Zimmerman Verdit Not Guilty

“It is what it is, folks!!”

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#88 Jul 15, 2013
JJ, I honestly don't know what definition I would fit into. I have a wide diversity of friends. A couple of which who are in mixed marriages, a couple of which who are gay, etc. They are my friends. I have learned that I can also count on them. THAT is what discerns a real friendship from those who are just mere acquaintance..

I have even learned to avoid the people in my life that I've gotten to know because they didn't end up being the kind of person they tried to portray themselves as. And skin color has never entered those decisions that I made, or still make, when I mentally delete someone from my personal "inner circle"...

I also like doing just about all of the above that you posted. Even the Merlot, ROFLMBO!! I'm part redneck, biggest part is biker, part lady, part tomboy. I can be feminine in every aspect of my life, yet I can out shoot a few of the men I personally know. I know how to out fish them too.

So I can't honestly find a way to fit myself into any category, LOL!!! I'm still a 'girl' though, so I reasonably can't even begin to claim that I can do everything a man can. I just don't have that kind of physical strength due to my gender.

Point is, I can go anywhere. And as long as I'm treated respectfully, I will always, and I mean ALWAYS, give that respect back ten fold. When I'm bored or tired, I leave while giving a thank you for the company and generosity shown to me.

I saw a pic on FaceBook the other day. It was of one brown egg and one white. When cracked, the yolks were the same.
I liked that portrayal....
justme

Somerset, KY

#89 Jul 15, 2013
Know the facts wrote:
<quoted text>
Wanna know why this story isn't relevant? Because you left some facts out. Like the fact that she went to the house that day to get her things knowing that the ex-husband was there with the kids....she went in and start an argument with the ex. She then left the house and the danger only to go to her car and get a gun....to which she came back in and threatened the ex....she then shot in the air a 'warning' shot that she tried to claim was a stand your ground defense. She was even offered a plea deal that was reduce the time to 3 yrs and would have gotten almost all of it with time served but she declined the deal. Instead (and knowing the mandatory years would get added on) she rolled the dice that a jury would see through HER actions that put not only her in danger but her own children in danger as well.
Even more than that this case was weak at best. Zimmerman's camp started to use the stand your ground argument but ended up using a basic self defense argument because the state had no real evidence. I'm not saying he is innocent but that they had nothing to prove their case. When the police and local prosecutor don't want to push for an arrest then it should've ended there. But the Prez and FLA's Gov wanted to get this stirred up because of some little political pressure. They even avoided a grand jury because they knew it wouldn't get an arrest. There is tons of room for reasonable doubt in this case and if you have any of that as a juror you have to acquit. There was no hard evidence to convict here. The justice system isn't broke people...but when you have a weak argument and nothing to back it up along with lemmings listening to a media telling the world how bad Zimmerman is...it appears the system is broke.
i was wondering when the rest of the story would come out on that one...

“Question, Explore, Discover”

Level 6

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#92 Jul 15, 2013
Know the facts wrote:
<quoted text>
Wanna know why this story isn't relevant? Because you left some facts out. Like the fact that she went to the house that day to get her things knowing that the ex-husband was there with the kids....she went in and start an argument with the ex. She then left the house and the danger only to go to her car and get a gun....to which she came back in and threatened the ex....she then shot in the air a 'warning' shot that she tried to claim was a stand your ground defense. She was even offered a plea deal that was reduce the time to 3 yrs and would have gotten almost all of it with time served but she declined the deal. Instead (and knowing the mandatory years would get added on) she rolled the dice that a jury would see through HER actions that put not only her in danger but her own children in danger as well.
Even more than that this case was weak at best. Zimmerman's camp started to use the stand your ground argument but ended up using a basic self defense argument because the state had no real evidence. I'm not saying he is innocent but that they had nothing to prove their case. When the police and local prosecutor don't want to push for an arrest then it should've ended there. But the Prez and FLA's Gov wanted to get this stirred up because of some little political pressure. They even avoided a grand jury because they knew it wouldn't get an arrest. There is tons of room for reasonable doubt in this case and if you have any of that as a juror you have to acquit. There was no hard evidence to convict here. The justice system isn't broke people...but when you have a weak argument and nothing to back it up along with lemmings listening to a media telling the world how bad Zimmerman is...it appears the system is broke.
I disagree about the woman's case. It is easy to make those kinds of statements when you aren't on the receiving end of the abuse. There is no way in hell that woman deserves 20 years in prison for sticking up for herself. And anyone whining about the Zimmerman case and how he was just defending himself out of one side of their mouth and then basically writing this woman off out of the other side of their mouth is on very shaky grounds.

