Guest FourAces Posted July 10, 2013 Share Posted July 10, 2013 Any of you following this trial? I have been about 75% and now that its basically ended still cannot decide if Zimmerman is guilty or not. I know there were several things he did that should not have been done, like leave his vehicle, follow Martin ... but what happened? Why did this kid get murdered? I also found out a few things I did not know ... like Martin had a small amount of THC in his system. But more disturbing Zimmerman's ex wife (or girlfriend) had to take out a restraining order on him. Plus he was arrested for assaulting a police officer.The last two the jury will not hear about. And of course the infamous screams for help heard in the background of a 911 call. I'm leaning now toward its Martin. Sounds like I would do if I was in a fight and someone pulled out a gun. But when it comes to Zimmerman being guilt or not still no clue ... what do you guys think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wayout Posted July 10, 2013 Members Share Posted July 10, 2013 Without hearing the final arguments or instruction to the jury, I think there is enough reasonable doubt to come in with a not guilty on the main charge. On the lesser chargers, perhaps there is something to find him guilty of and I need to consider that some more. JKane and TotallyOz 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted July 10, 2013 Members Share Posted July 10, 2013 As a layman regarding the law, I have to say Zimmerman is not guilty and this trial should have never happened. Whether he is completely innocent is another question. Best regards, RA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TotallyOz Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 I don't see the evidence to prove 2nd Degree Murder. There is so much doubt in the case with everyone on the stand saying it was him on the tape and the others saying it was the other guy. They all seem to truly believe this. IMHO, that is reasonable doubt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest EXPAT Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 If he is convicted its an emotional conviction not based on fact or some OJ Simpson retribution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest josephga Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 i'm going with not guilty as well. some say that if he was beating zimmermans head against the ground or payment that doesn't justify shooting him. I disagree. in that instance you don't know what's in the mind of this person. if I was getting my head banged against the ground and could get to the gun id shoot. if that's what happen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members boiworship Posted July 11, 2013 Members Share Posted July 11, 2013 A show trial, but good television. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members boiworship Posted July 11, 2013 Members Share Posted July 11, 2013 I don't watch much television, but get the impression that these mega-trials are great for ratings and guest lawyers. It's almost as if the justice system has morphed into reality tv these days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest EXPAT Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 A show trial, but good television. good television? I think not. I'm offended by all of this coverage. I think it is hurting the legal system because it's creating a bunch of showmen and women instead of focusing on their responsibilities. I hate hate this trend and WILL not support it by watching. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted July 11, 2013 Members Share Posted July 11, 2013 Boi and Ex- You both are correct. Starting for sure with OJ. I too am not going to support this silliness but we are decidedly in the minority. But, that is nothing new. Best regards, RA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caeron Posted July 11, 2013 Share Posted July 11, 2013 I haven't been following much, but think he is guilty. He chased the kid and cornered him. All that followed was the result of his own actions. What the law will say, I don't know, but I hope he is forced to pay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted July 11, 2013 Members Share Posted July 11, 2013 caeron- You raise two questions. Is he guilty? As a legal issue, I think not. Will he pay? Without a doubt he will pay a big price for everything. Best regards, RA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest FourAces Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 good television? I think not. I'm offended by all of this coverage. I think it is hurting the legal system because it's creating a bunch of showmen and women instead of focusing on their responsibilities. I hate hate this trend and WILL not support it by watching. EXPAT I think the way this trial has been run the cameras are truly in the background. I have not seen any TV showboating from the large amount I have watched. The judge is far from a Judge Itto as we saw in the OJ trial. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest josephga Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 I don't care for the option of the jury having manslaughter as a option. they wanted second degree murder and should stick with that. I think the jury might compromise and give the manslaughter sentence instead of having the balls of saying guilty or not guilty to murder 2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamSmith Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 Didn't the judge say yesterday that by law and case precedent the lesser charge is automatically present in the greater charge? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TampaYankee Posted July 12, 2013 Members Share Posted July 12, 2013 FWIW, I think a case is there for manslaughter. Zimmerman clearly was the armed aggressor. If anyone was standing his own ground it was Treyvon. I think there is enough circumstantial evidence to believe that beyond a reasonable doubt. The stalking by an armed Zimmerman even after 911 urged him to back off, the lack of blood or DNA on Trayvon supposedly after an intense body-to-body tussel, the limited injury to Zimmerman in contrast to his story of a life-threatening beating, the contradictions in Zimerman's story to police and on Hannity with those presented in court by his attorneys. That said, I expect a hung jury or acquital. There is just too much noise woven into the facts as presented. I doubt the jury has the analytical chops to separate the wheat from the chaff, which would take a lot of time. The prosecution did not have a slam dunk. Their main witness was shaky. IMO the defense did not present a cogent defense but did throw up a lot of dust and mud to obscure a circumstantial case with a weak main witness. As always, it depends on the jury analysis and emotions, and character too. One fact is unassailable IMO. The Sanford Police and Sherif, organizations, labs and individuals, deserve a lot of credit for the facts of this case being so clouded and screwed up. Heads should roll. I know some have but I suspect more should. Also, I think the bald-headed defense attorney ought to be sanctioned after the