G. Zimmerman

[RandyDaytona]

All this Monday morning quarterbacking is funny, only George and the dead kid know what happened that night. Bottom line George is alive, kid is dead. All this supposed outrage over one death, but why doesn't Rev. Sharpless get upset over the 47 YTD deaths of black school age kids in Chicago ? Guess Peruvian on black is bad, blacks killing blacks is okay.

End of the day, we have bigger problems than this.

Because Sharpton is like an ambulance-chasing attorney with the "Injured-on-the-Job?" billboard on the side of the highway. Just as that attorney only chooses the cases he can make money from, Sharpton cherry-picks only the racial issues which allow him to drum up the most sensationalism and drama and ignores everything that is either too clear-cut or doesn't strike enough of a chord with the masses.

And you can bet that this same dirtbag will be holding the Martin family's collective hand will continue to milk this for all the publicity he can get. Just because the criminal court case is done, or even if Zimmerman won't be held liable in civil court, the entire issue is way too much of a low-hanging plum for him to let go of so easily.

 

[huntsonora]

My "evidence" is unreliable and anecdotal like yours. Obviously neither of us has a dog in this fight and we're more than unswayed in our opinion of the matter so this continuing on is most redundant.

If you want to feel like you "won" or are "right" then please continue. Had the inept prosecution gone for the rightful charge of manslaughter from the get go rather than try to feed the media and Barry's hype of second degree murder, etc. I'm sure we'd see another outcome. Regardless, karma will get Zimmerman. That "he mentored "african american" kids" is akin to "some of my best friends are black." What a joke.

Also Mr. Keyboard Tough Guy, I didn't sit through a CCW class, buy a carry piece, make a appointment with the sheriff, etc. because I can't "comprehend" using deadly force to protect myself or my family - but your repeated jabs are certainly telling.

If your "evidence" is "anecdotal and unreliable" then it's not evidence. This is the point I have been trying to make. It is inadmissible and irrelevant. What you "think" happened doesn't matter. Not trying to be ugly, just stating the facts. It is frustrating to see people say he should have been found guilty of something when there was ZERO evidence to substantiate any of it. He never should have been charged in the first place

As for winning and losing, its not about that. Fact is we all lost in this deal. Trayvon Martin lost his life, his parents lost a son, George Zimmerman will lose everything before its all said and done, America went backwards as it relates to racial tension and 2nd Amendment rights. The mainstream media lost all credibility, the current administration lost more trust with the American public. There was nothing good that came of this with the exception of a GZ being acquitted which is as it should be regardless of the fact that the prosecution, the judge and all of the political pressures were against him. At least the jurors didn't succumb to the same pressure that the prosecution did

As for you, you have lost as well, you've lost your damn mind if you think that the prosecution would have gotten a conviction for manslaughter if that was the only conviction they sought. It didn't matter what the charge was ndcent, there wasn't any evidence for any conviction on any level. If there was GZ would have been found guilty, especially considering all of the outside pressure to get a conviction

As for what is going to "get Zimmerman", you call it Karma and I contest that as well. If anything that gets him it will be hate. What you call karma I call evil.

 

[zopperman]

If your "evidence" is "anecdotal and unreliable" then it's not evidence. This is the point I have been trying to make. It is inadmissible and irrelevant. What you "think" happened doesn't matter. Not trying to be ugly, just stating the facts. It is frustrating to see people say he should have been found guilty of something when there was ZERO evidence to substantiate any of it. He never should have been charged in the first place

As for winning and losing, its not about that. Fact is we all lost in this deal. Trayvon Martin lost his life, his parents lost a son, George Zimmerman will lose everything before its all said and done, America went backwards as it relates to racial tension and 2nd Amendment rights. The mainstream media lost all credibility, the current administration lost more trust with the American public. There was nothing good that came of this with the exception of a GZ being acquitted which is as it should be regardless of the fact that the prosecution, the judge and all of the political pressures were against him. At least the jurors didn't succumb to the same pressure that the prosecution did

As for you, you have lost as well, you've lost your damn mind if you think that the prosecution would have gotten a conviction for manslaughter if that was the only conviction they sought. It didn't matter what the charge was ndcent, there wasn't any evidence for any conviction on any level. If there was GZ would have been found guilty, especially considering all of the outside pressure to get a conviction

As for what is going to "get Zimmerman", you call it Karma and I contest that as well. If anything that gets him it will be hate. What you call karma I call evil.

I think that the prosecution could have had a case for involuntary manslaughter but like i said before i believe that the political pressure led them to seek a harsher charge. Go big or go home... they went home..

 

[huntsonora]

I think that the prosecution could have had a case for involuntary manslaughter but like i said before i believe that the political pressure led them to seek a harsher charge. Go big or go home... they went home..

