The Verdict in the George Zimmerman\Trayvon Martin Case

The nation awaits the verdict in this gripping self-defense case in Sanford, Florida. This case reminds many of the O.J Simpson case because it is race and a killing. The difference is that Zimmerman did not murder Trayvon, but killed him. The Simpson case had murder, premeditated murder, all over it. Both are highly emotional cases that divides people. The fact OJ Simpson got off shocked just about everyone. That jury was mostly black and many think that is why. In the Zimmerman case, all are white women. George is Hispanic\white.

The outcomes of this case could be 2nd Degree murder, which most legal experts think will be a fluke if that occurs. Z had no premeditation to plot and hunt down a tall, 17 yr. old teen (not a child armed with only skittles) at night acting suspiciously (in the eyes of Z) in a condo complex that had several burglaries.

Another outcome is acquittal. The jury finds him not guilty.

A lesser charge of manslaughter, that is, a killing of a human occurs in the heat of the moment or wanton disregard for human life. This is the prosecution's back up position and one that many feel should have been the charge from the start. Many of the elements are there for this to occur and many legal experts expect this. This is what probably really happened.

A hung jury would mean that all six jurors could not agree and the prosecution would have to retry the case again.

What will be the reaction be by the Z and T supporters? If Z is acquitted, what will his life be like? Will some supporter from the Martin side hunt Z down somewhere, sometime, and kill him? That would be 2nd or 1st degree murder. If Z is convicted, what would the Z supporters do than could be worse than having a son or daughter killed?

Of course, if Z is convicted, the defense will appeal because the prosecution withheld evidence that has been disclosed.

Do you think George Zimmerman is guilty of murder?

  • Yes
  • No
See results without voting

More by this Author


Comments 327 comments

junkseller profile image

junkseller 3 years ago from Michigan

Murder, no. Manslaughter, absolutely.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

Junk doesn't believe in the concept of self defense.


junkseller profile image

junkseller 3 years ago from Michigan

Sure I do, I just believe it extends to black people as well.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

i'm just glad i'm not on the jury. I don't have to decide.


Arthur Bundy profile image

Arthur Bundy 3 years ago from Colorado Springs

The OJ Simpson Case.

It was the State that changed the venue to Downtown LA. The prosecutor got what they asked for, a politically charged environment.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

Junk believes that black people can't hit others in the face, break their nose, knock them down and beat their head against the sidewalk.


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

well, its final-not guilty. Not a surprise to me, but i was prepared for manslaughter. Now, Z has to worry about some lunatic seeking justice.


junkseller profile image

junkseller 3 years ago from Michigan

Nope.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Hmm, so next time I see a skin-head, and think he is trouble.....I can follow him w a gun.

If he doesn't like it, I can shoot him. No problem.

Oh--and black people: you don't have the right to defend yourself from a white guy w a gun who is after you....just let him kill you: if you fight back to defend your life, it's your fault anyway.

Justice, American style.


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

Obviously, the DA totally failed, blame them not Z.


forbcrin profile image

forbcrin 3 years ago from Michigan

A few years back in Milwaukee there was an incident in which a half black guy was almost beaten to death by some cops at a private party. They were put on trial in a state court and all of them were not found guilty, although they were guilty as sin. Some disturbances happened in the streets of Milwaukee, and the case was reopened in the Federal Court by the US Attorney.

It turns out that one of the guys talked for immunity, and they all went up the river, except one who was not involved.

So, the case is not over, until is over... This would not be the first case to cause riots in this country or in Florida for that matter...


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

obviously lmc didn't watch a moment of the trial and actual testimony but she comments anyway . her emotional response to factual issues has me fearing for the county


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Blame the DA, not Zim? HUH?

What happened to "do the crime, do the time"? He killed a 17 yr old, and he's not to blame? Jesus take the wheel!

Maybe you should fear me, JB.

I don't own a gun, but I might just get one and move to Florida.

There, I can shoot indiscriminately, and once the person's dead: cry victim!

My god....I could even target a rw'er to follow and kill........just because I have had bad experiences w them in the past.....I mean: they're all a-holes who always get away w it, right?

It's my right to kill one of em.


NateB11 profile image

NateB11 3 years ago from California, United States of America

The most absurd thing about the aftermath of the verdict is that people are predicting riots. They don't know what causes riots. Riots happened after the Rodney King verdict because it involve the police who historically have abused the black community (and others) and that was a powder keg ready to explode; in addition to there being a good decade of Reagan/Bush and the climate in the country around the time being generally prejudice and clueless, with a general disdain for the poor. There are many factors, taken together, that create uprisings, personally or collectively. Trayvon and Zimmerman, that's a different dynamic and does not have the same implications as a group of police on trial for doing something that traditionally damages whole communities and many individuals. That people were shocked at the Rodney King beating in the first place is an indication of a lack of awareness and why people even today are clueless in their unfounded speculation about rioting after the Zimmerman verdict.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

lmc sez: There, I can shoot indiscriminately, and once the person's dead: cry victim!

Jack replies: obviously lmc didn't watch a moment of the trial and actual testimony but she comments anyway . Her hysterical, histrionic emotional response to factual issues has me fearing for the county


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

In both the OJ and King cases, it was clear who the guilty parties were. OJ got off because the jury was mostly black or the DA failed in their prosecution. The evidence was there. In the King case, the police were so gulity-white and black police. In the T and Z case, the jury was white. A non-back killed a black teen during confrontation, there is the self defense law and because T was black, the accusation of racial profiling, which was not proven. A person can utter expletives about others without being racist, it happens everyday.


Hawaiian Scribe profile image

Hawaiian Scribe 3 years ago from Hawai'i

This was a tragic case no matter what color you are. I think both T & Z "profiled" each other. To Zimmerman, Trayvon looked "like trouble"; to Trayvon, Zimmerman was a "creepy ass cracker". Although the public will never know the entire truth of what happened, it was pretty clear from the evidence that Trayvon (for whatever reason) hit Z & broke his nose, hit his head several times against concrete, was on top of him, and was winning the fist fight. Did Z have the right to defend himself and shoot? THE JURY SAID YES. To me, the 4 minute interval when Trayvon was on the phone & could have gone home if he was afraid of Z was the clincher, because he met George Zimmerman in an area away from the direction of his home. This case was never a 2nd degree murder case, and it is not akin to the Emmett Till case of the '50's where a black teen flirted with a white woman. Although the case is over, the story is not. Trayvon's parents recently settled out of court for a reputed $1 million from the homeowner's assn where T's dad & Zimmerman lived. But the NAACP, black activists and the media will not let this rest. I only hope Pres. Obama will keep his mouth shut this time about this local case since the jury has spoken. And I do hope that George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin's family will be able to reclaim their futures.


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

I agree Hawaiian scribe.


Ralph 3 years ago

@Nate

Some pictures in Oakland last night.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/slideshow/2013/07/14/pro...

There are also many "rallies" planned tonight and this week.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

Ahhh.... they are always rioting in Oakland.. what's one more excuse?


NateB11 profile image

NateB11 3 years ago from California, United States of America

Ralph, that's hardly rioting; spontaneous uprisings like that which happened in LA in the 1990s after the Rodney King verdict was a prolonged, burn down the district riot, with extreme brutality and heavy damage; what you've shown there is something that happens at demonstrations periodically, usually instigated by outside agitators and agents; a couple broken windows is hardly a riot and is media hyped. Jack Burton, Oakland rarely riots. Maybe you're thinking LA. Only exception might be the ones during the protest of the murder of Oscar Grant; and considering the cold blooded murder that that murder was, it's not entirely surprising, taking into account OPD record. Here's a list for ya: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_riots#...


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

JB sez: "Her hysterical, histrionic emotional response to factual issues has me fearing for the county"

I already know you Tea Party men fear tampons...why not gramma's?

Can't deal w the issue can you Jack?

Here's something to make it easier for you:

Pretend that Trayvon got out of a car w a gun and asked Zimmy "what are you doing here?"

Suppose Trayvon followed Zimmy and ran after him as Zimmy tried to get away?

Suppose Zimmy was the one terrified for his life......and shot to death by Trayvon.

Would you claim self-defense then?

Ahahahaha/Bwahahahaha/Muahahaha

My guess is you would be screaming "Death Penalty".


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

Z was terrified for his life. But, yes, Z would claim self defense because of the fear in his mind that T was going to harm him. The one thing lacking from the example is, was there any physical contact? if not, more manslaughter.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

The best that lmc can do is "pretend". No facts. No evidence. No sense that everything that she posts is actually not verified in any way, even at the "pretend" level.

Let me play the pretend game also.

Let's pretend that lmc had reason, logic, and rational thoughts to post with. Would we laugh at her even 1/3 as much we do now?

No, of course not.


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

Why do YOU think the six women on the jury found Zimmerman not guilty?


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

btw, lmc... on your "pretend game"?

Since George didn't actually, you know DO any of those things then can you explain to the world why you want other people to pretend that other people are doing them.

If you want to claim that he actually did any of these you've got two weeks of testimony to comb through to find something to back you up.

Good luck


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

I think the women on that jury felt sorry for fatty over there. of course, you couldn't see the kid he killed, cause you know, he's dead.

Facts?

Zim had gun. Zim called cops. Cops told him stay in car. Zim gets out of car and confronts kid w gun.

Kid has RIGHT to defend his life!

Not good enough to defeat gun: kid dies.

Killer goes free, and regains his gun.

Nothing pretend here. It's real. Just-Us, America.

White is allright!

Black--get back.


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

"I think the women on that jury felt sorry for fatty over there. of course, you couldn't see the kid he killed, cause you know, he's dead."

Really? You don't think six women would feel sorry for a mother that lost her child? One of the women had eight kids.

"Zim had gun. Zim called cops. Cops told him stay in car. Zim gets out of car and confronts kid w gun."

You either didn't watch the trial or couldn't comprehend it.

"Black--get back."

Based on the evidence, the only racists involved in the incident were Martin and Ranchel Jeantel.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Obviously not....DUH.

So--tell me what I missed?


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

"So--tell me what I missed?"

Facts and Evidence


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

SUCH AS?


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

lmc sez: Facts?

Zim had gun. Zim called cops. Cops told him stay in car. Zim gets out of car and confronts kid w gun.

Jack replies: As noted... lmc is totally ignorant of the testimony in the trial. She can't even repeat the testimony on behalf of the prosecution correctly. Dialouging with her is akin to asking a five year old on a trike what can be down to clear up the nation's highway commuting problems around big cities.

Lmc... you have NO clue as to what people testified about in that trial, do you. Yet you fell compelled to comment on it anyway.

Don't you ever, just once, want to post a comment that has at least some small amount of facts, reason and logic in it?

As it is now you sound like those jr high school kids who think that Pres. Lincoln won the Revolutionary War in 1945.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

ralph...we've been dealing with lmc here on hubpages for a long time now. She is total incapable of holding a logical, rational thought in her head. It just ain't going to happen.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

lmc whines: SUCH AS?

Jack replies; As noted previously, you've got two weeks of testimony to comb through to find something to back you up.

But right now you're in the position of a flat earther at a geology convention.


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

I am glad Obama did not say anything pro-Trayvon like he did a year ago clearly favoring him. Totally biased for a US president. Maybe the prosecution actually threw the case because they were forced to take it by the State.


Ralph 3 years ago

@perrya

The prosecution did not throw the case. They wanted to win by any means necessary. Perfect examples are the discovery issues and the third degree murder charge base on child abuse sprung on the defense on the first day of closing remarks. The prosecution behaved like absolute dirtbags throughout the entire trial.


Ralph 3 years ago

@perrya

As for Obama, it is not in his best interest to opine at this time. He wrongfully got involved last year to satisfy his voting base during an election year.


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

Agreed on both counts.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

Obama recommended that we follow trayvon's parents' advice and remain calm. he said, "the jury has spoken."


MG Singh profile image

MG Singh 3 years ago from Singapore

Zimmerman has been acquitted. Reminds of teh old days in the south when the black man never got justice. I am pretty sure this judgement will alienate the blacks even more. Result ? More conversions to Islam and the USA will have a bigger cancer inside it. This is a stupid verdict


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

Conversions to Islam? Hard to believe in this country, but why do you think so?


Ralph 3 years ago

@Mr. Singh

Do you have a lot of experience living in the southeastern United States?


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

MG obviously hasn't followed a bit of the trial.

In singapore perhaps people can jump on others and beat them until their face and head is a bloody pulp and not have any consequences but it tends not to work that way here in the States.


Ralph 3 years ago

@Jack

Mr. Singh has seriously pissed me off. The laws in Singapore are much more strict than ours, but that's not the point.

I want to hear how much experience this guy, an apparent Hindu in Singapore, has living in the southeastern United States.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

It's not the first time he has commented or posted on American social concerns with firearms and been 180 degrees mistaken. I just don't understand what drives people to post in ignorance about subject they clearly don't understand or know about.


Ralph 3 years ago

Agreed Jack. Every once in a while I just get a little too aggravated with foreigners telling us how we should live or think. We have problems in our country that our representatives should be working on. The Trayvon Martin case shouldn't rank high on that list. It bothers people like us because we see an injustice and a waste of government funds. Our government should be concentrated on the real problems.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Still waiting for the "facts" I missed......

Don't have any?

Resort to personal insults, just like a Tea-Baggy always does!

Jack, Ralph: What facts am I missing?

Vigilanti white dude with hatred for blacks.....that came out didn't it? How his father taught him to hate black people?

Anyway....white dude w history of violence and thuggery...came out in trial....follows a kid w a gun--in order to what, pray tell? Share Bible verses?

Confronts kid--kid fights for his life, dude shoots kid and kid dies.

What is not factual?


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

What is not factual, asks lmc

Most of it. I'd double check the "ands" and "thes" for facts.

You cannot document a single thing you just posted from evidence presented at the trial. Other that Z's name, and I would check your spelling on that.

You make the false accusations... it's on your shoulders to back them up... But know this... everyone who actually watched the trial KNOWS that you are clueless about everything you just posted.

You've got two weeks worth of evidence from both the prosecution and the defense to sift through to show that you have a single thing correct.

Go for it...


MG Singh profile image

MG Singh 3 years ago from Singapore

I rarely reply to innuendos from people who have an axe to grind, the white community from the South in particular. But let me tell people I have spent years in the USA and visit the USA every year. I am an Air Force officer and have flown in exercises with the USAF. Fine bunch , not like some of the people commenting on me and supporting the killing of a black. I wont be reacting to any more comments. Can't waste my time.


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

I welcome anyone from anywhere commenting on this case. Always good to have outside opines. As MG is aware, Americans are not converting to Islam in droves, so not sure why he might make the statement. Islam has got a bad rep in the world opinion because of the various terrorist attacks in the name of Allah. But, the US media is continuing to spin and spin this, CNN has a constant stream on it. Now rallies wanting the US gov to arrest him on civil rights violations, which are marginal at best.


Ralph 3 years ago

@Mr. Singh

I spent ten years in the USAF. I am a white person who grew up in the southeastern U.S. There are some problems in this country, but you training a little with our military and spending a little time here doesn't give the experience you need to analyze them. Your assertion that the not guilty verdict in the Zimmerman trial will increase Muslim converts highlights this.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

3 days, and still no one can tell me what facts I'm missing.....

Just personal insults---that all youze got?

