I can't pretend to know what was going through his head, because of where and how he grew up, his past experiences with neighborhood watch and police, etc, etc. He was a kid, I still can't figure out why I did the things I did when I was a kid. But this is another two-sided coin. George Zimmerman, an adult (apparently level headed enough to be on neighborhood watch) had a similar set of choices, and he had a loaded gun with him. When you carry a gun, you're carrying a shitload of responsibility (I don't have to tell you that). Who do you think is responsible for this situation? The kid, who despite his portrayal by supporters was probably no angel (again, kids rarely are)? Or the man who accepted the responsibility of being on the watch, who got his gun and followed the kid against the advice/orders of the police? Again, I don't think this was some cold blooded premeditated killing. I'd probably lean towards a manslaughter charge instead of murder. I don't think he went after him looking for an excuse to kill him. But he's an adult who caused what happened, 100%, the way I see it. And in civilized societies, you should be held accountable for your actions. Letting him walk around in public with guns again sends a message, and it's not a good one, in my opinion.
George Zimmerman Found Not Guilty
- Thread starter Straight Shooter
- Start date
Sam Fisher
Banned
I take it you were there watching the entire incident unfold?
By the way, a 911 operator isn't a police officer. She or he has no authority.
Sam Fisher
Banned
OKAY, SO... Hispanic guy shoots a black teen and gets acquitted by his peers which creates racial tension between whites and blacks....got it! :/
That's part of the problem. With a potential murder sentence "maybe" just isn't good enough to convict anybody. Just a normal probably isn't good enough to convict anybody. It seems that both of them made very unwise decisions. Then again there is a difference between doing something that isn't smart, like following somebody when you don't need to, and have actually been informed it's a bad idea, like Zimmerman in that situation, or jumping somebody when a person doesn't have rise to the level of violence yet like Martin, and what's illegal. Since we also have a system of being innocent until proven guilty, unless things prove beyond a reasonable doubt otherwise the system has to go on the basis that Zimmerman was attacked to the level he then felt he had to use lethal force. Is that the truth? I don't know, and unfortunately besides Zimmerman nobody else really does either. We can only speculate. The only other person that could shed as much light on the situation is no longer alive to do so.
I could also point out that even if Martin rightfully though he needed to defend himself there, like any other situation of self defense that doesn't give somebody a blank check to do whatever they want after that. If, for example, somebody came up on the street and punched me in the face I probably would have the right evoke self defense there. If I reasonably ended any threat to myself that wouldn't then let me beat the person that attacked me to an inch of their lives for an hour and curb stomp that person because I was attacked. Self defense is only a viable defense if the force is the lest amount reasonable used based of the circumstances and context of what the situation is. Sometimes that might mean lethal force is needed or at least reasonably thought to be needed, other times not. So, it's not even as simple as saying that somebody "started it" and using that to determine whether somebody can claim self defense or not. Heck, we still don't reasonably know who started the physical altercation. It's possible for the person that was victim at the star to go too far and not be defending themselves anymore. One can no longer use the argument that the person that started it got himself into that situation as an valid excuse for what happened. Did that happen here with either one of them. I don't know, but again on in a situation where one is innocent until proven guilty the defendant has to be assumed to use reasonable force until evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt otherwise.
Personally I think Zimmerman is a jackass. I also think he's an idiot that did something stupid. I even think there is a non-unthinkable chance he really did murder Martin or used more force than he needed to even if I think it's more likely he really didn't intend to kill the kid. There is a decent chance he got away with it. What I think and what I think can be proved are two different things however. In a world where we're all psychic and all knowing judging cases like this would be easy. It's that in reality we don't get that benefit and juries have to do the best they can do. In a lot of cases I think they got it wrong, but in this case they probably got it right.
Waste of time and money.
People need to find a better way to spend their time, just pathetic.
People need to find a better way to spend their time, just pathetic.
Allow me play devil's advocate. What do you think the outcome would've been had a 29 year old black man shot and killed a 17 year old white kid?
Ace Boobtoucher
Founder and Captain of the Douchepatrol
The marketing department at Mar's is probably in deep shit over this.
As a Norwegian with only rudimentary knowledge of this case, it only added to my confusion to see this:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57433184/fla-mom-gets-20-years-for-firing-warning-shots/
What's to think of this?
(...Not that our court system is perfect in any way. Odd stuff here too.)
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57433184/fla-mom-gets-20-years-for-firing-warning-shots/
What's to think of this?
(...Not that our court system is perfect in any way. Odd stuff here too.)
Philbert
Banned
Woman wanted to get some stuff at her old house, his current residence. They were divorced or separated, one of those things. She had a restraining order on him.
