Questions for George Zimmerman supporters.

[emzie]

Let me lay out my cards here: I'm having a really hard time seeing the other side of this case. I can see the other side, legally, as it's been decided; I cannot see why people actually think GZ is completely innocent. Without a clear answer, a very convenient answer is that a lot of the antipathy towards Trayvon Martin is latent bias / people fearing being 'railroaded' like GZ was. I don't want to think this is the case, so I need to understand where you all are coming from.

Before we continue, I want to outline the format of this thread. This is not to be a debate. It's question and answer. I'm not interested in convincing anyone, on either side, they're wrong. There are other threads for that. Rather, I want to know why people think whatever. If you disagree with something someone has said, please be civil.

Do not limit answers to evidence that was presented at trial. This is your opinion and opinions don't meet the same standard as reasonable doubt.

So I'd like to start with a few questions:

1: Do you think what happened between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin was a tragedy?

2: Do you think GZ did anything wrong?

3: Do you think Trayvon did anything wrong?

4: Do you think there has been a lot (not minor outliers) of racially tinged language used in defense of GZ?

5: Why do you think people are disappointed by the verdict?

 

[Bamspeedy]

1. Someone's dead so of course it's a tragedy.

2. Hindsight is a great thing isn't it? Sure, it wasn't smart of him to leave his vehicle, but is leaving your vehicle illegal? What happened after that is where the details get messy. Was he looking for an address, trying to find what direction T was going, or was he 'stalking' T. Depending on which of those he was doing it was either not wrong, not a smart move but not illegal, or very wrong and should be illegal.

3. If he initiated the fight, which is what z claims. But we don't know for sure who did. If z started the fight then no, T didn't do anything wrong.

4. It's been evident on both sides. Is the argument which side was worse? Everyone will say the other side was worse.

5. Just because someone's dead doesn't mean someone has to go to prison. That's for a jury to decide, which they did.

Most of the people I know who were disappointed were those who didn't watch the case. It's like that horrible young Turks report posted somewhere else where the narrative is reduced to "this horrible white person killed this unarmed young black kid for no reason at all". And are totally ignorant of Zs claim of self defense, that even if you don't think the injuries were serious enough, it at least complicates the case, and at least should cause you to pause and consider his defense rather than knee jerk "someone died so someone needs to pay" reactions.

 

[Evie]

EDIT: Wrong thread.

 

[JohnRM]

1: Do you think what happened between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin was a tragedy?

Of course, in so many ways. Regardless if the facts of the case, I am a Christian man who is forgiving. No matter who is at fault, this is not the kind of life and circumstances that anyone would want for themselves or their loved ones.

2: Do you think GZ did anything wrong?

The evidence provided does not contradict Zimmerman's story, or stories, as the case may be. If I were Zimmerman, I would have identified myself in a friendly way as soon as possible to discourage the individual from believing that I were a threat.

3: Do you think Trayvon did anything wrong?

We have no idea how or why the confrontation began. Zimmerman lost sight of Martin at one point. He didn't track the kid down. Martin was perfectly capable of outrunning him. Somehow, at some point, Martin found himself confronting Zimmerman and I don't know why that is. I think that it is more likely that Martin stuck around and initiated the confrontation. I have no idea who actually provoked the struggle. If I were Martin, I would have run and not stopped running until I got home.


It cannot be proven that either of these individuals committed a crime. It may be that neither of them did. Our laws are not perfect. Bad things can happen where no one is at fault.

4: Do you think there has been a lot (not minor outliers) of racially tinged language used in defense of GZ?

I am not sure I understand. I do not believe that the defense had any racist motivations whatsoever.

5: Why do you think people are disappointed by the verdict?

Because they don't understand the details and the particulars of the case. They don't identify with what George Zimmerman was doing. They don't see a need for a person to defend his own neighborhood from crime. They are under the delusion that the police can do the job adequately. The reality is that they cannot and citizens have accordingly been given the right in many states to defend themselves, and others, from crime, if necessary. George Zimmerman claims it was necessary to defend himself. There is no evidence to prove otherwise. But, again, people don't believe that he ought to have that right and instead of trying to change the law, they erroneously believe that Zimmerman should have been thrown in jail, regardless. They see the court system as a justice system based on morality and not laws.

 

[Goodfella]

I guess I can classify myself as a Zimmerman supporter since I've posted 30 posts or so in defense of the verdict. But my support of either side is tantamount to whichever has the most evidence so I'm not in favor of the label "Zimmerman Supporter." If some new evidence arrives that wasn't presented at the trial that indicates that Zimmerman profiled Trayvon and that he started the altercation, I'm more than willing to change my view. I've actually already experienced a reflection of my perspective on the case by watching the trial alone. Prior to several weeks ago I was mostly on the side of Martin's supporters. My position isn't based on any preexisting prejudices that you'll large amounts of people use to base their opinions.

