George Zimmerman Trial

[kmoose]

Putting all of that aside, it really doesn't matter what kind of kid Martin was or what kind of parents his folks were. He wasn't doing anything wrong the night he was shot. He was just walking home from the convenience store. Him being suspended from school doesn't really matter. If his parents win in court, they should get whatever they get. Zimmerman probably doesn't "deserve" to be walking around as a free man, but he won in court so that's the way it is.

People keep repeating this as if it is an incontrovertible fact. It's not. Only 2 people really know who started the physical confrontation. One of them says that Trayvon did. Trayvon is not alive to tell his side of the story, but that doesn't make Zimmerman a liar (about who started the fight) by default. It's still possible that Martin got scared(or felt disrespected), overreacted, and attacked Zimmerman. I'm not trying to make any argument about how likely that scenario is, because I don't know enough to make an educated guess. But I do know that it is possible.

 

[EddytoNow]

The fact that TM had no injuries other than to his knuckles prior to being shot would suggest pretty strongly that GZ was not the aggressor or instigator of the physical confrontation. There were multiple injuries to GZ's head to support his version of the story. The evidence leans very heavily in support of GZ's version of what happened, an account he gave immediately after the confrontation, not one he had days or even hours to think up.

There is absolutely no evidence that GZ is a racist. The existing evidence suggests exactly the opposite. The evidence suggests that TM resented being observed and decided to settle the matter physically. In short, he was going to teach this "Creepy *** Cracker" a lesson.

 

[GoIrish41]

It is highly unlikely that the fight happened the way GZ suggested. The problem with the prosecution in this case is that they never put together a cohesive alternative story that made more sense based on the evidence. From the moment that Zimmerman made the decision to go "find an address for police" his story is simply unbelievable. What makes more sense? That he continued to follow Martin. If he was frightened of Martin as he said when he told the police operator when Martin was allegedly circling his car, would he have followed Martin into the darkness? Not without a gun he wouldn't. Zimmerman made it sound like that entire fight happened in a relatively small area between the two rows of condos, but there were items belonging to Zimmerman and Martin scattered across the grass over a fairly wide path. Eye witnesses saw both Zimmerman on top and Martin on top, which is certainly possible if there was a fist fight going on. The eviidence suggests, then, that at times Martin was getting the upper hand and at times Zimmerman was. Since, as I have brought up many times in this thread, Zimmerman's account of when he took the gun out defies common sense (with Martin on top of him and his leg blocking Zimmerman's side, it would have been nearly impossible for Martin to spot the gun and even harder for Zimmerman to draw it, given that he was on his back taking a beeting from Martin) I think it is much more likely that he pulled the gun at some other time in the back and forth struggle (or maybe even had the gun out when he entered the darkness, which could have been a reason from Martin to defend himself) and he shot Martin. The only aspect of this case that had to do with race is the fact that Zimmerman profiled him and chose to follow the suspicious black guy in his neighborhood. There were plenty of facts and an application of common sense that could have made this case go the other way. The prosecution was out-lawyerd by the Defense, no question about it.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

...with Martin on top of him and his leg blocking Zimmerman's side, it would have been nearly impossible for Martin to spot the gun and even harder for Zimmerman to draw it, given that he was on his back taking a beeting from Martin...

As a former wrestler I can say with a bit of certainty that top-bottom conflict is so dynamic that if you want to grab something at your hip, you'll be able to do it unless you're a complete and total fish.

But in any event, what the evidence shows is that GZ was scooting around, thrusting his hips, and trying to get out from under Martin, which provided the opening to grab his gun. (GZ's scooting is how they got to the grass, for example).

It's not like he's a complete fish and just would have laid there. Although he did probably waste too much time yelling for help.

 

[Ndaccountant]

It is highly unlikely that the fight happened the way GZ suggested. The problem with the prosecution in this case is that they never put together a cohesive alternative story that made more sense based on the evidence. From the moment that Zimmerman made the decision to go "find an address for police" his story is simply unbelievable. What makes more sense? That he continued to follow Martin. If he was frightened of Martin as he said when he told the police operator when Martin was allegedly circling his car, would he have followed Martin into the darkness? Not without a gun he wouldn't. Zimmerman made it sound like that entire fight happened in a relatively small area between the two rows of condos, but there were items belonging to Zimmerman and Martin scattered across the grass over a fairly wide path. Eye witnesses saw both Zimmerman on top and Martin on top, which is certainly possible if there was a fist fight going on. The eviidence suggests, then, that at times Martin was getting the upper hand and at times Zimmerman was. Since, as I have brought up many times in this thread, Zimmerman's account of when he took the gun out defies common sense (with Martin on top of him and his leg blocking Zimmerman's side, it would have been nearly impossible for Martin to spot the gun and even harder for Zimmerman to draw it, given that he was on his back taking a beeting from Martin) I think it is much more likely that he pulled the gun at some other time in the back and forth struggle (or maybe even had the gun out when he entered the darkness, which could have been a reason from Martin to defend himself) and he shot Martin. The only aspect of this case that had to do with race is the fact that Zimmerman profiled him and chose to follow the suspicious black guy in his neighborhood. There were plenty of facts and an application of common sense that could have made this case go the other way. The prosecution was out-lawyerd by the Defense, no question about it.

