'Florida'

[Jack Weber]

Whatever. Clearly there's a discrepancy between their reluctance to prosecute Zimmerman and their zeal for prosecuting this woman who shot her ceiling.

-k

Of course,the ceiling doesn't have Al Sharpton speaking on its behalf...

[scribblet]

The prosecutor should be charged for withholding evidence and so on. I listened to Dershowitz tonight and a video clip. There has been a real mess up with this and the media hasn't helped. Zimmerman was arrested and taken away in handcuffs at the time but released. The prosecutor has withheld evidence and has now raised expectations so high that even if convicted of a much lesser charge we can expect violence and riots. No reasonable jury would convict him based on this evidence and Florida law, but another problem of course is finding a reasonable jury.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/drop-george-zimmerman-murder-charge-article-1.1080161

[Guest American Woman]

The case may still be tossed out. There certainly is conflicting evidence; none that I've read that would stand up in court. It sure doesn't seem as if the shooting was done with malice, even Martin's parents have said that. The photos do show Zimmerman with injuries consistent with his original claims. The cries for help heard over the phone can't even be identified - Martin's mother has said it was her son while his father has said it wasn't. There are no witnesses that can say who was chasing who. Zimmerman claims that Martin started the fight and there's no evidence, apparently, to contradict it. Zimmerman likely shouldn't have been following Martin, but that in itself isn't a crime. And it does sound as if "there has been a real mess up with this and the media hasn't helped."

[scribblet]

Yes, I don't know what they can do now to forestall riots and violence if Zimmerman should be acquitted.

Is it possible with this new evidence and an unethical prosecutor that they could somehow plea bargain for a lesser charge of manslaughter without it going to a trial? How on earth can they hope to get a decent jury. I don't think Zimmerman should get away scott free but it doesn't appear that they will be able to get the murder charge to stick. Surely there is something they can do to come to some arrangement and forestall violence.

Any juror would know that if they did acquit Zimmerman they could be targetted, who would want to be on that jury !!!

Edited May 20, 2012 by scribblet

[Guest American Woman]

Yes, I don't know what they can do now to forestall riots and violence if Zimmerman should be acquitted.

Is it possible with this new evidence and an unethical prosecutor that they could somehow plea bargain for a lesser charge of manslaughter without it going to a trial?

From what I've read, it's possible. Perhaps that's what will happen.

How on earth can they hope to get a decent jury. I don't think Zimmerman should get away scott free but it doesn't appear that they will be able to get the murder charge to stick. Surely there is something they can do to come to some arrangement and forestall violence.

I think there will be a reaction no matter what, but it sounds as if this is all some time down the road, so perhaps tempers will have cooled a bit.

Any juror would know that if they did acquit Zimmerman they could be targetted, who would want to be on that jury !!!

I wouldn't want to be on the jury - sort of like the OJ trial in reverse in some regards, thanks in part to the media. Of course we don't have all of the evidence available to us, but I do think it's interesting to note that some, even here, are reacting as if Zimmerman were lily white and this is a race issue. It really doesn't appear that way to me; from all I've read, it sounds as if both parties were hotheaded and overreacted - leading to this tragedy.

[GostHacked]

Of course,the ceiling doesn't have Al Sharpton speaking on its behalf...

Thank you. Damn near fell off my chair.

[msj]

Time to add another to the list of crazy Florida:

How about shutting down the states' only TB treatment facility during a TB outbreak?

Nah, that ain't crazy - for Florida!

[jbg]

trayvon martin is a drug dealing locker thief.

zimmerman was just protecting his neighbourhood from this thug trying to peddle drugs.

he should be freed and given an award by the community for his efforts and volunteerism.

Well, he was acquitted.

I don't seem to recall threats of riots in Jewish neighborhoods when Yitzhak Rabin was shot, or Meir Kahane (a horrible person) killed. I don't remember Italian neighborhoods going up in flames when John Gotti Sr. or Jr. was convicted and given long prison terms.

I don't understand whey Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are involved.

Edited July 14, 2013 by jbg

[The_Squid]

Because if this was a black man shooting a white guy the verdict would have been the opposite.

[Guest American Woman]

Because if this was a black man shooting a white guy the verdict would have been the opposite.

Zimmerman is just as much Latino as he is White; just as much Latino as Obama is Black. If there is racism involved, it's because of Zimmerman's racist remark to Martin, not because he's "White." Minorities are capable of racism, too. That doesn't mean the jury let Zimmerman off because Martin was Black, though; as I said, the laws of Florida may have made it difficult for the jury to find Zimmerman guilty of second degree murder beyond a doubt. But then again, I think 'race' was a factor in the OJ Simpson verdict; likely being Black saved him from a guilty verdict.

Edited July 14, 2013 by American Woman

[Shady]

Because if this was a black man shooting a white guy the verdict would have been the opposite.

Complete nonsense. That's just an easy way out of actually understanding the law, and why in this specific case, the jury found at least a little reasonable doubt. It's much easier to fall back to bumper sticker slogans. Requires a lot less thought.

[Shady]

Zimmerman is just as much Latino as he is White; just as much Latino as Obama is Black. If there is racism involved, it's because of Zimmerman's racist remark to Martin, not because he's "White." Minorities are capable of racism, too. That doesn't mean the jury let Zimmerman off because Martin was Black, though; as I said, the laws of Florida may have made it difficult for the jury to find Zimmerman guilty of second degree murder beyond a doubt. But then again, I think 'race' was a factor in the OJ Simpson verdict; likely being Black saved him from a guilty verdict.