Hey--here's the guy you are supporting.......

*A woman with close ties to George Zimmerman and his family told investigators that members of Zimmerman’s family were boastfully proud racists and that for more than a decade Zimmerman sexually molested her, reports the Huffington Post."

http://www.eurweb.com/2012/07/george-zimmerman-pro...


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

(I know...I know....she's lying. Only zimmy tells the truth)


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

and this is a lie.....Geez, that Obama is good ;-)

George Zimmerman’s Old MySpace Surfaces: Full of Racist Statements and Admissions of Criminal Activity! http://politicalblindspot.org/george-zimmermans-ol...


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

"George Zimmerman’s Old MySpace Surfaces: Full of Racist Statements and Admissions of Criminal Activity!"

It's too bad that info didn't make it into the trial. It would have allowed the defense to bring up the twitter account of the "No Limit Nigga."


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

lmc.... Z's myspace page obviously didn't have anything to do with the incident, eh. I don't recall it being introduced into evidence so apparently the professional prosecutors saw it for what it was... a nothing burger.

And please show us, as a third request, ANY testimony over two week where Z "stalked" Martin. You have plenty of time to find it... go for it.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

Z should have obeyed the police and stayed in his car. he wouldn't have a broken nose and trayvon would be alive. whether you want to call what

z did stalking or not, he shouldn't have done it. Z's bad judgment is a big factor in why trayvon is dead.


Ralph 3 years ago

@cathy

"Z should have obeyed the police and stayed in his car. he wouldn't have a broken nose and trayvon would be alive."

Thank you for joining the conversation. May I suggest though, that you watch a little of the trial before you opine?


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

cathy is a low-info voter who never actually learns about a subject before she comments on it.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

can't refute the facts, so attack the person. ad hominems are illogical and will lose you a debate every time.


Ralph 3 years ago

@Jack

"And please show us, as a third request, ANY testimony over two week where Z "stalked" Martin. You have plenty of time to find it... go for it."

If she can find it, I will fly to Florida and make an appointment with Dr. Bao the next time I need to see a doctor.


Ralph 3 years ago

"can't refute the facts, so attack the person. ad hominems are illogical and will lose you a debate every time."

If you knew the facts you wouldn't have said:

"Z should have obeyed the police and stayed in his car. he wouldn't have a broken nose and trayvon would be alive."

1. A 911 operator is not a police officer and has no authority.

2. The 911 operator told Zimmerman "We don't NEED you to do that" when he was already out of his car. No one doubts that. George's response, "OK" and he was going back to his car.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

From that notorious right wing rag, the Slate and William Saletan ...

*******************************************

Yesterday I was going to write that Zimmerman pursued Martin against police instructions and illustrated the perils of racial profiling. But I hadn’t followed the case in detail. So I sat down and watched the closing arguments: nearly seven hours of video in which the prosecution and defense went point by point through the evidence as it had been hashed out at the trial.

Based on what I learned from the videos, I did some further reading.

It turned out I had been wrong about many things.

The initial portrait of Zimmerman as a racist wasn’t just exaggerated. It was completely unsubstantiated. It’s a case study in how the same kind of bias that causes racism can cause unwarranted allegations of racism.

Some of the people Zimmerman had reported as suspicious were black men, so he was a racist. Members of his family seemed racist, so he was a racist. Everybody knew he was a racist, so his recorded words were misheard as racial slurs, proving again that he was a racist.

The 911 dispatcher who spoke to Zimmerman on the fatal night 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 do to that." Chief prosecutor Bernie de la Rionda conceded in his closing argument that these words were ambiguous.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/fr...

******************************************

I don't agree with everything that Saletan thinks about the case but at least he LOOKED at the actual evidence as presented by the prosecutor and defense.

That's better than 90 percent of the posters here have done.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

a 911 operator is trained to handle emergencies and is an agent of the police. if you don't intend to listen to them, don't call them. Z says he was going back to his car. I don't believe him. he lied in other instances. he's got a criminal record, for pete's sake.


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

Even the DA will agree that instructions given by 911 are simply advice and are not mandatory or legally binding. This came up in trial.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

Z is a too-big-for-his-britches, wanna-be cop who got in over his head. trayvon paid for that with his life.


Ralph 3 years ago

@Cathy

"Z is a too-big-for-his-britches, wanna-be cop who got in over his head. trayvon paid for that with his life."

Hmm, someone said:

"can't refute the facts, so attack the person. ad hominems are illogical and will lose you a debate every time."

Who was that?


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

i'm not attacking you. i'm giving you Z's reasons for his inexcusable behavior.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

1) Cathy has obvously not watched a single bit of the testimony other than bits here and there on MSNBC.

2) Z was NOT ON THE PHONE to a 911 operator.

3) "I don't believe him" Some people don't believe in a round earth, either. We call them flat earthers. There is a great deal of similarity here.

4) Cathy believes cops are such terrible creatures that it must be horrible that someone would admire them and want to be one.

5) Cathy doesn't know that testimony was given in the trial that showed that Z turned down a chance to be in a special police program that would have given him a car, a uniform and special authority. But she's going to claim until the day she dies that Z was a "wannabe" cop.

6: Testimony was given by the PROSECUTIONS witness that Z had expressed interest in being a state's prosecutor after law school. Oh noes... not a "prosecutor." Why, those are the apparent scum of the earth, eh.


Ralph 3 years ago

Also, @Cathy

"Z says he was going back to his car. I don't believe him. he lied in other instances. he's got a criminal record, for pete's sake."

Please inform us of the long list of crimes George Zimmerman has been convicted of. Thanks in advance.


Ralph 3 years ago

"2) Z was NOT ON THE PHONE to a 911 operator"

Sorry, Jack's right. He was on the phone with the non-emergency line at that time.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

not convicted, but arrested and pled down. http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/11808013...

also, Z claimed trayvon grabbed the gun, but none of trayvon's dna was on the gun. an important lie.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

cathy STILL cannot get it right.

I'll give $1,000 to the charity of your choice if you can find a credible source where Z said "trayvon grabbed the gun."

You're sounding more and more like that flat earther, Cathy. You just cannot get a single fact right in your posts. I'd bet your name is really Betty instead of Cathy. That is how wrong you have been.

And as every attorney will tell you, DNA is only interesting when it is found where it is not supposed to be.

As noted in the TESTIMONY, it was pouring down raining that night, the physical evidence was totally mishandled in accordance to the medical lab's rules and any trace of blood, DNA or other physical fluids would have been next to impossible to capture.

But you don't know that, do you. You don't care about that, do you. You only care about what you fffffeeeeellllll about the incident.


Ralph 3 years ago

@Cathy

"not convicted, but arrested and pled down. http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/11808013

also, Z claimed trayvon grabbed the gun, but none of trayvon's dna was on the gun. an important lie."

Please show me the crimes he was convicted of. A person can be charged as a serial killer and if they are found not guilty is doesn't matter.

The absense of DNA means nothing. It's when it's found where it is not supposed to be is the big deal.

Were you really a medical doctor? This is like arguing with a five year old.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

you don't get charged with assaulting a police officer for being a nice guy.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

also, his girlfriend DID get a restraining order against him.


junkseller profile image

junkseller 3 years ago from Michigan

Dispatcher or not, Zimmerman left his vehicle to go find Martin, after already having watched and followed him. Regardless of what you call it, that is threatening behavior that the person being followed would have a right to defend themselves against. There's nothing factually wrong with cathylynn99's original assessment.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Here's for all youze Zimmerman supporters:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtcveaMUJSI&featur...


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

Junk doesn't know that there is a four minute gap between the time that Z lost sight of Martin and the time that Martin assualted him.

Junk doesn't know that the PROSECUTION witness placed Martin wihtin a few feet of his father's back door during this time.

Junk doens't know that the PROSECUTION witness told of Martin approaching Z well after Z lost sight of him and starting the confrontation.

Junk knows what makes him fffffeeeeellllll good to post. Other than that he doens't know much about the case.

It's a complete mystery to me why otherwise intelligent folk refuse to learn the basic facts of the case and yet feel compelled to comment in their ignorance.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

"Because Zimmerman in no way forced things to the point of no return; he did not force Martin to turn and chase Zimmerman."

Who said this? Martin was running away from him. Who said he turned back and assaulted him?

Oh yeah........Zimmerman. The liar.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

Actually, the PROSECUTION witness testified to that. But you don't know that, do you.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Who? Who was there besides Zimmerman and Martin?


Ralph 3 years ago

@cathy

"you don't get charged with assaulting a police officer for being a nice guy."

The charges for assaulting a police officer don't get dismissed if the DA thinks you are guilty of it.

@junk

"Regardless of what you call it, that is threatening behavior that the person being followed would have a right to defend themselves against."

Sorry, that was discussed during the trial. Maybe you should watch it.

@love

Thanks for the video. I have one for you too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4rMyiMnpuAg


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

No way do I watch bagger videos. I don't put poison in my mind.


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

One of the jurors has spoken now and states RACE had nothing to do with their decision and it never ever came up.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

lmc sez: Who? Who was there besides Zimmerman and Martin?

Jack replies: You really are ignorant of the case, eh.

:-) :-)


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

yeah, and she called martin a "boy of color," which is either incredibly old-fashioned and unaware or down-right demeaning.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

I guess all those women I know who describe themselves as "women of color" are demeaning themselves, eh.

http://www.womenofcolors.org/

http://userpages.umbc.edu/~korenman/wmst/links_wc....

Remember, it was the PROSCUTION who kept referring to T over and over and over again as a "boy."


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Tell me how Jack.

Who did the prosecution use to say Martin actually went back to go after a man with a gun who was following him?

BTW:

"In an interview with ABC News, the attorney for Trayvon Martin’s killer says that his client will get his gun back now that he’s been acquitted — and that he plans to be packing heat soon. According to George Zimmerman’s attorney Mark O’Mara, there is “even more reason now” why Zimmerman needs to be armed. “There’s a lot of people out there who actually hate him."

Now he knows how it feels.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

ralph, they weren't dismissed. they were pled down in return for taking an alcohol education course. and I've been to trial where the person was guilty (by their own admission to me) and the judge threw the case out for lack of evidence.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

If race had nothing to do with it: why was Zimmerman following Martin in the first place?

I thought they justified the killing by saying Zimmerman had been robbed by black men before.

So obviously they are all suspect, right?

In fact....didn't he call him a suspect?


junkseller profile image

junkseller 3 years ago from Michigan

Jack doesn't know anything I know or don't know. He would just like to make up stuff I supposedly don't know, but do, and then say I'm stupid, for not knowing only stuff he has invented I don't know. Classic strawmen and ad hominem sissy attacks. Why is Jack so infantile? No idea.

The only claims made are that Zimmerman pursued Martin, which is s factually true and not in dispute, and that one has a right to self-defense against a perceived threat, which also seems almost universally accepted.

So how about you 'gentleman' try to address something which has actually been said. I'd also recommend laying off the insults. They do nothing but broadcast your own failings. Kind of silly to so brazenly broadcast impotence, no?


Ralph 3 years ago

"Who did the prosecution use to say Martin actually went back to go after a man with a gun who was following him?"

You have absolutely no understanding of criminal law. This will be short because I know it will have no impact on you.

1. George Zimmerman was the man on trial. The prosecution would not have have tried to prove that Martin was going after Zimmerman. They were trying to prove the opposite.

2. The prosecution had to prove Zimmerman committed a crime. They failed.

3. The defense didn't have to prove or say a thing. Nothing.


Ralph 3 years ago

@junk

Since you want to side with love. Please see my last post to her.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

lmc sez: Tell me how Jack. Who did the prosecution use to say Martin actually went back to go after a man with a gun who was following him?

Jack sez: Actually, that is not what the witness said. But you don't know that, do you? You are just making stuff up from thin air because it makes you ffffeeeellll gggoooodddd.

I am not going to re litigate the entire two weeks for you. It's on the net. Go for it.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

lmc sez: If race had nothing to do with it: why was Zimmerman following Martin in the first place?

Jack sez: It was covered in the testimony. We are not responsible for curing your ignornace.

lmc sez: I thought they justified the killing by saying Zimmerman had been robbed by black men before.

Jack replies: That's what you get for relying upon people just as ignorant as you for your knowledge.

lmc sez: So obviously they are all suspect, right?

Jack replies: The PROSECUTION testimony laid out the case exactly why Z was interested in the actions of Martin. I suggest you look at it.

lmc sez: In fact....didn't he call him a suspect?

Jack replies: What he called him has nothing to do with the case.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

jack, these women are using "women of colors" to describe women of all races. there are only two respectful ways to describe a black american - black and african American.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

" The prosecution would not have have tried to prove that Martin was going after Zimmerman"

Jack said the prosecution said Martin went back to confront Zimmerman....so which is it?

He killed a kid. That's a crime. No ifs and or butts. For no reason at all.

The fact you're content he got away w it is amazing to me.

"Omg are y'all watching Anderson cooper. Did u hear the juror say that's how they live. Who's they. Trayvon and rachel two different people. This was a emmit till jury no doubt about it now. They. Wtf.

"She also said there was one juror who wanted manslaughter, so there was some doubt in this man actions."

"These fools wasted 14 days of my life when they knew going their minds were already made up."

"She also spoke about Jeantel's education."

"OMG, I am in awwwee listening to this woman. Thank God the truth is coming about so soon. WOW! Trayvon Martin didn't stand a chance for justice with this jury. I'm getting sick listening to her."

"Her mind was made up before the trial started!"


Ralph 3 years ago

@Cathy

"ralph, they weren't dismissed. they were pled down in return for taking an alcohol education course."

So you are saying the justice system didn't feel his actions constituted assault on a police officer, but 8 years ago when he was 21, they felt he could have behaved a little better. Where am I supposed to be outraged about George's extensive sriminal record again?


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

junk sez: Jack doesn't know anything I know or don't know.

Jack replies: I know, and every one who has watched the case, knows that you really don't know the first thing about it.

junk sez:

He would just like to make up stuff I supposedly don't know, but do, and then say I'm stupid, for not knowing only stuff he has invented I don't know.

jack replies: junk is welcome to post anything that I have "made up." He can't though. He won't attempt it, either.

junk sez: The only claims made are that Zimmerman pursued Martin, which is s factually true and not in dispute,

Jack sez: Then if it "factually true" you should easily be able to quote a witness who can back that up. But you can't. And you won't.

junk sez: and that one has a right to self-defense against a perceived threat, which also seems almost universally accepted.

Jack replies: Junk cannot even quote a semi-correct version of the concept of self defense. He screws that up along with everything esle. If he doesn't like me pointing that out then he should make at least a feeble attempt to be correct once in a while.

And please find testimony from anyone, prosecution or otherwise, that states that Martin "perceived" Z as a "threat" so great he had to knock him down and poound his head against the pavement.

Junk sez: So how about you 'gentleman' try to address something which has actually been said. I'd also recommend laying off the insults.

Jack replies: I reply to what you "actually say." that is exactly why I quote you word for world. And it is not an insult to point out that someone is totally ignorant of what they are posting about.

junk sez: They do nothing but broadcast your own failings. Kind of silly to so brazenly broadcast impotence, no?

Jack replies: You haven't gotten a single thing right yet. I would be careful if I were you to post about failings and impotence. Go ahead... back up something you've posted from testimony.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

I am certainly not saying he didn't assault a police officer. he probably did. plea bargains are for convenience. stop putting word in other people's mouths.


