Support NeoGAF

[tino]

NO!

You know I meant the Jury System right? What did you think when I wrote "do something about it"?

 

[CharlieDigital]

Apart from the pro-gun stuff, what exactly is wrong with this?

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?

Trayvon Martin, on his way home from buying some Skittles and Arizona, was responsible for his own death?

 

[JB1981]

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.

I doubt Zimmerman would have started anything if he didn't feel emboldened by the gun he was carrying.

 

[I am Michael Bolton]

These jurors are ridiculous. Where do they find these people.

Florida.

 

[Nash20]

Funny how easily the media can manipulate and control people. They created this entire situation and now they are reaping the benefits.

 

[Polari]

Trayvon Martin, on his way home from buying some Skittles and Arizona, was responsible for his own death?

If he assaulted Zimmerman, he contributed to the situation that led to it.

 

[Showaddy]

I just can't understand how this man hasn't been charged with Manslaughter? He recklessly ignored the orders from the Police not to 'pursue' Treyvon, confronted him and then shot him dead.

Regardless of what happened during the confrontation how can the Jury not find him responsible for the 17 year olds death?

 

[MThanded]

You know I meant the Jury System right? What did you think when I wrote "do something about it"?

Who said anything about getting rid of trial by jury. This is a strawman. Especially since this is one specific juror on one specific case. I just posted the information. No one in this thread said get rid of juries.

 

[travisbickle]

Going by that description it sounds like he was checking places for future burglary. But still. The guy had a gun, couldn't he make a citizens arrest or something?

Are you saying this with any knowledge of how to commit the crime?

Exactly what would Trayvon Martin be looking for as he passed the houses in the rain at night from the pavement 20+ feet away if he were to be planning a future robbery?

 

[BrokenEchelon]

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.

Regardless of what the operator said, the operator wasn't a cop, they were a civilian. Their opinion/advice was just that.

I agree that he shouldn't have pursued him though, or attempted to confront him, assuming he confronted him (for a citizen's arrest, or to stall for time), but we don't know who confronted whom.

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.

Speaking multiple languages isn't necessarily some sign of greater intellect. I speak three languages fluently because I lived in three different countries in the first decade of my life. You pick that shit up automatically when you're that young. Is Rachel mentioned specifically by her? I can't seem to find it, but I'm also very tried this morning so my eyes may just be failing.

I think it's pretty obvious that her "Above and Beyond" comment meant that he did more than he should've, and as a result caused an unfortunate situation to occur.

I can also easily see someone getting convinced against second degree murder, there isn't enough evidence to prove that GZ killed TM in cold blood. So keep in mind that the Jury was really split in a 3 - 2 - 1 way on this, with the majority believing him to be innocent of both charges.

So, basically, anyone being cautious at night is suspicious. Hell, I look over my shoulder even during the day.

I don't know why people are so quick to take this out of context. He was a guy on the neighborhood watch, which means he was concerned about his neighborhood more than the average joe. I don't mean this in some as some sort of pat on the back, but rather that it needs to be taken into account that this guy was ok with spending his evening in a car, looking out for would-be criminals. Secondly, the neighborhood had suffered a recent crime spree. It isn't as if he based his decision on the sole factor that someone was walking down a street at night.

 

[Jarmel]

Holy fuck. I thought they had a good reason. Fuck this country.

The verdict didn't piss me off. This did. Fuck them.

 

[CharlieDigital]

If he assaulted Zimmerman, yeah.

If you believe that Zimmerman had the right of self defense in taking Martin's life, how can you deny that right to Martin who probably feared for his life as a stranger followed him and likely made aggressive approaches to him?

How can you bless Zimmerman with the right to defend himself but deny Martin that same right?

If you accept that they both had the right to self defense, then the only question is who initiated the incident. And that, undoubtedly, is Zimmerman.

 

[Pie and Beans]

So, "boy of color", "everybody should carry guns", "gonna write a book/get rich off this". And thats seemingly the alpha of the jury that somehow managed to convince the other 6 women that not even manslaughter took place. I can only assume there weren't any "women of colour" in that room to maybe have tackled that "he shot an unarmed black kid because he thought he was a criminal" hot potato.

I'd certainly agree this should be one of the main focusses for people going forward though:
The Zimmerman verdict outrage should also be about concealed guns
Apparently all states now have conceal-carry allowances? Thats... you're a terrifying place, America.

 

[RurouniZel]

What I got from her explanation:

"The kid is dead and never coming back, but I'm sure he's learned his lesson, so we won't punish him."

All I can say is "Wut?"

