ChatterBank0 min ago
American Man Aquited Of Murder
Answers
In the UK he would have been done for at least man slaughter as he doesn't deny killing him (in the chest and not a bullet wound) but to be guilty of absolutely nothing is incredible.
17:08 Sun 14th Jul 2013
The protests raise several questions. If it was dark and raining and the victim was wearing a hooded top, would Zimmerman, from his car, have been able to ascertain Martin’s ethnicity? Initially, Zimmerman, himself Hispanic American and a neighbourhood watch co-ordinator, called the police to report a suspicious person, so it would appear he did the right thing before following Martin and challenging him. Additionally, when the police arrived Zimmerman was found to be bleeding from the nose and from two vertical lacerations on the back of his head, so why are protesters convinced that Martin didn’t punch Zimmerman, slam his head into the pavement and reach for the gun? The jury reached a conclusion based upon the evidence presented to the court and accepted by the court, so it appears to me that the ‘Stand your Ground’ law has been appropriately applied.
http://
http://
The Stand your Ground law has allowed a death to go unpunished. What did people think would happen when a law is passed that allows someone to shoot another person, for no better reason than he looked suspicious and wore a hoody ? There were no witnesses in this case, so there was nobody to stand up for the boy that was killed.
I am tempted to use that phrase that you hear every now and then...only in America. Too many stupid people, with too many guns.
I am tempted to use that phrase that you hear every now and then...only in America. Too many stupid people, with too many guns.
There were quite a few witnesses to various parts of the case, actually -- but the evidence they give is often muddled, or contradictory, or at least difficult to reconcile. The physical evidence is that Zimmerman himself sustained injuries. There was a fight of some sort. One of the witnesses describes one person being on the ground hit repeatedly:
" "the guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help! Help!' and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911 ... [later] the guy who was on the top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point."
Zimmerman was wearing a red top that night. Other witness accounts vary, slightly, but generally they agree that there was a fight and that Trayvon Martin was on top of Zimmerman.
This changes the picture radically from what I had initially thought. My first idea was that this was a cold-blooded killing combined with some made-up story. That looks to be very wrong. More likely, as it seems to me, is that there was a confrontation that was unintended, spontaneous, and possibly started by either side, but that it seems reasonable to assume that Zimmerman didn't intend to shoot the boy.
The remaining question is who actually started it, and to this there doesn't seem to be any clear answer. Zimmerman's phone call (recorded) to the police suggests that the boy was the first one to approach the other; another phone call (unrecorded) at about the same time paints a different picture. But the point is that it doesn't seem to be clear either way, and if there is reasonable doubt then you can't convict.
" "the guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help! Help!' and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911 ... [later] the guy who was on the top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point."
Zimmerman was wearing a red top that night. Other witness accounts vary, slightly, but generally they agree that there was a fight and that Trayvon Martin was on top of Zimmerman.
This changes the picture radically from what I had initially thought. My first idea was that this was a cold-blooded killing combined with some made-up story. That looks to be very wrong. More likely, as it seems to me, is that there was a confrontation that was unintended, spontaneous, and possibly started by either side, but that it seems reasonable to assume that Zimmerman didn't intend to shoot the boy.
The remaining question is who actually started it, and to this there doesn't seem to be any clear answer. Zimmerman's phone call (recorded) to the police suggests that the boy was the first one to approach the other; another phone call (unrecorded) at about the same time paints a different picture. But the point is that it doesn't seem to be clear either way, and if there is reasonable doubt then you can't convict.
Well thought out reply Jim and thanks. But we are left with a man being murdered and nobody seems to responsible for it !
According to this mornings news on the BBC, the victims family are considering bringing some kind of civil case against Zimmerman, in rather the same way that occurred in the O J Simpson affair. It would seem that it just can't be left where it is at present.
According to this mornings news on the BBC, the victims family are considering bringing some kind of civil case against Zimmerman, in rather the same way that occurred in the O J Simpson affair. It would seem that it just can't be left where it is at present.
Whoah there jim , steady on...the hand wringers on here arent going to be too pleased with you presenting evidence that doesnt help their biased case.
dont you realise its a hispanic (or white as the lefties prefer in this instance to bolster their case) that alledgedly murdered a black.....come on he must be guilty, how on earth could a black even presumed to have been at fault...what a ridiculous thought........
dont you realise its a hispanic (or white as the lefties prefer in this instance to bolster their case) that alledgedly murdered a black.....come on he must be guilty, how on earth could a black even presumed to have been at fault...what a ridiculous thought........
But of course we do know Ladybirder, he admitted that he killed Martin...nobody is disputing that, even our AB knuckle-draggers. The jury found him not-guilty, but it would seem that justice hasn't been done.
His admittance of the killing will help in any further civil action taken against Zimmerman I'm sure. In the O J Simpson case, he didn't admit to anything, so the Martin family would appear to be luckier in that regard at least.
My thoughts are with Martin's family...a dead son and nobody is to blame apparently.
His admittance of the killing will help in any further civil action taken against Zimmerman I'm sure. In the O J Simpson case, he didn't admit to anything, so the Martin family would appear to be luckier in that regard at least.
My thoughts are with Martin's family...a dead son and nobody is to blame apparently.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.