Breaking News! George Zimmerman found not guilty.

reply to post by DarkNite


One of the reporters brought it up, I had never even heard that. The older defense attorney apparently got death threats on him and his family. That's messed up isn't it?

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by VoidRonin
You wanna tell me how it was Righteous for him to defend himself from punches with a bullet through Trayvon's heart? Doesn't make much sense to me. Zimmerman could've easily subdued Trayvon with his hands if he had to.

Punches kill or can cause severe damage, permanent damage.

Some people are not skilled in fighting, nor should they have to be.

If you think he was guilty you NEED to check out this video:

www.youtube.com...

its by Stephan... hes a great speaker and explains everything.


There is no way in hell, you could find zimerman guilty knowing the facts.

reply to post by RalagaNarHallas


like i said i think he is gonna go to peru where his mother is from. and there he will be able to live king with all the money he gonna get!!

and yes west did prove that TM was the aggressor, with his marathon cross of her.
and that TM was the raciest.

reply to post by VoidRonin


If that was the case, why was zimmerman treated for head injuries? Maybe he made the wrong decision that night but how can you hold him accountable when he had very apparent head injuries?

If you put them in a cage and let them fight it out... maybe Zimmerman would have won... real fighting is different. No rules. The injuries indicate he was subdued and feared his life.

Should he have killed Trayvon? Nobody can even relate enough to answer that, you were not there.

reply to post by neo96


It was the coverage. Many teens get killed but don't make headlines. And news crews didn't follow the others like this one. Oh well though. My life and most others will go on normally and will be the same no matter what the verdict was but i am curious as to how long it took the jury to come to their conclusion.

Originally posted by WP4YT

Originally posted by VoidRonin

I'm sorry but if someone is on top of you slamming your head into the concrete curb, that is attempted murder. You have every right to defend yourself by shooting the person trying to kill you. The jury obviously felt the same way. If your mother was being attacked and someone was trying to kill her, even if the person that was trying to kill her was 17 years old, would you tell her to just sit there and take it?


Justice has been served today.

The moral of the story here is that if you are going to go around attacking people, expect that there's a possibility they may try to defend themselves and you may wind up dead.

Yes, I feel sorry for Treyvan's parents, they did lose their son. But it was his own actions that caused this. They should only be upset at their son for not living a safer lifestyle, and no one else. Would they feel the same way about their son if he had attacked a police officer and was killed rather than by Zimmerman? Should only police officers be able to kill an attacker?

Yes, George did follow Treyvan around. But George broke no laws by doing that. If I was going through a neighborhood late at night and the neighborhood watch captain was following me and on his cell phone, I know my reaction wouldn't be to attack him. Any normal, level-headed person would say hello, ask what they are doing, explain that they are not causing trouble and that there's nothing to worry about. The trouble is: Treyvan WAS up to no good. Or he just plain had no common sense.

edit on Sat Jul 13 2013 by DontTreadOnMe because: fixed code

I agree with you. So many posts focus on the fact that Martin was 17 - as if NO 17 year old on the face of this planet has been in a fight/attempted murder/ actually murdered another human being. The evidence and witness statements all indicated that Zimmerman was defending himself - just because Z had a gun and was able to use it does not mean that he is guilty of anything like murder. What if he would have had a knife and stabbed Martin and he bled to death? What if he would have pushed him off of him and Martin fell back on the concrete just right and was killed? What difference does it make that it was a gun that helped him? it is called self defense. If I was being beaten and I had a weapon and I feared for my life, you better believe that I would use whatever I could get my hands on to get the person off of me. Whether he was 57 or 17. Was Z supposed to ask for his driver's license to check his age before deciding to defend his own life?

reply to post by DarkNite


It took them two long days. thirteen hours today, I forget how long yesterday,

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by hounddoghowlie

 

If I was Zimmerman I leave my mark with suing Obama for making the case into something personal and also a racial issue.

all i can say is damn right, show him this is still The United States Of America, where a person is innocent until proven guilty.

Originally posted by PLASIFISK

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by PLASIFISK

 

Apparently not, at least not in the jury's mind.

How so. He claimed self defense.

It was self defense.

That's why he was found not guilty, in addition to not enough evidence to prove otherwise.

With that being said........ Follow, confront, fight, kill is legal!

Yes or no?

Irrelevant, as that isn't what happened. He observed, reported, and was behaving responsibly. Martin hid, then confronted, attacked, and thus committed a felony assault.

Now psychopaths can pull a "zimmerman" and get away with it if caught!

Another loops in the messed up justice system.

Zimmerman started the confrontation and the teen got mad. This is what I see. I guess if you start a conflict it is not against the law anymore. The boy also had a right to stand his ground and was not in the wrong for punching a jerk that was harrassing him by the same law. Yet Zimmerman goes free when he killed this teen that was standing his ground, with the same rights we all have.

I see a major riot brewing, worse than we have ever seen in this country. Our country is so polarized I feel that this will collapse it. It is the governments fault, they intentionally polarized us so we will not stick together. It is a regular tactic of governments but when it goes wrong, it really goes wrong.

reply to post by litterbaux


Yes! Trayvon is the criminal here, NOT Zimmerman! Just goes to show you that sometimes the criminal system gets it right!

reply to post by rickymouse


Dead can't talk, so if you want to win a case, shoot your enemy and make sure he is dead.

ben crump talking now,invoking mlk,and talking about disgust with the verdict and saying he was in the same place as two individuals whos names i did not get,the martin family is not at the confrence and it seems to be people and lawyers speaking on their behalf and that people should respect family privacy and to respect travons memory they should not be violent

Originally posted by luciddream
Now psychopaths can pull a "zimmerman" and get away with it if caught!

Another loops in the messed up justice system.

Well if thugs want to pull a Martin and attack someone without cause they may get Zimmermaned.

If Zimmerman doesn't get out of his car that night, TM is still alive.

Zimmerman is the aggressor.

Zimmerman killed an innocent kid.

I agree with you. So many posts focus on the fact that Martin was 17 - as if NO 17 year old on the face of this planet has been in a fight/attempted murder/ actually murdered another human being. The evidence and witness statements all indicated that Zimmerman was defending himself - just because Z had a gun and was able to use it does not mean that he is guilty of anything like murder. What if he would have had a knife and stabbed Martin and he bled to death? What if he would have pushed him off of him and Martin fell back on the concrete just right and was killed? What difference does it make that it was a gun that helped him? it is called self defense. If I was being beaten and I had a weapon and I feared for my life, you better believe that I would use whatever I could get my hands on to get the person off of me. Whether he was 57 or 17. Was Z supposed to ask for his driver's license to check his age before deciding to defend his own life?

reply to post by 1curiousmama

Yes.. Tm did attack first and probably didn't realize gZ had a gun. But seeing that tm attacked him if tm had a gun hisself he probably would've just shot first. Which would've been breaking the law. This is a hard one to judge though. I would've hated to be on the jury stand. Hard decisions it must of been. I still feel for the kid who lost his life at such a young age. Sad day in America no matter what your position is

Only thing I could agree with crump was his plea for peace.