Devolution
Member
Yeah but that runs contrary to the naivete that I see everyone as equal therefore they are.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Verdict reached in George Zimmerman case - Not Guilty
- Thread starter Zep
- Start date
- Status
Yeah but that runs contrary to the naivete that I see everyone as equal therefore they are.
Lysander518
Banned
Maybe you should re-read your post. You called me selfish and naive.
I never said that there is no point to having pride in one's background. I just think it's the wrong way to do things.
Its not even about the lawyers. They screwed up and so did the cops. The prosecution and the police department will probably be in legal trouble after this lol.
As of now, and by peers, it was in self defense. He should walk free if proven not guilty, and there's nothing disgusting about it. That's just the way it is. Was the scenario murky? Absolutely. But the prosecution couldn't make him out to be guilty, and that's in part to the lack of evidence in a poorly presented case, or, that what happened was in legitimate self-defense. Having your head smashed into the concrete is more than enough to be considered a life or death situation.
As far as "lie detectors" go, they don't stand for a reason. They're flawed. Honestly, anyone can beat them, anyone in well control of their mind that is. Some people can in their mind make their lies the truth temporarily, or permanently. If you believe what you're saying is "true" then you're not going to get flagged. It's simple as that.
Your logic/analogy fails because TM WAS DOING NOTHING WRONG!!!
Epsilon-delta
Banned
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
Just because the jury thought the evidence presented by the state wasn't enough to convict GZ of any charges, doesn't mean it proves your stance that it must have only been self defense.
Zeus Molecules
illegal immigrants are stealing our air
See heres the thing. He wasnt robbing anyone! Zimmerman assumed and based on an assumption git into an altercation (on grass) started to lose. Acted liks a pussy and killed a kid whose only crime was being a kid. The things you described millions of upstanding citizen did when they were teenagers.
Like your whole pov reeks of fox news type bullet points.
I don't know the details of either side of the argument but my gut reaction is wtf. Written in the biggest font possible.
I've just woken up so I'm a little fuzzy. Trying to think of scenarios where stand your ground would be useful. I'm sure there will be some but can't think of any. Here's to hoping for lasting change to the system from this whole mess.
I've just woken up so I'm a little fuzzy. Trying to think of scenarios where stand your ground would be useful. I'm sure there will be some but can't think of any. Here's to hoping for lasting change to the system from this whole mess.
Like a what? You're not as clear as you think you are.
------------------------------
What crime did he commit exactly? Were you there that night? Or are you simply basing it off your 'common sense' e.g. OH MY GOD SOMEONE DIED AND I'M SO ANGRY! THAT GUY, HE WAS INVOLVED SOMEHOW! I DONT KNOW HOW! NEITHER DOES ANYONE BUT HIM! BUT SOMEONE HAS TOPAY!
That is not how reality and society works. It is especially not how a system based on justice works. You actually need evidence of the events in such a system.
Is Zimmerman completely innocent?
Most likely not.
Is he guilty of a second degree murder?
Absolutely no evidence to prove that.
How about manslaughter?
Not beyond a reasonable doubt. So no. The state could not prove he deserved to be found guilty. And they did the best job they could with the evidence they had. Hell, they illegally withheld evidence that should have been turned over to the defense. And they still couldn't convict him.
The only, and I mean only, thing that a legitimate system based on meting out justice; can do in this situation was err on the side of caution and let a potentially guilty man go instead of running the risk of convicting a innocent man.
You think he should still be punished? Fine, that just your opinion, and you're entitled to it. But all your opinion amounts to is nothing more valid than vengeance. Vengeance isn't justice. It's just a selfish way for the simpletons to make themselves feel better about their little corner of the world while disregarding any implications their actions have for the rest of society. Remember, your not the only one out there with an opinion on whose guilty or not. Maybe we should just let everyone met out punishment to whomever they think is guilty. Witch hunts worked so well before, and I certainly can't recall an incident where they failed to deliver justice.
And I said from the start that you need to realize your perspective is not a helpful one. Its a selfish one. Why? Because as I said before, it immediately dismisses history and present society. I also said that people who hold that sort of opinion and perspective are the hardest to deal with in these sorts of topics because they truly believe that by simply ignoring such things will immediately fix the world and help everyone. I then said I'd rather talk with a actively hateful racist because they're easier to deal with.
Why did he believe that?