Perhaps. But let me ask you this. I have been pulled over two different times in the last 3 years on the same stretch of highway because I was a lone, male white driver in a four door vehicle. In both cases, I was not given any citations or warnings and was sent on my way. After talking with the troopers, it was obvious they were looking for drug runners and I fit the profile of the runners they have seen in the recent past.

Should I be making a big case out of the fact that I have been profiled? Should I scream for justice? I completely understand that I will never experience the types of things many minorities have/continue to fight. However, there is a distinct difference between profiling strictly on race (like, all minority males walking around at night are up to no good) versus target profiling where recent history supports such actions. GZ, IMO, was not out of line when profiling TM and calling the cops. What happened from that point forward has been rehashed enough.

 

[GoIrish41]

As a former wrestler I can say with a bit of certainty that top-bottom conflict is so dynamic that if you want to grab something at your hip, you'll be able to do it unless you're a complete and total fish.

But in any event, what the evidence shows is that GZ was scooting around, thrusting his hips, and trying to get out from under Martin, which provided the opening to grab his gun. (GZ's scooting is how they got to the grass, for example).

It's not like he's a complete fish and just would have laid there. Although he did probably waste too much time yelling for help.

in fairness, what is in evidence is Zimmerman's account. The items spread all over the law suggest a fight that took place over a much wider area and eye witnesses at times have Zimmerman on top in the fight. That seems a much more likely time to pull out the gun than when he is getting his face beat in and his head smashed on the cement. It also happens to destroy his self-defense claim. I'm not saying that is what happened, but if I'm the prosecution I'm going to push the story that is the most plausible and point out over and over again that Zimmerman's account is not only nonsensical, but also self-serving.

 

[GoIrish41]

Perhaps. But let me ask you this. I have been pulled over two different times in the last 3 years on the same stretch of highway because I was a lone, male white driver in a four door vehicle. In both cases, I was not given any citations or warnings and was sent on my way. After talking with the troopers, it was obvious they were looking for drug runners and I fit the profile of the runners they have seen in the recent past.

Should I be making a big case out of the fact that I have been profiled? Should I scream for justice? I completely understand that I will never experience the types of things many minorities have/continue to fight. However, there is a distinct difference between profiling strictly on race (like, all minority males walking around at night are up to no good) versus target profiling where recent history supports such actions. GZ, IMO, was not out of line when profiling TM and calling the cops. What happened from that point forward has been rehashed enough.

I think there is a distinction between being profiled by trained law enforcement officers and a private citizen. In your situation above, would you be more or less annoyed if it was a private citizen with a police light on his car that pulled you over? At any rate, if he would have called the cops and waited in his car, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

 

[kmoose]

in fairness, what is in evidence is Zimmerman's account. The items spread all over the law suggest a fight that took place over a much wider area and eye witnesses at times have Zimmerman on top in the fight. That seems a much more likely time to pull out the gun than when he is getting his face beat in and his head smashed on the cement. It also happens to destroy his self-defense claim. I'm not saying that is what happened, but if I'm the prosecution I'm going to push the story that is the most plausible and point out over and over again that Zimmerman's account is not only nonsensical, but also self-serving.

All this proves is that Zimmerman's story may not be completely accurate. It creates a reasonable doubt that the fight happened exactly the way that Zimmerman says it did. The absence of certainty does NOT mean that Trayvon Martin must have had no fault in the fight, and that he was "a kid who did nothing wrong".

 

[Emcee77]

This pretty much sums up why the trial ended the way it did.



http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/15/u...se-was-hard-to-topple.html?smid=fb-share&_r=0

Great article. Lots of interesting analysis there.

