General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMy State of Florida vs Zimmerman Prediction ...
From my (admittedly brief and sketchy) following of the evidence presented, I predict that Zimmerman will be found not guilty of the 2nd Degree Murder charge (the reckless disregard for human life standard might be to high a hurdle); but he will be found guilty of the lesser, included charge of manslaughter ... but that will turn on the jury instructions.
I, also, predict that whatever the jury returns, the losing party will appeal ... from what I've gathered, the judge is doing a good job; but is providing plenty of grounds for either side to appeal.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)
ZombieHorde
(29,047 posts)1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)this case means so much more than what can be put in on evidence, e.g., racial frustration (on the part of Black folks ... read: another instance of justice avoided, racial fear (on the part of some white folks that fear the others), etc.
A guilty verdict will confirm white fear that they are being over run by lawless others; a not guilty verdict will confirm Black fear that there is no justice ... But neither sentiment will be based on the evidence presented at trial.
Captain Stern
(2,253 posts)The outcome of this case shouldn't confirm anyone's fears, black or white. It's one case, with one victim, and one defendant.
A 'guilty verdict' won't mean that racism is dead, and a 'not guilty' verdict won't mean that racism is more prevalent than ever.
In my opinion, a lot of people are making this case into more than it really is.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I couldn't agree more; but as a Black man ... I am, unfortunately, informed by history. Therefore, a guilty verdict (for Black folks) will not mean racism is dead ... just served this time. And a not guilty verdict will just be another confirming fact in American history.
JustAnotherGen
(38,080 posts)
ChiciB1
(15,435 posts)seem to be as bad as it once was, but make no mistake it is NOT dead, nor is very much better in various areas. I, as a white woman have felt that no other race has made less progress over time than the black race!! Asians & Latinos just as a small example are more accepted by far!
AND again, this is Florida! You should live where I do. I don't know if it was done by design, but there are VERY few blacks who live around here. I've said many times here on DU, that this place is a "white bread" community. More so than Sanford!
I have friends who come here from other parts of the US, and more than most do NOTICE how white this place is!
Callmecrazy
(3,070 posts)I'm sitting at my folks house in North Port for the weekend. I visit my grandmother in Venice often and I have cousins in Osprey. There are plenty of Seniors living in the area but I cannot recall seeing or meeting any black folks.
P.S. I was heartbroken when I read about the death of Beggar, the dolphin. He was a great attraction for my visiting friends from Las Vegas. 
My family used to own the Marina there next to Pelican Alley.
ChiciB1
(15,435 posts)my door to you. We bought 5 acres of land in North Port, really want to sell, BUT! So I'm in between Venice & Osprey on the Gulf side. I "like" where I live, a small quiet community but politically I live in the wrong place. Amazingly, just right around me there are more progressive/liberal minded people than most of the rest of this area. Weird, but true. I've lived here a long time and have good friendly neighbors. I'm a Boomer, so I could probably your grandmother too, but not a normal type. I think young, and a little crazy at times. I'm fortunate to have my kids and grand kids living very, very close. We have very good times together.
But you DO know what I'm saying. Very white bread!
And I know where you're talking about. I get upset when I hear about any animal or mammal dying... total MUSH! Very heartbreaking.
Callmecrazy
(3,070 posts)He works in the produce department. Ask for Richard. Mom is soon going to be Managing the Gulf Surf resort on Casey Key near the swing bridge. Small world.
I'm a young boomer too. 47.
ChiciB1
(15,435 posts)Yes, you're a "young" Boomer... I'm probably your parent's age, early 60's. Sweet Bay right down the road.
Small world for sure. Very nice. I think I will ask for Richard, just because.
HipChick
(25,615 posts)They live it - day in - day out
ChiciB1
(15,435 posts)I think we feel the same. I'm positive that many blacks live it day in and day out. Racial profiling is alive a well. My point was that it's the black race that has made less progress than any other race here in America. And they didn't actually ask to come here.