Juror B37 just did an interview on CNN and she said it was split 3-3. 3 jurors said not guilty from the beginning and 3 wanted a guilty verdict but after going over and over the evidence they found that there was just no way to convict him of any crime.

 

[zopperman]

Juror B37 just did an interview on CNN and she said it was split 3-3. 3 jurors said not guilty from the beginning and 3 wanted a guilty verdict but after going over and over the evidence they found that there was just no way to convict him of any crime.

IMO had they been instructed on the definition of involuntary manslaughter there would have been a conviction, but that's just speculation. With that charge, the P wouldn't have had to prove intent which was the whole issue.

 

[BrianSD_42]

IMO had they been instructed on the definition of involuntary manslaughter there would have been a conviction

[MENTION=55855]zopperman[/MENTION]

Can you define involuntary manslaughter in the state of FL?

But seriously ... educate us.

 

[blue dog]

Police just declared unlawful assembly of large crowds on crenshaw in Lemert park. A predominately african american area. Seems to me to be a large crowd of high school kids. The pack mentality has started, and at this point, i am anticipating the LAPD and Sheriffs to shut it down how ever possible. this area is just south and a bit west of USC.
Honestly, it is a crap neighborhood, and i expect this mentality from the area.
OH O, is that racist of me. Just calling a spade a spade.

 

[zopperman]

[MENTION=55855]zopperman[/MENTION]

Can you define involuntary manslaughter in the state of FL?

But seriously ... educate us.

Not off the top of my head, no. I'm speaking from my experience where the laws are different.
I can try to find it in the office somewhere tomorrow and get back to you :shrug:

Found this on google

Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine

Don't see anything about involuntary here

But as per wikipedia

Involuntary manslaughter[edit]
Involuntary manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice aforethought, either express or implied. It is distinguished from voluntary manslaughter by the absence of intention. It is normally divided into two categories; constructive manslaughter and criminally negligent manslaughter, both of which involve criminal liability.

 

[blue dog]

what about castle doctrine ? does that not apply to the favor of zimmerman ? Or does Castle doctrine only apply to your home ?

 

[zopperman]

what about castle doctrine ? does that not plat to the favor of zimmerman ? Or does Castle doctrine only apply to your home ?

only applies to home or potentially business

 

[blue dog]

I believe it applies to your automobile as well.

 

[zacattack20]

Police just declared unlawful assembly of large crowds on crenshaw in Lemert park. A predominately african american area. Seems to me to be a large crowd of high school kids. The pack mentality has started, and at this point, i am anticipating the LAPD and Sheriffs to shut it down how ever possible. this area is just south and a bit west of USC.
Honestly, it is a crap neighborhood, and i expect this mentality from the area.
OH O, is that racist of me. Just calling a spade a spade.

Yeah and they just prove how bigger of idiots they are by uniting over the same issue and then fighting each other in the streets.

 

[Thai]

Involuntary manslaughter[edit]
Involuntary manslaughter is the unlawful killing of a human being without malice aforethought, either express or implied.

To be specific to the Zimmerman case, this will NOT hold. Zimmerman was defending his life against a potential lethal threat when he shot Trayvon. This is fully protected by law. Thus, it is NOT an unlawful killing.

I am no lawyer. However, think about it, do you guys (ndcent et al.) really think that the Prosecution team is a bunch of idiots?! They would have got him on any charges IF they could. The pressure was on them to get ANY charges against Zimmerman...it was not all or nothing...they understood the consequences of screwing up...they even brought evidence last minute to screw the Defense team...AND they had a Judge on their side (!!)...but they could not get a guilty verdict because there was nothing there.

The ONLY weapon that the Prosecution had was Trayvon's mistress (Precious) confession. And their closer to hopefully tug at the juror's hearts was Trayvon's mother. Unfortunately, Precious was a disaster on the stand, which is expected of a teenager on a big court stand. (I would probably be as incompetent as Precious!) And the Defense team did a remarkable job with Travyon's mother...they treated her with politeness so not to offend the jurors.

(The Medical Examiner was a mess for the Prosecution...he changed his definitions along the way! He read from his handwritten notes!)

No, there was nothing there for ANY charge against Zimmerman. Curiousity (and possibly lack of better judgement) is probably the gravest charge against him.

 

[zopperman]

To be specific to the Zimmerman case, this will NOT hold. Zimmerman was defending his life against a potential lethal threat when he shot Trayvon. This is fully protected by law. Thus, it is NOT an unlawful killing.

I am no lawyer. However, think about it, do you guys (ndcent et al.) really think that the Prosecution team is a bunch of idiots?! They would have got him on any charges IF they could. The pressure was on them to get ANY charges against Zimmerman...it was not all or nothing...they understood the consequences of screwing up...they even brought evidence last minute to screw the Defense team...AND they had a Judge on their side (!!)...but they could not get a guilty verdict because there was nothing there.

