George Zimmerman acquitted in Trayvon Martin case

I am the same in as much as I haven't followed the case closely. However I did spend a week in America last month when they were picking the jury and saw a bit of the news coverage ( on different channels). From what I could see the allegations of Racism were more to do with how the Police treated the case especially in the eary stages rather then focusing particularly on the individual. Noyt saying that is correct or not as I didn't follow the case closely enough.

Re: The Jury I know the TV coverage meant they found it very hard to find people suitable. I seem to remember a few people picked were quickly kicked off as they made it clear they had made up their minds before the trial.

 

How in earth is he not guilty? How is that possible? The * should of been sentenced to life, he took the life of a innocent 17 year old.

 

:smiley-laughing002: Fox News completly defending the verdict.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jul/14/open-season-black-boys-verdict

 

Typically incisive piece by Gary Younge - cuts stright to the heart of the issue.

White Americans are * savages.

 

Thats a pretty broad percentage of the population your calling savages there

 

Hispanic American's are savages?

Some would find that notion a bit racist. The Mexicans and the like don't take kindly to that sort of talk.

 

You make a good point. Sadly it always turns into a boring argument.

 

http://m.cbsnews.com/storysynopsis....ng-shots/&feed_id=1&videoid=37&catid=57433184

When you see things like this in the same state you do begin to wonder how bad racism still is in certain parts of the country

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk 2

 

Exactly the same would have happened he would have been taken to court and they would have decided if he was guilty .

 

And the percentage of the population that runs the country, the economy, pays the most taxes, determines popular fashion, music, and film, and has invented and created more in the 20th century than any other demographic on the planet.

Dont be so silly.

As regards this case, I think the issue it highlights is the nature of the legal system in Florida. From what I understand its laws make proving 2nd degree murder very very difficult so the nature of the system means one will typically either by found of 1st degree murder, or will not be charged. Also, the extent to which self-defence with a gun in the US is cherished makes it very difficult to convict people in situations such as these. Seeing as there were no clear witnesses to the event, a non-guilty verdict seemed pretty inevitable from what I have read.

The case was never about race, but it was always going to be brought into it by some angry nuts wanting to play the race card.

 

Florida also have the crazy stand your ground law

In theUnited States,stand-your-ground lawstates that a person may justifiably use force inself-defensewhen there is reasonable belief of an unlawful threat, without anobligation to retreatfirst. The concept sometimes exists instatutory lawand sometimes throughcommon lawprecedents. One key distinction is whether the concept only applies to defending a home or vehicle, or whether it applies to all lawfully occupied locations. Under these legal concepts, a person is justified in usingdeadly forcein certain situations and the "stand your ground" law would be a defense orimmunitytocriminal chargesandcivil suit. The difference between immunity and a defense is that an immunity bars suit, charges, detention and arrest. A defense, such as anaffirmative defense, permits aplaintiffor the state to seek civil damages or a criminal conviction but may offer mitigating circumstances that justify the accused's conduct.

 

I actually think it's a pretty good verdict.

 

From what I have seen of the case, it was the right verdict.

 

:bbpd:

 

I didn't know I was a savage. All I do is go to school, go to work at a minimum wage job, come home and sleep. I'm such a terror to the poor, oppressed black man

Important thing to remember about this Verdict. He was pronounced NOT GUILTY. Not INNOCENT. The merely states that the jury doesn't think he's innocent, they just didn't see enough proof to put it beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman is guilty.

I think Zimmerman is a creep and should be locked up, but unfortunately, the evidence wasn't there to prove that he did anything wrong in the eyes of Florida law, regardless of races involved.

 

The case, or rather verdict, is racist because it was the word of one (basically) white man against one black man. The black man couldn't defend his word due to death at the hands of the aforementioned, and thus the jury took the word of Zimmerman to be true. Why didn't they question his motives, story, or seek more evidence?

You think an unarmed 17 year old kid really ran up and punched a gun-wielding man, who was on the phone to the police? And then, after viciously assaulting poor little George, he screamed for help, before getting put down?

Bull. *. *. The kid was murdered in cold blood and any motives, excuses or reasons since concocted by Zimemrman, no matter how legitimate they may actually be, shouldn't wash in any democractic courtroom.

 

Utterly ridiculous decision. Trayvon Martin was killed because he was an African American walking by a nice neighbourhood. He had went to the shops to by himself skittles and some ice tea - that's what he was 'armed' with. Zimmerman, at first, phoned the police when he noticed Martin, apparently, acting suspicious. I'm convinced that, had it been a White 17 year-old, Zimmerman wouldn't have had any concerns with their motive as to why they were there. Phoning the police at that point was the correct thing to do if he suspected something. The police told him not to leave the car or go after Martin. Ignoring this, Zimmerman went after Martin - armed with a gun. Martin didn't go after Zimmerman. After stalking and following Martin, it isn't fully known exactly what happened but you had a heavy, full grown man, weighing 200 pounds with previous for assault and domestic abuse, with a gun against a slim, teenage boy with skittles. He was specifically told to stop following Martin by the police whilst he was on the phone to him. If someone followed me in the dark for 70 yards, I'd be wanting to defend myself too. The fact is that Zimmerman believed Martin was up to no good and actively seeked to apprehend Martin. He actively went after him and he shot him. He is also now a free man.

The police department are a disgrace - they released Zimmerman after a couple of hours and never done anything for months until pressure from the public and the President forced them to start criminal proceedings, The Police just assumed that Zimmerman must be right - after all, it was just another African American criminal that had been removed from the streets - who cares, right?

How someone can chase somebody for 70 yards, having been specifically told not to by the law, and kill somebody with a gun whilst the victim is unarmed yet get off not guilty is beyond any rational thinker. The whole thing echoes the Emmett Till murder, something that sparked the Civil Rights movement - the likes of Rosa Parks drawing inspiration from the injustice. Almost 60 years later and we are still seeing similar cases. Sad.

 

*Hispanic.

 

They took his word because they believed him and surely the prosecution must have questioned his motives the story and the evidence.