The Trayvon Martin Case

[turbojet]

Okay, second time.

 

It was Occupy Oakland that protested last week.

 

Dammit man.

[Mauro Fonseca]

Follow the BBC rule, man. If it's not on an actual reputable news site, don't believe it, even if it means days' delay.

[KHCast]

This is a disgusting miscarriage of justice; i'm honestly a bit lost for words now. How can such an obvious case as this fall through?   The boy was shot dead, end of story. There's no debating that and I don't give a damn of the ins and outs of it all, at the end of the day a young unarmed boy was murdered by a much older, stronger (armed!) man. Whatever the situation was, even if Trayvon had been up to no good, I'd still be on his side. The boy was murdered and that, in my books, is manslaughter.

The ins and outs can really determine if it was justified. Now I'm not defending this case,not by a long shot, however had Treyvon,lets say been attacking someone and Zimmerman rushed in to aid the person only for Treyvon to pull a knife or weapon on him, and was intending serious harm,shooting him would hold more water. So I think their are definitely justifiable reasons for shooting someone. But of course this wasn't a justifiable. I was mainly talking hypothetically in the above statement.

[Badnik Zero]

I understand the ruling, but I'm disappointed in the jury. At the very least Zimmerman was reckless with his weapon, which should count towards some sort of manslaughter instead of not-guilty. They were even asked to consider some kind of manslaughter, if the case was not strong enough, and I understand the events of the scuffle between Zimmerman and Trayvon were not entirely clear, I get that. But it still does not warrant a not-guilty to me. Dude took several measures to initiate a confrontation, and then shot off his weapon, and that says to me at least manslaughter even if you can't make a strong enough case for murder. I really don't understand how the prosecution could've lost a case like this provided the jury was fair. How do you lose this case. I'm also disappointed in the media for making this case so damn sensational. The details of this case, involving one man and one kid, are not tantamount to race relations nationwide. Maybe in Seminole County. Maybe in courtrooms as well. But allowing yourself to be divided on race lines over a news incident is playing into some larger hate machine. Barack Obama commented on this, for the most part public opinion is a victory for the family, even if the shooter is free.

Edited July 14, 2013 by American Ristar

[Solly]

I understand the ruling, but I'm disappointed in the jury. At the very least Zimmerman was reckless with his weapon, which should count towards some sort of manslaughter instead of not-guilty. They were even asked to consider some kind of manslaughter, if the case was not strong enough, and I understand the events of the scuffle between Zimmerman and Trayvon were not entirely clear, I get that. But it still does not warrant a not-guilty to me. Dude took several measures to initiate a confrontation, and then shot off his weapon, and that says to me at least manslaughter even if you can't make a strong enough case for murder.

The jury couldn't call him guilty of murder because the possibility of self-defense (as we define it) was not disproved, and self-defense is equally justifiable to the charge of manslaughter as it is 2nd degree murder. The jury isn't at fault, the system is.

[turbojet]

And here we fucking go again.

[Nepenthe]

First few comments display some common sense: he was arrested immediately. It didn't take a whole bunch of shouting and marching for months to get him into some handcuffs.

[the_serendipitous]

Racism runs rampant in this wretched riptide of rogues and rapists. Sadly, scummy scoundrels such as Zimmerman and Michael Dunn slither by, scot-free in this sickening cesspool.

[turbojet]

First few comments display some common sense: he was arrested immediately. It didn't take a whole bunch of shouting and marching for months to get him into some handcuffs.

They did not do a comprehensive search on the vehicle for the alleged weapon until days later. The Defense is stating that the kids who evacuated the car may have stashed the weapon so there is your reasonable doubt.

Source

[Nepenthe]

They did not do a comprehensive search on the vehicle for the alleged weapon until days later. The Defense is stating that the kids who evacuated the car may have stashed the weapon so there is your reasonable doubt. Source

Oh for fuck's sake, Florida.

