Zimmerman Not guilty

[Formaldehyde]

Not just a creepy cracka, but apparently a homosexual rapist now too. Does anyone really want to continue talking about Zimmerman profiling?

That's not what the word "profiling" means.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Can't say I disagree strongly with the verdict. The circumstances of the shooting seem to show restraint on Zimmerman's part. It looks like the gun was pulled out at a desperate moment, at close range with Martin right on top. And the inability to pull it out earlier is suggestive of Zimmerman being attacked by Martin. I think any gun owner would prefer brandishing their weapon if it would prevent injury or danger.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Only nobody actually knows any of that besides Zimmerman. It is all taking the word of a known serial liar or speculation.

Zimmerman could very well have pulled out his gun as soon as he saw Martin, as the prosecution stated what might have occurred based on the facts we do know.

"Brandishing your weapon" is a serious criminal offense. It is quite likely a felony in the state of Florida. And if he had done so, Martin had every possible reason to try to save his life by doing whatever he could to disarm or even kill Zimmerman. It would also explain the screams for help and why they stopped immediately after the shot, as the prosecution also pointed out.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Zimmerman could very well have pulled out his gun as soon as he saw Martin, as the prosecution stated what might have occurred based on the facts we do know.

If that was the case, then it would have been stupid for Martin to attack Zimmerman. But a scuffle still happened.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

"Brandishing your weapon" is a serious criminal offense. It is quite likely a felony in the state of Florida.

It is without good cause to do it (IE someone pulls a knife or something), unless something has changed which I doubt. I know brandishing a weapon at a store is typically guaranteed jail time (quite a bit too), even more if you fire it, even if it hits nobody.

Only nobody actually knows any of that besides Zimmerman. It is all speculation or taking the word of a known serial liar.

Zimmerman could very well have pulled out his gun as soon as he saw Martin, as the prosecution stated what might have occurred based on the facts we do know.

There's quite lot that we don't/can't know based on what was given to us. I find it doubtful that Martin would attack a man brandishing a gun unarmed because that's rather...an illogical thing to attempt (and a good way to get your arm blown off), and doubtful given the lack of other injuries on Martin that he was attacked first at gunpoint, then fought back and gained a position of advantage after doing so.

Baiting situations, exactly what was said, threats etc though are plausible. However, with evidence pointing strongly to Martin being on top and his only injury being the gunshot, he was either the aggressor or set up quite well. The reasonable doubt burden wasn't satisfied, and despite that I actually think that a few things smell from Martin and from Zimmerman's perspective, they just aren't relevant to the case.

Zimmerman claiming a ground and pound and being supported by the forensic expert, along with no good evidence that Zimmerman initiated the physical altercation and that he was damaged, are what supplied reasonable doubt here. Prosecution had no evidence over that.

Reasonable doubt of innocence does not merit conviction. Reasonable doubt of guilt does merit a not guilty verdict.

 

[Formaldehyde]

If that was the case, then it would have been stupid for Martin to attack Zimmerman. But a scuffle still happened.

It would be "stupid" for Martin to try to save his life from a stranger who kept stalking him and refused to identify what he was trying to do, and who then pulled out a gun as a direct threat to his very life and in clear violation of Florida law? What an extremely odd notion.

It is without good cause to do it (IE someone pulls a knife or something), unless something has changed which I doubt. I know brandishing a weapon at a store is typically guaranteed jail time (quite a bit too), even more if you fire it, even if it hits nobody.

It is not only "without good cause to do it", it is clearly illegal. This is one of the many things they teach you when you get your concealed carry permit because it turns self-defense into murder if the victim does lose his life.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

If that was the case, then it would have been stupid for Martin to attack Zimmerman. But a scuffle still happened.

Kids do stupid things.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

It would be "stupid" for Martin to try to save his life from a stranger who kept stalking him and refused to identify what he was trying to do, and who then pulled out a gun as a direct threat to his very life and in clear violation of Florida law? What an extremely odd notion.

That's not what I called "stupid". Make up your mind. Did Zimmerman pull out his gun before the fight or not?

 

[FriendlyFire]

Not just a creepy cracka, but apparently a homosexual rapist now too. Does anyone really want to continue talking about Zimmerman profiling?

Cant seem to find any homosexual rapist references. ????
EDIT: I would say it is a derogatory term.

cracka
Web definitions
Cracker, sometimes white cracker or cracka, is a derogatory term for white people,[1] especially poor rural whites in the Southern United States. In reference to a native of Florida or Georgia, however, it is sometimes used in a neutral or positive context and is sometimes used self-descriptively with pride.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cracka

Rush Limbaugh weighed in, and there was a whole column on Mediaite about how " ‘Cracker’ Means Something Entirely Different in Florida: A Source of ‘Pride.’ "
To which my first reaction was to quote the legendary Inigo Montoya: "I don't think that word means what you think it means."
Let me break it down for you. If you are white and you grew up in Florida and you can trace your ancestry here back to the rawboned pioneers who braved the heat and skeeters and snakes and gators to establish the earliest farms and cattle ranches and settlements, then yes, you can call yourself a cracker, and it might be a point of pride to do so.