Now, people have argued with me when I say that, giving me the answer that slavery was sooooooo long ago so doesn't apply. Bull Hockey, to put it mildly. And I could go on and on.
I admit that I don't live in an area that I see it often, but my eyes have been very open since I was a child. I'm was an Army brat, so was taught that there was no such thing as color in our family, but that this wasn't true for millions of other people.
Oh my, said I wasn't going to go on and on. But you get the point I hope.
HipChick
(25,615 posts)ChiciB1
(15,435 posts)but a few high profile names come to mind. Michael Steele, Eugene Robinson (won Noble Prize), Corey Booker and while no where near enough, more black elected officials.
When I was in high school, living in Killeen, TX (Ft. Hood) I still recall the civil rights movement. I saw first hand the discrimination that blacks endured. Black & white water fountains, swimming pool denials, poll taxes, refusal by most whites to allow blacks service or even let them enter cafes & restaurants.
History is clear about how blacks were made to "understand" their place in society and one had better NOT dare to speak out or make waves. And at THE VERY LEAST, to understand they were less than 2nd class people. I would say citizens, but I'm not sure there were many who felt they had a right to be called that. Ku Klux Klan activity was rampant, lynchings were still a common occurrence without much outcry. I knew people who felt that all blacks didn't even deserve to mingle or be seen with a white person. The "N" word wasn't the only word used to describe a person of color. I'd rather not mention them myself.
Am I wrong to think that more acceptance and understanding isn't progress? I see very few people who have problems with inter-racial marriage and dating, where once a black person knew they could be hanged and nobody cared.
Where would sports be without black athletes? Where would music be without overwhelming influence from blacks? Do you not feel this is progress and/or acceptance? Maybe you don't. I already stated that even with all these examples that blacks still lag behind other ethnic races, and I think they have been in this country longer than most others.
If you still disagree with me, I suppose my interpretation will always be wrong in your eyes. Under the surface you will always find more racism than many think exist. I've tried to make a certain point, there are those who probably don't agree.
avebury
(11,197 posts)Martin was not a criminal. He did nothing to deserve what he received. Zimmerman is not the guy you want as the poster boy for defending your turf. He is a narcissistic, pathological liar. He told numerous stories that have more holes then Swiss Chess as well as bold face lies.
1. He told Sean Hannity that he didn't know anything about Stand Your Ground, forget about the fact that he receive and A in a class that spent significant time discussing it.
2. He was a cop wannabee whose police application was denied, wanted to do ride alongs and mannerisms that night were like he was a cop.
3. Trayvon hid behind a bush and jumped out to attach Zimmerman. In all the pictures and videos of the complex, I did not see one bush large enough to hide Martin.
4. Trayvon slammed Zimmerman's head on the concrete numerous times (20-30) while Trayvon put his hands over Zimmerman's mouth, grabbed for the gun, and still held onto the skittles. Yes - Martin was an octopus.
5. Recreations conducted with someone playing Martin on top and someone playing Zimmerman on the bottom show that Martin could not have possibly seen the gun nor be able to reach for the gun. With all the things Zimmerman accused Martin of, Zimmerman could not have reached for the gun as well if it were in the holster. It makes you think that Zimmerman might have already had the gun out of the holster when he approached Martin.
6. Zimmerman didn't know the name of the street. Now from what I have heard, there are only 3 streets in the complex, the street he could not name was the main street, and it contains the name of the complex. Also, in the video walk through, there was a clear shot of the building number.
7. The cell phone records support a lot of what Martin's friend Rachel testified to. Yes she is not the most polished, educated witness but she is a kid. I work with young people not that much older then her and recognize that a lot of what people complain about her are related to generational and cultural issues. On the important points, she was consistent in her testimony.
