Defense in Trayvon Martin Case Raises Questions About the Victim’s Character

[Purveyor]

MIAMI — Intending to draw a fuller, perhaps more negative portrait of Trayvon Martin, the unarmed teenager who was shot and killed by George Zimmerman in early 2012, a lawyer for Mr. Zimmerman released new material on Thursday that depicted Mr. Martin as troubled at school and enamored of a “gangsta” culture.

In a series of text messages from November 2011 to February 2012, Mr. Martin wrote that he had been suspended from school for cutting classes. In the messages, he said his mother had “kicked” him out of the house and told him to move in with his father. In one message, Mr. Martin described himself as “gangsta.” Other text messages refer to his involvement in fights and reveal an interest in guns, including an exchange about possibly buying one, referring to it as a .380.

Earlier, in a separate text, he asked whether a friend had a gun.

“U gotta gun?” he asked the friend on Feb. 18, 2012. His friend replied, “It my mommy but she buy for me.”

“She let u hold it?” Mr. Martin asked. “Yea,” the friend replied. “But she keep it,” Mr. Martin said. “Yea,” the friend texted back.

MORE...

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/24/us/zimmermans-lawyers-release-text-messages-of-trayvon-martin.html?_r=0

[still_one]

1. First why is that admissible?

[freshwest]

4. IDK. Because it may be a death penalty case? IMO, Zim belonged in his car. EOM.

[still_one]

8. The question is was he threatening zim or was zim threatening him

Anything he did outside of those events is not relevant. It is the argument if a call girl gets raped does the fact that she is a call girl have a bearing on the rape? No

[newmember]

23. Rape shield law is different

People past arrests and their character can be admitted in certain instances and are done so everyday
in our criminal court system.

[treestar]

32. Agree, it is not

Prior bad acts and character are not admissible.

The right has been trying to make this about Trayvon's character or even what he looks like in photos all along.

[jberryhill]

70. Ummm.....

Prior bad acts are not admissible as evidence that the *accused* acted in conformity therewith, with a few exceptions such as motive, common plan, or whatnot.

But Trayvon Martin is not accused or on trial.

In other words, prior bad act evidence is prejudicial to the defendant.

But that's not a rule which applies here. Since Martin is not a defendant, there is no reasoning by which the state could bar it on grounds that it "might help the defendant be found not guilty". That's part of the Constitutional package of rights we have in criminal proceedings.

[WinkyDink]

46. It won't be.

[niyad]

2. second, why was the defense given access to martin's cell phone records?

[freshwest]

5. Don't they have to do that in discovery? The cell phone record is part of the prosecution's case.

There was the phone call to his girlfriend that said he was afraid of some strange guy following him down the street.

My position, as always, Zim should have stayed in his truck, car, SUV, whatever. None of this would have happened if Zim hadn't decided to play cop. He had no authority to detain TM.

That's where the case ends for me, anyway, all the rest is just muddying the issue. Stay in your vehicle, especially when the police dispatch tells you to do so. Problem solved, lives saved. JMHO.

[davidn3600]

6. Prosecution can't withold evidence that could assist the defense

And they have to hand over any evidence they plan to use at trial.

[niyad]

16. I can see the phone records from the night of the murder--but NOT from months prior to that.

tell me why the prosecution would be introducing those months-ago calls.

[jberryhill]

102. We have this stupid rule....

We have this dumb rule in criminal trials where we provide the defense with the ability to require production of all kinds of evidence, to actually force people to show up and testify, and all kinds of things like that.

It's almost as if the entire system is biased against being able to lock people up.

[MotherPetrie]

3. Totally fucking irrelevant

[lunasun]

7. Mr. Martin, who had no criminal record...........

[curlyred]

9. Golly gee whiz! Then what is all the fuss about?

This makes everything just peachy, doesn't it?

[newmember]

10. Bad If it shows his intention of buying an illegal weapon

[Iggo]

12. How is that bad?

[newmember]

13. Its bad for anybody to be found out doing this.

This is acceptable behavior to you?