[Tornado]

Why the fuck would you want the media to get ahold of this in the first place?

[TheGerkuman]

I really wonder in topics like this how many people take the OP or stuff they've heard as gospel and suddenly run in to complain about the unfairness of the situation. If you don't feel you're informed enough on the situation why wade in? This was not an open and shut case by any means which was only compounded by the prosecution being, to put it bluntly, shit. I get really worried when people seem to be trying to redefine what 'reasonable doubt' is.

 

Again, I don't know whether or not I think that Mr. Zimmerman did it, I just believe that the jury did what they thought was reasonable and the fact that people are shitting on them for doing that, possibly because they're just knee-jerking a reaction, is frustrating. (And yes, I admit that my reaction here is kinda knee-jerk too, maybe I should've waited a couple of hours)

 

Edit: This post was not aimed at specific people. Also, I'm watching a video about the case and considering whether to post it. It seems to be trying to be as opinion-free as possible and it's giving me more info on the case than the news has. Still wondering if it is biased though, hence me being reluctant to post it. If you guys think I should, let me know.

Edited July 14, 2013 by Son Gerku

[The Kid]

I don't know of anyone is blaming the jury as much as they are the laws that are in effect. With the Trayvon Martin case and the Dunn case posted above, it's all a case of "he said, she said", with witnesses not being able to give a clear account of what happened. And since the law heavily favors the person who shot the gun, not much can be done until the law is changed.

 

All I know is that you better not piss off anyone in Florida. They may feel that their life is in danger and shoot you.

[Nepenthe]

The first hit was never established, nor were his wounds representative of a life and death struggle.

[Nepenthe]

It was never established that he was pinned the entire time either.

The fact that a grown man merely says he was scared of a 17-year old that dwarfed him by 40 pounds is tenuous. He could be lying, which wouldn't be a stretch to assume considering his story has changed multiple times. The fact that you are giving the benefit of the doubt to the mental and legal adult of the situation who followed a minor knowingly with a handgun and- based on actual witness testimony from Trayvon's friend who heard as such on the phone- confronted him, and not the minor who was unarmed, is expectedly disappointing.

[CrownSlayers Shadow]

If he was a scared man who got pinned down after following a minor around, one would think he would at least get charged for stalking from the way this sounds.

[Pelly <3's U]

If he was a scared man who got pinned down after following a minor around, one would think he would at least get charged for stalking from the way this sounds.

 

I don't think you can charge someone with stalking for following someone around for a short period of time. I'm pretty sure as with harassment, there has to be ongoing repeated incidences. 

[Tornado]

The fact that you are giving the benefit of the doubt to the mental and legal adult of the situation who followed a minor knowingly with a handgun and- based on actual witness testimony from Trayvon's friend who heard as such on the phone- confronted him, and not the minor who was unarmed, is expectedly disappointing.

 

Honestly, you're the one who's coming off as being unfair here.

 

If he was a scared man who got pinned down after following a minor around, one would think he would at least get charged for stalking from the way this sounds.

 

Nothing Zimmerman did constituted stalking.

[Nepenthe]

I think that Trayvon Martin was terrified. He called for help because he was afraid of this creepy guy who was following him. I don't blame him for attacking ZImmerman, but here's the thing: I also don't blame Zimmerman for defending himself, and that's what this case is about.

So you believe that Trayvon being on top for any period of time at all means he forfeited his right to life? This witness did not see the entire altercation. No witness did. For all you know, they could have been rolling around in the grass (something that is corroborated by another witness as well.) Overall, one witness is not inherently more credible than the other in determining how the fight was actually playing out.

And I blame him wholeheartedly because he was paramount in instigating the events that night due his own irresponsible need to play cop at the ignoring of both neighborhood watch protocol and emergency operator suggestion. If he literally just let Trayvon go home, we wouldn't be here arguing about this.

[Tornado]

So you believe that Trayvon being on top for any period of time at all means he forfeited his right to life?

