Zimmerman found not guilty in shootin...

Zimmerman found not guilty in shooting death of Trayvon Martin

There are 1868 comments on the The Hill story from Jul 13, 2013, titled Zimmerman found not guilty in shooting death of Trayvon Martin. In it, The Hill reports that:

George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch volunteer who triggered a national debate about race after shooting an unarmed black teenager named Trayvon Martin, was found not guilty of second-degree murder and manslaughter charges Saturday night.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Hill.

chisholm

Columbus, OH

#1870 Jul 25, 2013
i see oj wrote:
<quoted text>
No, I'm saying following someone does not "initiate" a confrontation....
Try to keep up!
So the confrontation WOULD have happened even if Zimmerman had not followed Martin? I mean, one or the other, at least make up your mind..
chisholm

Columbus, OH

#1871 Jul 25, 2013
The chain of events is undeniable. Zimmerman followed Martin, first in his car, then on foot. He was armed. Martin and Zimmerman had a confrontation after Martin became aware he was being followed by a man he didn't know. No one knows how that confrontation began. During the confrontation, Zimmmerman shot Martin to death.

Zimmerman will ALWAYS be responsible for this kid's death, and that responsibility started when he GOT OUT OF HIS CAR.

You racists, righties, and gun nuts can deny that until you're blue in the face, but it remains a fact.

End of story.
i see oj

Virginia Beach, VA

#1872 Jul 25, 2013
chisholm wrote:
<quoted text>
Would Trayvon have confronted Zimmerman if he hadn't followed him? Yes or no? Surely that's a simple enough question for you?
Would Zimmerman have followed Trayvon if he hadn't been suspended from school and therefore in Sanford?

Yes or no.......
chisholm

Columbus, OH

#1873 Jul 25, 2013
Addendum: Zimmerman knows how the confrontation began, but whether he's telling the truth about it we have no way of confirming.

FWIW
i see oj

Virginia Beach, VA

#1874 Jul 25, 2013
chisholm wrote:
<quoted text>
So the confrontation WOULD have happened even if Zimmerman had not followed Martin? I mean, one or the other, at least make up your mind..
No, the question is "who initiated the confrontation?"

Here are your own words which answer that question:

"....it was clear that without solid evidence of how the actual confrontation began..."

That pretty much sums it up! Thanks!
chisholm

Columbus, OH

#1876 Jul 25, 2013
i see oj wrote:
<quoted text>
Would Zimmerman have followed Trayvon if he hadn't been suspended from school and therefore in Sanford?
Yes or no.......
LOL...completely irrelevant and you know it.

Evidently you can't or won't answer my question. Dismissed.
STD free

United States

#1877 Jul 25, 2013
chisholm wrote:
<quoted text>You're yet another reason not to ever visit the state of Florida. Too many cockroaches down there.
Yeah we don't need anymore cockroaches like you. By the way how are those roach motels working where you live?
i see oj

Virginia Beach, VA

#1878 Jul 25, 2013
chisholm wrote:
....During the confrontation, Zimmmerman shot Martin to death....
Correction: during Martin's violent assault of Zimmerman, Zimmerman feared for his life and shot Martin in self defense.

End of story!
STD free

United States

#1879 Jul 25, 2013
chisholm wrote:
The chain of events is undeniable. Zimmerman followed Martin, first in his car, then on foot. He was armed. Martin and Zimmerman had a confrontation after Martin became aware he was being followed by a man he didn't know. No one knows how that confrontation began. During the confrontation, Zimmmerman shot Martin to death.

Zimmerman will ALWAYS be responsible for this kid's death, and that responsibility started when he GOT OUT OF HIS CAR.

You racists, righties, and gun nuts can deny that until you're blue in the face, but it remains a fact.

End of story.
Yeah dead thug being eaten by hungry bugs. Get well soon Trayvon not really.
i see oj

Virginia Beach, VA

#1880 Jul 25, 2013
chisholm wrote:
Addendum: Zimmerman knows how the confrontation began, but whether he's telling the truth about it we have no way of confirming.
Yet you are convinced it is murder?