[Iggo]

14. I meant for the case...

...which is what I thought you were talking about.

My mistake.

[newmember]

15. It's irrelevant to the case

[Iggo]

33. Exactly.

And by the way, nothing's bad for Trayvon Martin anymore. He's dead now. That's kind of the whole point.

[JustAnotherGen]

39. Thanks iggo

Trayvon Martin will not be testifying at the trial of his murdered. Yeah - I'm in NJ and won't be on the jury - so I'm going with the word murdered. Nothing alleged about it.

[Rex]

96. Kewl story bro!

nt.

[Buzz Clik]

128. He was not carrying an illegal weapon. Irrelevant. Totally.

[Demo_Chris]

11. I doubt any of this will be admissable but I am no expert

It seems completely irrelevant to me, but I can understand why the defense wants this garbage out there.

[Pelican]

18. Defense will claim...

... that it goes to the character of Martin.

They will claim that it shows that he had tendencies towards violence, ie the gun and the fighting, and that it lends credence to the claim that Martin attacked Zimmerman.

Admissible? I don't know... He may just be muddying the jury pool waters.

[Demo_Chris]

20. Yeah, I don't know how admissable any of that is....

But I really don't know anything about it. I think they are trying to:

A) Keep the right wing money flowing towards the Zimmerman defense fund. The guy is a damn hero to some of them, but that only works so long as Trayvon is seen as a black thug rather than an innocent victim.

B) It probably has some impact on the Jury pool, but Limbaugh and Hannity have done their best to mess that up already.

I have followed this case religiously and meticulously, probably more than I should, and I really want to see Zimmerman convicted.

[newmember]

19. It's going to depend on the judge and what the prosecution has admitted

as character reference on Zimmerman.
If they tried to paint him as a vigilante type character then the judge might allow
the past character of Martin admissible as evidence.

[Demo_Chris]

21. If so, then one hopes Zimmerman's past is also admitted. If so he's finished. nt

[newmember]

22. I don't know about that , he wasn't convicted of domestic violence

It was a claim she made and also a claim he made against her.

Both petitions were granted against each other and have expired.

As for pushing the police officer in a bar when he was 20 ?
And convicted of speeding...

I don't think any of that will matter .

[Demo_Chris]

25. He was also terminated from a job for assault

In any case, what would convictions matter? Trayvon has no convictions either, and none of these things are relevant to this case.

[newmember]

26. I agree , the only thing that matters is what happened those few minutes

[newmember]

28. What I wanted to ask you is are you convinced

that Zimmerman was the first to physically assault Martin?
or the other way around?

[JustAnotherGen]

41. Having been stalked

In a methodical manner over several years . . . Having grabbed a paring knife *hides head in shame* because the wolf was at the door . . .

If I was on that jury - it wouldn't matter.

Self-Defense.

But - that said. I have zero faith in the goodwill of America towards black men.

Point blank - my brother, my nephews, my uncles, my father who is now dead - They aren't 'allowed' to defend themselves in America. Everyone knows the short, stocky, white guy was threatened just being in the presence of a black male teenager.

Regardless of whether or not he got out of his truck, followed Trayvon, and Trayvon cold cocked him to stun him and get away - it doesn't matter . . . in America.

[uppityperson]

43. Zimmerman stalked Trayvon. Why should Zimmy get to defend himself, yet Trayvon not?

[newmember]

44. Self defense is protected and allowed in every state

You will disagree but in my opinion which is what everyone is using in this case.

No matter how angry you become at someone you don't have the right to start
physical confrontation.

Just because you're angry....

Martin was angry being asked what he was doing there.
He had a history of fighting in school , his mother couldn't handle him anymore(her own words not mine)

This has nothing to do with stand your ground . It has to do with self defense

Is it within reason that Zimmerman felt he was going to be seriously injured or worse
when he was being hit with Martin on top of him at 3:00 am in the morning .

The case that Zimmerman was the attacker will fall apart during trial . Martin was the first who attacked.

You are convinced Zimmerman is the devil in this and nothing I or a trial says will change your mind.