Without telling him she went there thinking he wasn't there (breaking and entering, a criminal act). Then, when she found out he was home, she ended up going outside to her car, getting her firearm, returning to the house and soon after, fired at him, missing him, and the bullet ricocheted off the wall and hit the ceiling.
She (and her attorney) are claiming she only fired a warning shot, to protect herself.
What...she was warning him she was gonna shoot him for being in his house when she wanted to burgle it?
So...she got convicted of a much more serious charge than "firing a warning shot", she'll get out in 10 or so years, maybe less.
I don't really know that much about the case, but that's some of the details.
Also, she was offered a plea deal for 3 years, turned it down, and got convicted on evidence. Mandatory sentencing is a bitch, but in a casino, you take your winnings when ya win, you don't get a pass when ya lose. She lost...same rules in the court as any gambling house.
'Cept you gotta stay longer.
Ace Boobtoucher
Founder and Captain of the Douchepatrol
Wow, you'd think a news organization as reputable as CBS would give the whole story.
Philbert
Banned
Update...she did the "his house" another time, hit him and filed Domestic abuse on him...she got in trouble for that.
This case, she and him were in the same house, hers I think, with their 2 children, she went outside to the garage and got her gun, and fired in his and the 2 children's direction, missing him and etc.
THAT was the 20 year min sentence...she wasn't being attacked, and she fired a gun in the direction of 3 people including 2 children.
Then the plea turned down, etc. She was serving time and didn't want to do anymore. Bad move (again.)
A state rep has done the usual wailing and bullshitting about women, institutional racism, and injustice...good thing she missed the kids. That wouldn't have looked good.
http://www.wokv.com/news/news/local/it-wasnt-warning-shot-corey-says/nN4r4/
This case, she and him were in the same house, hers I think, with their 2 children, she went outside to the garage and got her gun, and fired in his and the 2 children's direction, missing him and etc.
THAT was the 20 year min sentence...she wasn't being attacked, and she fired a gun in the direction of 3 people including 2 children.
Then the plea turned down, etc. She was serving time and didn't want to do anymore. Bad move (again.)
A state rep has done the usual wailing and bullshitting about women, institutional racism, and injustice...good thing she missed the kids. That wouldn't have looked good.
http://www.wokv.com/news/news/local/it-wasnt-warning-shot-corey-says/nN4r4/
twat36975248664224
Closed Account
They may not have authority, but they are still a branch of the services that knows lawful activity. That do call the police, and when he was asked questions his story did change. I think the story is really more about the poor job the prosecute side did not winning this. The majority opinion on this case seemed to believe that George Zimmerman was guilty of murder, but this may not be the only time he faces court about this incident though. Other charges may be brought up after now.
Philbert
Banned
Not too likely.
911 has no legal authority at all, so try some other bullshit theory.
It was a political gang rape and he was aquitted because of no evidence TO THE CONTRARY.
There was some evidence and it corroborated his story way more than the prosecutors.
They had no case before he was charged and had none at trial.
haha...that cracked me up. Made some problems for me sipping my coffee.
Btw Elwood...Jake says "Hello!"
Maggie Green
Official Checked Star Member
I love how everyone has such a heated opinion on this. The fact is, we DON"T know what exactly happened and we never will. I wasn't on that jury and given all of the evidence for two weeks, were you? It was an extremely unfortunate incident and it seems like both parties acted like assholes. The jury made their decision. Plain and simple. They know better than any of us! People are just looking for an excuse to cry racism.
Wow this board blew up while I was in Montreal. The jury got it right. Very surprised the jury didn't cave and convict of manslaughter. I knew a murder 2 conviction wouldn't happen. Martin should not assaulted Zimmerman and he would be alive today pure and simple. Zimmerman should auction the pistol for a million or 2 and move to Peru. He will never get any peace here.
Maggie Green said it perfectly. And those that are calling Zimmerman a murderer are showing their ignorance as to what constitutes murder.
Little Red Wagon Repairman
MFOMBSoPGA
That is a great idea. Seriously. He would get serious cash for that piece at auction then give the high hat to a system that tried to lynch him then move to Peru.
Philbert
Banned
To be more specific, it was people using the system that tried to get him "lynched', and it was the system that not only gave him an all clear, it is the same system that will be used to punish him for being found not guilty of something.
Peace of mind is a tenuous thing, wherever he goes to live he will always be dealing with other people's agendas.
Spirit and letter of the law is the real issue, and how anyone can be litigated to hell and back whether guilty or innocent.
OJ- beat the murder rap but has been in a prison since the trial, with walls and without walls.
Casey Anthony-beat the murder rap and is waiting for the hammer to fall; karma is a bitch.
George is still awaiting the real verdict on his life...I for one wish him godspeed and fair winds.