 

[Ndaccountant]

I think there is a distinction between being profiled by trained law enforcement officers and a private citizen. In your situation above, would you be more or less annoyed if it was a private citizen with a police light on his car that pulled you over? At any rate, if he would have called the cops and waited in his car, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Apples and oranges if you ask me. In the public domain, yes, it would annoy me. If I was in a private community, not at all. It is the prerogative of the community to profile me all they want given that often times there is minimal (if any) patrolling in the area.

 

[Wild Bill]

I think there is a distinction between being profiled by trained law enforcement officers and a private citizen. In your situation above, would you be more or less annoyed if it was a private citizen with a police light on his car that pulled you over? At any rate, if he would have called the cops and waited in his car, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.

You think it's more acceptable for the government to profile than it is a private citizen?

 

[GoIrish41]

All this proves is that Zimmerman's story may not be completely accurate. It creates a reasonable doubt that the fight happened exactly the way that Zimmerman says it did. The absence of certainty does NOT mean that Trayvon Martin must have had no fault in the fight, and that he was "a kid who did nothing wrong".

What it does is demonstrate that Zimmerman was not truthful in his account. That leads to the question, "why would he embellish?" The logical answer to that question is that the fight did not occur in the way he is describing it (which is to say that the clarity of the self-defense argument was likely not apparent). Without a self-defense claim, Zimmerman would be waking up in prison this morning.

 

[GoIrish41]

You think it's more acceptable for the government to profile than it is a private citizen?

I think the training to appropriately take action following the profiling is what is problematic. Zimmerman didn't have adequate training or judgment to act on his observations. Police are trained to handle situations like this.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

Man, the burden some people are putting on Zimmerman is ridiculous. This is like that Dave Chappelle episode.

Prosecutor: Mr. Chappelle, what would it take to convince you that R. Kelly is guilty?

Dave Chappelle: Okay, I'd have to see a video of him singing "Pee On You," two forms of government ID, a police officer there to verify the whole thing, four or five of my buddies and Neal taking notes, and R. Kelly's grandma to confirm his identity.

R. Kelly's Grandma: That's my Robert, always peeing on people.

 

[irishpat183]

Did Zimmerman take the stand? Irish Houstonian, I want all your v-bucks forever.

I DO RECALL THIS!!! LOL

 

[Irish Houstonian]

I DO RECALL THIS!!! LOL

Hey, you have to accept a bet for it to be valid -- otherwise I would have had nothing to enforce had I won.

 

[irishpat183]

I think the training to appropriately take action following the profiling is what is problematic. Zimmerman didn't have adequate training or judgment to act on his observations. Police are trained to handle situations like this.

Come on. Even police don't make good decisions. It's a gut feeling. GZ simply used the hoodie (which other offenders in the area had worn in committing robberies) as his justification for approaching TM.

Again....who's to say that TM didn't start the fight. We keep assuming that GZ was guiilty of this. Maybe he asked TM what he was doing and TM wanted to "keep it real" and went at GZ?

Is that not possible?

 

[irishpat183]

Hey, you have to accept a bet for it to be valid -- otherwise I would have had nothing to enforce had I won.

Crack and I are going to organize a protest. Although you did nothing wrong, socially, we feel that you should pay the price for your actions.

And if we don't get justice, we're going to take it to mods on IE and pressure them to step in and give up your vbucks.

 

[Irish Houstonian]

Crack and I are going to organize a protest. Although you did nothing wrong, socially, we feel that you should pay the price for your actions.

And if we don't get justice, we're going to take it to mods on IE and pressure them to step in and give up your vbucks.

Ha. No Vbucks, no peace.

 

[BobD]

Come on. Even police don't make good decisions. It's a gut feeling. GZ simply used the hoodie (which other offenders in the area had worn in committing robberies) as his justification for approaching TM.

Again....who's to say that TM didn't start the fight. We keep assuming that GZ was guiilty of this. Maybe he asked TM what he was doing and TM wanted to "keep it real" and went at GZ?

Is that not possible?

Black, white or any other color, hoodies are part of the hoodlum uniform.

 

[irishpat183]

Great article. Lots of interesting analysis there.

Good piece.

"But Mr. Zimmerman appeared calm during the call and did not describe Mr. Martin’s race until he was asked. And defense lawyers brought in witnesses to say that Mr. Zimmerman, on the whole, was a courteous, kind and caring neighbor.

“That was a fatal flaw right from the start in the case,” said Jeff Weiner, a well-known Miami criminal defense lawyer"


Exactly. GZ was NOT the devil that so many sheep...err...people made him out to be. Look for his own civil suit against the MSM.