Your bias is showing..........
chisholm

Columbus, OH

#1881 Jul 25, 2013
STD free wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah we don't need anymore cockroaches like you. By the way how are those roach motels working where you live?
Only in Florida do people live in roach motels...:)
chisholm

Columbus, OH

#1882 Jul 25, 2013
i see oj wrote:
<quoted text>
No, the question is "who initiated the confrontation?"
Here are your own words which answer that question:
"....it was clear that without solid evidence of how the actual confrontation began..."
That pretty much sums it up! Thanks!
"Actual confrontation" meaning the fight, of course, but don't let words confuse you.:)
i see oj

Virginia Beach, VA

#1883 Jul 25, 2013
chisholm wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL...completely irrelevant and you know it.
Evidently you can't or won't answer my question. Dismissed.
As irrelevant as yours......you're starting to get it!
chisholm

Columbus, OH

#1884 Jul 25, 2013
i see oj wrote:
<quoted text>
Correction: during Martin's violent assault of Zimmerman, Zimmerman feared for his life and shot Martin in self defense.
End of story!
It's not a "correction" to lie and claim it's the "end of story." Which is what you just did.

I repeat in clearer terms for you..NO ONE KNOWS who started the fight. And Martin had every bit as much reason to suspect himself in danger from Zimmerman as Zimmerman did Martin. If Zimmerman approached him, demanded he halt, waved a gun at him, or initiated a physical encounter (threw a punch, shoved him, tried to grab him by the shoulder) Martin had EVERY RIGHT to resist.

Problem at the trial was that there was no evidence to oppose Zimmerman's testimony. Why? because he killed the other guy.
chisholm

Columbus, OH

#1885 Jul 25, 2013
i see oj wrote:
<quoted text>
Yet you are convinced it is murder?
Your bias is showing..........
I'm convinced it was manglaughter. And please, bias? LOL!

No one here's more biased than you are.
chisholm

Columbus, OH

#1886 Jul 25, 2013
"Manslaughter," sorry.
chisholm

Columbus, OH

#1887 Jul 25, 2013
i see oj wrote:
<quoted text>
As irrelevant as yours......you're starting to get it!
ANOTHER obvious lie. I was talking about what happened that day...you're digging back days to try to justify Zimmerman.

Here's one for you - if Zimmerman hadn't joined the blockwatch, Martin would still be alive..
TGO

Vernon, FL

#1888 Jul 25, 2013
chisholm wrote:
The chain of events is undeniable. Zimmerman followed Martin, first in his car, then on foot. He was armed. Martin and Zimmerman had a confrontation after Martin became aware he was being followed by a man he didn't know. No one knows how that confrontation began. During the confrontation, Zimmmerman shot Martin to death.
Zimmerman will ALWAYS be responsible for this kid's death, and that responsibility started when he GOT OUT OF HIS CAR.
You racists, righties, and gun nuts can deny that until you're blue in the face, but it remains a fact.
End of story.
Who do you think you're fooling?

You keep banging your ZIMMERMAN GOT AWAY WITH MURDER drum in hopes that someone else will act out your revenge fantasy.

No skin off your nose if someone else gets killed getting you your pound of flesh.
chisholm

Columbus, OH

#1889 Jul 25, 2013
TGO wrote:
<quoted text>
Who do you think you're fooling?
You keep banging your ZIMMERMAN GOT AWAY WITH MURDER drum in hopes that someone else will act out your revenge fantasy.
No skin off your nose if someone else gets killed getting you your pound of flesh.
Not once have I called for Zimmerman's death, and I've already said that IMO he was guilty of MANSLAUGHTER, but the jury disagreed.

Your lies are tiresome, I don't see any reason to discuss it further.
TGO

Vernon, FL

#1891 Jul 25, 2013
i see oj wrote:
<quoted text>
Not just Florida's laws, laws anywhere in the US!
"Innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt"
"Burden of proof lies with the prosecution"
Either of those ring a bell?
Strictly speaking innocent until proven guilty is English Common Law - and Florida is a common law state.

Under Code Napoleon the rule is "guilty until proven innocent".

Not all US states are common law states, and even fewer countries recognize it.

The Castle Doctrine "An Englishman's home is his Castle" - also English Common Law - is not universal.

One of the rallying cries of the revolution was "The Rights of an Englishman!". Not all americans agree with that.

Some would prefer Code Napoleon.

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.

Violent Crime Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Teen gets prison in unintentional Columbus fata... 48 min They cannot kill ... 1
News Black Lives Matter* (Oct '15) 1 hr Dr G 1,889
News Man shoots self after hostage-taking, standoff,... (Sep '09) 3 hr April 13
News San Francisco police chief releases more racist... 3 hr Julie Jane 1
News Shooting suspect stole woman's car during robbe... 6 hr Sneaky Pete 1
News Man Accused of Shooting at Rochester Police Off... 7 hr Yankee Dave 8
News Pregnant woman shot, learning to walk again 19 hr commenters 1
More from around the web