Regarding Zimmerman, I've actually changed my mind on this matter after doing a lot of reading on the topic. I think I said that he was a murderer in one of these posts and I actually had regrets about that right after posting it. I don't think that's true at all. I think he was rash and foolish and had NO BUSINESS carrying a gun and I think the whole damn thing is his fault. But I don't believe he was out to kill anyone.

It's so irritating how much complete stupidity is coming from both sides on this matter. On one side seems to be a witch hunt against Zimmerman, on the other seems to be a "circle the white wagons and get the guns" bunch of BS. For example, someone was making a big deal that Martin smoked pot. F*ck so? LOTS of people do that. And he had tiny traces of the stuff in him so it wasn't even a factor that night. Also, his knuckles were not all cut and bloodied as far as I can tell. So the vivid descriptions people are giving about him beating the crap out of Zimmerman appear to be exaggerated.

In the end, this was a guy who thought Martin was up to no good. He made some very bad calls and ended up killing the kid. Martin didn't seem to be doing anything wrong that night. For whatever reason, he and Zimmerman ended up in a fight that would not have happened if Zimmerman had just minded his own business or left his gun at home where it belonged.

Anyway, the trial is over. And I think I'm done with the topic.
Clueless

Sunbright, TN

#93 Jul 15, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree about the woman's case. It is easy to make those kinds of statements when you aren't on the receiving end of the abuse. There is no way in hell that woman deserves 20 years in prison for sticking up for herself. And anyone whining about the Zimmerman case and how he was just defending himself out of one side of their mouth and then basically writing this woman off out of the other side of their mouth is on very shaky grounds.
Regarding Zimmerman, I've actually changed my mind on this matter after doing a lot of reading on the topic. I think I said that he was a murderer in one of these posts and I actually had regrets about that right after posting it. I don't think that's true at all. I think he was rash and foolish and had NO BUSINESS carrying a gun and I think the whole damn thing is his fault. But I don't believe he was out to kill anyone.
It's so irritating how much complete stupidity is coming from both sides on this matter. On one side seems to be a witch hunt against Zimmerman, on the other seems to be a "circle the white wagons and get the guns" bunch of BS. For example, someone was making a big deal that Martin smoked pot. F*ck so? LOTS of people do that. And he had tiny traces of the stuff in him so it wasn't even a factor that night. Also, his knuckles were not all cut and bloodied as far as I can tell. So the vivid descriptions people are giving about him beating the crap out of Zimmerman appear to be exaggerated.
In the end, this was a guy who thought Martin was up to no good. He made some very bad calls and ended up killing the kid. Martin didn't seem to be doing anything wrong that night. For whatever reason, he and Zimmerman ended up in a fight that would not have happened if Zimmerman had just minded his own business or left his gun at home where it belonged.
Anyway, the trial is over. And I think I'm done with the topic.
You don't use your knuckles when slaming some ones head into the concrete.

“Boogie Chill'un”

Level 6

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#94 Jul 15, 2013
_-_Nope_-_ wrote:
JJ, I honestly don't know what definition I would fit into. I have a wide diversity of friends. A couple of which who are in mixed marriages, a couple of which who are gay, etc. They are my friends. I have learned that I can also count on them. THAT is what discerns a real friendship from those who are just mere acquaintance..
I have even learned to avoid the people in my life that I've gotten to know because they didn't end up being the kind of person they tried to portray themselves as. And skin color has never entered those decisions that I made, or still make, when I mentally delete someone from my personal "inner circle"...
I also like doing just about all of the above that you posted. Even the Merlot, ROFLMBO!! I'm part redneck, biggest part is biker, part lady, part tomboy. I can be feminine in every aspect of my life, yet I can out shoot a few of the men I personally know. I know how to out fish them too.
So I can't honestly find a way to fit myself into any category, LOL!!! I'm still a 'girl' though, so I reasonably can't even begin to claim that I can do everything a man can. I just don't have that kind of physical strength due to my gender.
Point is, I can go anywhere. And as long as I'm treated respectfully, I will always, and I mean ALWAYS, give that respect back ten fold. When I'm bored or tired, I leave while giving a thank you for the company and generosity shown to me.
I saw a pic on FaceBook the other day. It was of one brown egg and one white. When cracked, the yolks were the same.
I liked that portrayal....
Couldn't agree more.....it seems I can get along with most any crowd.....except narrow minded, hate mongering bigots. I can overlook some things in bad taste....but when you infringe on someone's God given rights, "you're walkin on the fightin' side of me".