 

[Wild Bill]

I think the training to appropriately take action following the profiling is what is problematic. Zimmerman didn't have adequate training or judgment to act on his observations. Police are trained to handle situations like this.

I don't believe profiling is part of law enforcement training. Either way, a private citizen is well within their right to profile anyone. It is not illegal, and in my opinion, not morally objectionable.

 

[GoIrish41]

Come on. Even police don't make good decisions. It's a gut feeling. GZ simply used the hoodie (which other offenders in the area had worn in committing robberies) as his justification for approaching TM.

Again....who's to say that TM didn't start the fight. We keep assuming that GZ was guiilty of this. Maybe he asked TM what he was doing and TM wanted to "keep it real" and went at GZ?

Is that not possible?

Sure it is possible. In fact, it is the story that I would tell if I were in Zimmerman's place because it is a self-serving account that would allow me to claim self-defense. The problem is, that there are other big pieces of Zimmerman's story that don't add up. My contention is that if he is going to lie about those pieces, why assume that he is telling the truth about what started the fight. Why are you assuming that Zimmerman's account is correct? Isn't what I wrote also possible? I believe it is and indeed I think it is more probably. Usually the thing that makes the most sense is where the truth is.

 

[EddytoNow]

Come on. Even police don't make good decisions. It's a gut feeling. GZ simply used the hoodie (which other offenders in the area had worn in committing robberies) as his justification for approaching TM.

Again....who's to say that TM didn't start the fight. We keep assuming that GZ was guiilty of this. Maybe he asked TM what he was doing and TM wanted to "keep it real" and went at GZ?

Is that not possible?

Not only possible, but probable. If GZ had the gun out prior to the physical confrontation, wouldn't TM have made an effort to remove the gun from GZ's hand? From all the physical evidence TM had the upper-hand in the fight. Why then are TM fingerprints or DNA not on the gun? Surely if he had punched GZ in the nose and was straddled across his hips, he had enough of an advantage to attempt removing the gun from GZ's hand. Also, why are GZ's injuries limited to his face and head? If the gun was already out and you had the advantage in the fight, wouldn't you be focused on removing the gun from the assailant's hand? Why wasn't he banging GZ's hand on the ground in an attempt to dislodge the gun? I don't remember any evidence being presented that GZ's hand had been banged repeatedly against the ground or the concrete. The evidence suggests quite the opposite. Repeated blows to the head. It's obvious that TM wasn't aware that GZ had a gun strapped to his hip. All his effort was directed at inflicting a beating on GZ.

Profiling based upon a pattern of burglaries in the neighborhood, probably. Racial profiling, no evidence at all.

 

[GoIrish41]

I don't believe profiling is part of law enforcement training. Either way, a private citizen is well within their right to profile anyone. It is not illegal, and in my opinion, not morally objectionable.

Law enforcement has training on acting on the suspicions they have -- Zimmerman didn't.

Profiling is a mental exercise -- pursuing a "suspect" is not. It was perfectly OK for him to profile and call the cops. Everything after that, was not at all appropriate and a kid died as a result of his poor judgment. Purposely killing someone in the street is morally objectionable, especially when the person who pulled the trigger could have prevented the whole situation by calling the cops and waiting for them to arrive.

 

[ShawneeIrish]

Perhaps. But let me ask you this. I have been pulled over two different times in the last 3 years on the same stretch of highway because I was a lone, male white driver in a four door vehicle. In both cases, I was not given any citations or warnings and was sent on my way. After talking with the troopers, it was obvious they were looking for drug runners and I fit the profile of the runners they have seen in the recent past.

Should I be making a big case out of the fact that I have been profiled? Should I scream for justice? I completely understand that I will never experience the types of things many minorities have/continue to fight. However, there is a distinct difference between profiling strictly on race (like, all minority males walking around at night are up to no good) versus target profiling where recent history supports such actions. GZ, IMO, was not out of line when profiling TM and calling the cops. What happened from that point forward has been rehashed enough.

Yes, you should be offended by this. It also should be a violation of your 4th Amendment rights. Unfortunately it is too difficult to rule on the subjective intent of cops so if they have any objective reason to stop you then profiling is permissible.

You think it's more acceptable for the government to profile than it is a private citizen?

In a law enforcement role, yes, and this is from someone who is certainly not a fan of the military industrial complex, prison industrial complex, war on drugs, or many police actions. That said even libertarians believe the government has a role to protect its citizens. If someone breaks into your home, or something similar, you have absolutely every right to defend yourself. I also do not have a general problem with gun ownership. What I cannot understand is people thinking it is normal or acceptable to behave as a quasi cop and roam the streets with a gun, profile people they believe are criminals, and then follow and engage the individual.