1. Yes it's a tragedy and a travesty because someone died and it's even worse that the person who died was only 17.

2. Yes, and a lot of things. If Zimmerman's account of events was correct, he should not have gotten out of his truck to follow Martin. But, this does seem like a hindsight's 20-20 situation and I can't completely blame him for that. If Zimmerman's account is the truth, then he was confronted by Trayvon while going back to the truck and was actually listening to the dispatcher, not disobeying him. Zimmerman's story is somewhat sketchy because he maintains that he was following Trayvon to figure out which direction he was heading and that he was trying to figure out the address of his location. I'm not totally sure if I believe him but I can't find any serious reason to doubt his story and it seems somewhat likely so I'm willing to accept it. If Zimmerman did continue to pursuit Martin, obviously that was a mistake. Zimmerman also shouldn't have reached into his pocket when Martin confronted him (assuming that Zimmerman's account is the truth) because it may have scared Martin and caused him to think that Zimmerman was reaching for a weapon. Next, if I were Zimmerman I would not have gone to the media nor would I have made the "a**hole" comment.

3. If Zimmerman's account is true, which I believe to be so based on the presented evidence, Martin shouldn't have attacked him and that's what caused his death.

4. Yes there is but I'm not going to side against Zimmerman just so I can take an opposite stance of what I'd expect racists to take.
(I'm not totally sure if you're referring to the people that defend Zimmerman, like the common folk, or Zimmerman's actual defense.)

5. For the same reason that I used to be in favor of Zimmerman's arrest on conviction. I totally understand their position; they believe the prosecution's accounts of events. This isn't the most unreasonable thing in the world, but I feel that most of the witness testimonies and forensics side with Zimmerman and so I think they're wrong. I also think Zimmerman's interactions with African Americans, such as going to prom with a black girl, shows that Zimmerman probably wasn't racist enough to do what he did just because Trayvon was black. But I'm not saying he wasn't at least somewhat racist, just not to the extent that his actions deserve comparison to lynchings. A lot of the civil rights groups and Obama himself jumped the gun and passed judgement too soon. They are right about a lot of things. There is a lot of horrendous inequality and injustices that occur across the country (like the 20 year warning shots sentence that was handed out recently). It's just that the shooting of Trayvon Martin wasn't one of them.

 

[MobBoss]

1: Do you think what happened between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin was a tragedy?

Of course it is.

2: Do you think GZ did anything wrong?

3: Do you think Trayvon did anything wrong?

I'll answer both of these together. The bottom line is no one will know exactly what happened last night. But one person is dead and another was beaten, so someone obviously did something wrong.

I think Zimmerman was trying to conduct himself how he thought a neighborhood watch person should. I also think Martin could have easily avoided Zimmerman if he had chosen to, but got upset about being followed and confronted Zimmerman about it. That confrontation let to the events as we know them.

4: Do you think there has been a lot (not minor outliers) of racially tinged language used in defense of GZ?

I think people have chosen to make this entire case about race when it shouldn't be.

5: Why do you think people are disappointed by the verdict?

Because they think emotionally instead of logically. This wasn't about what people thought happened - it was about what we could prove happened. This is why Zimmerman was acquitted - there just simply wasn't enough evidence available to counter his story about what occurred that night; and in fact, what forensic evidence there was offered in this case supported Zimmerman's account of that night.

 

[FriendlyFire]

1) Yes
2) Yes, Changing testimony, Lied to judge about passport and stole money from defense fund, History of being a bully, violence.
3) Yes, Assaulted GZ, Escalated confrontation into physical violence, History of drug use
4) Yes, I would say some stereotyping but not racism.
5) Preconceived expectations and false information

I do not think GZ is telling the whole truth, but the key elements of TM beat GZ are clear and GZ subsequently shot TM.

 

[Zelig]

5: Why do you think people are disappointed by the verdict?

I like how the majority of answers to this so far is "those people are stupid."

 

[Berzerker]

1: Do you think what happened between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin was a tragedy?

of course, a dozen or more people have been ripped apart by this and one is dead

2: Do you think GZ did anything wrong?

no

3: Do you think Trayvon did anything wrong?

yes, he attacked someone for asking what he was doing there

4: Do you think there has been a lot (not minor outliers) of racially tinged language used in defense of GZ?

no, the race baiting has come from Zimmerman's enemies

5: Why do you think people are disappointed by the verdict?

because they need a scapegoat for the sins of the white man

I dont know how a peruvian jew appeases the guilt, but he aint black so let the whining of "civil rights" hypocrites begin

 

[Buddhafish]

I don't identify myself as a Zimmerman supporter, but I am not upset by the verdict.