The ONLY weapon that the Prosecution had was Trayvon's mistress (Precious) confession. And their closer to hopefully tug at the juror's hearts was Trayvon's mother. Unfortunately, Precious was a disaster on the stand, which is expected of a teenager on a big court stand. (I would probably be as incompetent as Precious!) And the Defense team did a remarkable job with Travyon's mother...they treated her with politeness so not to offend the jurors.

(The Medical Examiner was a mess for the Prosecution...he changed his definitions along the way! He read from his handwritten notes!)

No, there was nothing there for ANY charge against Zimmerman. Curiousity (and possibly lack of better judgement) is probably the gravest charge against him.

Not sure if you saw my earlier post about this, but I disagree. and that's okay because we're all entitled to our opinions and as courtesy captain i'm not going to berate you for having a different opinion.

So, I think that Z got acquitted not because he acted in self defense and not because the defense was able to prove that, but because of the lack of evidence of the P's side. It's like the contrapositive.

If they went involuntary manslaughter, the P wouldn't have had to prove intent to kill, just prove that the killing was unlawful/unjustifiable. I think they could have have a better shot at this. Not to say that they would have won, but all that crap about Z calling TM a punk wouldn't have mattered.

Then again, this charge doesn't even look like it exists in florida :shrug:

 

[eddiebx]

Heard about this on the radio this morning, oh the irony.

Kim Kardashian Gets #nojustice For Trayvon Tweet, Forgot Dad Defended O.J.

 

[huntsonora]

Not sure if you saw my earlier post about this, but I disagree. and that's okay because we're all entitled to our opinions and as courtesy captain i'm not going to berate you for having a different opinion.

So, I think that Z got acquitted not because he acted in self defense and not because the defense was able to prove that, but because of the lack of evidence of the P's side. It's like the contrapositive.

If they went involuntary manslaughter, the P wouldn't have had to prove intent to kill, just prove that the killing was unlawful/unjustifiable. I think they could have have a better shot at this. Not to say that they would have won, but all that crap about Z calling TM a punk wouldn't have mattered.

Then again, this charge doesn't even look like it exists in florida :shrug:

According to the jurors interview with Anderson Cooper they felt that GZ felt his life was being threatened and they also felt like it was GZ screaming for help. Don't know if that changes your way of thinking about an involuntary manslaughter charge or now but it was interesting to read that.

Even though we disagree on some points is it nice to talk with a "decent" person about it. I appreciate opposing viewpoints when one is willing to engage in a constructive conversation

 

[zopperman]

According to the jurors interview with Anderson Cooper they felt that GZ felt his life was being threatened and they also felt like it was GZ screaming for help. Don't know if that changes your way of thinking about an involuntary manslaughter charge or now but it was interesting to read that.

Even though we disagree on some points is it nice to talk with a "decent" person about it. I appreciate opposing viewpoints when one is willing to engage in a constructive conversation

That's what this conversation should have been from the start but some people feel the need to turn it into a pissing contest.
Also, nice pun :thumb:

That bit about the juror is interesting. The proper and objective way to look at this case is not what happened? but instead, did the P meet the burden of proof to prove the charges which were applied. So in a perfect world, the defense theory wouldn't have mattered too much because the P had no evidence. I don't know - with this jury they probably would NOT have gotten a conviction for any charge in light of that fact.

The defense did a good job of playing on the jury's heart strings with the self defense theories. Clearly that worked.

 

[WillK]

I completely agree with you, Zak. The state's case was weak and overreaching.
Their best option from the beginning was manslaughter based on the circumstances, which was my point earlier in this thread. Whether he was guilty of manslaughter by the letter of the law would be up to the state to prove and the jury to find fault/guilt. But it would have set the direction of the case from the beginning instead of changing things up mid-stream.

But to quote a great movie line, "It's not what you know, it's what you can prove"...


Which is what this case has been exactly about. No credible witnesses, no good evidence (beyond circumstantial), no real motive. Was GZ stupid and over zealous in his actions- Yes. but being stupid isn't against the law.

 

[Thai]

If they went involuntary manslaughter, the P wouldn't have had to prove intent to kill, just prove that the killing was unlawful/unjustifiable.

I am sure that they (Prosecution) thought of this. IF Zimmerman had just gone up to Trayvon to shoot him because Trayvon was sleeping with his wife, then yeah easy. But, in this case, there was nothing to say that Zimmerman shot Trayvon for any other reason than self-defense against a potential lethal threat. Thus, there is no evidence to say that the killing was unlawful. None. And if you have nothing, then how can you prove anything? All evidence to date shows that the shooting was LAWFUL and JUSTIFIABLE.

 

[Thai]

Which is what this case has been exactly about. No credible witnesses, no good evidence (beyond circumstantial), no real motive. Was GZ stupid and over zealous in his actions- Yes. but being stupid isn't against the law.

Yup, if that was the case, then a lot of us will be in jail!