I already know that.

[Cal Carpenter]

48. This did not happen "at 3:00 am in the morning"

It happened in the evening. At around 7:15pm.

It seems like the picture you are trying to paint of this event is not based in the facts at all, even on the most basic, known details.

[newmember]

49. Thank you for the correction , it's been a while since I followed this but

whether it was 3am ,3 pm , 6 am the details are the same when it comes to self defense
and who was the first to commit assault.

You want to believe was Zimmerman maybe.

it wasn't..........

[uppityperson]

50. Wow, I didn't realize we had a witness as a DU member. Cool!

[newmember]

54. Like I said you are convinced Zimmerman is guilty of racism and murder

Nothing will change your mind on this , even if he is found not guilty of all charges.

You will say he was guilty. I'm correct right?

It's not always racism ...all the time
sometimes juries get it right

[uppityperson]

55. I am amazed you didn't tell us before now that you were an eye witness. Too modest perhaps?

[newmember]

56. search it your self

You will find

[uppityperson]

58. Claims made without supporting links = nonsense. eom

[niyad]

131. you are conveniently overlooking a tiny little fact. zimmerman was told by the police dispatcher to

go back to his vehicle and leave the teenager alone. after that, whatever happened was the direct result of that armed vigilante deliberately going after martin. you can dress it up in all the reichwing talking points you want, but that is the salient fact.

but you go right on acting as though you were a witness, and that everything we learned about zimmerman and his actions that night are totally irrelevant. are you certain you have the correct board?

[newmember]

136. Do you have a link to prove Zimmerman continued following Martin after

the dispatcher told him not to?

Please present your proof

[niyad]

137. right after you present your proof for all your assertions, which you have not done. but you

go right on defending this murderer. we all know what is going on, contrary to your reichwing talking points.

[newmember]

138. So you don't have one...gotcha

just made it up

[niyad]

140. oh, sweetie, you have to try a lot harder than that. as I said, as soon as YOU produce links

to all the claims you have made, as people have asked you to do. we all know your game.

[newmember]

141. already did sweetie

now your turn

Just admit you got nothing.

[newmember]

51. Also the very first wittiness that came forward on this was a african american male child

8 or 9 years old ,,,that the media found the very next morning. He stated he saw the white guy on the ground
face up being hit by the other guy.

After it became a media circus by calling racism , having Sharpton involved his mother had him change his statement.

and I'm not searching for a link on this , anyone that watched this unfold the first few days knows this.

[uppityperson]

57. You claim "wittiness" but don't give links, just rely on your memory. Did you know that eyewitnesses

are notoriously easy to lead and mislead, depending on how you talk to them and question them? As an EyeWitness(tm), you should know that.

I am not calling it racism and many here are not but we ARE calling it murder. Which it is.

You continue to claim "it isn't racism" which I don't see people particularly arguing for. I wonder why an EyeWitness(tm) would continue to argue against something that people aren't claiming yet miss the larger point that Zimmy stalked and murdered Trayvon. Whether Trayvon felt endangered enough to defend himself is another point, but still not racism.

[newmember]

71. Are you kidding me , this whole thing is about racism

Starting with the media circus and Sharpton conducting marches.

The kid changed his testimony after Sharpton got with his mother.

you want a link to that also...


gimme break , at least be honest about it.

You asked for links I gave them to you

[uppityperson]

72. You gave me no links. I will go search and see if you gave them to someone else. Yup.

[Hoyt]

59. Do you have a link to any of that?

[newmember]

62. I don't

I'm sure it could be found if someone wanted to spend the time.

It was before the cable news stations descended on the case like vultures, before Sharpton and before racism was called, it was local media and
the reporter said it exactly like I posted it. They didn't show the interview of the child
just what the reporter said. If he is a witness in the trial he has changed his testimony.

Anyone that lives there and watched the local news that day knows what I posted.

It might be the 13 year old one called as a witness now.

What he said then and what he said after are completely different.