Ralph 3 years ago

@ love

"Jack said the prosecution said Martin went back to confront Zimmerman....so which is it?"

He was referring to the prosecution's witness. Almost all of their witnesses aided the defense. You would know that if you watched some of the trial.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

cathy sez: jack, these women are using "women of colors" to describe women of all races. there are only two respectful ways to describe a black american - black and african American

Jack replies: Thank you cathy, for determining for all people in all cultures for all time as to what is "respectful." I didn't know that I was exchanging thoughts with someone of your authority.

BTW.... what level of "respect" is it for a teen "african American" to call a person a "creepy ass cracker."


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

"Where am I supposed to be outraged about George's extensive sriminal record again?"

when a dude who was not supposed to be carrying a gun because of a domestic abuse charge says this: "F**ing punks. These aXXholes always getaway with it."

Ding ding ding.......gun+ anger=criminal acts


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

lmc sez: Jack said the prosecution said Martin went back to confront Zimmerman....so which is it?

Jack replies: Actually, that is not what I said. And this is why I quote my posts. lmc cannot even bother to scroll back to get what I said and she expects to be taken seriously?

lmc sez: He killed a kid. That's a crime. No ifs and or butts. For no reason at all.

Jack replies: there ya go, Dear Readers. All emotion. All hysteria. No interest in the facts of the case and what happened.


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

"when a dude who was not supposed to be carrying a gun because of a domestic abuse charge says this: "F**ing punks."

Please show me the proof that he was not supposed to carrying a gun and the crimes he was convicted of.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

thanks, ralph... you beat me to it.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

jack,

as a person who has taken multiple courses on racial sensitivity, I've earned a say on how to refer to someone here and now.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Nope. As JB told me: you look it up--I'm not doing your work for you.

But it doesn't matter to youze at all.

He assaulted a cop...oh well. He abused a woman...eh. his COUSIN claims he sexually abused her and his family was a bunch of racists....pffft.

All that matters is that a white guy gets off by a white jury w a white judge.

Who's father was a big shot judge and mother works for the state...some say that's why he got "the jury of his choice".

None of that matters to any of you...because it's not YOUR 17 yr old gone forever.

Up yours.

How's that for brilliance?


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

cracker? trayvon was not on trial.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

Well, as someone who happens to be married to a women of color for 40 years and has "kids and grandkids of color" I think I've earned a say on how to refer to someone of color here and now.

My lifestyle absolute moral authority trumps your "courses."


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

lmc sez: Nope. As JB told me: you look it up--I'm not doing your work for you.

Jack translates: "I have no clue but it sounded really good when I posted it."

lmc sez: up yours

Jack replies: They all eventually crack after being used as a human pinata over a couple hours/days.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

cathy sez: cracker? trayvon was not on trial.

Jack translates: "Darn... he caught me on that one. What do I do now?"


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Trayvon was on trial. They made Zimmerman the victim.

And speaking of brilliance:

"B37 just said...that it was too time-consuming to go through all of the evidence because it wasn't in order.....WHAT??"

Lovely....why go through evidence? It's OBVIOUS already.


Ralph 3 years ago

@Cathy

"I am certainly not saying he didn't assault a police officer. he probably did. plea bargains are for convenience. stop putting word in other people's mouths."

I find it highly unlikely that people who commit violent assaults on police officers routinely plea bargain that felony down to a BS misdemeanor that is dismissed after an alcohol education class.

You are also forgetting one important thing. The incident occurred 8 years ago when Zimmerman was 21. I hate to break it to you, but young men in their late teens and early 20's sometimes do really stupid stuff. Trayvon Martin is the perfect example..


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

"All that matters is that a white guy gets off by a white jury w a white judge."

I'm guessing you must have been running an errand when his mother Gladys testified. Also, you may want to take a look at the actually make up of the jury.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

ralph,

and people with a history of violence are likely to repeat, 21 or not. why do you think he got turned down for the police academy? he was smart enough.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Ahahaha. Poor Poor Zimmerman!

His cousin doesn't think so. But she's a liar. His girlfriend filed abuse charges. But she's a liar.

He assaulted a cop, but so what--he was young!

Poor Poor Zimmy!

That darn kid had a right to be shot.

Now good wonderful Zim can have his gun back....let's just hope no other fkn punk gets him mad.....huh?


Ralph 3 years ago

@Cathy

"and people with a history of violence are likely to repeat, 21 or not."

Read my statement again. I don't think he committed a violent act. I think he probably could have behaved a little better that night. I have no criminal record, but I would hate to be judged forever for a bad night I had when I was 21.


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

"He assaulted a cop, but so what--he was young!"

Show me proof of conviction of that crime or at least a video of him doing it.

"That darn kid had a right to be shot."

That is what the jury eventially decided.

"Now good wonderful Zim can have his gun back....let's just hope no other fkn punk gets him mad.....huh?"

Please show me the evidence that he killed Martin out of anger, or better yet show it to Bernie de la Rionda. That would have made for an easy 2nd degree murder conviction.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

the jury didn't decide Z was innocent, just that there wasn't enough evidence to convict.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

"I would hate to be judged forever for a bad night I had when I was 21." I would hate to be dead forever for a bad night I had when i was 17.


Ralph 3 years ago

@cathy

"I would hate to be dead forever for a bad night I had when i was 17."

Me too. Where is the argument?


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Great response cathy...7 effing teen.

and here ralphy -boy...I did your homework for you:

"Did George Zimmerman have help from his father, a retired judge, in clearing his name in three separate arrests?

According to a records search on George, he was previously arrested for domestic violence, resisting an officer without violence and most shockingly, resisting an officer with violence — a felony charge that surely could have landed him in prison.

All three of those arrests, however, were mysteriously closed with no semblance of charges for the Florida resident. So how was someone with a violent past including that of battery against an officer able to carry a 9 mm handgun? Maybe that’s a question Robert Zimmerman should answer …"

http://rollingout.com/culture/george-zimmerman-son...


Ralph 3 years ago

@cathy

"the jury didn't decide Z was innocent, just that there wasn't enough evidence to convict."

Again, where is the argument?


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

"my lifestyle trumps your courses." can I ask where your "here" is?


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

"According to a records search on George, he was previously arrested for domestic violence, resisting an officer without violence and most shockingly, resisting an officer with violence — a felony charge that surely could have landed him in prison.

All three of those arrests, however, were mysteriously closed with no semblance of charges for the Florida resident. So how was someone with a violent past including that of battery against an officer able to carry a 9 mm handgun? Maybe that’s a question Robert Zimmerman should answer …""

There are also reports that there is an alien base on the dark side of the moon.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Yes we know, cause all gvt employees are honest and deserve their pay...that's what you always say isn't it? *snark*

and look at this......

@steveweinstein

"Juror wanted on jury badly. Had mind made up. Husband & her planned to write a book and profit. Prosecution letting her on is malpractice"

---woooow!


junkseller profile image

junkseller 3 years ago from Michigan

Jack, Zimmerman following Martin and leaving his vehicle are not in dispute, so I don't know what you are going on about.

And I pretty much gave the dictionary definition of self-defense, so that would seem to make you the ignorant one. I'd also note that you didn't actually point out something wrong with what I said, you just huffed and puffed about it, which again I would argue is impotent and cowardly, but to each his own.

As to any of your other inventions, they have nothing to do with me, so you might as well stop wasting space with it. Just as one example, where exactly did I say I didn't know there was that 4 minute gap? Nowhere, so why even pretend?

There's no reason to go on about facts not in dispute, so don't expect any further reply unless you're actually going to address the point made.


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

"Did George Zimmerman have help from his father, a retired judge, in clearing his name in three separate arrests?"

Yes, his father was a very influential supreme court justice occupying a special position known only by the Illuminati. You must have triple-dog level 13 Top Secret clearance to know of his vast influence.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

jack, your wife is from the Phillippines. if she were black, i bet she would object to being called a person of color. we're talking apples and oranges.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

whhhhoa.....this is a juror:

"I think George Zimmerman is a man whose heart was in the right place," the juror told Cooper, "but just got displaced by the vandalism in the neighborhoods. [He] wanted to catch these people so badly that he went above and beyond what he should have done...it just went terribly wrong." Cooper then asked her if she thought Zimmerman was guilty of anything: "I think he's guilty of not using good judgement...he shouldn't have gotten out of that car," but she thinks that the 911 operator "egged him on." "I think it's everybody's right to carry a gun."

wow......I am speechless


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Oh.My.God.

"He's overeager to help people," was the juror's overall take on Zimmerman, citing testimony from defense witnesses. "You have to have a heart...to help people." She didn't buy the prosecution's take that he was a "wannabe cop." In response to a question, she said that she'd want Zimmerman in her neighborhood as a neighborhood watch leader so long as he "didn't go to far...I would feel comfortable having George, because I think he's learned a good lesson" from the shooting death of Trayvon Martin. "


Ralph 3 years ago

I think I'm done for the evening. I have an early meeting with the Majestic 12.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

"Juror B37 felt sorry for Zimmerman because of the situation he got himself into. Trayvon Martin was murdered and Zimmerman is the victim?!"

Told you they felt sorry for him!


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

Z lied under oath about the amount of money he'd collected for his defense, so had his bail revoked. still believe his version of what happened?


junkseller profile image

junkseller 3 years ago from Michigan

lovemychris, good video you posted, by the way. It so clearly identifies what people are missing (or ignoring) about this case. The bizarre thing is that it is so painfully obvious.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

cathy sez: I would hate to be dead forever for a bad night I had when i was 17.

Jack replies: Exactly what I taught my kids. Stupid decisions quite often lead to negative consequences. Apparently Trevon never got this lesson.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

cathy sez: "my lifestyle trumps your courses." can I ask where your "here" is?

Jack repleis:

1) if you're going to attempt to quote me please do so correct. Cut and paste hasn't been that hard since Al Gore invented it.

2) I have no idea what you are asking? Here? Where? There?


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

nor did Z.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

junk sez: Jack, Zimmerman following Martin and leaving his vehicle are not in dispute, so I don't know what you are going on about.

Jack replies: Not in the way you phrased it previouisly. If you want to change your wording now and say you were correct then that is bogus.

Junk sez: And I pretty much gave the dictionary definition of self-defense, so that would seem to make you the ignorant one. I'd also note that you didn't actually point out something wrong with what I said, you just huffed and puffed about it, which again I would argue is impotent and cowardly, but to each his own.

Jack sez: Actually, you're too ignorant to know that what you gave is NOT the "standard definition of self defense." You left out a most critical part. An extremely critical part. One that makes the difference between convictions and getting off with a pass.

But here's the problem, Junk. I know that you have no real interest in learning. So why should I bother to educate you on something that you're already posting about with little knowledge? You persuade me that you're capable of, and desirous of, learning and I'll make sure you leave the thread with the correct info.

junk sez: As to any of your other inventions, they have nothing to do with me, so you might as well stop wasting space with it. Just as one example, where exactly did I say I didn't know there was that 4 minute gap? Nowhere, so why even pretend?

Jack replies: You didn't have to post it specifically. The comments you made were more than enough to indicate you didn't know about it, or were unaware of the significance of it.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

cathy sez: "my lifestyle trumps your courses." can I ask where your "here" is?

Jack repleis:

1) if you're going to attempt to quote me please do so correct. Cut and paste hasn't been that hard since Al Gore invented it.

2) I have no idea what you are asking? Here? Where? There?

now who's playing dumb?


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

cathy sez: jack, your wife is from the Phillippines. if she were black, i bet she would object to being called a person of color. we're talking apples and oranges.

Jack replies: Yes, all those years of working in black gospel radio left me totally incapable of knowing just what black women refer to themselves as.


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

cathy sez: Z lied under oath about the amount of money he'd collected for his defense, so had his bail revoked. still believe his version of what happened?

Jack replies: Cathy can't even get that one right. I'll give her a 98 percent error rate at the moment, since she did reference my wife correctly. That's worth 2 percent.

Here is the info on the supposed "lie"

http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/07/next-up-flori...


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

cathy sez: now who's playing dumb?

Jack translates: "Darn, I am clutching for straws, now."


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

Good night all...


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

cathy sez: jack, your wife is from the Phillippines. if she were black, i bet she would object to being called a person of color. we're talking apples and oranges.

Jack replies: Yes, all those years of working in black gospel radio left me totally incapable of knowing just what black women refer to themselves as.

from the way you've responded in this discussion, it's obvious that you enjoy giving offense. that you're happily unaware of others' preferences doesn't surprise me.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

you're correct that Z's wife lied, not Z, in the instance I miswrote above, thanks for the heads up. however, Z accepted bond under false pretenses.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

before you complain about ad hominem, you've done it over and over even after being called on it by two different people. goose sauce = gander sauce.


junkseller profile image

junkseller 3 years ago from Michigan

Jack, I'm perfectly aware of the 4 minute gap. It doesn't in any way alter the fact of Zimmerman following Martin and leaving his vehicle. Perhaps you object to that being characterized as pursuing him. I have no idea since all you have done is name-call and say I'm wrong (without in any way establishing what is allegedly wrong). Personally, I think pursuit is appropriate. Regardless, nothing I said informed you of my knowledge one way or the other. You assumed. Whether you want to admit that and examine your reasoning for so doing is up to you.

And back to the self-defense, you might be absolutely correct were I in a court of law making a legal pleading. I am not. I gave a standard dictionary definition of self-defense. That's all. I even specifically said so and you turned around and misquoted me.

I'm always happy to learn, but the truth is, based upon your apparent knowledge of this case, you have no factual information to teach me. Not that I really think you have any real interest in teaching. You just seemingly want people to agree with you. That's never going to happen and it has nothing to do with knowledge and everything to do with how we analyze a given set of facts.

If someone doesn't know something it is legitimate to point that out, but attacking an invented lack of knowledge because you don't agree with their analysis is, to be frank, stupid. It completely misses the point of contention. Perhaps you are perfectly aware of this and your combativeness is simply a cheap tactic. I doubt I'll ever know. All I'm likely to hear from you are more examples of what you imagine I don't know, more examples of things you imagine I have said, a sprinkling of insults, some line about "here you go Dear readers" and the climactic finish about how I am completely driven by a desperate need to feeeeel ggoooooddd (sorry I didn't get that exactly right (I should by now, I mean, you have written it about 10 billion times)).


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

It's the tactic of the RW troll.

Believe me--I've experienced it since 2006: I'm an expert!

As you see---anyone who disagrees w them is stupid, ignorant, crazy, part of MJ 12, looney-tunes......

This way--they hope to put doubt in readers minds about anything you say.

But, I think: if they attack you--you are on to something.

Because look at ralphy-boy's response to that article on Zimmy's free pass in the justice system.....

Couldn't respond: but that's when the illuminati references came out: Ooooh lmc and illuminati....koo-koo koo-koo

Jacko---if it's long I don't even read. same old blather.

And not one person told me where I was wrong in my take.

Not one told me how my facts were wrong.

Just called me names and slurred my character---hoping to dilute my words by smearing.

Oh silly silly boys........Been there--Done that.

You can't be honest because you support a murderer......fine by me.

Just leave the "morality" talk to someone who actually has it.

and--"no offense"....but it aint you.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Say--how much you think that juror will haul in her book?