So when Trayvon Martin, who was black, referred to George Zimmerman, a light-skinned Hispanic, as a "cracker," did he mean it in the "hey, look, it's a son of the pioneers!" way? Given that the term was modified by the adjective "creepy-ass," I would have to say no.

http://www.slate.com/articles/life/...ss_cracker_what_cracker_means_in_florida.html

 

[Formaldehyde]

That's not what I called "stupid".

But that is what it actually means based on what we do know, as well as what is clearly Florida law. Now isn't it?

It is utter nonsense to suggest that someone not try to defend himself in such a situation if he possibly could do so.

Did Zimmerman pull out his gun before the fight or not?

I have no idea. Do you?

One thing is certain. It definitely didn't occur as Zimmerman claims it did.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

I have no idea. Do you?

I don't either. There's too many doubts about this case, and I'm trying to figure out if they're reasonable.

These ninja edits are perplexing. Perhaps I should wait 24 hours before responding. Or maybe I should just talk to someone else who doesn't quibble as much.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

It is not only "without good cause to do it", it is clearly illegal.

I don't think someone who had a knife pulled on him and responded by brandishing his weapon would face serious legal trouble, though I could be mistaken. Were I to own a gun I would certainly know which ways are legal to use it and which aren't. If you don't pull it out then you might not have the opportunity.

I have no idea. Do you?

Nobody knows. It's less likely that he pulled it out before though. Far from impossible, but less likely.

Edit: Zero point in discussing what might have happened. In a court of law, what matters is what we know happened, and if that's sufficient.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Cant seem to find any homosexual rapist references. ????

Here you go:

Piers Morgan on his exclusive interview: "Rachel Jeantel told us more about Trayvon Martin last night in 25 minutes than I heard in the entire trial"

I don't think someone who had a knife pulled on him and responded by brandishing his weapon would face serious legal trouble, though I could be mistaken.

So now you are claiming that Martin committed a felony so Zimmerman had a right to "brandish" a firearm without egregiously violating Florida law? Source, please.

 

[timtofly]

Kids do stupid things.

Adults do stupid things.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I don't either. There's too many doubts about this case, and I'm trying to figure out if they're reasonable.

Well, posting sheer speculation instead of doing a bit of research, which could easily be accomplished just by reading this one thread, is one way to go about it.

These ninja edits are perplexing. Perhaps I should wait 24 hours before responding. Or maybe I should just talk to someone else who doesn't quibble as much.

Yeah. It just be quite a pain to have to wait 5 whole minutes to see a minor edit, which you actually complained about 11 minutes after the fact with your own "ninja edit".

Talk about "quibbling"...

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Well, posting sheer speculation instead of doing a bit of research, which could easily be accomplished just by reading this one thread, is one way to go about it.

Feel free to summarize points from the last 15 pages that refute my version of events. It would be a great help.

Yeah. It just be quite a pain to have to wait 5 whole minutes to see a minor edit, which you actually complained about 11 minutes after the fact with your own "ninja edit".

Unless you're traveling close to the speed of light, 9:00-9:31 shouldn't feel like 5 minutes.

 

[timtofly]

Feel free to summarize points from the last 15 pages that refute my version of events. It would be a great help.

Z showed a tremendous amount of restraint. He was on the way to the grocery store. He saw Z presumably outside of the development heading back towards the development. He had his gun holstered. He turned around and headed back into the development. His gun was still holstered. M passed him. He followed M in his truck. His gun still in the holster. He once again passed M. He then parked again. The gun was still holstered. M passed him again while on the phone with dispatch. His gun was still holstered. He was loosing sight of M and got out of his truck. The gun was still holstered. M began to run, so Z started to run. The gun was still holstered. He was told to stop following, and the gun was still holstered. He got off the phone and standing there in the dark got boring, but he did not take his gun out. Somehow he ended up bumping into M, and his gun was still holstered. He fell to the ground and his gun was still holstered. Suddenly the gun was in his hand and he shot.

Unless you're traveling close to the speed of light, 9:00-9:31 shouldn't feel like 5 minutes.

The internet is pretty darned fast.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Feel free to summarize points from the last 15 pages that refute my version of events. It would be a great help.

I already did.

nless you're traveling close to the speed of light, 9:00-9:31 shouldn't feel like 5 minutes.

Only you were obviously whining about the post that immediately preceded your rant instead of one that was 3 posts ago. And your own "ninja edit" to complain about it took you 11 minutes.

It is quite simple. If you don't like the way I occasionally edit my posts simply don't respond to them. Or try to get the administrators to change the way they deliberately set up the forum to cut down on multiple posts by the same person, which is what I actually did by embellishing it quite slightly. After all, this isn't a chat room.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

I already did.

I'll wait for confirmation from other posters that you did summarize their points well in your posts.

Only you were obviously whining about the post that immediately preceded your rant.

I pointed out the post edit that bothered me...you assume a lot of things about what people's posts say.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I'll wait for confirmation from other posters that you did summarize their points well in your posts.

That certainly makes far more sense than you simply taking a few minutes to read the thread.

I pointed out the post edit that bothered me...you assume a lot of things about what people's posts say.

Of course you did with your own 11-minute "ninja edit".