If that is the child the reporter was referring too

[Hoyt]

63. Most folks know Zimmerman grabbed his gun and stalked Martin. Are you sure

you didn't read your assertion on Free Republic, Stormfront, or worse? Anyway, you should produce your source.

BTW, without Rev Sharpton and a few others, Zimmerman would never have been charged. The bigots and gun nuts in the area probably would have made Zimmerman a hero.

[newmember]

64. Read this

In addition, an eyewitness, 13-year-old Austin Brown, told police he saw a man fitting Zimmerman's description lying on the grass moaning and crying for help just seconds before he heard the gunshot that killed Martin

http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin-shooter-teenager-gun/story?id=16000239#.UaAzxknD-M8






Both Austin and his mother are adamant that the teen could not see who was screaming, but they believe now that it was Martin


Now by his mothers coaxing it has changed



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/17/trayvon-martin-killing-yo_n_1355795.html


So far this is Two eye witnesses that said the same thing......except now one changes his testimony


funny that

[uppityperson]

73. Hahahaha. You are claiming all sorts of contradictory things. Funny, that.

You say "He stated he saw the white guy on the ground face up being hit by the other guy. "

Your first link says" he saw a man fitting Zimmerman's description lying on the grass moaning and crying for help just seconds before he heard the gunshot that killed Martin"

Your second link says " It also includes the way she says that the police and some media have twisted his account of the night to fit a self-defense theory, to say that a 13-year-old witness has claimed Zimmerman, and not Martin, was screaming for help. Both Austin and his mother are adamant that the teen could not see who was screaming, but they believe now that it was Martin.

Brown said in hindsight she feels the police investigator on the case attempted to lead her son to provide information that he didn't have. The investigator, she said, would nod yes when asking if it was the man in the T-shirt, who turned out to be Zimmerman, and not the one in the hooded sweatshirt, Martin, who was screaming out for help"


Since his mother wasn't an EyeWitness(tm), who is " Two eye witnesses that said the same thing"? the 13 yr old and...the 13 yr old?

Good grief.

[newmember]

75. I said he said that to the reporter , which he did

That is what the local reporter , he said that's what the child told him .

What you are reading now is the testimony he gave police.

NO and No that's what the mother claimed after Sharpton got down there.

She did not dispute her sons claim at first.

[uppityperson]

76. So the 13 yr old is your "Two eye witnesses that said the same thing". OK

It's what the child told the reporter, is the testimony he gave the police, NO and No that's what the mother claimed.

Oh....kay.... Stepping away from the keyboard slowly.

[newmember]

77. And you know what her hind sight was???? Al Sharpton

Brown said in hindsight she feels the police investigator on the case attempted to lead her son to provide information that he didn't have



funny that...........

[uppityperson]

78. Holy crap! I didn't know Al Sharpton was a police investigator too. Cool! Thanks for the information

[newmember]

80. why don't you admit I'm right and you were wrong on this

[uppityperson]

81. Link to Al Sharpton being a police investigator is needed otherwise, again, it is just words.

[newmember]

83. Like I said you know I'm right

[uppityperson]

84. I've met Al and never knew he was a police investigator. Your claim is the only one I've ever read

and since you don't have a link, it isn't very believable. It is easy to claim things on the internet.

[newmember]

65. Ii don't have a problem that he was charged . my problem is let the facts convict or acquit

Not the media circus or people calling racism

And I'm a little surprised that you stoop to that level with me saying I read stormfront

[uppityperson]

74. Your "facts"?

[newmember]

79. Not mine ....they are what they are

[uppityperson]

82. the 13 yr old is "Two eye witnesses that said the same thing" and that's a Fact(tm)?

Backing away slowly

[newmember]

85. We went through this in another thread

There is another eye witness stating exactly what the 13 year old said .







I mean before Sharpton and his crew got with the boys mother and some how the testimony miraculously

it changed .......


anyways you have a good night . and you know I'm right , so just say it...it won't hurt you ..I promise

[reusrename]

113. If it's not racism, what is your explanation for Zimmerman following Martin?

Do you think he confronts EVERYONE that walks through the neighborhood?