His friends keep trying to tell the public that this is someone everybody would want watching over their neighborhood. I DO NOT THINK SO. In the Hannity interview he is clear that he would not do anything different and what happened was God's will. Most human beings, if forced to kill someone in self defense (even if fully justified) would still have some reaction to that act. There is no reaction what so ever except satisfaction. It is like there is no one home upstairs. If he had not killed Martin that night I have absolutely no doubt what so ever, that he would have killed someone else at some point in time. He was an accident waiting to happen.
For Zimmerman to be acquitted, the jury must first believe his story. An honest jury will not find him believable. An Zimmerman does not have to get on the stand because he has told his story over and over in the numerous interviews that his narcissistic behavior insisted upon.
Edit to add - A rational person, if found in the position of Zimmerman that night, would have known to shut their mouth and get an attorney before talking to the police. This is a guy that you could not shut up. He wanted to be perceived as a hero.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)A not guilty verdict doesn't mean that the jury believed Z; but rather, that the prosecution did not convincingly satisfy the elements required to establish 2nd degree murder.
But as a partisan on this issue, I hope the jury understands their charge as determining whether they believe Z or not ... That cuts towards the Prosecution.
avebury
(11,197 posts)and most certainly for manslaughter. When the Prosecution provided their summary on why a summary judgment of acquittal should not be given they absolutely blew Zimmerman out of the water. It gave you a good idea of their closing argument. What I think will be in the Prosecution's favor is their ability to clearly, concisely yet thoroughly outline the pertinent facts of the case while pointing out the lies and flaws in Zimmerman's numerous stories. They have the ability to engage the people in the courtroom and suck you in will 100% attention. The Defense can't even hold a candle in presentation style. They whine and meander and do not hold your attention.
I have closely watched this trial and, while I know that the defense's job is to try to tear apart prosecution witnesses and evidence they have not learned the lesson of diminishing returns. They don't know how to make their point and then move on. I hope that there is at least one analytical thinker on the jury. I am an analytical thinker and the more I look at or hear the evidence, the more the attorneys talk I do reach the wait a minute moment where I can start to pull bits and pieces together and tear apart the defense attorney's argument.
If you watch or listen to Zimmerman's numerous interviews I just don't think that the Defense team can get around all of Zimmerman's lies and fairy tales. I think that the interviews go a long way to giving the Prosecution what they need for a conviction.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)We will see.
When I practiced, the Defense, as a matter of course, move for aquital at the close of the State's case, not expecting a favorable ruling; but rather as a strategic move to get a peek at the State's closing. Z's defense now has a team of attorneys and consultants pulling together focus groups to prepare a response.
Our system of "justice" is not about justice, it's about winning.
handmade34
(24,027 posts)I still see this case as much bigger than Zimmerman and Trayvon...
this is one of those very important times that our country and many people really NEED to see JUSTICE and not just a "Win'
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)But sadly, for the attorneys in this matter, it is merely a job ... a job where you future is built on your wins and loses ... the realization of which led to my decision to stop the practice of law.
premium
(3,731 posts)defense an prosecutor alike.
Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)zimmerman was ashen
so was o'mara, and when he came back
he went on and on in such a whiny voice.
They've got nothing. The case for self-defense
is looking more and more absurd.
I was convinced they couldn't convict for
2nd degree until yesterday watching the
Prosecution, as the poster above just described.
It was so clean, and utterly convincing
that Zimmerman is a habitual liar and there
is no evidence of self defense except his own
claims. There is also strong (I thought) legal
precedent for conviction on 2nd. And I just
learned today the prosecution gets the
last word to the jury if they want it.
Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)he got me thinking 2nd degree conviction is a
real possibility.
if you haven't seen it, there's video.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)was not done for Martin. The white people that fear that they are being overrun are those who are the fringe and I certainly would agree with you that there are many of those people in the US (too many). Most people on this forum want Zimmerman to be convicted regardless of race (I know there are exceptions). I will be gravely disappointed if he is not convicted.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)It may be hard for a jury to convict someone when "beyond reasonable doubt" enters into it.