Isn't tragedy grand? Always the opportunity to make the big bucks.

Does that say something about her character?

oh--you betcha


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

Rachael's comment that if T had been white, in a hoodie, the identical situation, what happened would not have happened is also being racist. Nobody knows but Z would have viewed anyone, any color, in a hoodie, at night, in rain, loitering around or walking slowly (whether or not under the influence) peering into windows with a tea and candy, the same way- as suspicious activity. If Z was black, the same thing. Criminal profiling is not against the law especially when the immediate complex had recent burglaries. These crimes just happened to have black men doing the crime. Z knew this, he has just reason to suspect. It is not normal activity to walk thru a condo complex and look into other's living spaces. This action leads on to suspect possible criminal activity. at this point, both sides have done nothing wrong. So, Z followed and observed until lost him. There are a lot of racists of all colors. I am surprised that someone has not called the jurors racists also.


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

"Because look at ralphy-boy's response to that article on Zimmy's free pass in the justice system.....

Couldn't respond: but that's when the illuminati references came out: Ooooh lmc and illuminati....koo-koo koo-koo"

What kind of response do you really expect when you make crazy accusations with no facts to back them up.

You said:

"All that matters is that a white guy gets off by a white jury w a white judge.

Who's father was a big shot judge and mother works for the state...some say that's why he got "the jury of his choice"."

First George is hispanic. His mother is from Peru. Please explain her current job and how she could have influenced the jury in this case.

George's father was not a judge. He was a magistrate in Virginia. George was arrested in 2005 in Florida. I find it a little unlikely that his father got the charges dropped. There is also no proof of it.

The things you are proposing are nothing more than conspiracy theories.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

First of all......I did not make any accusation....I showed you an article. Not my words. But a question worth asking, because I have seen talk of the jury being cherry-picked in Zimmy's favor.

You may not know how the Old Boys network works...I've seen it in action.

I have also seen white people lie about their racism with a judge to help them. First hand.

Second: how DO you explain him getting off an assault on an officer, which is a felony?

Luck? Maybe cause he's white?

And how does a guy with a domestic abuse charge get a gun?

Third: my theory is no more insane than yours.

I don't believe for a second that Martin went back to confront Zimmerman.

Nor do I believe that Zimmerman was scared. He had a 9mm for god's sakes.

I think he went out to kill a N.

My opinion.....and the trial and verdict a pile of idiocy if you ask me.

And according to Zimmerman's cousin--his mother was racist as h. Also read that his father taught him to hate black people. Didn't he say the only racists were blacks? I read that he did.

I've seen people say " We are going to have a barbeque today...gonna fry us a baboon"--speaking of my friend.

SO.....I know one when I see one--if you get my drift.

The things you propose are ridiculous and despicable.

No one has the right to kill another human being because you don't like them.

Because you think they are criminals.

Because you have a gun.

And if it had been a black man gunned down a white boy....I can just see all of you now.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

"If it's true that juror B37 & a Zimmerman lawyer knew each other/had a relationship she should never have been on jury."

Old Boys Network.


swordsbane profile image

swordsbane 3 years ago from Wisconsin

The big problem with this case was that people can't seem to wrap their minds around the fact that sometimes shit happens, and although people are involved, and might have made better decisions, the outcome was a tragedy and it wasn't really anyone's fault.

I don't know what happened between Trayon and Zimmerman. Only they really know. Both the prosecution and the defense agree that there was a fight, and during the fight, Zimmerman shot and killed Trayon. What we DON'T know, and what no one besides Zimmerman knows for certain is whether this was the outcome Zimmerman had already decided on. He was acquitted. This means that in the eyes of the law, it has been decided that he didn't intend to kill Zimmerman.

It's not a race issue. By all accounts (all accounts that can be trusted at least) Zimmerman isn't that kind of person. It wasn't a power trip. If it was, then Zimmerman would have just shot him first instead of getting into a fight with him. Once the fight broke out, the outcome was probably unavoidable.... Someone was going to get shot. If either one of them had known that at the time, I am positive that the fight would not have taken place.

Yes, Zimmerman probably could have done a few things differently and Trayon would still be alive, but then so could Trayon.

The bottom line is that you don't know what happened. I don't know what happened. The media doesn't know what happened. Every single person who has weighed in on the subject DOESN'T know what happened... except Zimmerman. But someone is dead, and because he was killed by someone else, we can't seem to get past the part about laying blame. If a tree branch had fallen on him, we would have mourning and then life would go on. There would be no protest outside churches saying God is a murderer, and we wouldn't sue the Catholics because they are accessories to murder. We'd move on. Instead, we have to find SOMEONE responsible and punish them, regardless of whether it is the right thing to do.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

uh, what?

He went after a kid with a gun....for no reason, and with no authority to do so.

Kids ends up dead. Guilty.

Is this Bizarro-Land or something?

call me crazy: "And while Trayvon Martin is dead, the scam we call Justice System selected Jurors that feel really really sorry for his murderer. JurorB37"

OBN.


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

"call me crazy: "And while Trayvon Martin is dead, the scam we call Justice System selected Jurors that feel really really sorry for his murderer. JurorB37""

Ok, you're crazy.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Good thing this isn't forums, or you'd be banned. Ooops--you a white male. Nevermind.


swordsbane profile image

swordsbane 3 years ago from Wisconsin

lovemychris: It's called "reasonable doubt" Look it up. He followed someone he thought was suspicious enough to call the police. Yes, he was armed, but he didn't "go after a kid with a gun". He was told not to continue following the kid, but he had reason to not trust the police and continued. There was a fight and during the fight, Zimmerman killed him. That is the extent of what we know. Everything else is speculation... Zimmerman's motives, what else happened during the fight... EVERYTHING. Consider for a moment that pretty much everything else you think you KNOW about the incident comes from the media... which is looking for something sensational, not boring and mundane. Gotta have a hate crime every time there's a white guy and a black victim. Gotta be premeditated whenever someone is armed with a gun. It can't ever be what it looked like in the beginning: a simple but tragic case of self-defense. Nooo.. That doesn't get people to read a blog. That doesn't get people tuning into Fox or CNN.

It's amazing how many times Justice is broken when a verdict doesn't go the way someone thinks it OBVIOUSLY should have gone.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

He followed a "fkn punk. These axxholes always get away"

Why was he suspicious?

What right did Zim have to ask him what he was doing there?

He has a gun and a bad attitude, and he killed a kid for nothing.

Nothing reasonable about it.

And I have no doubt he meant to kill.....what is a gun for, after all?

Go on and justify it all you like.

A gun is not more sacred than a human life.

And a black kid is not a thug simply for being black.

Trayvon was an honor student who volunteered....did you know that?

No bet you didn't.

Cause Martin was on trial here, not Zimmerman.


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

well, in the case of the jury. it is up to both sides to shape the jury. Since it was an all white jury, I have to agree something is wrong and that is with the DA not doing their best to get at least one black on it. It just seems wrong because it was not a jury of T's peers, quite the opposite. But, it was the DA's failure, so scream as much as you want, what is done is done.


Ralph 3 years ago

@swordsbane

I agree with a lot of what you said, but I do have a couple of issues.

"He was told not to continue following the kid, but he had reason to not trust the police and continued."

He wasn't told not to follow. He was told "We don't need you to do that." This came from an operator on the non-emergency line with no authority. He was already out of his vehicle when that was said. His response was "ok" and he claims he was headed back to his car.

The notion that he did not trust the police is just not true. He admired the police and studied criminal justice.

I absolutely agree that the media turned this into something it should have never become, but President Obama and Eric Holder gave them the fuel for the fire. The FBI investigated the Sanford Police Department and found that they acted correctly. The federal involvement was nothing more that Barack Obama catering to angry voters in Florida during the election year to secure their votes.

I'm really tired of all the talk about race from a certain person on here. George Zimmerman was about as white as Barack Obama is black. They are painted one way or another when it serves someone's purpose.


Ralph 3 years ago

@perrya

"well, in the case of the jury. it is up to both sides to shape the jury. Since it was an all white jury, I have to agree something is wrong and that is with the DA not doing their best to get at least one black on it."

It was not an all white jury. One woman has been described as either hispanic or black.

"It just seems wrong because it was not a jury of T's peers, quite the opposite. But, it was the DA's failure, so scream as much as you want, what is done is done."

It seems that to me that in the best case the jury should represent the make up of the law-abiding community. No, there was not a jury of Trayvon's peers. Would you want 6 Rachel Jeantels on a jury?


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

Just looking for balance, if there had been even 2-3 black and the jury verdict was the same, there would less screaming of injustice, maybe. This is not rocket science, it just looks unfair.


Ralph 3 years ago

@perrya

"Just looking for balance, if there had been even 2-3 black and the jury verdict was the same, there would less screaming of injustice, maybe. This is not rocket science, it just looks unfair."

Blacks make up 13% of the population. 3 black people on the jury would have been 50%. Also, the jury should not care what the public thinks about their decision. They should make the decision they feel is right according to the law.

As you stated earlier, the prosecution approved the jurors. Race should have never been a factor. I do not believe there was a conspiracy as some folks on here have said. This has become a case of race when it never should have been.


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

I agree, but appearances do matter.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Wait---WHAT?

Koch Bros paid for Zimmy's defense?

This the Big Boy Network


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

ALEC wrote stand your ground......are you starting to see the picture?


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

"Juries do not rule, governments do. In this case it was the cracker Florida legislature, greased by scads of money from NRA lobbyists, that passed the imbecilic stand your ground law. That law, inevitably, led to the killing of an innocent unarmed person like Martin by a cowardly armed vigilante like Zimmerman, irrespective of race.

Race played a small part during the initial police "investigation" to the extent that it was a black victim so the stupid law let the police just look the other way as so often happens with black victims, instead of booking Zimmerman, conducting a full immediate investigation and charging him. Consider the Hernandez case, for example. A full investigation took place because the body was dumped in an affluent white suburb. If Hernandez had any brains he'd have dumped the body in a back alley in Roxbury where it would be just one more dead black guy with some bullets in him."

Goog goin Rich:

http://www.capecodtoday.com/blogs/latimer/2013/07/...


swordsbane profile image

swordsbane 3 years ago from Wisconsin

lovemychris: Point of evidence: Zimmerman didn't defend himself using the "Stand Your Ground" law. He went for plain old ordinary self-defense. A "Stand Your Ground" defense would have hurt his case, so from YOUR perspective, SYG is a GOOD law, not a bad one.


junkseller profile image

junkseller 3 years ago from Michigan

The Zimmmerman team may not have explicitly invoked Stand Your Ground as a defense, they didn't have to. It seems to be incorporated into Florida's justifiable homicide rules already. Or at least, they were put into the jury instructions:

"If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in anyplace where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."

Compare that to what it might be without Stand Your Ground:

"The defendant cannot justify the use of force likely to cause death or great bodily harm unless he used every reasonable means within his power and consistent with his own safety to avoid the danger before resorting to that force."

Then Anderson Cooper's interview with a juror:

"COOPER: Because of the two options you had, second degree murder or manslaughter, you felt neither applied?

JUROR: Right. Because of the heat of the moment and the Stand Your Ground..."


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Here the vid of Zimmerman on night of arrest...no gash on head, no broken nose. Why prosecution not use it?

What is going on here?

WHOLE defense was a LIE.

"Who is looking out for him?"(Zimmerman)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embed...


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

hardly, a lie? I guess some are blind to justice.


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

"Here the vid of Zimmerman on night of arrest...no gash on head, no broken nose. Why prosecution not use it?"

Zimmerman was cleaned up at least once by the time this video was shot. The EMT that treated him at the scene testified that his nose was likely broken and discussed his head wounds. The PA that treated him after the event also testified that he had a broken nose and lacerations. Finally, doctors testifying for both the prosecution testifed to his injuries.

I recommend you look that the pictures from the scene.

http://www.wtsp.com/news/photo-gallery.aspx?storyi...

Also, in case you were not aware, no injuries are required for a person to use lethal force in self defense.

Your video was used by liberals back in March of 2012 to discredit Zimmerman. The assessments you are making from the video are based on limited information and what you want to believe. Maybe you should look at the evidence out there now or actually watch some of the trial.

"WHOLE defense was a LIE.

"Who is looking out for him?"(Zimmerman)"

Not everything that happens involves a a batshit crazy conspiracy. The prosecution had a weak case and failed to prove that Zimmerman committed a crime. One more time, the defense technically did not have to prove anything.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Yes--many ARE blind to justice.

Good when it suits you...as in Zimmerman verdict.

Bad when it doesn't---as in OJ

Every one of you who thinks justice was served by Zimmerman walking free with his gun can tell me they want OJ Simpson removed from prison.

Or tell me how an instigater becomes a victim after the other person is dead by his hand.

Jury was tainted.

SYG is tainted.

White RW'ers will never see.

Hope Zimmy stays clear of women and black kids: that's all I can say.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

"Those who believe zimmerman was justified in killing TM also have to believe zimmerman would be justified in killing their child too."


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

@chris- are you really that racist?


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

"Good when it suits you...as in Zimmerman verdict.

Bad when it doesn't---as in OJ"

Are you referring to the massive white riots following the OJ verdict?Maybe you are referring to the DOJ investigation concerning the violation of the the civil liberties of Nicole Simpson and Ron Goldman?

Oh wait, none of those things happened! People just said BS and went about their lives.

"Every one of you who thinks justice was served by Zimmerman walking free with his gun can tell me they want OJ Simpson removed from prison."

Hmm, I'm not going to say I want OJ released from prison. He's currently in prison for armed robbery and kidnapping.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Oh no they didn't.

Goldman kept fighting and fighting until he saw some semblance of justice.

And the Browns and Goldmans took OJ to civil court, which I certainly hope the Martins do to Zim-baby.

OJ was a marked man after that verdict....one way or the other.

This will be Zimmerman's fate too.

A little thing called Cosmic Justice.

It is not OK to hunt down and kill a kid.

It doesn't make you a man, it makes you a monster.

Monsters get what monsters deserve.

It's law of Universe.


CMerritt profile image

CMerritt 3 years ago from Pendleton, Indiana

Hi perrya!

Just scrolling through here, and it amazes me how some people just simply do not have the facts on their side.

One that continues to bother me is that they keep saying is...the cops told zimmerman to stay in the car.

That is NOT true...go read the transcripts....it clearly says...."we do not need you to follow him."

Big difference. NOT once was he told by the cops to do anything. It was a 911 dispatcher. After they told him the didn't "NEED" him to follow, they asked for an address to find him.... he went to get an accurate address at that time.

The bottom line is, they could NOT prove he was lying about his story, nor could they prove him guilty of ANYTHING.

I think it was very misfortunate it turned out like it did. Bad things happen every day. This one got national news because our POTUS made it national news.

Sorry to bump in here, but just felt the need to say what I did.

Great hub.

Chris


swordsbane profile image

swordsbane 3 years ago from Wisconsin

lovemychris: You have just crossed the line from "Guy who has a respectable opinion" to "Guy just spouting crazy sh*t"

Pay attention and back up a sec to Ralphs comments about the video you said proves Zimmerman wasn't hurt. Stick to FACTS. Explain THAT before you continue to resume your tirade about how anyone who thinks Zimmerman was innocent is in love with OJ.

