved will live with the memory of that night. Martin
cannot be brought back. Martin was a human being. Zimmerman is a human being.
Leave race out of it.
1) Mob rule is bad; cool, calm, judicial review is good.2) Better to let
one guilty man free, than to convict an innocent man.3) Facts, evidence
and proper procedure make a case, not hysterical shouting and rioting!and
finally4) Vote the lazy, ineffective politicians out of office, and get
some one who will write and pass good laws in the seat of Government.Thank
What is really a shame is that this trial was so biasedly presented to the
public by the media. From the onset Martin was portrayed as an innocent child.
Only pre and early teen photos were shown depicting him as an innocent.
Eventually one photo showing a darker side surfaced but it was quickly pushed
under the rug. Heaven forbid that anyone would dare make him out to be the
instigator. Whether or not he was an innocent I don't know and to be
factual neither do the rest of us. It was a shame that a young man died. It is
always a shame when violence leads to someone death.With one mother saying
that was her son's voice on that recording and the other saying no it was
her son's. Witnesses such that they were could only say what they think
they saw.Only two people know what happened. One is dead and the other
didn't testify.Get over it America. If you really want to protest
protest an injustice, protest the incessant gang violence that takes many more
innocents from us without even a whimper from the media.
" I'd be sadly disappointed in them if they did not follow people who
acted suspiciously"Ah yes.... walking through his "own"
neighborhood while being black.... very suspicious. Heaven forbid. Perhaps he
should have been wearing a sign saying "I live here - not casing the
place".I think Martin does have responsibility if he was walking
around acting all "gangster"... just like if white kids were walking
around looking all red-knecked. The thing most people in prison have in common
is not the color of their skin, but their economic status and education level.
That factor crosses all ethnic boundaries.But yes, people will be
suspicious of people wearing baggy cloths, or "wife beaters" and lots of
tattoos, or skin headed and wearing mostly black. It is a fact of life. And
our kids need to know what it means when they emulate these "styles".But this would have never happened if Zimmerman had followed the
dispatchers direction to not follow. He had done his job, identified what he
thought was suspicious activity. He should have disengaged as instructed.
Martin should not have confronted him... and Zimmerman should not have been
following him. He was told not to.
" In the end there seemed to be plenty of evidence to convict Zimmerman of
poor judgment, but not enough to convict him of a crime."That
statement is what has me puzzled about the outcome of this trial. I know there
has been second guessing across the country about the jury's decision and
the debate will continue for a long time. But as much as my personal feelings
say that justice was not done, the fact is that justice was done. A trial was
held and a jury of his peers decided George Zimmerman was not guilty of the
crimes he was charged with. Just like the OJ Simpson trial, there will be many,
perhaps myself included, who will forever assume the jury got it wrong. But that
is the system we have and it was put into action, just as planned.But considering the quoted statement, even in light of Florida's Stand
Your Ground law, isn't the fact that Zimmerman provoked the incident proof
that he was responsible for the death of Travon Martin? If not second degree
murder, wouldn't manslughter at least be appropriate?
This case has brought to light the trend to use race as a crutch for personal
issues. If people don't get what they want they blame the government,
their parents, race etc. This is a product of our entitlement society. The
reaction to the Zimmerman case is a modern lynch mob. The court of public
gossip didn't like the verdict so they will get him one way or another no
matter if it's right. This is the mob mentality in full force. No federal
charges will be brought against Zimmerman because there is no evidence to
"It is proper to confront attitudes based on skin color that influence
judgment."Do you mean the fact that even though 93% of all
murders of blacks are committed by blacks, a tragedy involving a Hispanic male
and a black male is evidence of white racism because it is convenient to the
narrative of the Obama Department of Justice and Al Sharpton?
I am disappointed in the Deseret News as part of editorial is based on assumed
facts. Where is the evidence that Zimmerman started the altercation? Yes, he
may have followed Martin to see what he was up to, but there is no evidence that
he initiated the contact. Second, the defense did not rely on the stand your
ground law. That law says you do not have a duty to retreat. The defense
asserted that Martin was on top of Zimmerman and had expert witnesses that
supported Zimmerman's claim. It was a straight self defense claim.Yes it is true that that certain ethnic groups are looked at with more
suspition than others. However, statistically these groups also commit more
crime. (Hispanic males are also viewed as potential threats and one could argue
that the assumptions in the editorial are evidence of that). There real story
here is that we should all avoid altercations because they can have tragic
outcomes. The second, lets stop beating the racism drum. While
society needs to overcome its biases, those groups needs to step up and address
the issues which lead to high crime rates.
Stand Your Ground, while discussed by the media had no part in this case (yet).
Unfortunately statistics show that most crime is generated by black young males.
Taken as a whole, including Chicago, where so much so called "black on
black" crime takes place is included in those statistics. 92% of crimes
against blacks is committed by blacks. How is an outsider (ie not black) to
look at those statistics? It only happens in Chicago? Unfortunately again the
question is why do so many young black males feel they need to do crime on any
body, which "sets" people up to be suspicious of black young men? The
poverty answer is incomplete as there are more poor white people in America.
Does the fact that 70% of black children are born to unwed mothers related to
this? Hard questions that are NOT asked because of course you will be called a
racist. But we have people that cannot see the forest because of the trees.
They are "in" the demographic but cannot find a solution but are
unwilling to allow anyone to comment objectively on the problem. Bill Cosby has
commented and has been criticized.
And why are young black men treated with suspicion? Anyone ever seen the
statistics on race based crime? African Americans make up only 14% of the
population but they commit over 50% of the violent crime. This isn't
racist, this is simple fact. From The Color of Crime web site citing FBI
statistics:"Blacks are seven times more likely than people of
other races to commit murder, and eight times more likely to commit
robbery."Is this racist? Facts are facts.
Profiling - racial or not - is a problem... it is part of human nature.
People are "profiled" daily on their race, their religion, their weight,
how they dress, the car they drive, this list goes on and on. Sometimes those
profiles are correct... sometimes not. Regardless, it is a problem that
entangles society as a whole.And while victim in this case surely
didn't deserve the "profiling" he received, he is also partially
responsible for creating the environment he found himself. I tell my own kids
that how they present themselves is their responsibility, and that they have to
take some ownership on the message they send to other people about who they
are.For example, my boys have had to wear collared shirts to school
- no t-shirts - because I want them to show the teachers they respect the
environment they are in. They are not a school to play, but to learn. How we
present ourselves tells people what we want them to know about us.My
oldest loves to wear hoodies... but he is white... and it doesn't carry the
stigma with it does if my less complexionly challenged child did... which is not
There was no evidence presented at trial that Zimmerman started any altercation.
The altercation began when Martin punched Zimmerman in the nose. Frankly if my
neighborhood had neighborhood watch volunteers I'd be sadly disappointed
in them if they did not follow people who acted suspiciously--i.e. looking
around as if they were casing the joint.
There is no evidence that Zimmerman "confronted" Martin. It is also
not illegal for a neighborhood watch volunteer to profile someone who fits the
description of the people who had burglarized the neighborhood.