[uppityperson]

52. That is a lot of assumptions there. Is it within reason that Trayvon felt he was going to be seriou

seriously injured or worse when he was stalked by Zimmy that evening? Zimmy, who has a history of domestic violence and assaulting a police officer and resisting arrest? You are convinced Trayvon is the devil in this and nothing I or a trial says will change your mind.

[Blue_Tires]

133. It's clear you have zero fucking idea

On the concept of racial profiling...

I know you just like being cutesy-cutesy and stir shit up, but this case is actually serious for some of us...

Just out of curiosity, how many accounts have you burned through while playing this game?

[morningfog]

24. But it is irrelevant to Zimmerman's vigilantism.

And to the events of the night Zimmy killed Martin. I don't see it coming in. This is just to taint the jury pool ahead of the trial.

[WinkyDink]

47. Never going to happen.

[muntrv]

17. Translation: HE'S BLACK!!!

[backscatter712]

116. This. N/t

[MADem]

27. The victim's 'character' is 'deceased.' And Justin Frigging Beiber is "enamoured of the gangsta

culture" and that doesn't stop mothers from taking their tween girls to his concerts.

What a craven defense--'blame the victim' is never cool, and it's just tone deaf when the defendant MURDERED the victim in cold blood.

[Incitatus]

29. I question the character of someone who roams his neighborhood day and night with a gun

following around black kids.

[freshwest]

66. +1. And has a record of violent behavior a mile long.

[hollysmom]

30. Apparently people don't understand teens and bravado once again.

I swear, I don't have children but have been around enough of them to know how they talk and kid around.

[defacto7]

31. Sometimes teens go through a dark period

where they are just trying to find where they fit. They try a couple of stupid things and say a few stupid things to test the ground. It's part of growing up and is played out in a lot of different ways.

The information given is immaterial. What a person expects may be someones future, has no bearing on the facts. What he was going through, what he has said... means nothing. Immaterial. There are no acts that show he was being anything other than a typical 17 year old in our time.

The other thing is that he isn't there to defend those well chosen moments in media. He's dead. Why? Because of the facts. A thug challenged him with a "real" weapon for no reason or purpose than to be a control freak and a bigot, making assumptions that were completely non-fact and acting on those neurotic impulses to be the savior of the community from a threat that only existed in his warped mind.

Zim is guilty as charged.

[freshwest]

68. Agreed. All of this could have been avoided if Z had stood his ground inside his truck.

Everything after that, particularly after police told him to not go and confront TM, shows Z was not acting to protect himself from the beginnning. He was looking for trouble and killed a man who resisted being mugged. Few people would accept a stranger following and then accosting them in the night was up to any good. He's guilty.

[HappyMe]

34. I think the defense is just

putting this out there to destroy Trayvon Martin. Ramp up the prejudice and start up a 'poor attacked George' campaign.

From what I heard on Rev. Sharpton's show last night, none of this crap is admissable in court. Zimmerman's defense has asked for a 6 week delay in the start of the trial.

[cali]

35. character assasination. that's all the defense has and they know it.

[HappyMe]

37. Exactly.

They got nothin'.

[Nine]

36. So now being interested in guns is bad?

I wonder why the same people who seem enamored of guns in other contexts are now horrified by the idea of someone showing an interest in guns?

There must be some reason but what could it possibly be? I wonder... I wonder...

[ZombieHorde]

53. Interesting point. nt

[Capt. Obvious]

38. Next, the defense will enter his race into the record

[uponit7771]

89. +1

[malaise]

40. George Zimmerman murdered an unarmed Trayvon Martin

in cold effin' blood. Spin away - it's irrelevant.

[Hoyt]

61. I agree. Problem is that Zimmerman only has to convince one bigot/gun nut on jury.

I think the jury will include at least racist gun nut, and the murderer will eventually walk.

[malaise]

87. And that's all this is about

[NCTraveler]

42. I have never said Trayvon was a good person.

From what is known, I doubt he was. There are periods in most of our lives where we weren't the best person. It is often when we are around his age. I had the opportunity to grow up and change, he did not.