I tend to agree with the above posters comments on the first three answers. Yes it's a tragedy, and whoever started the altercation is in the wrong.

As for #4:
I'm going to take this in a different direction. A lot has been made about profiling and racism in this case. Most people lump the two together and say that Zimmerman was either guilty of both or none. That's not necessarily true. Did he profile Martin? Of course he did. There were reports of black teenagers loosely matching Martin's description committing robberies in that same neighborhood before the night of this incident. So Zimmerman was looking for a profile, and Martin set off a red flag (purely my opinion, but I would see this as very plausible), so Zimmerman followed Martin to see what he was up to (according to his story). If the reports had been different, say robberies had been committed by tall, blond, white teenagers in that neighborhood, and Martin were tall, blond, and white, the result would have been the same.

Was it racist? No, probably not. Was it profiling? Of course. Is that bad? Not necessarily. We all profile, so I'm not going to try to be above everyone and say I don't. Whether it's at school, in society, at work, we all know stereotypes and profile people based on them. We judge books by their cover a lot. It's only when we start to get to know someone that our opinions may change, but people always say first impressions matter. Why? Profiling and stereotypes. (sorry if that sounds rambling, I hope it makes sense)

5. A lot of people believed CNN, NBC, FOX, and whatever other source when they repeatedly convicted Zimmerman on their news shows. The media portrayed a story and a series of events that were more skewed to the prosecution's side of things than the defense's. So people who were uninformed (or didn't watch the trial, or didn't understand it) thought that it was a slam-dunk case. Tie it up in a bow and send Zimmerman off to prison. But the prosecution never really presented a solid story, one that was supported by facts and concrete evidence. They had a hell of a circumstantial case, and really nothing more. People shouldn't be shocked that he was acquitted. The prosecution had the burden of proof, and they didn't meet that threshold.

The justice system worked. Miami Marlins outfielder Bryan Petersen said it best, "If you trusted the justice system to find a man guilty, you must trust it when it finds a man not guilty, or it's just partiality you seek." That pretty much sums it up for me.

 

[JohnRM]

I don't identify myself as a Zimmerman supporter, but I am not upset by the verdict.

I tend to agree with the above posters comments on the first three answers. Yes it's a tragedy, and whoever started the altercation is in the wrong.

As for #4:
I'm going to take this in a different direction. A lot has been made about profiling and racism in this case. Most people lump the two together and say that Zimmerman was either guilty of both or none. That's not necessarily true. Did he profile Martin? Of course he did. There were reports of black teenagers loosely matching Martin's description committing robberies in that same neighborhood before the night of this incident. So Zimmerman was looking for a profile, and Martin set off a red flag (purely my opinion, but I would see this as very plausible), so Zimmerman followed Martin to see what he was up to (according to his story). If the reports had been different, say robberies had been committed by tall, blond, white teenagers in that neighborhood, and Martin were tall, blond, and white, the result would have been the same.

Was it racist? No, probably not. Was it profiling? Of course. Is that bad? Not necessarily. We all profile, so I'm not going to try to be above everyone and say I don't. Whether it's at school, in society, at work, we all know stereotypes and profile people based on them. We judge books by their cover a lot. It's only when we start to get to know someone that our opinions may change, but people always say first impressions matter. Why? Profiling and stereotypes. (sorry if that sounds rambling, I hope it makes sense)

5. A lot of people believed CNN, NBC, FOX, and whatever other source when they repeatedly convicted Zimmerman on their news shows. The media portrayed a story and a series of events that were more skewed to the prosecution's side of things than the defense's. So people who were uninformed (or didn't watch the trial, or didn't understand it) thought that it was a slam-dunk case. Tie it up in a bow and send Zimmerman off to prison. But the prosecution never really presented a solid story, one that was supported by facts and concrete evidence. They had a hell of a circumstantial case, and really nothing more. People shouldn't be shocked that he was acquitted. The prosecution had the burden of proof, and they didn't meet that threshold.

The justice system worked. Miami Marlins outfielder Bryan Petersen said it best, "If you trusted the justice system to find a man guilty, you must trust it when it finds a man not guilty, or it's just partiality you seek." That pretty much sums it up for me.

Very well said.

 

[classical_hero]

1: Do you think what happened between George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin was a tragedy?

Yes it is a tragedy that someone died.

2: Do you think GZ did anything wrong?