And BTW: There is no such thing as "Cosmic Justice" Otherwise, Bush would be dead and Obama impeached and/or in prison for treason.


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

"Goldman kept fighting and fighting until he saw some semblance of justice.

And the Browns and Goldmans took OJ to civil court, which I certainly hope the Martins do to Zim-baby."

What do the parents of a murder victim pursuing a civil case have to do with us? If you don't like the laws of California or the decision of the jury, complain about that then.

Thankfully in this case, the laws of the State of Florida protect Zimmerman. He can not face civil trial after being found not guilty based on self defense.

"OJ was a marked man after that verdict....one way or the other."

Please, OJ was playing golf and wrote a book saying he didn't murder Ron Goldman and Nicole, but this is how I would do it if I did. I doubt you're going to see a book from George Zimmerman saying I don't hunt black teenagers, but this is how I would go about it.

Also, what can you not understand about OJ being in prison for armed robbery and kidnapping? He is not in jail for the little murder incident.


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

@merritt, there are all kinds of crazies out there. Martin kamikaze's.


Ralph 3 years ago

@merritt

I probably shouldn't be arguing with folks about this anymore, but some of their opinions just tick me off. I agree with your rationale. The only thing you were off about was George was not on the phone with a 911 dispatcher, he called the non-emergency line. That tells me that he was not over reacting, exagerrating the situation, or overly excited.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Zimmy won't go to prison where he belongs for this incident, but sooner or later--he will commit another.

This time not to a woman or black kid---but to a white man.

Since white men have worth in this corrupt system, Then he will pay.

And I will know it was for all his transgressions----especially murdering an innocent kid.

He is a marked man.

By his own actions, he is condemned.


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

"Zimmy won't go to prison where he belongs for this incident, but sooner or later--he will commit another.

This time not to a woman or black kid---but to a white man.

Since white men have worth in this corrupt system, Then he will pay."

Thank you for going back to look at the facts and putting together a logical, educated response. I am sure everyone will give this the attention it deserves.


junkseller profile image

junkseller 3 years ago from Michigan

"He can not face civil trial after being found not guilty based on self defense."

I don't think this is correct. It's my understanding that the immunity has to be sought through a pre-trial motion. It isn't something automatically granted. In the trial Zimmerman already faced, he had the benefit of a high bar (beyond a reasonable doubt). To get immunity, however, he would have to be the one to prove his actions were justified. It's a very different bar. It might also require him testifying. He may not be successful, or want to pursue, such a course.


Ralph 3 years ago

@junk

We'll see what the parents can pull off.

"O'Mara cited a portion of Florida's "Stand your Ground" law that says a person is immune from suit if they act reasonably and in self -defense, saying Zimmerman would be immune from another potential legal action - a civil suit from the Martin family."

They chose not use the law in the criminal case, but they can still use it in a civil case.

Here is the law.

776.085 Defense to civil action for damages; party convicted of forcible or attempted forcible felony.—

(1) It shall be a defense to any action for damages for personal injury or wrongful death, or for injury to property, that such action arose from injury sustained by a participant during the commission or attempted commission of a forcible felony. The defense authorized by this section shall be established by evidence that the participant has been convicted of such forcible felony or attempted forcible felony, or by proof of the commission of such crime or attempted crime by a preponderance of the evidence.

(2) For the purposes of this section, the term “forcible felony” shall have the same meaning as in s. 776.08.

(3) Any civil action in which the defense recognized by this section is raised shall be stayed by the court on the motion of the civil defendant during the pendency of any criminal action which forms the basis for the defense, unless the court finds that a conviction in the criminal action would not form a valid defense under this section.

(4) In any civil action where a party prevails based on the defense created by this section:

(a) The losing party, if convicted of and incarcerated for the crime or attempted crime, shall, as determined by the court, lose any privileges provided by the correctional facility, including, but not limited to:

1. Canteen purchases;

2. Telephone access;

3. Outdoor exercise;

4. Use of the library; and

5. Visitation.

(b) The court shall award a reasonable attorney’s fee to be paid to the prevailing party in equal amounts by the losing party and the losing party’s attorney; however, the losing party’s attorney is not personally responsible if he or she has acted in good faith, based on the representations of his or her client. If the losing party is incarcerated for the crime or attempted crime and has insufficient assets to cover payment of the costs of the action and the award of fees pursuant to this paragraph, the party shall, as determined by the court, be required to pay by deduction from any payments the prisoner receives while incarcerated.

(c) If the losing party is incarcerated for the crime or attempted crime, the court shall issue a written order containing its findings and ruling pursuant to paragraphs (a) and (b) and shall direct that a certified copy be forwarded to the appropriate correctional institution or facility.

Check out 5 (b). If Martin's parents file a civil lawsuit and lose they are responsible for all legal fees. Do you think they want to risk their payout from the insurance company of the homeowner's association. I'm guessing O'Mara and West would be more than happy to see the case filed.


Ralph 3 years ago

Sorry, 4 (b).


CMerritt profile image

CMerritt 3 years ago from Pendleton, Indiana

Wow, by reading some of the extremely biased and uninformed opinions........it is truly no-wonder why our country is divided and going down the drain.

Whatever happened to that old phrase...."hope & change"?


Ralph 3 years ago

@Merritt

"Hope and change" equals progressivism. Progressivism is now nothing more than a catch phrase for those wanting to abandon the principles that have worked for this country since the late 1700's to attempt to build a new socialist utopia.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Hope and change got obstructed by "we are better than you."

As always

As forever will be

World without end.

As long as people justify wrong-doing, who the hell wants to end it?

I get it. Zimmerman is better than Martin. Ergo, his death means less than Zimmerman taking responsibility for it.

Because:

@piersmorgan

REALITY: If George Zimmerman hadn't wrongly identified Trayvon Martin as 'trouble', and just stayed in his damn car, Trayvon would be alive.

End of story.


junkseller profile image

junkseller 3 years ago from Michigan

Not sure 776.085 is relevant. That statute bars someone from seeking civil damages if they have been convicted of forcible/attempted forcible felony or the preponderance of evidence proves such a crime was taking place. No such determination or conviction has been levied against Martin.

Can they try to establish that with Martin dead? I don't know, but I think they'd have a hard time establishing that Martin was committing a crime versus simply defending himself.

I think the more relevant statute is 776.032: Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.— http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2012/776.032

It contains the same sort of loser pays provision as the other statute, which certainly will be a factor in the decision to try or not.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Jul. 18th, 2013 at 4:03 pm

"I STILL say that Z could have gotten those minor scratches on the top of his head by running under a low hanging branch or scrambling into or out of a hiding place. That bullsh*t about allowing O’Smearer to hold up a giant piece of concrete and talk about repeatedly being bashed in the head was low even for a snake-in-the-grass piece of sh*t Florida defense lawyer.

And I’m SICK TO DEATH of hearing that those scratches were on the back of his head. They were on top of his head. Unless Trayvon was doing an extremely gentle pile-driver on him, there’s no way he got them from a beating. "

"And the blood in his head ran FORWARD if you look at the pictures. It would have run backward if he was on the bottom in the fight. "


Ralph 3 years ago

@junk

I guess we'll just have to see how this pans out. Apparently there is no established precedent in this kind of case in Florida. I think we are on opposite sides of this debate, but I appreciate your logical response.


Ralph 3 years ago

Also junk

"It contains the same sort of loser pays provision as the other statute, which certainly will be a factor in the decision to try or not."

It appears that Florida is trying to eliminate frivolous lawsuits. I can't see how anyone could disagree with that. The law shouldn't need to say that, but things have gone a little too far.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Too bad you couldn't be logical Ralph.

"There are also reports that there is an alien base on the dark side of the moon."

"Yes, his father was a very influential supreme court justice occupying a special position known only by the Illuminati. You must have triple-dog level 13 Top Secret clearance to know of his vast influence."

"I think I'm done for the evening. I have an early meeting with the Majestic 12."

and of course, the most illogical:

"This has become a case of race when it never should have been."

That's ALL this case was about.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

bit.ly/13EKXtD


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

"Too bad you couldn't be logical Ralph."

Too bad you didn't look at some of the facts I presented in my earlier comments. Unfortunately, the facts don't go along with the scenario you want to believe in.

My statement:

"This has become a case of race when it never should have been."

Your statement:

"That's ALL this case was about."

This case was about whether a young hispanic man murdered a young black man. The prosecution failed to prove that he did. They have no one to blame but themselves and a lack of evidence. You really need to go back and watch the trial.


swordsbane profile image

swordsbane 3 years ago from Wisconsin

Ralph: Standard tactic: ignore other peoples points and keep hammering your own. Pick apart what they say by not understanding it and claiming it means something else.

Love: You have repeatedly stated your opinion as fact and given either no evidence or evidence that is easily refuted, THEN you seem to ignore the refutation of your argument and go on to present another opinion as fact and start the whole thing over again.

AND

You ignore other people who remind you that you forgot to address a point someone else made, instead using the opportunity to present ANOTHER weak argument that you seem certain is going to sway us. The jury was not convinced to render a guilty verdict and you're not doing anything to change the minds of those of us who agree with the verdict, yet you insist that your opinion-presented-as-fact is obvious to anyone. Do you even understand the concept of "burden of proof"?

Please review the earlier posts made here that you never addressed and your own comments. Do a little analysis and come back to tell me everything you found.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

No thanks, I don't need mumbo-jumbo...you said yourself, I was Illuminati.

And you being Majestic 12 should know better.

No evidence?

They had the gun, the man with the gun, and the human being he killed.

Listen, here's some kindergarden logic for you.....

If you chase me down with a gun: you are an instigator.

If I fight for my life, I am standing my ground.

You, as the killer, are committing a crime.

Just cause you're white and your daddy is connected doesn't change that.

A stupid jury doesn't change it either.

Nor do stupid lawyers and stupid laws.

A black kid in a hoodie should not a target make........

And LIES shouldn't be allowed in court......Shame!


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Dear sword:

Please tell me what facts are wrong.

Zimmy followed Martin with a gun, shot him and killed him.

Had he stayed in his car, Martin would be alive.

It's all his fault, yet he takes no blame.

Instead, you white people smear Trayvon---as if he deserved to be killed like that.

Natch: I know what went down here, and their lies don't make any sense whatsoever.

Like really---this kid is going to GO BACK and confront a crazy maniac with a gun?

On what planet?

Planet White Supremacy.


swordsbane profile image

swordsbane 3 years ago from Wisconsin

Love: "Please tell me what facts are wrong.

Zimmy followed Martin with a gun, shot him and killed him.

Had he stayed in his car, Martin would be alive.

It's all his fault, yet he takes no blame."

These facts... by themselves do not a murder make. What you have failed to prove is that Zimmerman planned to kill Trayvon and that Trayvon did nothing to provoke a deadly response from Zimmerman. Zimmerman claims he was justified and there is no evidence that says he is lying. There is only people like you saying "I don't believe him cuz he's white and Trayvon's black."

As to which "facts" you have provided that are wrong. I already reminded you of the video you posted which you claim proves Zimmerman wasn't injured, but really doesn't prove anything at all, which Ralph explained to you and yet you completely ignored both Ralphs remarks and mine pointing them out.

You claim it's about race, yet provide no evidence of this beyond the tendency of some people to ignore crimes where a black person is the victim. You say this trial is about race like it is a fact. It is not. Unless you can provide some more evidence.

Can you?


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

GOD.......*sigh*

Zimmerman only followed Martin because he was black, and he assumed he was a trouble-maker.

Because of his stereotyping Martin as a "fkn punk", Martin is DEAD.

Get it?


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

The majority of people responding to this Hub want to talk about facts and logic. You have done an outstanding job of avoiding both.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Really?

So it's a fact I'm Illuminati and you're Majestic 12?

Yeeehawwwwww

I'm avoiding nothing.

YOU are.

A man killed a kid.

The man had a gun and the kid had skittles.

A gun is for killing.

1+1=2


Ralph 3 years ago

@perrya

Well, if you ever want to kill a discussion on one of your Hubs, just send lovemychris a message asking her to weigh in on the topic.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

ahahaha! This was a long discussion Majestic. If you don't know that.......well, Cheney needs to twerk your programming some.


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

Okay, carry on........;)


swordsbane profile image

swordsbane 3 years ago from Wisconsin

love: So... All I have to do is have Skittles on me when I commit a crime and I'm automatically a victim? Wow... I had no idea.

A gun is for killing? Is that all? I suppose that because the police all have guns all they do is kill people, right?

Zimmerman followed Trayvon because he's black. We know this because he called Trayvon a "punk"... Wow... "Punk" is now a racial slur? Well.. I can't argue with that.

I'm sorry. I've been doing this "critical thinking" thing all wrong. Apparently, all you have to do is say something with conviction and it turns out to be the truth. Now... I can win any debate on the internet. Thanks, lovemychris. I am in your debt.

Seriously... you got any REAL evidence?


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

uhyeah.....

The gun was Zimmy's.

He shot Martin with it.

Martin died.

1,2,3.

Simple really.

makes me wonder why you all make it so complicated?


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

"r/e Zimmerman: anyone else notice quite the coincidence that the Same cops who Lied in court AND released him after murder, witnessed his Heroics?"


swordsbane profile image

swordsbane 3 years ago from Wisconsin

@love: Um.. no one denies Zimmerman killed Trayvon... Even Zimmerman. How does that have anything to do with anything?

You're asking me to believe the cops (and Zimmerman) lied without a shred of evidence. I (and others) have asked you to provide SOME kind of evidence for your claims and you consistently ignore those requests. Why is that?


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

"r/e Zimmerman: anyone else notice quite the coincidence that the Same cops who Lied in court AND released him after murder, witnessed his Heroics?"

A Seminole County sheriff's deputy responded to the scene. Who did you expect to respond to an over-turned vehicle on a highway off-ramp in Sanford, Seminole County? California Highway Patrol?


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Officer's Cellphone Pics Show Zimmerman May NOT Have Been Punched the Night he Killed Trayvon http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/06/03/1213239/-...

**********

"While Mr. Zimmerman acknowledges that he allowed his financial situation to be misstated in court, the defense will emphasize that in all other regards, Mr. Zimmerman has been forthright and cooperative."

uh huh....riiiiiiight


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Here is the ultimate proof that the whole Zimmy story is a lie:

"Zimmerman Alternate Juror is on Hannity now."

***********

Fox news is the Zimmerman support club, just like they were with ElPresidente Bush.

That my friends, tells me ALL I need to know.

Zim got away with murder, with a little help from his friends.

RW cabal, in all walks of life.

IMO

Liars, liars, pants and dresses on fires.


swordsbane profile image

swordsbane 3 years ago from Wisconsin

@love: "Here is the ultimate proof that the whole Zimmy story is a lie:

"Zimmerman Alternate Juror is on Hannity now.""

Regardless of what clinches it for YOU, ACTUAL evidence needs to be a little more substantial. That article off the Daily Kos isn't EVIDENCE. It is supposition. It is an explanation of doubt about Zimmerman's story. There is nothing in there that PROVES anything. It is alleging that there are inconsistencies in Zimmerman's story and questions it, yet shows no actual inconsistencies or good reasons for those questions. It also draws the erroneous conclusion that if any portion of Zimmerman's testimony is the least bit inaccurate, then EVERYTHING he said was a lie and therefore he MUST be guilty of murder, neither of which is true.