 

[ShawneeIrish]

Black, white or any other color, hoodies are part of the hoodlum uniform.

I frequently wear hoodies. I do not think this says anything about my character, perhaps my fashion sense or lack thereof, but certainly not my character. Saying a hoodie is part of the "hoodlum uniform" speaks more to your character than it does to the individuals wearing the hoodies.

 

[GoIrish41]

Not only possible, but probable. If GZ had the gun out prior to the physical confrontation, wouldn't TM have made an effort to remove the gun from GZ's hand? From all the physical evidence TM had the upper-hand in the fight. Why then are TM fingerprints or DNA not on the gun? Surely if he had punched GZ in the nose and was straddled across his hips, he had enough of an advantage to attempt removing the gun from GZ's hand. Also, why are GZ's injuries limited to his face and head? If the gun was already out and you had the advantage in the fight, wouldn't you be focused on removing the gun from the assailant's hand? Why wasn't he banging GZ's hand on the ground in an attempt to dislodge the gun? I don't remember any evidence being presented that GZ's hand had been banged repeatedly against the ground or the concrete. The evidence suggests quite the opposite. Repeated blows to the head. It's obvious that TM wasn't aware that GZ had a gun strapped to his hip. All his effort was directed at inflicting a beating on GZ.

Profiling based upon a pattern of burglaries in the neighborhood, probably. Racial profiling, no evidence at all.

Absolutely!!! that is the point. Perhaps that is why the fight started. And, if that is the case, Zimmerman's self-defense claim goes out the window.

His knees were in Zimmerman's armpits -- and the gun was supposedly conceled in a black holster on Zimmerman's back right hip, tucked inside his pants, with a shirt and a jacket overtop, in the dark of night. First, how did Martin see that weapon and second, if he was going for it, as Zimmerman claims (because it was an excuse for him to defend himself), if Martin was on top and dominiating him as he said, how would Zimmerman get the gun out that was now pressed between his back and the ground, obscured by a jacket, shirt, pants and a holster all while having his head bashed into a sidewalk. And, when he pulled the gun, wouldn't Martin have tried to wrestle the gun away from him. I mean, he was in the dominant position and completely in control of the fight according to Zimmerman. Picture all that happening in your mind and you decide if that makes sense. To me, it makes zero sense. On top of that, his claim that he jumped on his back and spread his arms out. But, when the police arrived, Martin's arms were tucked underneith his body. That doesn't pass the smell test. So, why would Zimmerman fabricate the story that he did? I submit that he did it to make it look like Martin was the agressor and he had no choice but to shoot him. His story is simply not believable.

 

[Ndaccountant]

Yes, you should be offended by this. It also should be a violation of your 4th Amendment rights. Unfortunately it is too difficult to rule on the subjective intent of cops so if they have any objective reason to stop you then profiling is permissible.




In a law enforcement role, yes, and this is from someone who is certainly not a fan of the military industrial complex, prison industrial complex, war on drugs, or many police actions. That said even libertarians believe the government has a role to protect its citizens. If someone breaks into your home, or something similar, you have absolutely every right to defend yourself. I also do not have a general problem with gun ownership. What I cannot understand is people thinking it is normal or acceptable to behave as a quasi cop and roam the streets with a gun, profile people they believe are criminals, and then follow and engage the individual.

If I am driving about 5 mph over the limit, which I was, they can pull me over, which they did. None of the questions were about my speeding and they were spending much more time looking in my windows than looking at me. Either way, once my license and insurance all checked out, they were very pleasant.

It was a minor inconvenience, but nothing more. I am not sure why I should be offended. If this is what it takes to keep drugs out of the area, I am okay with it. I personally find nothing offensive about it.

 

[irishpat183]

Sure it is possible. In fact, it is the story that I would tell if I were in Zimmerman's place because it is a self-serving account that would allow me to claim self-defense. The problem is, that there are other big pieces of Zimmerman's story that don't add up. My contention is that if he is going to lie about those pieces, why assume that he is telling the truth about what started the fight. Why are you assuming that Zimmerman's account is correct? Isn't what I wrote also possible? I believe it is and indeed I think it is more probably. Usually the thing that makes the most sense is where the truth is.

Like what?


And it's perfectly normal for "little pieces" to be either forgotten or embelished in the chaotic moments during a struggle for your life, no?