TV viewers can dislike someone all they want (And boy, do I dislike both Casey Anthony and Zimmerman) but jurors are obliged to deal with the reality that after the fact, the manner in which the deaths came about is not something they may really truly "know."
In both cases, the one person who could clear up the matter is dead.
JI7
(93,755 posts)and the prosecutor came off as kind of a jackass with the smirks and laughs which Baez even pointed out.
so far in this case it's the defense lawyers who come off as asses and Zimmerman doesn't come off as sympathetic in any way. CAsey anthony always put on that sad face and made it seem like her dad was the actual one who was guilty.
on the prosecution side i really liked that guy who spoke today. and the other guy that looks like kevin costner is good also. but that other older guy sometimes seems kind of weak.
also in Casey anthony's case they didn't really know how her daughter died. in this case we know for a fact trayvon died when zimmerman shot him.
if he is found not guilty of even manslaughter i'm going to have to say it's because of racism .
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)What prejudices and sympathies the jury holds are important. We saw that in the OJ Simpson case - the mostly African American jury couldn't bring themselves to convict yet another black person, and once LA Det. Furhman was tagged by the defense with the suspicion that he might have planted evidence, it was case closed and OJ walked.
I have not watched any of the trial, so I didn't know who appears sympathetic and who doesn't.
In a perfect world, people would decide only on actual evidence, but even so, I believe most jurors do try to do what they are supposed to.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)I don't think the jury will even get to the "beyond a reasonable doubt" question; the "reckless disregard for human life" element will have to be decided by the jury, first.
That is why the Defense (from the few transcripts that I've read) spent so much time asking the witnesses that dealt with Z before and immediately after the shooting, whether he appeared angry.
The only opening for the Prosecution is the Hannity interview where Z stated, that in hind-sight (and with the benefit of knowing the outcome), he wouldn't have done anything differently. I suspect the Prosecution will make much of that during their closing argument.
Finally, this case (as with most circumstantial cases) will turn on the jury instructions and the jury's fidelity to those instructions.
madashelltoo
(1,832 posts)He didn't think that real bullet really killed a really human being. His incredulity at hearing Trayvon actually died verifies that. Depraved indifference requires one to first acknowledge Trayvon was real. He didn't need an attorney because he was one of them . . . A cop . . . Get it? When they didn't charge him immediately it reinforced his delusion. The re-enactment reminds me of listening to little boys playing cops and robbers. When Zimmerman does not make sense and changes his story he shrugs his shoulders, "I don't know where he came from"' "I don't know how he was holding my head while slamming my head into the cement"' and goes on with his fantastic tale. He dismisses those details as inconsequential. What is important is the cops are here with ME, listening to ME, believing ME like I am one of THEM.
I hope the jury sees through the nonsense.
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)You say: Finally, this case (as with most circumstantial cases) will turn on the jury instructions and the jury's fidelity to those instructions.
And that is it in a nutshell for many of the cases that jurors hear and then decide.
Way back in the 1970's, I had a very prejudiced relative who had to sit in on whether a young African American had stolen a certain car. That relative simply couldn't bring themselves to agreeing with the prosecution that the witness had adequately identified the defendant.
This relative also had been chosen as the jury foreman, and was able to convince everyone that the evidence was not there. I don't know what the jury instructions were, but it is possible they played a part in all of this.
Response to truedelphi (Reply #4)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Captain Stern
(2,253 posts)I'm teeter-tottering between 'not guilty' and 'voluntary manslaughter'.
I think the jury instructions will definitely be important, but I think the closing arguments by each side will have a bigger impact.
I think something important to remember when we try and predict the outcomes of trials is that juries are made up of individuals. I'm guessing that when the six jurists initially start to deliberate, they aren't all going to be of a like mind.....some of them are going to think the Prosecutors proved their case, some of them are going to be ready to vote 'not guilty', and some of them just aren't going to be sure either way. Then they are going to discuss, and argue.......just like folks here are doing.