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#95 Jul 16, 2013
Even though "stand your ground" didn't officially come up during the trial (as far as I know) I believe that law is at least partially to blame here. I'm betting that if it weren't for "stand your ground" Zimmerman wouldn't have followed Martin and nothing would have happened.
Zimmerman put himself into a situation in which his only means of defense was the loaded gun on his person (because he obviously can't fight). Why did he do that? If he didn't have the gun on him would he have pursued? I doubt it... which in my mind, makes this a clear case of manslaughter. But it gets muddled because of "stand your ground".
Hopper

London, KY

#96 Jul 16, 2013
Does anyone here think that stupidass AG Holder will investigate any of the death threats Zimmerman is receiving? Wouldn't that be something.

Level 5

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#97 Jul 16, 2013
Let the riots commence. I don't like a verdict. Iwill burn my neighbor hood. Sounds like black culture.

“Boogie Chill'un”

Level 6

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#98 Jul 16, 2013
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
Even though "stand your ground" didn't officially come up during the trial (as far as I know) I believe that law is at least partially to blame here. I'm betting that if it weren't for "stand your ground" Zimmerman wouldn't have followed Martin and nothing would have happened.
Zimmerman put himself into a situation in which his only means of defense was the loaded gun on his person (because he obviously can't fight). Why did he do that? If he didn't have the gun on him would he have pursued? I doubt it... which in my mind, makes this a clear case of manslaughter. But it gets muddled because of "stand your ground".
I believe you are right. Manslaughter seems like the most logical charge here. I'm confident Zimmerman didn't set out to kill this young man, but violence ensued and that was the ultimate result. Isn't that definition of manslaughter?
inquiring mind

Lexington, KY

#99 Jul 16, 2013
while we're pointing fingers, i understood that the kid was the attacker, am I wrong? since when do you attack someone for following you? in my opinion, if the kid hadn't initiated physical contact, nothing would have happened. right?
walt

Pine Knot, KY

#100 Jul 16, 2013
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
Even though "stand your ground" didn't officially come up during the trial (as far as I know) I believe that law is at least partially to blame here. I'm betting that if it weren't for "stand your ground" Zimmerman wouldn't have followed Martin and nothing would have happened.
Zimmerman put himself into a situation in which his only means of defense was the loaded gun on his person (because he obviously can't fight). Why did he do that? If he didn't have the gun on him would he have pursued? I doubt it... which in my mind, makes this a clear case of manslaughter. But it gets muddled because of "stand your ground".
Should we all take fighting lessons so we can defend ourselves? I assume that with the danger of being a community watch person, you never know what you may come up against so a concealed weapon is the smart way to survive.

"Stand your ground" didn't come into play because it was clearly a case of basic self defense.

Now if Zimmerman intentionally confronted Martin and provoked him to hit him so he could kill him, then you have a case. The evidence presented in the courtroom didn't support any of that, not even racial motivation, the only racial slur was from Martin.

You said, "Zimmerman put himself into a situation", its called doing your job, its what was required of him to be an effective community watcher keeping people safe from thugs.