They ignore the fact that his mother is Latina because it doesn't fit as well into their preconceived biases.

[Black Dog]

They ignore the fact that his mother is Latina because it doesn't fit as well into their preconceived biases.

Or some people realize that when people talk about race in the context of this story, it's not just about the racial background of the two central figures in the case.

Then there are dopes like you who pretend there's no such thing as racism (unless it's "reverse-racism").

[Boges]

I think it's obvious there was some racial profiling involved here.

But under the laws as they are written in Florida it would have been an injustice had Zimmerman been convicted. I've heard opinions that charges shouldn't even have been laid and the only reason they were is because of public pressure.

Evidence was clear that he was in a fight with Martin was winning. So a self-defence defence would appear to be appropriate. Now the problem with that law are completely different from the racial undertones of the case.

It'll also be interesting to see if the race issue will be address in coverage of another recent murder case.

Hispanic NFL football star Aaron Hernandez has been charged with executing African American Odin Lloyd. It's clear that this is a gruesome murder charge. The racial makeup of the people involved are the same. Will racism be an issue here, or because Hernandez is a famous athlete, will he avoid such charges? Or will that effect the case?

Edited July 16, 2013 by Boges

[Black Dog]

I think it's obvious there was some racial profiling involved here.

But under the laws as they are written in Florida it would have been an injustice had Zimmerman been convicted. I've heard opinions that charges shouldn't even have been laid and the only reason they were is because of public pressure.

Evidence was clear that he was in a fight with Martin was winning. So a self-defence defence would appear to be appropriate. Now the problem with that law are completely different from the racial undertones of the case.

A fight instigated when an armed Zimmerman followed and antagonized an unarmed youth. So, in Florida, it's basically legal to pick a fight and then, when you're losing, kill the guy.

Edited July 16, 2013 by Black Dog

[Boges]

A fight instigated when an armed Zimmerman followed and antagonized an unarmed youth. So, in Florida, it's basically legal to pick a fight and then, when you're losing, kill the guy.

Yep, and most reasonable people would agree that's a stupid law. Especially in a nation like Canada where carrying a concealed weapon is effectively banned.

But am I wrong in thinking there's no way to prove that Zimmerman actually instigated a fight? He may have confronted Martin but in a non-violent manor and Martin was insulted by the obvious racism and tried to beat the piss out of Zimmerman.

Edited July 16, 2013 by Boges

[Black Dog]

Yep, and most reasonable people would agree that's a stupid law. Especially in a nation like Canada where carrying a concealed weapon is effectively banned.

But am I wrong in thinking there's no way to prove that Zimmerman actually instigated a fight? He may have confronted Martin but in a non-violent manor and Martin was insulted by the obvious racism and tried to beat the piss out of Zimmerman.

You're right, we don't know if he started it in the sense of throwing the first punch or anything. But he sought out the confrontation. And the fact he was packing in the first place indicates he understood the potential for such a situation to escalate. I'd suggest he got exactly what he was looking for.

[Boges]

You're right, we don't know if he started it in the sense of throwing the first punch or anything. But he sought out the confrontation. And the fact he was packing in the first place indicates he understood the potential for such a situation to escalate. I'd suggest he got exactly what he was looking for.

I suspect you're correct. Impossible to prove however.

You also might be given Zimmerman too much credit. From what I hear, he doesn't appear to be that smart.

[Black Dog]

I suspect you're correct. Impossible to prove however.

You also might be given Zimmerman too much credit. From what I hear, he doesn't appear to be that smart.

What I mean is, he understood somewhere in his lizard brain that violence was one of a limited number of possible outcomes of his choice.

[cybercoma]

A fight instigated when an armed Zimmerman followed and antagonized an unarmed youth. So, in Florida, it's basically legal to pick a fight and then, when you're losing, kill the guy.

This is a misunderstanding of the Stand Your Ground law. If you're at all responsible for the confrontation, then SYG does not apply. I don't see how lethal force was justifiable as self-defence in this fight either, even if Martin was the aggressor.

One of the jurors was on a talk show (Anderson Cooper I believe) and she said that they ultimate acquitted him because of the SYG law, but at the same time she also said Zimmerman was partly responsible for the conflict. This shows that the jury didn't understand the law and were not advised properly by the judge.

Edited July 16, 2013 by cybercoma

[Shady]

A fight instigated when an armed Zimmerman followed and antagonized an unarmed youth. So, in Florida, it's basically legal to pick a fight and then, when you're losing, kill the guy.

You're pretending to know what happened. That's complete and utter nonsense.

[Black Dog]

You're pretending to know what happened. That's complete and utter nonsense.

I do know what happened: Zimemrman sought out Martin, confronted him, they scuffled, Zimmerman killed Martin. Those facts aren't in dispute.

[Shady]

I do know what happened: Zimemrman sought out Martin, confronted him, they scuffled, Zimmerman killed Martin. Those facts aren't in dispute.

Those aren't facts at all. You obviously didn't spend any time paying attention to the trial.

[Black Dog]

Those aren't facts at all. You obviously didn't spend any time paying attention to the trial.

So Martin isn't dead? Zimmerman didn't shoot him? Zimmerman didn't tell the cops he was being attacked and acted in self defense?

[Shady]

So Martin isn't dead? Zimmerman didn't shoot him? Zimmerman didn't tell the cops he was being attacked and acted in self defense?

That's different from your previous post. You've said two different things.