Bbbuuut theirs no 100% evidence showing that, and ZM was on the suspicion that he was breaking into areas. and which leads up when he goes to ask him what is he doing, which TV attacks.
eh?
Well the problem is that it didn't happen like that. He stalked the kid despite being told not too. As neighborhood watch he was successfully serving his role by reporting what he deemed to be suspicious. The problem lies in the fact that Trayvon wasn't breaking into anyone's house or committing any sort of crime. That would be a different story. He was just walking. It also neglects Trayvons right to defend himself. The boy was being actively stalked, and then approached by a strange man in the middle of the night. He felt threatened, but the difference was that he didn't have a gun on him.
Devolution
Member
I assume you mean GZ? Wasn't his responsibility.
Should Trayvon have carried a sign with him to the store that said in size 1000 bold font, "I AM NOT TRYING TO ROB HOUSES"? Should we have to prove to every person we meet that we aren't actively committing a crime?
metalslimer
Member
Can't wait for Zimmermans ass to be bankrupt after he loses in civil court. Fuck that motherfucker.
Lysander518
Banned
Individualists judge others based on their merrit.
That doesn't answer my question.
I like how you typed all that out like I didn't present you a simply answer as to why people are upset lol.
I'm not even mad. I knew Zimmerman was getting off after the prosecution shot for 2nd degree in spite of a lack of evidence and a grossly mismanaged start to the entire ordeal.
Go back to my simple statement and your question is answered. Its not about Florida Law by definition. Its about the fact that you can be an active vigilante and its okay. There is no witch hunt here.
Witch hunt does not mean what you think it means either.
You didn't post the youtube link before
Point still stands though. That's her version of self-defense, shitty legal advice, overconfidence, etc.
Devolution
Member
It's a pretty scary reality for people with their heads above sand.
Pseudo_Sam
Survives without air, food, or water
If you're gonna start spewing that sort of bullshit then you can't be surprised when someone calls you out. Doesn't matter who you are. This is a smart enough place where different opinions actually mean something.
In the end, pretty much everything the prosecution brought forth was circumstantial. Reasonable doubt wins, as it should. Pretty much all of the facts involved, as far as the public is aware, were in favor of Zimmerman. Don't know why anyone is surprised.
IrishNinja
Member
this is always the wiser course, mind
ahaha, i didnt wanna add to the Nowise10 pile on but yeah, this
that's one word for it, yeah
or, the prosecution could've done it's job
also there's a pretty strong false dichotomy to be found between the notion that this trial turned out the way he did, so dude is innocent and anyone disagreeing is emotionally crying for vengeance...tonight's a great night for strawmen though
"calling out" someone by cussing them is really a great way to foster discussion around this smart place, but then you still think the facts favor zimmerman so let's call this an impasse
Blood Diamonds
Banned
Here is the thing, though. He was not robbing anyone, he was doing nothing wrong. He was being followed by some idiot who felt like fucking batman.
Um texas?
Zimmermans job wasn't to go attack people committing crimes. He needed to call the police. And he did. Thats it. Thats what most people should do. Confronting a criminal (Which Trayvon wasnt) isn't a good idea. You don't know what they're carrying, or capable of. In this case GZ was confident to confront because he had a gun, and he knew the police were on their way, two advantages that trayvon didn't have. So assuming that he did attack first, its not an unreasonable response to being stalked by a strange man at night.
Funny, that "reasonable doubt" wouldn't hold up if the tables were turned.
*That* is what a lot of us are upset about, including myself.
ZM didn't believe he was breaking into anyones house, he noticed the kid walking form the 711 and then he made the rash assumption that this kid looked suspicious & therefore was and thus will probably break into a house, so he followed the kid. How he came to his suspicions is also suspect and from his wording to the 911 dispatcher smelled of profiling from a mile away.
He then followed the kid by Car and then when the kid ran away & lost sight of the kid, he followed him until he could get sight of him, despite being told not to. He followed him by car and then when TM went into an area the car couldn't go, he followed him on foot.
Now, the whole case really was about the altercation that happened after all of this. And almost all of it was not seen by a witness and we could only follow the carefully worded reenactment of Zimmermans.
And the fact that the prosecution couldn't establish a strong enough argument to make the Jury believe Zimmermans account of him fearing for his life was false(no self defense) allowed Zimmerman to walk.