As far as appeals go, I'm fairly certain that Zimmerman will appeal if he's found guilty of anything. However, I don't think the Prosecution can appeal a 'not guilty' verdict (I could be wrong).
exboyfil
(18,366 posts)Not guilty means the end of any sort of prosecution (unless you are a cop in Simi Valley and you can find federal charges that apply).
Almost anything can happen when it goes to the jury. Just ask O.J.
I think the most appropriate conviction is manslaughter (which will carry significant time as well). That is what Dooley was convicted of in a case very similar to this one (in that case it was an African American shooting a European American during a fight). Dooley and Zimmerman are blood brothers as far as I am concerned who did their thinking with their guns. If you can prove that Martin is the one crying for help then it is Murder 2.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)about the prosecution's appealing ... brain-fart ... I was thinking ahead to the inevitable civil trial, and meant to say the judge has given plaintiffs significant footholds in the civil case by her ruling for the defense in this criminal trial.
And I REALLY agree that the closing will have a large impact. While I believe that the jury members take their charge very seriously, our system is flawed because our society has produced/is producing citizens with the attention spans of goldfish and puppies ... try as they may, most evidence presented at trial is only assigned value by juries at the closing. So juries go into deliberations to argue whether they believe the evidence says what the lawyers says it means ... and that more often than not turns on whether the jury likes/trusts the lawyer that gave the closing. (Or, at least that's what I had found).
Again, from the little I've gathered on the case, I think it would be a mistake for Z's attorney (the one that did the "knock knock" joke) to do the closing argument.
Captain Stern
(2,253 posts)I haven't had a chance to actually watch the case, but I've been reading the transcripts, so I know I'm not getting the nonverbal nuances of the presentations (which are really important), but "Knock Knock" just doesn't sound like a likeable guy.
Besides that, his "joke" was essentially about how uninformed the jury was. The way I interpreted it was that he was saying that the jurors were chosen because they don't follow the news. I actually think that's the best kind of jury, but I could see how someone on the jury could take personal offense to his remark.
Voice for Peace
(13,141 posts)JimDandy
(7,318 posts)a civil case to be brought against a defendant who pleads self defense and is found not guilty in a criminal trial. The poster asserting that numerous times on another thread never cited a statute though.
rocktivity
(45,007 posts)The real question is whether the jury is willing to tacitly admit that by convicting him of the top charge.
rocktivity
Pelican
(1,156 posts)... are you basing that off of?
DemocratSinceBirth
(101,930 posts)HMMMMMMM
Pelican
(1,156 posts)... that I do enjoy throwing water on everyone's inflamed emotions.
What should be vs. what is rarely match...
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)for Black folks and Hispanics to identity as Hispanics (i.e., Brown) and white folks that witnessed (not "know of", but "seen first hand) society's treatment of Black and Brown folks ... Z's knowledge that M was a young Black man, would layer into Z's thinking, i.e., unknown young, black man equals criminal.
For white folks and Hispanics that don't identity as Brown ... they will only see Z confronting a stranger.
Pelican
(1,156 posts)Wouldn't this then speak to Zimmerman's frame of mind and suggest that he was just confronting a stranger, in his perception?
Unless you have some sense that Zimmerman identifies strongly as "brown"
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)but only for white folks (that haven't witnessed society's treatment of Black and Brown folks).
Little Star
(17,055 posts)Z saw a black person and in his mind (& from his mouth) labeled TM as "one of those". I just pray there are more, who see that truth, like me on that jury.
truth2power
(8,219 posts)I'm white and I firmly believe that Zimmerman saw Travon as a black kid and therefore up to no good.
In my mind, Z is guilty of second degree murder.
rocktivity
(45,007 posts)And on racism being a form of depravity (which very few of us want to admit).