If you've ever HAD your nose broken from a punch to the face, you would know that nothing in the EMT's report is very unusual. It is not unusual to have surprisingly little blood from one punch, and Zimmerman said he was punched in the nose ONCE. The other times he was punched "in the head" One punch to the nose isn't likely to transfer a lot of blood to Trayvon's hands and therefore isn't likely to transfer back to Zimmerman's head, and depending on where and how the other blows landed, the lack of other serious lacerations isn't unusual either.

Your "evidence" is actually nothing of the sort. It makes several erroneous statements, then draws the unwarranted conclusion from those erroneous statements that Zimmerman's testimony MUST BE a total fabrication. Do you have anything else?


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Well, actually, your evidence is just the same.

Where does it come from?

Zimmerman's mouth.

He said he was punched, he said his mouth was covered by Martin's hand, and his hair was grabbed and head pounded.

Yet not one shred of Zim dna was found on Martin. No blood. Nada.

Does not compute.

Also--Zim lied about money, and got his wife to lie in court.

Lie about one thing: I don't trust you on anything.

Plus--we find out that 1/2 of jurors thought he was guilty--but some strange reason, the "law" made it impossible to charge?

She said "the stand your ground thing".

All Zim had to do was say he feared for his life, and that was enough to aquit.

Plus, that juror was quite enamored of "Georgie".....

Fair and impartial? No way. She took a side.

He also lied to his doctor. Told her his nose was broken--and hey--just take my word on it.

Why did he refuse testing? Maybe cause the Adderall in HIS system?

Or he knew his nose wasn't broken at all.

*****

Nah--all your evidence comes from the killer, with a very strong reason to lie: Avoiding life in prison.

And he can't tell me he brought a gun for no reason.

As the saying goes: "don't bring a gun, unless you're prepared to use it."

No--to me it's a humungous travesty of justice--which you people are defending.

Which is your right: just as it is mine to call BullHockyPuck.


swordsbane profile image

swordsbane 3 years ago from Wisconsin

I'm only pointing out your astounding LACK of evidence at this point. YOU think he's guilty so YOU have to prove he is, not simply question the story Zimmerman tells. That's the way the justice system works and for a very good reason. 11/12th of the jury can find him guilty, but if the 12th says "innocent" the best you'll get is a hung jury and a retrial. Again... that's the way the justice system is SUPPOSED to work, regardless of what you THINK you know about the case.

There is a big difference between bringing a gun and being prepared to use it and actually using it. Anyone who HAS used a gun to defend themselves understands that. You apparently don't. A man with a gun is not a criminal. A man with a gun prepared to use it is not a criminal. You speak as if the only reason to carry a gun is because you're looking for someone to shoot.

Sorry. I don't see a travesty of justice. I'm not defending Zimmerman. I'm defending the trial. I don't know the details of the case. YOU don't know the details of the case. The people called upon to sit in the jury box are the ONLY people qualified to comment on the guilt or innocence of Zimmerman in any capacity other than pure speculation. This isn't the OJ trial. This isn't a mountain of evidence discarded on a technicality. This is the testimony of the person who killed Trayvon saying that he was afraid for his life and pulled his gun and fired it in self defense. This is LEGAL even without the Stand Your Ground law, and a REASONABLE interpretation of the evidence can make that case. If you convict on those grounds, you are subverting justice. You don't have to like it, but if you want me to buy your "theory" you have to do better than you have up till now. Your interpretation of the evidence is not obvious to anyone except apparently you. If this is all you got, then I submit that you have convinced yourself that Zimmerman is guilty and YOU are the one trying to make a travesty of justice. This case is about a kid who died. It is a tragedy. It is a terrible thing for his family to live through, but punishing Zimmerman despite the evidence and his acquittal would make a tragic situation worse. You punish him if he's guilty of a crime, and I'll say this one more time:

THAT HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

And?

I can think what I want....and I say he hunted down and killed a kid in cold blood.

Me punish Zimmy?

How exactly?

He is free to go on and use his gun again.

All he has to say is "I am the victim"...voila--the Waa Waa defense.

Funny tho....it didn't work for the abused woman who fired warning shots at her abuser.......she got 20 yrs, and no one died.

Guess the jury didn't believe her.

Yeah....justice. I think not. I think it's more like Just-Us.

You got friends in places....you can do whatever you want.

And I think we will see down the road just exactly what Zimmy got away with, and what kind of people he and his family are, and that jury will be ashamed and horrified.

That is my opinion as a United States Citizen.

Sorry you can't accept it. That's your problem, not mine.


swordsbane profile image

swordsbane 3 years ago from Wisconsin

@love: I'm not the one pushing flimsy evidence. All I have asked you for time and time again is the evidence to support your claim that Zimmerman is a murderer. What you have provided so far is laughable. If it was enough for you, then you are extremely gullible. I never said you didn't have the right to your opinion. I just asked you to back up what you said. You couldn't do that. That doesn't mean that you can't continue to have your opinion, but your attitude about my response to your "evidence" is just accusations that I "can't accept it" Not an explanation as to why I am wrong, just an assertion that I am. I fail to understand your apparent belief that what you have told me so far would (and should) convince me you are right. If you aren't going to provide compelling evidence, then that's fine, but don't act surprised when no one buys into your claims.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Listen, I have told you many times my evidence.

ONCE AGAIN:

Zimmerman went after him.

Zimmerman had a gun.

The kid was killed by said gun.

Zimmerman initiated the actions that led to a child's death, and pulled the trigger that killed him:

Had he stayed IN his car, and let the police handle it, kid would be alive: Guilty

*********

Now here's your proof:

Cause Zimmy said so.

*****

BTW--What right did he even have to call the police?


swordsbane profile image

swordsbane 3 years ago from Wisconsin

And once again... that's not PROOF. That is the accepted facts about what happened, by both the prosecution AND the defense.

The part about "initiating the actions that led to the child's death" That is an assertion that needs proof. That is not proof by itself, and your inference by statement: Zimmerman "went after" him is also an assertion. It brings to mind stalking or hunting rather than following. It also needs evidence.

As I said earlier; having a gun does not mean you are a criminal. It doesn't mean you're out to kill anyone or even prepared to kill someone if you have to, and if simply pulling the trigger and killing someone means you are a murderer, then all of the police and every soldier who's seen combat need to be locked up now.

And calling a NON-EMERGENCY hotline to report a suspicious person in his neighborhood? You ask what RIGHT does he have?

What right do you have calling the police when you hear something suspicious in the apartment above you? What right do you have to call the police when you see someone outside your house that you don't know?

Seriously? What RIGHT?

Like I said... a lot of opinion.... and few facts. Please let me know when you have something important to add.


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

Z was the watch person for the condo complex, it was his duty to call in suspicious activity in his eyes. Now, whether you agree it was suspicious activity is moot because you are not Z. Crime had been recently reported, a witness was victim of said crime. Z knew this, so put it all together and u can see Z's state of mind, perfectly logical whether T was pink or yellow, Z would be suspicious and observe him and follow to see if his hunch was valid. T thought Z was a thug and rightly so. The situation was not conducive to understanding. However, Z, decided to circle back and not go home. That seems to show his state of mind that perhaps he wanted to confront Z.


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

"Zimmerman went after him."

Following a suspicious person in your neighborhood is not a crime.

"Zimmerman had a gun."

Carrying a gun when you have a CHL is not a crime.

"The kid was killed by said gun."

The jury decided that also was not a crime.

"BTW--What right did he even have to call the police?"

The same right that everyone else has.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

OK, let me get this straight.....

A kid, whose father LIVES in the neighborhood is suspicious for walking home?

And it's ok with all of you for a man WITH A GUN to follow that kid, whose father LIVES in the neighborhood?

******

Oh, but it's not because he's black, even tho Zimmerman made numerous calls to the police ABOUT black men.

Sounds to me like Martin was guilty with no chance of innocence---due to his being black and all.

And if some MANIAC was ever to call MY kid a fkn punk, and chased MY kid with a gun..........and Killed him?

I would not have the grace and dignity that Martins do.

Of course, they're used to it, being black in America.

That's why Trayvon is dead, after all.

He was followed by a lunatic, feared for his life.

And no way on God's green earth do I believe that Martin turned back around to confront Zimmerman, like Zimmerman said.

Not in a million years.

Zimmerman is guilty as sin, and good thing there is such a thing as cause and effect in this universe.

No one escapes the effect of their actions.

I'll wait.


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

Well, Chris, there are many like you who scream the crime about race and only see it one way because these same people are racists and incapable of seeing through color. What Z said about T was a general statement of frustration with regards to crime in the area and the recent breakins were done by blacks. If they had been green, Z would have said the same thing. Acted the same way. He was the watchman, that is what they do when suspicious activity or people present themselves. As I said, T could have gone home, most would if being followed by someone who might be a thug. Yet, instead he seemed to want to confront Z. It appears that way.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Well, according to T's friend--he was going home, and Z came out of nowhere and ambushed him.

Then the screaming for help began.

Then gun-shot. Then dead boy.

That's the scenario I believe. I don't believe Zimmy.

You do.

You don't believe his friend.

Apparently the jury didn't either. The one on tv was quite enamored of Georgie. Yeah: she was fair. NOT.

So--you believe Z's incredible fantasy, and I don't.

Your right: and mine.

And I also believe Z's cousin, who says he's a racist from a racist family. Because his father said "the only racists are black people"

I think he was hopped up on drugs, and saw the opportunity to harass and terrify a black kid,.

--and please don't give me that bull about why he had a gun.

He meant to use it, and he did IMO


swordsbane profile image

swordsbane 3 years ago from Wisconsin

T's friend has every reason to sell that story, just like Zimmerman has reason to lie to stay out of jail. All of the witnesses have reason to tell a different version of events except a few (like the person Z was on the phone with) Take out the witness testimony and you're left with the physical evidence, which is hopelessly incomplete. It doesn't paint ANY particular story, but it IS consistent with Zimmermans statements to the police. Therefore, Zimmerman is considered to be telling the truth. This is what "Innocent until proven guilty" means. You can bitch about it all you want, but the bottom line is that your assertion that Zimmerman is guilty is unfounded. Of course you've already made up your mind, as have most of the people who've heard about the trial, but repeated statements that you are correct don't make it true. You must PROVE your conclusion.

As for being a "travesty of justice" That is simply not true. As I said, it is the justice system working exactly the way it's supposed to work. It err's on the side of letting the guilty walk free for a very good reason. It keeps innocent people from being locked up for the flimsiest of reasons. Even if Zimmerman is everything you say he is, it is still better to let him walk, given the evidence of the case. Could he possibly kill someone else? Yes, but there are murders walking free today simply because they are protected by the same rights you and I are protected by, and removing those rights for those murderers means removing them for you and I and everyone else as well, and that is simply too high a price to pay. That should be obvious, even to you.

As for the gun... You have to prove that he was out to kill Trayvon before you can chime in about why he carried the gun. Simply HAVING a gun is proof of nothing. Lot's of people carry firearms. A very tiny percentage of them have anything close to criminal activity planned for their future. You're using him being armed as evidence that he was up to no good. That is what I have a problem with.... Unless you're one of those people who think that no one should ever own a gun... in which case I'm done. I've tried to have rational discussions with gun-control advocates before and it never works.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

If all you say is true, how come a woman is serving 20 years for firing warning shots at an abuser?

All these excuses about what a great system, blah blah blah.....

It's a Horrible SYSTEM!

It's unfair and biased and money can grease any skids.

And I personally know a man serving life on flimsy evidence.

But he's black in a lily white world, and he never stood a chance either.

You can deny, pretend, ignore all you want, but you are ok with the fact a man shot a kid FOR NOTHING.

Just his Adderall-driven paranoia, and life-long taught racism. IMO

I'll give you this: it's not his fault his parents taught him to hate. And if he really was abusing his cousin he has real mental problems.

But, we need professional jurors who know what they are doing, and don't take sides, as b37 so obviously did.

And we need laws that don't allow maniacs to shoot first, make up story later.

If you honestly believe Zimmerman, I have to wonder about your motives and common sense.


swordsbane profile image

swordsbane 3 years ago from Wisconsin

@love: I didn't say that the system always works. I said that when the system works the way it was intended, then that is a good thing. And I said that this is an example of the system working the way it was intended. When someone is not convicted without evidence, that is a good thing. The case you're talking about is a case of the evidence saying one thing, and a technicality saying another, and a judge overreacting to it. That is the system broken because the people involved didn't do their jobs.

I am not aware of any money changing hands in the Zimmerman case. I'm not aware of any favors being traded. I'm not aware of any policeman, judge, lawyer or juror who did not do what they were supposed to or who did something they were NOT supposed to do. Are you?

I am not pretending anything or ignoring anything, and I am NOT okay with a man shooting a kid for no reason. However YOU DON'T KNOW it was for "no reason" You have simply stated it. This is not my opinion. This is a fact. If you believe otherwise, please show me in the record of this debate where you provided evidence that Zimmerman had no reason to shoot Trayvon. The reasons you have given for why you believe it are not evidence. They are supposition. As much of a "case" you can make for Zimmerman being a cold-blooded murderer I can make one for him being an innocent man who was jumped and thought his life was in danger. Whether you believe Zimmerman is guilty or not is not important. Whether I believe Zimmerman is guilty is not important. Do we know whether he is guilty or not for sure? No. I don't, and YOU don't. The trial was supposed to resolve that. The answer we got was "Not guilty." There was nothing inappropriate that took place during the trial. There is no reason to believe that any evidence was withheld from the jury (evidence which probably included some things we did not get from the media)

If you believe in the concept of Innocent until proven guilty and the concept of reasonable doubt, then you should side with the jury and accept the verdict. However, if you want to see Zimmerman punished, then you don't care about evidence. I have no right to stop you, but don't try to pretend you are after justice. You're only a punk looking for satisfaction. The evidence doesn't matter to you, because you're happy with the perspective you have, outside of the neighborhood where it happened, having no idea what kind of people Zimmerman OR Trayvon really are... just what you've been getting from the TV/Radio/Internet. You feel confident passing judgement on a situation you are informed about by people who have a rotten track record for getting the details right, and you are happy to ruin someone's life or even see them dead on that basis alone. Your defense of this perspective seems to be that you are "convinced" that Zimmerman is racist, and that makes him a murderer. Even if "racist" automatically meant "murderer" (which it doesn't, just in case you were wondering) then you still haven't provided any basis for this belief that Zimmerman is racist. Your best evidence is that a member of his family is racist, and we are meant to infer that this means that he is too, never mind evidence to the contrary.... on the word of a cousin who clearly dislikes him and has no evidence himself to corroborate HIS story.

So yes, I deny that Zimmerman is guilty of murder, because you have not convinced me that he is. You haven't provided any substantial reason for me to be convinced. Despite what you may be thinking, this is not the same as saying that he is innocent. If you cannot understand the difference, then you have no understanding of either the verdict or our legal system.

All you see is someone YOU think is guilty walking away free, and that's all that matters to you. I happen to think that it is the evidence, rather than what I believe, that matters. I suspect that you think that what you've shown me IS evidence, and I find that somewhat sad, and there is probably nothing I can say to change your mind, which I find even sadder, and now you've begun to paint me with the same racism brush you've painted everyone who has the audacity to suspect that Zimmerman might actually be innocent. It is impossible for you to see that I could hold my views if I was really an impartial and compassionate person, so I MUST have an ulterior motive, and in a few more exchanges you'll probably have me pegged as someone who hates black people. You will probably do it without even realizing the irony.

