-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Juror says Zimmerman went "above and beyond" and has "learned a good lesson"
- Thread starter MThanded
- Start date
- Status
You didn't already?
Well half the jury team initially thought he should get charged with manslaughter or 2nd degree murder. I wonder what the other half did to convince them otherwise.
You're right. I should've said dimmer
Agreed. The first part of this thread title is misleading as hell and needs to be changed. It reads like some manipulative headline you'd read in a sketchy newspaper.
In the full interview she also says the 311 operator egged him to leave the car by asking him what direction TM went in.
Your post is faaaar to ambiguous to push that point across. Just saying.
Kiraly
Member
I think he meant salt on the wound.
100% agree.
Had it been a black man stalking and murdering a white youth that jury would have given him life.
Fuck this country and everyone that agrees with her.
Given how fast she announced her (now thankfully aborted) book deal, and how it was supposed to be about her AND HER LAWYER HUSBAND'S thoughts during the trial (which, correct me if I'm wrong, is a clear violation of jury instructions) I have a feeling that her husband coached her in order to get her on that jury and get a payday.
What really gets me is her total dismissal of Rachel Jeantel based on the way she spoke. Yeah, she got tore up on the stand, but the juror sounds like she didn't bother listening to what she said, she just immediately dismissed her as uneducated (despite Rachel speaking three languages) based on the way she talked.
What really gets me is her total dismissal of Rachel Jeantel based on the way she spoke. Yeah, she got tore up on the stand, but the juror sounds like she didn't bother listening to what she said, she just immediately dismissed her as uneducated (despite Rachel speaking three languages) based on the way she talked.
The operator should have probably said stay in your car and wait for police to arrive, but they were asking for various bits of info. I wouldn't call that "egging" him on, but it certainly didn't help the situation.
I just think this particular juror is stupid with her choice of words.
Her husband is also a lawyer, have to love that too.
Coached to get on the jury with dollar signs in their eyes.
The Cowboy
Member
I instantly thought "pouring salt on the wounds", as it is well - pouring salt.
Pretty much this. The way she's choosing to word things here is just bizarre. Hence the misunderstanding of "above and beyond". Not sure she's clear on what that means.
How in the hell does that surprise you? You need to learn more the USA and capitalism.
iamshadowlark
Banned
America is built on "fuck you, pay me".
Go on. This post is rich.
NO!
HamPster PamPster
Member
Don't people usually grow out of this false equivalence mindset after adolescence? Guess not
Omegasquash
Member
A young man is dead, but Zimmerman learned his lesson. WTF is that?
Future PhaZe
Member
my god
AlimNassor
Banned
A middle aged white woman on the jurors stand thats all i need to know GZ was fucking guilty. I hate this country, I hate this world. An innocent child brutally murdered by a lieing racist. There is no justice in this world. There is no hope. The law says you can legally as a white man murder for no reason a black, but, if a black man defends himself he's an animal and will get 25 to life.
then we wouldn't have the GOP
CharlieDigital
Banned
Manslaughter:
Manslaughter is a legal term for the killing of a human being, in a manner considered by law as less culpable than murder. The distinction between murder and manslaughter is said to have first been made by the Ancient Athenian lawmaker Draco in the 7th century BCE.[1]
The definition of manslaughter differs from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. The law generally differentiates between levels of criminal culpability based on the mens rea, or state of mind; or the circumstances under which the killing occurred (mitigating factors). Manslaughter is usually broken down into two distinct categories: voluntary manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter; however, this is not the case in all jurisdictions.[2]
In some jurisdictions, such as the UK, Canada and some Australian states provocation (or "loss of control" in English law) is a partial defence to a charge of murder which acts by converting what would otherwise have been murder into manslaughter.
The definition of manslaughter differs from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. The law generally differentiates between levels of criminal culpability based on the mens rea, or state of mind; or the circumstances under which the killing occurred (mitigating factors). Manslaughter is usually broken down into two distinct categories: voluntary manslaughter and involuntary manslaughter; however, this is not the case in all jurisdictions.[2]
In some jurisdictions, such as the UK, Canada and some Australian states provocation (or "loss of control" in English law) is a partial defence to a charge of murder which acts by converting what would otherwise have been murder into manslaughter.
iamshadowlark
Banned
Weren't there manslaughter charges applicable?
Mr. B Natural
Member
Just let them get it out of their system, Jay.
User Name Here
Member
" he profiled anyone that was acting strange."
What kind of person goes to buy snacks in a hood during bad weather!?