The jury is in and a verdict has been reached, get over it.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#101 Jul 16, 2013
walt wrote:
<quoted text>
Should we all take fighting lessons so we can defend ourselves?
If you are going to put yourself into situations where you may need to defend yourself, and don't want to have to use lethal force...yes. If you don't know how, or are incapable of subduing someone without shooting them, then you shouldn't be playing cop.
walt wrote:
<quoted text>
I assume that with the danger of being a community watch person, you never know what you may come up against so a concealed weapon is the smart way to survive.
I'm not arguing that. I didn't say that he shouldn't be able to carry a concealed weapon. I personally don't condone their use, but I can see where some (responsible) people could feel the need.
walt wrote:
<quoted text>
"Stand your ground" didn't come into play because it was clearly a case of basic self defense.
I disagree with you there (obviously). Murder 2 shouldn't have come into play because it was self defense (and the overly ambitious prosecution should have known that). But "stand your ground" was at the root of Zimmerman's motivation (I believe). He felt empowered by the gun he carried, and he felt justified by "stand your ground" which led to reckless behavior and ultimately the loss of a life. That's manslaughter.
walt wrote:
<quoted text>
Now if Zimmerman intentionally confronted Martin and provoked him to hit him so he could kill him, then you have a case. The evidence presented in the courtroom didn't support any of that, not even racial motivation, the only racial slur was from Martin.
Yes, the evidence presented in the courtroom. Which was forensic, and spotty eye-witness testimony. There wasn't anything that could definitively refute Zimmerman's statement. But does that mean he told the truth? No, it just means there wasn't anything to remove a reasonable doubt. Only Zimmerman knows exactly what happened and I don't have a lot of confidence in his honesty. Or have you forgotten about his attempt to conceal his money from the court to get a reduced bail?

All of this, however, is tangential to my argument. Whatever happened after Zimmerman hung up with the 911 operator is moot(for my argument).
walt wrote:
<quoted text>
You said, "Zimmerman put himself into a situation", its called doing your job, its what was required of him to be an effective community watcher keeping people safe from thugs.
Doing his job?
His "job" was to report it to the authorities, not to be a hero. Neighborhood watches are not an excuse for vigilantism, but apparently you don't understand that. This is precisely why "stand your ground" type laws can lead to tragedies like this. Don't get me wrong, I believe a person should be able to defend their lives, their families, and their property with whatever force is necessary. It's a question of how far does that right reasonably extend?
Again, if Zimmerman didn't have the gun on him would he have followed Martin? I doubt it. We'll never know for sure, but I seriously doubt it.
Did he need to follow Martin? No.
walt wrote:
<quoted text>
The jury is in and a verdict has been reached, get over it.
I think there's a lesson in here somewhere and a kid had to die for us to maybe learn it. Do you believe Martin deserved to die?
Know the facts

Manchester, KY

#102 Jul 16, 2013
Yiago wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree about the woman's case. It is easy to make those kinds of statements when you aren't on the receiving end of the abuse. There is no way in hell that woman deserves 20 years in prison for sticking up for herself. And anyone whining about the Zimmerman case and how he was just defending himself out of one side of their mouth and then basically writing this woman off out of the other side of their mouth is on very shaky grounds.
------
In the end, this was a guy who thought Martin was up to no good. He made some very bad calls and ended up killing the kid. Martin didn't seem to be doing anything wrong that night. For whatever reason, he and Zimmerman ended up in a fight that would not have happened if Zimmerman had just minded his own business or left his gun at home where it belonged.
Anyway, the trial is over. And I think I'm done with the topic.
Here is the problem about your assertion on the woman, she didn't need to defend herself in this case....the man let her leave. She took it upon herself to go get a gun and go back into the house and actually threatened the EX. She then shot off a round (IMHO) to let him know she was serious about shooting him...not defending herself. I realize that I can't fully understand what it's like to be in an abusive situation and know the fear that comes with that BUT she was in the process of getting out of the relationship...she was moving on....she went to the house knowing he was there and she knew there'd be a fight....she got out of the house and away from danger (at that point) if she felt like she needed something more to protect herself she could have called the police because she did have a restraining order on him....she certainly didn't need to go back into the house, back in to a dangerous situation...which she was aware would be dangerous since she took a gun in with her. Comparing this to the Zimmerman case is not an apples to apples comparison because she could have walked away from the danger that she knew was coming...Zimmerman didn't know he was walking into a fight. He felt he was just going to talk to a kid to see what was going on and protect his neighborhood.