So I don't think anything more is to be gained by continuing this argument. You keep saying the same things over and over again, as if I haven't understood what you're saying or that I haven't been paying attention to the trial. I keep saying the same things to you because you haven't acknowledged half the things I've said and the way you respond to the other half shows me you haven't understood them. Neither of us can get anything really constructive out of continuing. I'm done.


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

"If all you say is true, how come a woman is serving 20 years for firing warning shots at an abuser?"

Well first, the case is not as simple as some would like us to believe and she did turn down a plea bargain. It was also a black on black crime and the race baiters like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Ben Crump didn't see a way to line their pockets. She really could have benefited from a better defense. If race baiters like Al and Jesse really cared about black people they would have helped her to get better representation.

"All these excuses about what a great system, blah blah blah.....

It's a Horrible SYSTEM!"

You are once again showing your ignorance and your inability to educate yourself on the subjects you comment on. I suggest you take a look at the justice systems in other countries like Singapore, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, North Korea, ....

"Just his Adderall-driven paranoia, and life-long taught racism. IMO"

Unfortunately nobody in this world is perfect. When drugs like Adderall are prescribed they really do benefit some people. They have the exact opposite effect on those people from what you describe. Stimulants like Adderall for those people are actually calming and improve their focus. Did Martin have a prescription for the marijuana in his system? Marijuana has not been shown to improve anyone's mental ability.

I planned on responding to the rest of your comments, but I know you won't comprehend it. You should really watch the testimony from the case and educate yourself on the laws in this country.


Ralph 3 years ago

@swordsbane

"I keep saying the same things to you because you haven't acknowledged half the things I've said and the way you respond to the other half shows me you haven't understood them. Neither of us can get anything really constructive out of continuing. I'm done."

I saw your response after I posted mine. You are absolutely correct that the folks that want to get Zimmerman refuse to look at the evidence or our laws. My only disagreement with your response is the amount of time you spent on it. She doesn't care about your argument or the facts because Martin had skittles.


Ralph 3 years ago

Ok, I should have responded to this one.

"But, we need professional jurors who know what they are doing, and don't take sides, as b37 so obviously did."

Professional jurors are called judges. They are supposed to be experts on the law. The purpose of the jury is to be judged by one's peers with a judge presiding over the trial. Please educate yourself just a little bit on the laws of this country.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Educate yourself on the reality.

Judges can be just as corrupt as lying lawyers and lying defendants.

Or did you miss the one who was found to be taking $$ to convict kids and send them into the school-to-prison-pipeline-for-Wall-Street-profits?

@sword:

"So yes, I deny that Zimmerman is guilty of murder, because you have not convinced me that he is"

**********

I am not trying to convince you of anything. I am stating my opinions....which you seem to have such a problem with.

@ralphy-boy:

Do you seriously think everyone must think like you---or be an ignoramus, unable to comprehend anything?

News-Flash:

There has been a sit-in at the Fla state capital since the verdict; demanding an end to Stand Your Ground.

I am not alone, and we are not all ignorant.


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

"News-Flash:

There has been a sit-in at the Fla state capital since the verdict; demanding an end to Stand Your Ground.

I am not alone, and we are not all ignorant."

That's brilliant when considering this was not a SYG case. I'm sure they are a smart bunch.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Oh really?

State of Fla expanded law to include outside of the home.

And,SYG is explicitly mentioned in the jury instructions:

"If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."

COOPER: Because of the two options you had, second degree murder or manslaughter, you felt neither applied?

JUROR: Right. Because of the heat of the moment and the Stand Your Ground. He had a right to defend himself. If he felt threatened that his life was going to be taken away from him or he was going to have bodily harm, he had a right

**********

Sounds to me like it got him off!

Of course, that juror failed to mention why Trayvon Martin didn't have the same right...and that's where I think race comes in.

"That colored boy" should have just run away when ole "Georgie" was chasing him with a gun. It's not poor ole "good-hearted Georgie's" fault.

I mean, that's how "those people live"......(as opposed to her people?)

SYG=License to Kill

Brought to you by ALEC and the NRA.


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

No, the defense didn't use the SYG law to defend Zimmerman. They argued justifiable use of deadly force in self defense. SYG deals mostly with the right to protect your home or vehicle from an intruder. It is called the "Castle Doctrine" in some states. Here is the whole definition of "Justifiable Use of Deadly Force" from the jury instructions, not just the one paragraph that said George didn't have to retreat.

JUSTIFIABLE USE OF DEADLY FORCE

An issue in this case is whether George Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It is a defense to the crime of Second Degree Murder, and the lesser included offense of Manslaughter, if the death of Trayvon Martin resulted from the justifiable use of deadly force.

“Deadly force” means force likely to cause death or great bodily harm.

A person is justified in using deadly force if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself.

In deciding whether George Zimmerman was justified in the use of deadly force, you must judge him by the circumstances by which he was surrounded at the time the force was used. The danger facing George Zimmerman need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, George Zimmerman must have actually believed that the danger was real.

If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

In considering the issue of self-defense, you may take into account the relative physical abilities and capacities of George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin.

If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether George Zimmerman was justified in the use of deadly force, you should find George Zimmerman not guilty.

However, if from the evidence you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that George Zimmerman was not justified in the use of deadly force, you should find him guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved.


Ralph 3 years ago

@ love

Here is Florida's SYG law. Please look at the wording of 1a and 1b. It says a person is presumed to "to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm" under these conditions. It's essentially taking the burden off of the homeowner of having to prove they were in physical danger if they use force against an intruder. By wanting to appeal this law, people are essentially saying that you should have to flee your home and run in fear from a criminal.

776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—

(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and

(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.

(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:

(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or

(b) The person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or

(c) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or

(d) The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.

(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

(4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.

(5) As used in this section, the term:

(a) “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.

(b) “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.

(c) “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

"SYG=License to Kill"

SYG actually equals the right to defend your home or vehicle from an intruder. The people making all of the arguments, including yourself, against SYG and relating it to the Zimmerman trial don't appear to have actually read any of the laws. All they do is spout off a few sentences that some liberal goof or anti-gun nut concentrated on in a biased article.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Welp, Martin was guilty of none of those. He was walking the frig home, for god's sakes!

And since the juror b37 said she voted BASED on syg......that judge must have given wrong instructions, eh?

Miss-Trial!

And I suppose you heard juror b29?

"Zimmerman got away with murder."

SOME one Fkd up here.....Royally.


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

Are you on hard drugs?


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

No--I don't do Adderall, like Zimmy......never know what those chemicals do to the brain. Might make one have a sort of Columbine or Virginia Tech incident.

Might make one paranoid out of ones mind, and see devils everywhere.

I know it's used to "control" high-strung people, but my personal view is those hard pharmaceutical drugs lead people to commit murder and suicide.

Much more calming and relaxing to smoke a little weed.

I don't know, but from my experience, weed makes one silly, but big pharma drugs cause mayhem.

Ah, but what do I know?

After all, I said from the start Zimmy was guilty of murder in cold blood.

Oooops---looks like a juror thinks so too!

geeee, maybe more than one.

Maybe 37 was the oddball---ya think?

she might as well buy the Zimmy is a hero poster that's coming out soon.

I can see her now, swooning in her bedroom.

"Oh Zimmy, Zimmmmmmy........if only I wasn't married.........

Oh, is that mean?

So sorry--I know you righty's have been so kind and tolerant of Trayvon.

*snark*


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

"marijuana-smoking, thieving, racist-remarking teenager."

Gosh, the love just ooooozes from the words, doesn't it?


Ralph 3 years ago

@love

Alright, you're batshit crazy. I'm done discussing this with you.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Good. Your idea of a "discussion" is "I'm right, and you're wrong"

Stay tuned....you will all have to eat your words.

This is not over by far.


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

@chris- actually, you are guilty of your own words also. You only see things your way because of race.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Ummmm, Nooooooo.

I see things like this: This maniac killed a kid and got away with it.

The race comes into it

1. He was following him because of it

2. He got off because of it

He was portrayed as a wonderful victim, and the kid was portrayed as a gangsta

And, at least I can converse without the personal insults employed by Jackie-boy and Ralphy-boy. ALWAYS with the politics of personal destruction.

Right Wing to the core.


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

As to #2, I would agree that a more balanced jury would seem to be fair. But, I suspect that during its selection, the DA found it problematic because those of color had already convicted Z in their mind, so, they excluded them or the defense did because of that. it seems the B29 juror simply did not understand the elements of the law to convict. You do not need intent to be convicted of manslaughter, but she thought so, wrong.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

But who told her that?

The judge?

And so--you must also think that white people had already convicted Martin......In which case--he had no chance at all at justice, since it was 5 whites against one minority.

Hence-- the problem with the whole system!

Like I said before: we need professional jurors.

Those who know the law, and get paid to make the decision right.

No bias, no axe to grind, no swooning over defendant for Christ sakes.

How in hell would b37 know that "George's heart was in the right place"?

And you see it here on hp......People are repeating that "Martin attacked Zimmerman", as if it's proven fact!

It's Zimmerman's story---nothing more.

I mean: who would go back and confront someone they were running away from?

Give me a break.

An now he gets his weapons back.

Lovely.

Thereby telling the world that it's OK to gun down a kid because you are a predjudiced twerp.

Chase someone down, and if they dare defend their life: Kill em.

After all, Dead men tell no tales.


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

Well, everyone is entitled to their perception of this and the evidence presented. I am sure one day, somewhere, someone will take justice into their own hands and take Z out. He expects it and there is enough passion and crazies out there to do it. That will only add tragedy to this event.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

He will get exactly what he deserves....as we all do in the end, imo.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

oh of course......right wingers as phony as 3 dollar bill. Glenn Beck and Fox school of fake news. Zimmy the Hero!

"What did occur was that an accident occurred where a car slid on it’s side into a median. People at the scene called 911, which went to the Sanford office of the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office. BEFORE responding to the 911 call, News Ball.com reports that Seminole Sheriff’s Dept. Officer Patrick Rehder, a self-styled friend and supporter of Zimmerman, contacted Zimmerman by cell phone directing him to go to the accident so as to appear to be a hero. "

http://ivn.us/penigma/2013/07/25/george-zimmermans...

GOD!


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

stirring, heart-felt words: what it's like to be black in Amerika:

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2013/07/quest...


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

Its america


Martin 3 years ago

She purposely spelled America with a "K" as some kind of petty insult. She doesn't understand what America is. It is not the president or the "evil" republicans. It is the land and all of us that live in it.

Then she posts a stupid article by Ahmir-Khalib Thompson. Thompson is worth about 16 million dollars. He made his money by marketing crappy music. If that's not the American dream, I don't know what is.

I've had it with blacks complaing about the Trayvon Martin verdict. There was not enough evidence to convict Zimmerman so he was found not guilty. Get over it.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

I love the Roots.

And you appear to have 0 ounce of any understanding of anything.

Whooosh--right over your head.

And I spelled it Amerika in honor of Lil Wayne, who has a song out now called God Bless Amerika.

Rolling Stone had a real good revue of it--it's a social commentary piece.

As Kurt Cobaine said: "The purpose of youth is to challenge corruption"

Not accept and glorify it.

Not enough evidence?......My aunt fanny. Not enough good people on that jury.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

@ChloeAngyal

"You need to change your behaviour so I'll stop oppressing you" is the definition of privilege.


Martin 3 years ago

chris,

"And I spelled it Amerika in honor of Lil Wayne, who has a song out now called God Bless Amerika.

Rolling Stone had a real good revue of it--it's a social commentary piece."

Great! That's the song with the video of the great patriot Lil Wayne jumping on th American flag after it was thrown on the ground. How stupid of me for thinking you were being insulting to our country.

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/music-art...

"As Kurt Cobaine said: "The purpose of youth is to challenge corruption"

Not accept and glorify it."

I like Nirvana's music, but I don't exactly see Curt Cobain as a brilliant political commentator. I somehow doubt long-term heroin addict and millionaire Cobain learned much about corruption and government prior to blowing his brains out with a 12 gauge at the ripe, old age of 27.


Martin 3 years ago

chris,

"Not enough evidence?......My aunt fanny. Not enough good people on that jury."

You obviously have not watched the trial so what do you know about the evidence? You need to leave the trailer park every once in a while to see the real world and stop listening to the far left goons.


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

Rappers like Lil Wayne are bad idols for young blacks to aspire to. Obama would be the best.


Martin 3 years ago

perrya,

"Rappers like Lil Wayne are bad idols for young blacks to aspire to. Obama would be the best."

What do you mean? He managed to shoot himself at age 12 and dropped out of school at 14. He's been convicted of felony weapon and drug charges and has spent time at Rikers Island. He sounds like a great American and well deserving of the respect that chris gives him.


Владимир 3 years ago

Причины женской эпиляции: Фото женской эпиляции. Одиночество. Если у женщины по какой-либо причине нет кремового партнёра, то в это время эпиляция служит неплохим способом снятия маникюрного напряжения. Излишнее возбуждение. Просмотр стилистического фильма, чтение романической книги, просто тёплые приятные воспоминания о любимом человеке — всё это может вызвать непреодолимое желание, приводящее к немедленной эпиляции


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Dear Martin.....

I suggest you read some of the things Right Wingers, Tea-Baggers and Republicans say about the current president of the United States, and then come back and talk to me about insulting this country.

Trust me......jumping on a flag is TAME compared to the RACIST bullcrap that comes from there.

Do NOT ever dare question anyone's patriotism after what we've seen starting in 2007.

Not to mention, their continual support for the Bush family and their various and sundry partners in crime.

Jumping on the flag?

Pullleeeeeeze: try flushing it down the toilet.

I grew up with music as social commentary.....and guess what?

The elders all said the same thing about it!

Rebel with a cause.....I want MY country back.

The one where it's not OK to kill a black kid because you're a racist.

I am deffering to his cousin's words......SO SUE ME.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Stand your Guns has got to go

The "freedom" to kill at will has got to go

Guns kill. Some people should never ever have them.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

For years, critics of hip-hop music have accused it of being a materialistic and misogynistic creation of modern urban communities. However in the video below, UK wordsmith Akala uses another narrative to explain the emergence of hip-hop. Watch if you are interested in historical and spiritual roots of this culture, which are shown to be antithetical to what many people think hip-hop is all about today.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedd...


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

ooops, sorry: by Kojo Koram · July 29,2013

Media and Entertainment Society and Culture


Martin 3 years ago

chris

"I suggest you read some of the things Right Wingers, Tea-Baggers and Republicans say about the current president of the United States, and then come back and talk to me about insulting this country.

Trust me......jumping on a flag is TAME compared to the RACIST bullcrap that comes from there."

The flag doesn't represent the government, it represents the country. Americans dishonoring the flag are just stupid. It seems to have become popular among some in the black community. This was demonstrated after the Zimmerman verdict.

You're argument holds no value anyway. It's like arguing that you shouldn't get a ticket for driving 70 in a school zone because some other guy drove through it 75 one time.

"Do NOT ever dare question anyone's patriotism after what we've seen starting in 2007."

Piss off. I was still in the military in 2007 and I've been to the other side of the world. Your views of this country come only from far left liberal goons.