Evidence, my donkey -- do you think it's an accident of fate that there are seven women on that jury?
rocktivity
Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)Little Star
(17,055 posts)I don't have much faith in FL juries to be able to give a lesser charge (Casey Anthony). They seem to want to punish the prosecution for overcharging. I hope this time is different.
Response to Little Star (Reply #34)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Little Star
(17,055 posts)Or is it all about you?
Response to Little Star (Reply #54)
Name removed Message auto-removed
siligut
(12,272 posts)And you want the mother to take responsibility because an over-zealous wannabe hero murdered her son? You have something wrong going-on.
handmade34
(24,027 posts)I would argue that we all want justice (not just you)... and what do you think would be the difference in this case??
I would hazard a guess that for most, it is not about making George Zimmerman suffer needlessly but about him forced to accept responsibility for callous and reckless actions he took... you may have to "live with the results of this verdict" for awhile but, throughout the United States, we all "deal with" and suffer from bigotry, racism, callous disregard for another individual and their rights, lax gun laws, etc...
the state had every right to charge 2nd degree...
Response to handmade34 (Reply #61)
Name removed Message auto-removed
Little Star
(17,055 posts)from the get go.
handmade34
(24,027 posts)I thought this was about racism... (and "white Hispanic" is not made up... Hispanic is the ethnicity and white is the race)
now... even though I never said this was about race.. the fact that George Zimmerman was not going to be charged and allowed to easily walk after killing a black teenager tells a little about racial dynamics... and if Al Sharpton stirring the pot was what was needed to bring attention to this unnecessary and grievous crimes, well, so be it.
The whole incident is extremely unfortunate but unless issues are addressed and discussed, we go nowhere... and I do think George Zimmerman had/has issues that caused the killing...
Little Star
(17,055 posts)siligut
(12,272 posts)It is disgusting to see.
RGR375
(107 posts)They did not even have enough evidence for a grand jury he would have been no billed. They skipped right to a trial to avoid riots and they were hoping zimmerman would take a plea deal that is why they over charged. He did not so the prosecution was stuck trying a case that a grand jury would have thrown out.
Finnmccool
(74 posts)if the state loses they only can blame themselves
They left a lot out.
DemocratSinceBirth
(101,930 posts)The state can not appeal a not guilty verdict.
RGR375
(107 posts)The state came with all they had. This should have never went to trial. The claims of self defense could not be refuted by the police or the original DA. That is why it well over a month before they charged him and the only reason they charged him was they were afraid of rioting. Most self defense shootings go in front of a Grand Jury if they have any question on if it was self defense or not. They skipped that because they did not have any evidence and Zimmerman would have been no billed.
Finnmccool
(74 posts)That were not addressed like TM circling his car
This is an affirmative defense they must show some proof that it was self defense.
JI7
(93,755 posts)Little Star
(17,055 posts)mountain grammy
(29,088 posts)
southerncrone
(5,510 posts)Prosecution not nearly tough enough & didn't question things like blood spatter/dripping evidence. Heck, many of their witnesses helped GZ as much as hurt him! Hoping that closing argument brings out lots of items & ties them together, but not holding out much hope for that. I think the best the Martin family will get will be in a civil case against GZ.
BainsBane
(57,771 posts)I hope he doesn't get off entirely.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)I assume that the argument for the reckless disregard for human life will be made at the end.
The guy trains mixed martial arts. He went to law classes to learn exactly how far he could go without getting in trouble. He patrolled his neighborhood with a loaded gun. He called Treyvon a suspect, a punk and an asshole .. all without any cause what so ever.
I think a very strong case can be made to clear that hurdle.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)On a slightly different note ...
I was going through the transcipt of Z's interview with Serino(sp?) and was surprised that the prosecution did not ask, at trial, about Z's statement that he (Z) had "a terrible memory" and had "trouble remembering 'stuff' ...", including his own address. I would have asked Serino (just to get it before the jury), if he believe that to be relevant to Z's recounting of what happened ... if he can't remember stuff like his own address, how can he accurately recount what happened that night?