However just like the Zimmerman case, we will never know for sure what happened. But in both cases if Zimmerman had listened to the 911 folks and if the woman had just left instead of going back inside the house...things would be drastically different. They aren't and everyone involved in these cases has to leave with the results.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#103 Jul 16, 2013
JumperJuice wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe you are right. Manslaughter seems like the most logical charge here. I'm confident Zimmerman didn't set out to kill this young man, but violence ensued and that was the ultimate result. Isn't that definition of manslaughter?
Yes, I think so. The prosecution, for some reason thought they could nail him with murder 2 but they never had a case. Heck, they should have known by the time they charged him that there wasn't enough to make it stick. Personally I think they got caught up in the media circus and lost perspective.
And I agree with you, I don't think Zimmerman set out to kill him. I never did. I think he just used some bad judgment. I think he wanted to be a hero and unnecessarily got himself into a bad spot.
Goosecreekfan

Somerset, KY

#104 Jul 16, 2013
I find it interesting in the uproar over this case and everyone fell silent over the Benghazi incident. Is Holder going to investigate that? We had a government who did not support fellow Americans and four were killed. I guess Al Sharpten did not think it important to protest against his president and country since there was no black person involved. If this man could not keep the pot stirring he would not have a job. Let's investigate him over civil inequality.
Know the facts

Manchester, KY

#105 Jul 16, 2013
Skeptical Spectacles wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I think so. The prosecution, for some reason thought they could nail him with murder 2 but they never had a case. Heck, they should have known by the time they charged him that there wasn't enough to make it stick. Personally I think they got caught up in the media circus and lost perspective.
And I agree with you, I don't think Zimmerman set out to kill him. I never did. I think he just used some bad judgment. I think he wanted to be a hero and unnecessarily got himself into a bad spot.
Bad judgement doesn't take away ones right to defend themselves. In hind sight everyone would agree that he should have stayed put but that is after the fact. He went up to the kid to ask what was going on....word were exchanged and probably not like he intended....kid attacked and got shot. Nobody is a winner in this one.

Besides it's all a mute point about manslaughter....the jury was allowed to look at manslaughter and they didn't convict him of that either.
Jesse

Sunbright, TN

#106 Jul 16, 2013
God forbid if Zimmerman had been White.The blacks would have been roiting in the streets.

Level 5

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#108 Jul 16, 2013
Jesse wrote:
God forbid if Zimmerman had been White.The blacks would have been roiting in the streets.
, They in California.

Since: Aug 10

Location hidden

#109 Jul 16, 2013
Know the facts wrote:
<quoted text>
Bad judgement doesn't take away ones right to defend themselves.
No, it doesn't. But it doesn't absolve them from responsibility either. Bad judgment, especially with a lethal weapon, that results in the death of someone is culpable negligence. And that, by definition, is manslaughter.
Know the facts wrote:
<quoted text>
In hind sight everyone would agree that he should have stayed put but that is after the fact.
How is that "after the fact"? Him not staying put is my whole point.
Know the facts wrote:
<quoted text>
He went up to the kid to ask what was going on....word were exchanged and probably not like he intended....kid attacked and got shot.
And you know this based on what? Zimmerman's testimony? Look, none of us know what events transpired. Did Zimmerman's following of Martin provoke Martin? It sure seemed so. How do you know that Zimmerman's actions didn't stimulate Martin's fight-or-flight response? As far as I know, Martin had no history of violence. It seems a stretch that he would suddenly attempt to beat a man to death for no reason. Don't you think?
Know the facts wrote:
<quoted text>
Besides it's all a mute point about manslaughter....the jury was allowed to look at manslaughter and they didn't convict him of that either.
True, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't have. Finding someone "not guilty" is not the same thing as finding them "innocent". I don't blame the jury. I blame the prosecution for being overzealous.
Runner

London, KY

#110 Jul 16, 2013
Closet racist wrote:
I don't really like black people, I don't hate them but if they all left it wouldn't bother me any.
Hmmm. You mean you would rather your ancestors hadn't brought them here? Against their will.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Somerset Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Bible study rules for public schools proposed (Feb '10) 32 min Strel 163,503
*keep a word- drop a word* Game (Jul '11) 2 hr Hatti_Hollerand 13,454
I'm in the mood 2 hr Dorothy 12
Hey Hatti. (Jan '12) 4 hr Voyeur 35,829
Jailer 9 hr Leaker 31
Bo Cook talking bout throwing hands lol (Aug '16) 9 hr Lucas king 43
gary murch- murch custom cabinetry (Apr '09) 9 hr John whang 8

Somerset Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Somerset Mortgages