What I have said is that he was murdered.

[sarisataka]

45. Not surprising

a fairly typical defense tactic.

By the same logic, Zimmerman's arrest history should also be admissible in court

[Starry Messenger]

60. So Zimmerman is trying to show that Trayvon was a teenager?

This is going to backfire on Zim. It's disgusting that he is using "he needed killing" about a young man he stalked when he was told not to by 911.

[freshwest]

69. Yup, the ol' 'he needed killing' defense. Doesn't work as well as it once did. Hope it won't work.

[Warpy]

67. Martin is not on trial. Zimmerman is.

I hope they draw a smart judge who throws this stuff out.

Zimmerman became just one more murderous punk with a gun the second he stepped out of his truck against the direct order from the police dispatcher.

[dkf]

86. The point of this release isn't to smear Martin's character but to paint a picture of a person who

was used to fighting and was punching Zimmerman from on top (evidence shows grass stains on the knees of Martin's pants which would suggest he wasn't the person on the bottom screaming for help).

This is all to further Zimmerman's self defense argument.

Here is a good summary of the materials from talkleft.

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2013/5/23/174547/402/crimenews/New-George-Zimmerman-Discovery-Trayvon-Liked-Guns-Fights-and-Pot

[uponit7771]

91. Then let ZMan submit his voice for anaylsis and case closed, no one's goin to argue that the

...calls for help were horrific and from the pit of a horror story.

If it was Zman let him submit his voice and get out of jail yesterday.

How is being interested in guns pointing towards someone who's used to fighting?

There are plenty of people who are interested in guns who've never thrown a punch

Regards

[dkf]

100. I'm sure they will.

This is going to be really tough for the parents. I have a feeling even they didn't know exactly what was going on in Trayvon's life, but it sounds like they knew there were issues.

[uppityperson]

105. marks on knees that "look like grass stains" which of course the ONLY way a teen boy could get those

would be kneeing on someone while beating him, right?

Stains of some sort on the knee of pants prove nothing.

[dkf]

107. But it's a plausible explanation.

If grass stains were also found on the knees of Zimmerman's pants then it would be less of a factor in explaining who was punching and who was screaming.

Add this to the autopsy which reportedly shows wounds on Trayvon's knuckles and George Zimmerman's broken nose.

What is the forensic evidence showing Trayvon was the one on the bottom?

[uppityperson]

109. I would expect a LOT more stains from someone kneeling in the grass over a struggling person.

A couple small "may be grass stains" of unknown etiology or chronology could be from pretty much anything, any time and don't prove anything. I do not know how a stain on the knee of a pair of pants prove who was screaming. Tell me how? How do they tell who was punching? All they tell me is at some time Trayvon rubbed his knee on something, or something on his knee.

I have stains on the knees of my pants. What does that prove about me?

The stains are minimal. The stains may or may not be grass. The stains have no date or location attached to them. Trayvon ended up face down dead so he could have gotten them when he fell/was rolled over.

[dkf]

111. But you would admit if one person has grass stains on their knees and the other has none....

A person could reasonably conclude the person with grass stains was on the top?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

88. Given that Zimmerman's defence is that Martin attacked him, this seems entirely relevant. N.T.

[uponit7771]

90. how? tia

[Donald Ian Rankin]

92. Because the plausibility of that defence partially depends on Martin's character.

The jury will have do decide whether they are certain beyond reasonable doubt that he did not attack Zimmerman.

On edit: actually, I may be wrong about that - I'm not sure if the burden of prove for "I did it, but it was self defence" is the same as for "I didn't do it"; I think it some jurisdictions it may not be.

[Hoyt]

93. It works both ways. When Zimmerman stuck his gun in his pants and went after a Black teen,

Zimmerman's character was exposed.

Personally, I hope Trayvon managed to punch that worthless gun wielding, police wannabe at least once before being murdered.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

97. Do you think that should be concealed from the jury?

Personally, I don't have anything like your certainty about what happened. I hope that Zimmerman is convicted if it was he that attacked Martin, and acquitted if it was the other way round, and I don't think either scenario is very unlikely.