Yes, I know that the defense would vigoriously object, as hearsay, and we would argue that the question was not to establish whether Z did, in fact, have a terrible memory, only that he said he did. At worst, it gets in because you can't unring the jury bell.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)If he is simply not remembering things correctly you will not be able to prove that he is trying to misrepresent what happened.
His bad memory could create reasonable doubt.
The jury needs to see that his story does not fit the evidence.
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)but it wouldn't create the reasonable doubt, it would open the door for the jury to "legitimately" determine whether his recounting of the events meets the evidence; but further, it would allow the jury to discount Z's recounting of the "facts" completely, thereby allowing them to step into his shoes as to what they would have done ... starting with getting out of the car, after calling the police.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)I kinda want them to come to the conclusion that he is deliberately lying because he knows he has something to hide.
I'm still hopeful of the "guilty on 2nd degree" outcome.
Kablooie
(19,115 posts)This seems really weird to me.
Here is a legal definition:
The condition of mind described as depravity of mind is characterized by an inherent deficiency of moral sense and integrity. It consists of evil, corrupt and perverted intent which is devoid of regard for human dignity and which is indifferent to human life. It is a state of mind outrageously horrible or inhuman.
Seems an outrageously horrible, inhuman mind would be limited to mass muderers and Mr. Hyde.
It also seems strange that 2nd degree murder requires this while 1st degree doesn't.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Not Mr. Hyde and a constant disregard for life.
At the moment Zimmerman killed Treyvon he was thinking of Treyvon not as a human but as an asshole, a punk and a suspect.
Besides that, this guy cruises his neighborhood with a loaded gun looking for trouble. As well as taking mixed martial arts classes so he will be prepared for a fight. Plus the law classes so he is informed on what steps he can take and when to take them.
In my opinion this guy is depraved.
RGR375
(107 posts)If zimmerman did or did not follow martin doesn't matter because it was not illegal to do so. It is not illegal to carry a gun and walk around your neighborhood if you have a ccw. It is not illegal to take classes to know when deadly force is authorized to use actually it is rather smart. The whole case boils down to the shooting and was he justified. Under Florida law he may well have been. Food for thought do you realize that if somebody would saw what was going on and felt that zimmerman was in immanent danger they could have slide a rifle out their window and shot martin off the top of him and it would have been legal.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)And I don't believe squat about him having to defend himself at any time. His story is completely unbelievable. If the jurors also find it unbelievable, I don't think it's a stretch to say that stalking, confronting, and then killing TM simply because he was black shows depravity and a complete disregard for human life. It depends on what the jurors believe happened.
Nevernose
(13,081 posts)In most, but not all, second degree murder cases, the "depravity" ends up requiring some sort of personal relationship between killer and victim, otherwise the appeals courts will, in general, find that it manslaughter.
I think the problem for the layman is that "depraved" is a much harsher word in the real world than the legal world.
DemocratSinceBirth
(101,930 posts).
Aerows
(39,961 posts)absolutely right in your assessment.
ChiciB1
(15,435 posts)to use the 10-20-Life law, though several here say they are, then THE manslaughter charge carries the same penalty as 2nd Degree, 25 to life. Mainly because he shot a minor (child) that carries a heavier sentence.
I too live in Florida and can only state my deep, deep desire that he gets he max, but because it's Florida I'll take anything that will give him as much time as possible in prison.
This is one very over zealous, and IMO opinion vigilante man who really needs to learn a very harsh lesson. Just because some say that he's a plus to his community because he's willing to volunteer his time to "protect" others are seeing are very different person than I am. I'll take a pass on anyone like him who feels a need to "help" when I find him to be more of a hunter with an agenda!
So please, please madam jury members don't be fooled by the facade he wants others to see. He seems to have very little compassion and a cold heart when it comes to people of a different ethic background.
PLEASE!!!