Yes he did many things wrong. He made himself out to seem to be a stalker of Trayvon. He tried to play cop when he wasn't and had he done what he should have been doing, then the confrontation wouldn't of happened.

3: Do you think Trayvon did anything wrong?

Yes, he should have taken an umbrella with him so that when he was walking homehe would be using the path and not needing to under the shelter of homes and thus make him look bad.

4: Do you think there has been a lot (not minor outliers) of racially tinged language used in defense of GZ?

I didn't really follow it that well to know exactly what went on.

5: Why do you think people are disappointed by the verdict?

The fact that such a case got so much TV coverage is rather shocking, since such things happen all the time. As such he was tried by media and that is something that should never had been done and most of the media tried him as guilty.

 

[druidravi]

Yes, he should have taken an umbrella with him so that when he was walking homehe would be using the path and not needing to under the shelter of homes and thus make him look bad.

Would that be the answer to Do you think Trayvon did anything wrong?.

 

[Yeekim]

Was he looking for an address, trying to find what direction T was going, or was he 'stalking' T. Depending on which of those he was doing it was either not wrong, not a smart move but not illegal, or very wrong and should be illegal.

What is the difference between "trying to find out what direction one went" and "stalking"?
EDIT: JohnRM answered the OP for me.

 

[warpus]

I'm not sure if I'm a Zimmerman "supporter" or whatever, but I understand the not guilty verdict and for the most part agree with it.

What I disagree with is that Zimmerman should have cared at all about a dude walking around on the street.. should not have followed or confronted him either. I have no idea how the confrontation started, but I feel that the death could have been easily prevented by Zimmerman. Then again, I don't really have all the info here and am likely missing some things. Do we know how the confrontation began? I have no idea.

I also don't think Zimmerman would have walked free if he had crappy lawyers.. I mean, maybe that sounds obvious, but the lawyer representing him seemed to have been made for the spotlight. i.e. super expensive lawyer with tricks up his butt

 

[JohnRM]

I'm not sure if I'm a Zimmerman "supporter" or whatever, but I understand the not guilty verdict and for the most part agree with it.

What I disagree with is that Zimmerman should have cared at all about a dude walking around on the street.. should not have followed or confronted him either. I have no idea how the confrontation started, but I feel that the death could have been easily prevented by Zimmerman. Then again, I don't really have all the info here and am likely missing some things. Do we know how the confrontation began? I have no idea.

Before I answer this question, please be aware of the fact that this was a gated community where the shooting took place. George Zimmerman lived there. Trayvon Martin did not and was trespassing.

No one knows for sure how the confrontation started. Zimmerman claims that while on the way back to his truck, Martin came from out of nowhere and attacked him. The evidence either supports this claim or does not disprove it.

 

[tonberry]

Because they don't understand the details and the particulars of the case. They don't identify with what George Zimmerman was doing. They don't see a need for a person to defend his own neighborhood from crime. They are under the delusion that the police can do the job adequately.

It seem to me that, even if someone agree with the verdict, this event is a very good argument that, for all it’s flaws, the police is the only one that can do the job of protecting the neighborhood adequately.

 

[JohnRM]

It seem to me that, even if someone agree with the verdict, this event is a very good argument that, for all it’s flaws, the police is the only one that can do the job of protecting the neighborhood adequately.

That is only if you believe that Trayvon Martin did NOT attack George Zimmerman and only agree with the verdict due to lack of evidence. If Martin did attack George Zimmerman, then I fail to see how one could argue that the need for the right to carry is somehow diminished by this case.

 

[warpus]

Before I answer this question, please be aware of the fact that this was a gated community where the shooting took place. George Zimmerman lived there. Trayvon Martin did not and was trespassing.

No one knows for sure how the confrontation started. Zimmerman claims that while on the way back to his truck, Martin came from out of nowhere and attacked him. The evidence either supports this claim or does not disprove it.

Oh really.. I did not know about this supposed attack.

Still though, gated community or not, my initial point stands. Don't people who live in gated communities have visitors? If there's someone wandering around, isn't it most likely that this person is someone's visitor?

I guess a black guy wearing a hood might look more suspicious than a white unhooded dude walking around, but still.. that's not right. You can't just say "This person looks suspicious" and take matters into your own hands, until you actually see this person doing something illegal. Not saying that this is what happened here, but being overly paranoid is what gets people hurt and/or killed.

 

[Buddhafish]

Zimmerman was a neighborhood watch captain, so it was his "job" persay to look for suspicious behavior in his neighborhood. Should he have followed Martin? Maybe not, but his actions are somewhat explained by his neighborhood watch position.