If I were *on the jury*, I'd almost certainly vote to acquit unless a lot more evidence than I'm currently aware of were made available, not because I think Zimmerman is innocent but because I'm not certain beyond reasonable doubt that he isn't. But, thankfully, that's not a decision I'll have to make.

More generally, I think I'd have no choice but to vote to acquit *anyone* accused of murder who claimed self-defence, unless there were forensic, witness or other evidence to the contrary of sufficient strength to prove beyond reasonable doubt that they were lying. This worries me, because I don't think it would be that hard to murder someone in such a way that there was no way of proving that beyond reasonable doubt, but I'd rather have murderers walking free than innocent people going to gaol.

[Hoyt]

104. I suspect one or more bigoted folks steeped in guns will be on jury.

I think we've had enough innocent Black kids killed by bigots with guns to last one lifetime. Unfortunately
bigoted gun owners are a significant portion of population in that area.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

106. I think the reverse is also a serious worry, possibly more so.

I've seen an awful lot of people whose assessment of whether or not the evidence proves beyond reasonable doubt that Mr Zimmerman is guilty of murder is biased because of their disapproval of his views.

I think people prejudging him as guilty is probably more of a danger than people prejudging him as not guilty.

[Hoyt]

108. I think Zimmerman did the prejudging, then executed an UNARMED teenager.

That's all I need to know. Your support for Zimmerman is noted.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

114. By "support" do you mean "lack of certainty that he is guilty"?

I'm afraid I think you're probably an example of what I'm talking about - can you honestly say that you arrived at the opinion that it is beyond reasonable doubt that Zimmerman was not acting in self defence from an unprejudiced assessment of the evidence, and not influenced by your contempt for him?

[uppityperson]

122. MY contempt for him comes from my certainty he was not acting in self defense, based on evidence.

You have it backwards. I hold him in contempt for what the evidence shows.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

123. What makes you so certain?

I don't know of any reason to be confident that Martin didn't attack him, but I haven't read about the case in that much detail.

[uppityperson]

110. He shot and killed Trayvon. He followed him, shot and killed him. He is guilty of that.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

112. That is neither in dispute, nor in itself grounds for a conviction.

What is disputed, and what a jury will have to rule on, is whether or not Martin attacked him before being shot.

[Hoyt]

115. If he did, it was self-defense on Martin's part. I hope he kicked the murdering gun wielding bigot.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

118. Absolutely not - being followed is not an excuse for physical assault.

Following people around is, quite rightly, legal. Physically assaulting people is, quite rightly, not, and if someone is physically assaulting you it's reasonable to use legal force to stop them, especially if you can't get away.

If Martin did assault Zimmerman, then Zimmerman deserves to walk.

Whether he did or not, I don't know.

I haven't seen enough evidence to convince me beyond reasonable doubt that he didn't, and I doubt if you have, either.

[Hoyt]

119. Nope. Stuffing a gun in your pants and taking off after an unarmed teen

just because he's black and looks "suspicious" allows Martin to legally defend himself. If Zimmerman got punched, he deserved it.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

120. Desert is irrelevant to the law, and it scares me that you think it is.

The question a jury needs to consider is not "does Zimmerman deserve to go to jail", it's "is Zimmerman legally guilty of the crime of murder".

"Being a bad person" is not a criminal offence.

Those are two completely different questions.

I think there is a risk that jurors will substitute the answer to the first for the answer to the second - as, it seems, you are doing.


On edit: I'm also fairly sure your description of the law is based on what you'd like it to be, rather than on what it actually is. I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty certain that being followed by a man in possession of a gun does not give you a legal right to attack them, and in fact almost certainly isn't even a mitigating circumstance. Certainly, it shouldn't be.