trial. IMO he attempted, not too discretely, to create chaos and grounds for an appeal by his numerous idiotic attempts to object to the court procedure as laid out by the judge, as it unfolded, to provoke either judicial error or prosecution error that would be grounds for appeal, if not grounds for mistrial. His courtroom behavior was unacceptable on several occasions, most especially in the last few days IMO. wayout 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members wayout Posted July 12, 2013 Members Share Posted July 12, 2013 I think that it will likely come down to whether or not the jury feels that Zimmerman was in fear for his life. That seems to be sufficient to address both the second degree murder charge (as self-defense) and manslaughter (as justifiable homicide). I wouldn't be surprised if it was a hung jury on both counts. From my own perspective, it will be interesting to see how the jury is instructed with regards to a person's responsibility when they initiate the whole sequence of events (as Zimmerman did by starting to follow). Would a reasonable person foresee the possible outcome at various stages in the progression of events and could he have backed off at various points to prevent the final result? I think likely so and as such I personally think at this point there are grounds to convict for manslaughter. As far as live coverage, I can see the potential for showmanship and not focusing on their responsibilities but from the trials I have watched I haven't sensed that. As FourAces says, the camera do seem to be truly in the background for their purposes. As an example, I don't think the bald defense attorney was playing to the camera with his antics as it certainly didn't show him in the best light. Even if it was a strategy to act that way, the cameras didn't influence his decision to do so. Even if we consider the negative impact of the cameras on some lawyers, perhaps we could also consider the positive impact. It is reasonable to speculate that it may create a greater incentive for some lawyers to be fully engaged, prepared and professional to give the greatest effort for their client because they are being seen by thousands, perhaps millions, of people. Just a thought. Here is a link regarding manslaughter charges in Florida for those interested: http://www.richardhornsby.com/crimes/homicide/manslaughter.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest josephga Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 I wonder what's the racial makeup of the jury. I know there's 6 females. I watch HLN after hours and every time their mock jury votes the blacks say guilty and the whites say not guilty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted July 12, 2013 Members Share Posted July 12, 2013 I wonder what's the racial makeup of the jury. I know there's 6 females. I watch HLN after hours and every time their mock jury votes the blacks say guilty and the whites say not guilty. So sad that this is true but isn't this the very reason there is a trial in progress? The local authorities declined to prosecute, the FBI was siced on Zimmerman and could find no reason to prosecute (under federal law) so then the state stepped in. Who siced the state on him? Is this not racial politics start to finish? We have had a long history of racial discrimination but does reverse discrimination solve anything? Best regards, RA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members boiworship Posted July 12, 2013 Members Share Posted July 12, 2013 I wonder what's the racial makeup of the jury. I know there's 6 females. I watch HLN after hours and every time their mock jury votes the blacks say guilty and the whites say not guilty. I believe the jury is composed of five white women and one Latina. Of course, Zimmerman is described as a "white Hispanic". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members TampaYankee Posted July 12, 2013 Members Share Posted July 12, 2013 I think raced played a part. It shouldn't have had to but without it this case was being deep-sixed by the local authorities. The parents raised a stink that it wasn't even going to be investigated beyond the cursory attention it was given at the scene. We see how serious that was given how the evidence and body was treated. Anytime a seventeen year old kid on the way home from a local convenience store is gunned down there ought to be a serious investigation undertaken no matter where the fault lies. One of the local high ranking detectives recommended one. He was overturned by the Chief. One can damn sure guarantee that if a white kid, a son of a local citizen, was gunned down under the same circumstances there would have been an investigation, doubly so if the shooter was black. Yeah, raced played a part, coming and going, and it was shameful that it had to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted July 12, 2013 Members Share Posted July 12, 2013 Don't you think it is very difficult for us outsiders to know how involved any investigation is especially when accompanied by a lot of media hype. I cite the media reports of Asiana 214 which even at this late date contain almost no accurate facts. Early on, there were approximately zero facts, only rank guesses by self styled experts and others. Therefore I am not sure we know a whole lot more about this case which also has been dissected by many "experts". As we also know, the prosecution and defense have vested interests in what and how they present it. It is a wonder justice is ever served. What it seemingly boils down to is our own perception of how human beings interact colored by our life experiences and prejudices. To compound this issue, if we are not "completely" honest in how we view ourselves, how can we be about how we view others? Best regards, RA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest FourAces Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 I know the state has their hour rebuttal to do but after listening to both closing arguments and taking in consideration the law I would have to find Zimmerman not guilty. There is plenty of reasonable doubt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest josephga Posted July 12, 2013 Share Posted July 12, 2013 I agree Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted July 13, 2013 Members Share Posted July 13, 2013 I just read the bio's of the 6 gals on the jury. I am almost positive that I would not want these 6 "peers" judging any thing that I might have done. However that does not mean they will not arrive at a reasonable verdict. What bothers me is there is so much clamor for a "middle" verdict of manslaughter that may in the end appeal to these gals. Unfortunately, the penalty, meaning length of prison term is the same for 2nd degree or manslaughter. Here I mean the minimum, which is 9+ years. Either one can be stretched by the judge to about 30 years. The minimum seems excessive for involuntary manslaughter. OTOH, Martin is dead forever, if Zimmerman is culpable in his demise. Again, all of this is beyond unfortunate but I still think GZ not guilty. Different from innocent. Best regards, RA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
