Man seems a whole lot of people in this thread forgot that you're "Innocent till proven guilty" and that the state has to prove beyond doubt. You can't speculate shit but you also can't condemn the dude for ignoring the dispatcher because it's a fucking dispatcher. If a cop had told him "You need to stay here" and he outright ran off anyways, then yeah, and like Day said. Dude probably felt like it was his duty as neighborhood watch to keep tabs on the guy if this type of shit was going on a lot.
If you can't prove he had intent, then it's probably criminally negligent manslaughter or less. He was reckless to pursue Martin, but did he feel his life was threatened? Who the fuck knows since none of you were there other then Plow who was probably too busy carrying a TV out of a house to help.
if you took the time to read, you'd notice that I, and others trying to argue the same point I am, have said that we are not arguing whether there is enough proof to convict him on murder; I am arguing that there is enough proof to suggest that it was not an act of self-defense. I believe criminally negligent manslaughter would probably be the "correct" verdict given the existing and lacking evidence; I happen to believe intent was there, but I am using conjecture there, and would definitely not incorporate that as a juror or anything like that.
I honestly don't think Zimmerman is a murderer. He's an idiot, and a guilty one at that, but hardly a murderer. His irresponsible choices resulted in the killing of another human being. He should face the consequences for his actions.
Where is your proof of "not-self defense" because I'm not seeing it, and the prosecution would probably love to have it.
My question was why was he pursuing after giving the police Trayvon's direction.
You are probably right in that it won't be used to convict. It's a tough situation when the 911 call is probably your best evidence. Tons of really conditional/anecdotal evidence but it isn't enough. This is a case where it feels wrong, but you just can't prove it. I don't know how much of that is because the FL State legal team is shit and how much of it is simply the fact that Zimmerman is the only one alive who knows what really happened, but something just feels wrong.
I don't care if he is the neighborhood watch. He saw the direction Trayvon was heading toward and reported it. After that point, it makes NO SENSE to me why he would pursue unless he wanted this shit to happen. I don't buy the "keeping sight of him" shit at all - the cops were on the way and they knew which direction the kid was headed in, he was advised not to follow and called the cops initially because he clearly wasn't initially comfortable enough just asking the kid what he was doing.
1. Sensed trouble with Trayvon, did his duty as watch and called the cops
2. Expressed strong anger regarding the situation in the neighborhood directed towards this one guy, who he suspected as being part of the problem
3. Reported location, then direction
4. Against advice and what would appear to be his initial caution, decides to go vigilante and tail this kid hard
5. ??????
6. Trayvon is on top of Zimmerman and gets shot
Why did he exercise caution before and abandon it while on the phone with 911? And what about the fact that Trayvon probably started running because he was being followed for an extended period of time?
I would agree with this completely, the problem arises when people can't separate their perception of events from courtroom proceedings and the law.
Courts convict people for breaking the law, not for being irresponsible, racist, stupid, a pussy, an asshole, etc. If it can't be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the law was broken it doesn't matter how appalling or reprehensible a person's actions were to you or anyone else, opinion has no place in a court room (unless you're a lifetime appointed SC justice, in which case go nuts).
That's the whole frame against Zim. If you replay the scene with a white kid in Trayvon's shoes, nothing Zim said or did seems all that hateful. The well was poisoned from day 1.
Or do people really find it hard to believe that an adult living in a gated community IN FL would follow a teenager he doesn't recognize around and call him a punk or "these guys"? Whole racism stance reeks of projection tbh
I mean the 5: ????? is really the question there, we don't know, so it's all speculation. Seems plausible to me he wanted to keep him in sight because in his mind "these punks always get away". Sounds like he's been dealing with theft or something in the area for a while to me. You say he went vigilante but we don't know that, just keeping an eye on someone suspicious is not grounds for getting attacked. (If that is what happened). Again we don't know exactly what happened at the time of the physical altercation. Just based off all the evidence provided in the court, his self defense holds up currently, imo obviously.
And here's where zimmerman really fucked himself, and the prosecution case gets even stronger:
The simple answer to that is "because he had a gun and therefore felt like he could. Stand your ground was a new thing, so he figured worst case he shoots the dude and gets off on that."
Want proof that that's what happened?
Zimmerman lied, saying he didn't know about stand your ground... forgetting that he'd already admitted he did.
Why would you lie about knowing about stand your ground laws if it didn't have anything to do with your actions?
Yeah but I don't see the prosecution presenting that case? Do you?
I thought they completely dropped the Stand Your Ground defense before the trial even began? What are you guys talking about?
Self-defense. Plow is saying he hunted him down and killed him because he lied about knowing about stand your ground.
Because he's obviously a member of the klan.
Edit: has there been any character witnesses about Zimmerman to give reference to his past? Like did he attend pro klan rallies in Alabama and keep a livejournal account where he talked about shooting teenagers?
Why doesn't the NSA step in and divulge all the info they have on Zimmerman?!
It is designed, but you have to rely on the prosecution to do their job and like people have said, FL has a really terrible prosecution so that's that. Maybe after a few of these horrible trials they might fire the staff and rehire.Someone died here due to those irresponsible actions. I believe that the justice system is designed to handle matters of this nature. I am not saying that there is clear-cut legal recourse to reprimand Zimmerman in this instance, but there should be, and that sucks
I missed it then. Which can happen. I'm not perfect.
Still doesn't really mean anything if the state can't prove he wasn't in fear for his life. Feeling safe enough to confront someone in your complex doesn't make you a killer. Without knowing what happened at time of altercation you really can't say one way or the other.
If Trayvon was so scared, why didn't he run to where he was staying/heading?. He took off running and dude is on the phone with the dispatcher for another 2-3 minutes. You mean to tell me he caught up with a high-school football player after all that?
You or I don't know wtf happened and it gets really old trying to debate with people that act like hypothetical situations are fact. Looking at the evidence provided in courtroom he's prob not getting convicted, we will know before too long if I am incorrect in my assessment.
The state doesn't have to prove he wasn't scared for his life, he has to prove a reasonable person would be.