[uppityperson]

125. I do not think there are many deserts in Florida and not sure why you bring one up.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

126. Right, it's getting too late for me (it's nearly midnight here). I'll check back in the morning.

[Hoyt]

134. The jury can look at this as bigots, or as citizens who don't tolerate

intimidating "suspicious" looking unarmed teenagers. I hope it is the latter.

[dkf]

101. I wouldn't call a propensity to fight a "character issue" necessarily.

But it shows a propensity to react in certain ways. The thing is it sounds like he had recently been involved in 2 fights and was talking about 3 rounds. Is that normal when recounting a fight or was this organized with actual timed rounds?

I have a feeling if they know who Trayvon was fighting with that person just may be called to the stand.

[tavernier]

94. It's irrelevant to the case legally

But a courtroom isn't always the arena of public opinion. When the crime first occurred we were vacationing in the area and the whole buzz in town was about Martin and how the media was trying to portray him as an angel and Zimmerman as the devil. The local news showed recent photos of Martin looking nothing like the pic of the young boy in the hoodie that was shown nightly on the national news.

I posted a thread about this back then because I thought the mood of the public in his community was an interesting factor and could play a role in the court proceedings . Wow, did I screw up! The responses were angry and viscious; I don't think they openly called me a racist but certainly I was a card carrying member of the KKK.

I was pretty certain back then that these questions would be raised. There are two communities involved here and both fiercely feel that they are in the right. This is the only point I was trying to make, then and now.

[Moses2SandyKoufax]

99. No, it's not a two equal sides scenario.

It's an example of the fact that in certain areas of the country black lives are cheap. What happened that night was nothing more than a modern day lynching.

Zimmerman is receiving support from the same sorry ass segment of society that, during the Jim Crow days, treated a public lynching as a social gathering. If this piece of garbage murdered a white 17 year old do you honestly think that he would be receiving the same support from one half of these "two communities"?

If he stalked and shot a white kid, his "brown" ass would be on death row!

[dkf]

103. Not if it shows a pattern of behavior that Trayvon was getting into fights recently

That would fit into Zimmerman's narrative.

The Martin family's attorney along with his friends and acquaintances painted him as a young boy who would have not started a fight, who was overwhelmed by Zimmerman and screaming for his life when he was shot in cold blood.

A new image of an aggressive young adult who would seek out confrontations with people who he felt wronged him would contradict that.

[Rex]

95. SO guns are scary and dangerous, UNLESS

it is a certain person holding said gun? Everytime Team Zim does something like this, I hope his jailtime is extended. Some people REALLY belong in jail and that is Zim. I hope the judge throws the book at him.

[shawn703]

121. I fail to see the strategy here

The kid didn't have a gun when he was shot to death.

By pointing to stuff like him calling himself "gangsta" (ooh scary stuff ) the defense is making it look like they're trying to profile Trayvon based on racial stereotypes exactly the way the prosecution is claiming happened the night he was killed.

Does Zimmerman's defense team have any clue how bad this makes their side look?

[Buzz Clik]

127. Oh, shit. I love lawyers -- not!

This is the same bullshit as the victim of a rape -- "yeah, but she was a slut. She deserved it."

[Blue_Tires]

130. Jesus fucking christ...

Unarmed innocent teenager walking from a convenience store gets profiled as a dangerous criminal, then shot....

Instead of dignity in death or hopes for swift justice, his family gets to see his reputation continually smeared in the national media...

[Moses2SandyKoufax]

132. If it were a white teenager would it matter?

Would so many people be willing to dig into a white kid's history? Would so many people be willing to smear a white kid's reputation? A fucking 17 year old black kid, who smoked a little dope is more threatening to a large number of people than a gun-toting 28 year old who can't hold down a job, and has a history of violence and racism?

This whole thing makes me sick. Absolutely sick to my stomach. Anybody defending Zimmerman on this message board should be banned ASAP.

[Hoyt]

135. Exactly.

[madokie]

139. He still murdered an innocent person in cold blood

no getting out of that. I don't think that the murderer has a leg to stand on, so to speak, in this case so they'll throw any and all things they can come up with hoping something sticks.
Zimmerman is a murderer, plain and simple.