What kind of person goes to buy snacks in a hood during bad weather!?
AbsolutBro
Member
No, it just sat there like a 10 ton elephant in the room.
iamshadowlark
Banned
Have we gotten any definition of what "acting strange" is?
AlimNassor
Banned
Justice is a made up concept.The bad guys always win, the good guys only rarely win.
COOPER: Why do you think George Zimmerman found Trayvon Martin suspicious then?
JUROR: Because he was cutting through the back, it was raining. He said he was looking in houses as he was walking down the road. Kind of just not having a purpose to where he was going. He was stopping and starting. But I mean, that’s George’s rendition of it, but I think the situation where Trayvon got into him being late at night, dark at night, raining, and anybody would think anybody walking down the road stopping and turning and looking, if that’s exactly what happened, is suspicious. And George said that he didn’t recognize who he was.
Panipal2009
Banned
The difference is, many on Neogaf were and still are monkeyshrieking that the person reacting to a bully in this case should have gone to prison and are pissed that he didn't.
travisbickle
Member
Prison is the place for people with bad judgement that ends up ruining other people's lives. That's why we want to put all the bloody bankers in there!
This is a thread about a juror. There is a thread about the verdict. So I posted the lens she saw the case through.
mugurumakensei
Member
So, basically, anyone being cautious at night is suspicious. Hell, I look over my shoulder even during the day.
chickdigger802
Banned
I feel like 'above and beyond' was the wrong words for what she is describing.
User Name Here
Member
"I think he’s guilty of not using good judgment."
Criminal negligence resulting in manslaughter?
"the distinction between recklessness and criminal negligence lies in the presence or absence of foresight as to the prohibited consequences."
" where the fault lies in the failure to foresee and so allow otherwise avoidable dangers to manifest"
Nothing I've heard of, but that sounds like a pretty broad statement.
Criminal negligence resulting in manslaughter?
"the distinction between recklessness and criminal negligence lies in the presence or absence of foresight as to the prohibited consequences."
" where the fault lies in the failure to foresee and so allow otherwise avoidable dangers to manifest"
Nothing I've heard of, but that sounds like a pretty broad statement.
I was referring to the way ppl comment but I know what you're saying
What facts are missing? Did the juror not say what is in the thread?
I never thought it meant she thought he did a great job. It seems more like she is saying GZ did something he shouldn't have done. He was overzealous and self aggrandizing but he learned his lesson according to juror B37.
I never thought it meant anything else.
Apart from the pro-gun stuff, what exactly is wrong with this?
From my read she's saying:
1. She didn't believe race was a factor, but rather Zimmerman was simply acting in his role as Neighbourhood Watch. Regardless of your personal interpretation, this seems like a fair view to have based on the evidence available.
2. Zimmerman was overzealous and holds some responsibility for what occurred. This however, doesn't carry comment on who she believes initiated the violence. This is a key point where self-defence is concerned: who took the first swing? The truth is none of us know. If I think a guy is following me, do I then have the right to turn around and punch him? Is that self-defence? Does he have a right to punch me back? Is that also self-defence?
3. That both of them hold some responsibility for what evolved. I also don't see this as particularly controversial. If cooler heads had prevailed on both sides this tragedy wouldn't have happened. Is anyone going to argue against that?
From my read she's saying:
1. She didn't believe race was a factor, but rather Zimmerman was simply acting in his role as Neighbourhood Watch. Regardless of your personal interpretation, this seems like a fair view to have based on the evidence available.
2. Zimmerman was overzealous and holds some responsibility for what occurred. This however, doesn't carry comment on who she believes initiated the violence. This is a key point where self-defence is concerned: who took the first swing? The truth is none of us know. If I think a guy is following me, do I then have the right to turn around and punch him? Is that self-defence? Does he have a right to punch me back? Is that also self-defence?
3. That both of them hold some responsibility for what evolved. I also don't see this as particularly controversial. If cooler heads had prevailed on both sides this tragedy wouldn't have happened. Is anyone going to argue against that?
Supposedly Martin was scared because Zimmerman was following him and likely initiated the fight. If Zimmerman had started things he would've likely just held him at gun point.
Making a citizens arrest because a black kid is walking down the street is kidnapping.
Apparently stalking and shooting him is ok though.
Ironically if this had happened then GZ probably would actually have ended up in jail for detaining someone against their will. He has no authority and is just a guy with a gun.
Where did I claim that. That part of the title is actually from the damn Yahoo link.
She means above and beyond as he should not have followed, attempted to detain or shot TM.
- Status