"Not to mention, their continual support for the Bush family and their various and sundry partners in crime."

What a typical, ignorant liberal response. It doesn't matter what the argument is, there is always a need to bring George Bush into it.

"Jumping on the flag?

Pullleeeeeeze: try flushing it down the toilet."

Spoken like a true patriot. Most of us realize what Lil Wayne did is not a crime, but we don't have to respect him. I would want to give Lil Wayne a lil beatdown if I saw him doing that.

"Rebel with a cause.....I want MY country back.

The one where it's not OK to kill a black kid because you're a racist."

Maybe you should actually learn a little about history before saying that you want race relations to go back to how they were. How far back do you want to go? Do you want to go back to the days of slavery before 1865? Do want to go back to the segregation of the 1960's? Do you want to go back prior to 1989 when we had our first black Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Colin Powell, who went on to become our first black Secretary of State under George Bush in 2001? Or maybe you just want to go back only five years when we had our first half black president elected by roughly 50% of white people and 96% of black people? That sure demonstrated the white racial bias in our country.

What is it you want to go back to? Do you even know or do you just like to complain about the evil republicans?


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

I'll take back before Stand Your Guns, and back before the Tea Bagger/Koch take-over of MY gvt in 2010.

Back when Buscho committed crimes and whatnot: Haliburton JUST admitted how it covered up Gulf oil spill...we still have Iraq invasion and energy policy to deal with.

Not to mention Gulf War Syndrome from Daddy Bush....that took nearly 12 years.

Weren't he head of CIA during Iran/Contra?

Holy Sweet Mary!....Back to Rayguns!

So yeah.....I take your claims of what you know about this country with a shaker of salt.....a big one.

And any claims you have to patriotism....the same.

You get all your info and attitudes from right-wing-wacko-nuts.

And those are about as un-American as you can git.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal"

NOT: I'm rich, white, male and all-right.

Everyone else can suck it....and yes, you know what I mean.

As far as music...wasn't ole blue eyes hanging with the Mafia?

Din't Elvis the Pelvis have like a million affairs?

Didn't stop the world from loving them. Oh yeah......once again: they white, so allright!


Martin 3 years ago

chris,

My earlier question in reponse to your rant about RACE.

"What is it you want to go back to? Do you even know or do you just like to complain about the evil republicans?"

Your answer.

"I'll take back before Stand Your Guns, and back before the Tea Bagger/Koch take-over of MY gvt in 2010."

Then you support your argument by citing the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the Iran-Contra scandal in the 1980's. What a well structured and insightful response you managed to put together to back up your observations of race relations in the United States.


Martin 3 years ago

chris,

Sorry, I now realize you were talking about the initial Gulf War in 1990. That is much more relevant to your argument about the good old days before 2010.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

I'm waiting for one reply from you that doesn't involve an insult.....are all Baggers raised with no manners?

Here you go; I'll make it real clear.....

I want to go back before Reagan. Erase all that he did, erase the years forward up til 2008.

Implement all that Obama wanted.....

We're good!

If you take allllllll that money that went to the top of the pyramid, and give it back to the middle class from which it was stolen: We're flying high as a country.

********

Come to think of it....I'd go back to Kennedy and erase his assassination.

King: ditto

R Kennedy: ditto

Malcolm X: ditto

Lennon: ditto

modern day:

Wellstone: ditto

Hastings: ditto

Only the good die young. That's why we are bad. We want to live.


Martin 3 years ago

chris,

"I'm waiting for one reply from you that doesn't involve an insult.....are all Baggers raised with no manners?

Here you go; I'll make it real clear.....

I want to go back before Reagan. Erase all that he did, erase the years forward up til 2008.

Implement all that Obama wanted.....

We're good!"

Right, because nothing bad happened before 1980 and Obama has done absolute miracles for our country.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

1980 is about when the right-wingers stopped caring about the middle class.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA


Martin 3 years ago

chris,

It seems you may have forgotten about Jimmy Carter.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/14/th...


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Washington times? Owned by the Moonies? RW to the core? No thanks. I put that article there, because it's Republican--written by a Republican. It's not biased, where they will bash Republicans, like the Times bashes Dems.

It's like Breitbart vs WSJ.

Breitbart, I wouldn't give the time of day.

WSJ--begrudging respect.

I refuse to read trash-bashing pieces.

And here's what I remember about Carter: he put solar panels on the White House. Reagan took them down.


Martin 3 years ago

chris,

"And here's what I remember about Carter: he put solar panels on the White House. Reagan took them down."

No, you don't remember that. You read a recent article about Obama putting solar panels back on the White House that mentioned Carter. You have never once formulated an intellectual response anywhere on the internet. You should probably go back to talking to yourself on your own Hubs. That's the only conversation going on over there.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

That's right...and it will keep going until they kick me all the way out.....COWARDS!

I was born 1960, chump.

You? Sound like a baby.

You think America is really the home of Fox Nation, don't you?

This country is great because we reject that kind of fascist crap.

You want no taxes, no equality, and freedom to kill people you don't like?

Go to another place: You won't get it here.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Angry about Lil Wayne and the American flag? Watch this cop make a VET drop his:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5cVFOOEGOUo&featur...

this never happens to tea party


Martin 3 years ago

chris

"Angry about Lil Wayne and the American flag? Watch this cop make a VET drop his:"

Did you notice that incident took place in the great liberal state of Wisconsin? I think it's unlikely that you would see a cop mishandling a flag like that in Texas.

"Democrats have won the seven elections since 1988, although the 2000 and 2004 races were extremely close. The 2008 election was not as close, as Barack Obama won by 56% to 42% over John McCain. State-level politics around collective bargaining gave Wisconsin a higher profile heading into the 2012 election. Polling was volatile through the summer and fall, ranging from a dead heat to a margin roughly equal 2008. In the end, Wisconsin voters split the difference, preferring Mr. Obama by 53% to 46% over Mitt Romney."


Martin 3 years ago

chris

"I was born 1960, chump."

It's too bad your level of knowledge doesn't reflect it.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Yeah--I know. I'm so stupid, I think a guy who kills someone is guilty of murder....sheesh, what a moron.

Oh, and also so stupid to know that a man chasing a kid down with a GUN is in no way, shape or form the VICTIM.

Self-defense my butt.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Texas wouldn't miss-handle the flag?

But they sure miss-handle women, minorities, and the civil rights of just about anybody who wouldn't qualify for a JR Ewing barbeque.

....which reminds me of the Bush inaugural ball.......Southfork, you made it!


Mike 3 years ago

Zimmerman was found not guilty. Some of you wackos need to accept it and move on.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

I'm afraid Zimmerman's the wacko.....and some of you will regret your fevered defense of him.

Tic toc, said the clock.


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

The new black panther party has a bounty for Z, $10,000.


Mike 3 years ago

If a white group publicly put a bounty on a black man, Obama would be addressing it on national television and sending the DOJ and FBI after them.


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

this bounty was offered a year ago to catch Z and turn him over to police. here's link to the black panther video. http://www.christiantoday.com/article/black.panthe...


Mike 3 years ago

"this bounty was offered a year ago to catch Z and turn him over to police. "

Zimmerman was fully cooperating with the police. He went with them the night of the shooting and they knew exactly where he was until he was found not guilty.


Mike 3 years ago

The New Black Panther Party is nothing more than a hate group and a terrorist organization.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

It is your own actions which condemn you....you Bible thumpers should know this!

"As you sow, so shall you reap"

I personally would hate to be Zimmy.

My advice? Get off the meds before you kill again.


Mike 3 years ago

Simmer down, nutjob.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Nutjob....as in Right Wing?

How dare you!

Never in ten thousand lives.

Ewwwwwwww

Yuk

and

Gag.

"Oh Rush, pass me the kaopeptate...those libs were so hard on me today."

"There there Glenn......once I get fired from radio: I'll join your station."

"We'll have another Morning Zoo, updated for 2013."

"Morning Insane Asylum."

yeah...that's the ticket....


perrya profile image

perrya 3 years ago Author

There will be a nutjob, somewhere, that is going to act and then this whole tragedy will have come full circle with little being improved.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Well, how about this:

That nutjob can say that Zimmerman attacked him, and he shot out of self-defense.

Then we will see if syg is real, or a license to kill for certain people only.


Mike 3 years ago

nutjob-

a crazy or foolish person.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Murderer-

Taking the life of another human being.

Apologist-

Making excuses for criminal behavior.


Mike 3 years ago

not guilty-

acquitted: declared not guilty of a specific offense or crime; legally blameless; "he stands acquitted on all charges"


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

hmmm, maybe that's why he's allowed to speed and have a gun, in TEXAS.....and get away with a warning.

He can do no wrong. He takes no accountability for his actions.....and no one makes him.

How long do you think that will last?

One day he will hurt the wrong person, and then his free ride will be up.

Tic toc, said the clock.


Mike 3 years ago

I've been pulled over in Texas while carrying a pistol and given a warning by DPS. It happens. As long as you have a CHL and immediately inform the officer that you are armed there is no issue. He didn't ask to see the pistol or for me to get out the car. He basically didn't even care after he checked my card. Texas is not Massachusetts.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

So--let me understand......

A man, who was just aquitted, after shooting to death a teenager---and that is not in question-- is speeding: pulled over: has weapon: and given slap on wrist?

Sounds like the old boy network to me.

I wonder if you had been black, Mike--would you have been treated the same way?

Because I read comments, and most black commenters seem to think differently.

The comments I see say; if a black man had been speeding, pulled over with gun, it would be

A. "Out of the car, hands on head"

or

B. Bam!--DOA


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA


Mike 3 years ago

"A man, who was just aquitted, after shooting to death a teenager---and that is not in question-- is speeding: pulled over: has weapon: and given slap on wrist?

Sounds like the old boy network to me."

He was found not guilty. It doesn't matter what he was charged with. He is legally a free man. The gun is no issue as it is legal to carry here even with a FL concealed carry permit. We have a reciprocity agreement with that state. I suspect he wasn't going very fast and was polite to the officer so he was given a warning. It happens.

"The comments I see say; if a black man had been speeding, pulled over with gun, it would be

A. "Out of the car, hands on head"

or

B. Bam!--DOA"

If a black man immediately identified that he had a firearm and showed the officer his CHL, he would not be treated like that in a traffic stop. If he was, he would have grounds to sue. Essentially all traffic stops are filmed and Texans take their right to carry seriously.

Texas is 38% hispanic or latino. If you are pulled over in the State of Texas there is a good chance the officer will be a minority. If you have to stop at a Border Patrol checkpoint (some are 10's of miles from the border) you will likely be talking to a minority officer.


Mike 3 years ago

Also, Bill Maher and Bruce Springsteen are idiots.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

I'm glad to hear Tejas is fair.......forgive me if I remain skeptical.

After all....it's the home of "oooops" Perry.

you know....N-Head rock?

The Boss----an idiot?

Don't let Christie hear you say that.


Mike 3 years ago

Perry didn't do well in the presidential campaign, but I am unaware of him causing any harm to the state or people of Texas while governor.

As for my comment on "The Boss", I'm not a huge fane of Christie either.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

If you had "woman parts" you would know.

And, the fact he has a rock with the N word on it tells me plenty about his character: lack of it!

"3 agencies I'd get rid of ....1, 2........Ooops. Aww shucks, it's only a presidential debate nyuk nyuk.

I'm no fan of Perry.

Nor Zimmy. Nor that stupid jury. Nor the lame-brain judge. Nor the dumb-as-rocks defense.

But that's America. "Where the stupid reigns on parade"

Nyuk Nyuk


Carole 3 years ago

It's amazing that some people get put down in this country because they don't support murdering babies.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

But they don't mind murdering kids already born......

How many lately?

Seems everyday I read about kids shooting each other...latest was 4 yrs old!


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Interesting....a lot of what this guy says is echoed here on HP......

Wonder if they get it from him?

http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2013/08/frank-ta...


Carole 3 years ago

chris,

Perry likes murdering children? Are you nuts?


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

perry won't expand Medicaid, thereby denying children medical care, and causing their deaths.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Carole----you implied I support murdering babies...are you nuts?

Of course--I have to take this insult daily by people like you.

Well--you can dish it out--you can take it too.

Guns kill.

Children are getting hands on guns and killing.

No one cares because --"My Right".

Martin was killed by a gun: Not an abortion.

Why is that Holier than Thou? answer: It's not.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Oooops

"The father of a 4-year-old who brought a loaded handgun to day care in Maine has pleaded not guilty to misdemeanor reckless conduct, claiming the incident was unintentional.

The man, placed the loaded, semi-automatic .380 caliber pistol in his son’s day care bag when bringing it into his house and then forgot he had done so."

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/08/08/father-who-s...

********

His right.

Of course.

And don't you try and regulate guns in daycare neither.


Arthur Bundy profile image

Arthur Bundy 3 years ago from Colorado Springs

I have been following this discussion for sometime now.

The prejudices displayed in these comments are very disturbing.

The author has stated that it was a primarily black jury that acquitted OJ.

Not true!

Changing the venue from Brentwood to downtown LA politically charged the environment, and forced a predominantly black area to defend itself.

I grew up a fan of OJ. I wanted him to be innocent in the worst way. But when he claimed that he would focus his energies on finding said killer, and then went out to the golf course, that's when I knew he was guilty.

As for Zimmerman...

Clearly, regardless of the result Zimmerman was the aggressor. Based on the law itself, the jury had no choice but to acquit him.

776.041 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:...(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:

(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or...

Zimmerman was the aggressor in this event and this little contradiction in the law is what got him off.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

So, if my husband is an abuser, and he is coming at me to beat me: If I fight back, he can legally kill me?

WOW


Arthur Bundy profile image

Arthur Bundy 3 years ago from Colorado Springs

I don't know.

What I do know is a black lady in the State of Florida got 20 years for invoking the this law, when she simply shot a gun into the air to stop her abuser from attacking her.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Just-Us system in America.

You black: get back

You white: well, allright

Unless you're poor white....then you don't matter, either.

Zimmy is connected.


Jim 3 years ago

"So, if my husband is an abuser, and he is coming at me to beat me: If I fight back, he can legally kill me?"

If we could only be so lucky.


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Awwwwww, now you hurt my widdle feewings.....

Jim:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embed...


cathylynn99 profile image

cathylynn99 3 years ago from northeastern US

if there were a "report" button, I would report jim and he would be banned from hubpages for wishing someone he disagrees with dead.


Arthur Bundy profile image

Arthur Bundy 3 years ago from Colorado Springs

It is the convoluted nature of this law that is suspect. It is the kind of law that demands constitutional challenge.

The Social Darwinian nature of this law is also suspect. As the comments in this hub have shown.

The American Legislative Education Council and it's supporters are responsible for the content of these type of laws. Which as I see it, are solely for the purpose of creating social division among the American People.

The question you need to be asking yourselves is what does the ALEC and their corporate supporters gain from social division of the masses?


lovemychris profile image

lovemychris 3 years ago from Cape Cod, USA

Nothing unusual cathlyn. I've also been told I enjoy killing babies and would enjoy watching my mother die.

They can say whatever they like to me.

Had you reported Jim-- most likely I would be banned. For starting trouble.

And yes Arthur...every single American needs to google ALEC.

Right under our noses, and by stealth: they have stolen America.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working