RGR375
(107 posts)and do not use emotion zimmerman walks. The law is the only thing that matters not what people think or feel.
ChiciB1
(15,435 posts)Bottom line, reasonable doubt, he walks. THE LAW in this case makes me want to puke!
I can not disagree with you. I just WANT to disagree with you.
Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
1StrongBlackMan
(31,849 posts)
Just Saying
(1,799 posts)But I think putting a gun to an unarmed kid's chest and pulling the trigger qualifies as reckless disregard for human life.
I really hope Zimmerman is held responsible for killing Trayvon Martin.
RGR375
(107 posts)Most all state self defense laws allow an armed person to shoot an unarmed person in certain circumstances and zimmerman may have met those circumstances. If one of those people like john good saw what was going on and felt zimmerman was in imminent danger. He could have slide a rifle out the window and shot martin off the top of zimmerman. That would have been legal.
Just Saying
(1,799 posts)Zimmerman when he saw him pull a gun.
Cuts both ways.
RGR375
(107 posts)The only point i was trying to make was depending on the circumstances the fact that one person is unarmed may be totally irrelevant to whether or not it is legal to shoot them.
Just Saying
(1,799 posts)The guy with the gun is at a distinct advantage. I think if he's going to claim self-defense there had better be a real threat. Frankly, the laws in Florida and elsewhere have become too forgiving. Taking a life is a big deal and the law shouldn't take it lightly.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)gopiscrap
(24,751 posts)I just put up a poll about this and that is so far, what the majority of respondents have predicted.
RGR375
(107 posts)This is a case that the state would not take to the grand jury because it would have been no billed. If you go to a trial with that and the jury follows the law then zimmerman walks.
southernyankeebelle
(11,304 posts)cause a riot in the streets. I hope the family can sue to get justice.
handmade34
(24,027 posts)have a 1mil settlement with the Homeowners Association... hopefully that will pay lawyer's fees
southernyankeebelle
(11,304 posts)KinMd
(966 posts)southernyankeebelle
(11,304 posts)Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Original post)
Jenoch This message was self-deleted by its author.
DonCoquixote
(13,970 posts)This case is very much a referendum on "stand your ground." yes, there have been cases where the policy could be debated, but few where the flaws in that law have floated to the surface in such a vile, festering manner.
Zimmerman is the sort of person that admittedly, the writers of that law never imagined: a former cop beater, alcoholic, and domestic abuser walking around with a gun in a neighborhood watch program? One that makes calls on every black male that enters the neighborhood? However, he is a living example of the sort of person, and the sort of case, that shows why this law in dangerous, so of course, gun lovers are circling the wagons around him. It does not help that this state has been on the forefront of laws that somehow make it easier for whites to vote than non whites, and that the Scotus just struck down the Voting Rights Act, meaning that a lot of bigots who have been waiting to shift laws against civil rights are drooling!
I understand that this case should be about a legal matter, however, the cops ruined that when they only brought him in under NATIONAL PROTEST. If Zimmerman was smart enough to head abroad during the month he was allowed to wander, he would be harder to bring back in Florida than Ed Snowden ever would be. Zimmerman has already gotten more of a chance than half the poor sods in Florida's rather infamous Death Row, the one that executes more people than anywhere outside of Texas.
And let us not forget that the GOP wackos are still pissed that we have been a "Blue State" for the past two elections, as people get mobile in this swing state, not wanting a repeat of 2000. I confess, I am scared that someone wacko will make sure to shoot someone, right in time for election, so that people are scared to go to the polls. This was the state where thugs dressed as rent a cops and tried the "true the vote" scheme, to challenge people they thought were illegal. Now of course, they will be able to carry guns.
So, to sum it up, yes, law is law, even if we ignore the fact that a lot of law is written as a weapon of racial bias, which, sadly many do. However, I would appreciate it if people did not go into self-righteous homilies about how this is just a legal matter involving one person, one case.
THAT
IS
BULLSHIT.