Lysander518
Banned
You're assuming that I'm ignoring "such things". I believe that the spread of individualism is the only way to get rid of race issues. You may not agree with my perspective, but don't tell me that I ignore the issues because I don't. Don't say that I ignore history because I don't. Frankly it's because of history that I think that pride is the wrong way to gain equal acceptance. I think that forcing people into groups is disgusting and having pride in one's race or something like diversity cannot fix the issues it can only make them more tolerable. You assume so much about me based on short forum posts that it's unreal. Respond to what I have written, not the false representation of me that you have in your mind.
Yes I didI like how you typed all that out like I didn't present you a simply answer as to why people are upset lol.
I'm not even mad. I knew Zimmerman was getting off after the prosecution shot for 2nd degree in spite of a lack of evidence and a grossly mismanaged start to the entire ordeal.
Go back to my simple statement and your question is answered. Its not about Florida Law by definition. Its about the fact that you can be an active vigilante and its okay. There is no witch hunt here.
Witch hunt does not mean what you think it means either.
You didn't post the youtube link before
Point still stands though. That's her version of self-defense, shitty legal advice, overconfidence, etc.
Because they are blinded by color.
Because 1) you would have initiated the conflict and 2) that's what we have law enforcement for. Besides, that's not even what happened here.
That said, the way the trial played out, there was no way the jury could come back with anything other a not guilty verdict and still be in accordance with the law.
Lysander518
Banned
It has nothing to do with being unique or not influencing others.
Pseudo_Sam
Survives without air, food, or water
Why is reasonable doubt in quotes. WHY. And what tables are we turning in this hypothetical of yours? It's a shame they didn't know you were out here with the truth, they could have just skipped the whole "jury" thing.
Well it was dark, and GZ, from the stuff I've read up, claimed Trayvon was looking around, and in the circumstances were that there were break ins reported recently, so it kind of just of became a recipe for disaster from their.
I don't know, I feel like it was just alot of bad circumstances, and some bad decisions, but I understand with the outcome of him being not guilty.
Also to check just because the dispatcher said "we dont need you to follow", doesnt make it illegal for him to follow, right?
Zeus Molecules
illegal immigrants are stealing our air
My dude Irish said it perfectly
SRTtoZ
Member
Fantastic post.
Lysander518
Banned
This is like calling Britain backwards because that 12 year old boy get that 15 year old girl pregnant a few years ago.
But it does. You say an individualist judges people based on merit. Who determines what is meritorious?
I hope to God any suit would prevent Zimmerman from making any profit off the trial. Getting away with killing TM AND making money off it? Jesus Christ.
Exactly, revenge and justice are two different things
To be fair the police are allowed to stop anyone with reasonable doubt that crime is "afoot"
lol
Soooooo.... for example.
Civil Rights Movement vs Individualism
Because that's hilarious on so many levels it needs its own thread.
Its funny because you believe that these groups formed for reasons other than getting kicked around by society's norms in the first place, but hey - that's really all I and others need to see to get more than enough of an understanding of where your argument comes from. Its a repeated and common one. And its also one of the biggest common failings of liberals when it comes to social issues (lack of understanding of the whole problem but a want to blunt force the problem away). I don't hold it against you, but you really should learn more about history, culture, and the depth and impact of both before you become so quick to outright dismiss them for your 'quickfix' solution.
Koodo made a damned great post that you didn't read too.
Pseudo_Sam
Survives without air, food, or water
Oh dear me, my language hurt your feelings? Don't even start. If you think telling someone to fuck off is "worse" than a blindingly racially-charged generalization devoid of any sort of proof, then you are a child.
BadAss2961
Member
Poor proof in this case is the lack of witnesses. We just got one side of the story because the only other person involved was shot dead.
With no witnesses, it's dumb hard to disprove the "self-defense" laws that Zimmerman had in play here. We're sure of the things he did wrong that night -- pursuing someone he falsely profiled when told not to, getting himself into a situation that resulted in him killing a 17 year old kid. But we're unsure of what mistakes Trayvon may or may not have made.
Blood Diamonds
Banned
"oh you know a fucking idiot thought something shady was going and like it was dark and there were breakins so it's totally understandable to follow a kid around just oh you know and then kill him yeah it was just a recipe for disaster and it was just bad decisions so yeah it's ok"
Let's make it as simple as possible: 'individualism' isn't something afforded by blacks in modern society. To say it is, is to discount today and the history that built it; to lack perspective. It's that simple.
I wish it wasn't.
- Status