I never thought I would see you strawmanning someone like this. SpikySprinter is not saying Martin forfeited his right to life. He's saying that when the situation became violent, Zimmerman had a right to defend himself (and the most that is known that it did become violent). And if he was getting the shit beat out of him and the only thing he had to do it was his gun, then it still falls under self defense if that is what he used.

 

This witness did not see the entire altercation. No witness did. For all you know, they could have been rolling around in the grass (something that is corroborated by another witness as well.) Overall, one witness is not inherently more credible than the other in determining how the fight was actually playing out.

 

There is a blatant double standard being displayed here, considering how much you were just assuring everyone in this thread about how obviously guilty Zimmerman was of, of all things, 2nd Degree Murder. Particularly when by very nature of law, it wasn't Zimmerman's job to prove that it wasn't.

 

 

And I blame him wholeheartedly because he was paramount in instigating the events that night due his own irresponsible need to play cop at the ignoring of both neighborhood watch protocol and emergency operator suggestion. If he literally just let Trayvon go home, we wouldn't be here arguing about this.

 

He bears the responsibility for his death. I doubt it is his entirely, but he does. But based on the absolute facts, the things that are known, the things presented at trial, he was within his rights to do everything that he did. It isn't against the law to follow someone around who you feel is suspicious. It isn't against the law to not follow something that a 911 dispatch officer says to do. It isn't even against the law to do both of those things because you are a racist fuckhead.

 

 

But that does not mean that anything beyond manslaughter applies (and he likely would have gotten pinned with that), and the prosecution dramatically overreaching meant he didn't even get that.

[Nepenthe]

I do not deny the right of anyone to defend themselves. If George had beaten Trayvon's ass with his own two fists or even killed him with a well-placed strike, as we are assuming in the worst case scenario against Trayvon's actions, this case wouldn't be that big a deal. Two dudes got into a fight- no one would care. But I am highly uncomfortable with the mere idea from a moralistic standpoint that you can effectively be legally be shot dead because you got into a fist fight, that the concept of self-defense immediately means you have a right to deadly force against someone who was unarmed, even more so in a situation where your physical wounds do not speak to an altercation that would reasonably be assumed to be life-threatening. I think that is ultimately what I am most livid about- that the concept of self-defense has been defined so broadly and so widely as to allow deadly force in paltry circumstances. It's asinine to me, personally, and scary. I've been in three fist fights in my life against boys who were both bigger and taller than me and never did I feel they fucking deserved death because I was smaller and at potential for losing.

I am also not saying any of the things he did up to the point of the fight were illegal. Fuck, it was perfectly legal and within his rights to carry the gun. I am saying, I have problems with him shooting a kid dead during a fist fight even though he was partly responsible for engaging the altercation by his own negligence. This is a moral argument I am making, not a legal one.

[The Kid]

In any case I'd be surprised if the guy survived the year. With how much backlash he's getting someone is most likely going to come after him.

[Nepenthe]

In any case I'd be surprised if the guy survived the year. With how much backlash he's getting someone is most likely going to come after him.

He is more likely to live out the rest of his life than be murdered by someone. This case will eventually blow over and his media relevance will fade. He will also probably go through protective measures in the meantime anyway.

[The Kid]

He is more likely to live out the rest of his life than be murdered by someone. This case will eventually blow over and his media relevance will fade. He will also probably go through protective measures in the meantime anyway.

 

Did he at least get kicked off the neighborhood watch?

[Brad]

ZImmerman has asked that African American apologise to him. Yes, he actually said this despite the circumstances of this entire fucked up case.

 

The real kicker came when Zimmerman accused African-Americans of rushing to judgement and asked everyone who he claims rushed to judgement to apologize to him. Zimmerman said, “I can’t guess to what their motives are. I would just ask for an apology. I mean if I did something that was wrong. I would apologize.”

Edited July 15, 2013 by Symbotic