 

[MThanded]

If you believe that Zimmerman had the right of self defense in taking Martin's life, how can you deny that right to Martin who probably feared for his life as a stranger followed him and likely made aggressive approaches to him?

How can you bless Zimmerman with the right to defend himself but deny Martin that same right?

If you accept that they both had the right to self defense, then the only question is who initiated the incident. And that, undoubtedly, is Zimmerman.

Quote from juror B37

"I think George got in a little bit too deep, which he shouldn't have been there. But Trayvon decided that he wasn't going to let him scare him ... and I think Trayvon got mad and attacked him," she said.

So, "boy of color", "everybody should carry guns", "gonna write a book/get rich off this". And thats seemingly the alpha of the jury that somehow managed to convince the other 6 women that not even manslaughter took place. I can only assume there weren't any "women of colour" in that room to maybe have tackled that "he shot an unarmed black kid because he thought he was a criminal" hot potato.

I'd certainly agree this should be one of the main focusses for people going forward though:
The Zimmerman verdict outrage should also be about concealed guns
Apparently all states now have conceal-carry allowances? Thats... you're a terrifying place, America.

Yeah I said this in the other thread. She is a clearly a type A. A go getter. Already had book deal signed, and interview on CNN so quickly. She was in the not guilty group initially and I am pretty sure she was able to talk a lot of people down. Her husband is an attorney.

 

[Polari]

If you believe that Zimmerman had the right of self defense in taking Martin's life, how can you deny that right to Martin who probably feared for his life as a stranger followed him and likely made aggressive approaches to him?

How can you bless Zimmerman with the right to defend himself but deny Martin that same right?

I don't think he had the right to take his life. But he had the right to defend himself, and the problem is being in possession of a gun makes it too easy to take someone's life.

Martin had the right to defend himself IF Zimmerman attacked him, not if he was only following him. That's a pretty key distinction right there. As I said though, none of us know exactly how this played out.

 

[Featheredkitten]

Is anyone else bothered that the juror seems to be on a first name basis with the accused(though i suppose now he's the acquitted)?

 

[Treefingers]

If you believe that Zimmerman had the right of self defense in taking Martin's life, how can you deny that right to Martin who probably feared for his life as a stranger followed him and likely made aggressive approaches to him?

How can you bless Zimmerman with the right to defend himself but deny Martin that same right?

If you accept that they both had the right to self defense, then the only question is who initiated the incident. And that, undoubtedly, is Zimmerman.

like what?

self defense for me would be to run. Then again we don't know quite how everything played out.

 

[MThanded]

I don't think he had the right to take his life. But he had the right to defend himself, and the problem is being in possession of a gun makes it too easy to take someone's life.

Martin had the right to defend himself IF Zimmerman attacked him, not if he was only following him. That's a pretty key distinction right there. As I said though, none of us know exactly how this played out.

The juror believes that TM through the first punch even though the defense had no proof of that claim.

 

[BrokenEchelon]

If you believe that Zimmerman had the right of self defense in taking Martin's life, how can you deny that right to Martin who probably feared for his life as a stranger followed him and likely made aggressive approaches to him?

How can you bless Zimmerman with the right to defend himself but deny Martin that same right?

If you accept that they both had the right to self defense, then the only question is who initiated the incident. And that, undoubtedly, is Zimmerman.

Do you have proof of that?

The way I see it, either GZ was following TM, and then attempted to stop him, either by force or verbally. If he attempted to stop him by force, then TM had the right to defend himself, and GZ pulling the gun was an act of desperation to win a losing fight and he should have gotten manslaughter.

If GZ was following TM, and TM turned around, said something like "What the fuck is your problem?", got pissed at GZ, and then started beating on him, then GZ is the one who has the right to self defense.

 

[CharlieDigital]

I don't think he had the right to take his life. But he had the right to defend himself, and the problem is being in possession of a gun makes it too easy to take someone's life.

Martin had the right to defend himself IF Zimmerman attacked him, not if he was only following him. That's a pretty key distinction right there. As I said though, none of us know exactly how this played out.

If GZ was following TM, and TM turned around, said something like "What the fuck is your problem?", got pissed at GZ, and then started beating on him, then GZ is the one who has the right to self defense.

So you are saying that you wouldn't feel your life in danger on a dark, rainy night with a stranger tailing you?

 

[otapnam]

I doubt Zimmerman would have started anything if he didn't feel emboldened by the gun he was carrying.

yeah. I think he felt safe being the neighborhood watch guy in his truck. But supposedly he got on foot and lost track of martin. That's when martin confronted him

 

[Polari]

The juror believes that TM through the first punch even though the defense had no proof of that claim.

Yeah that's a little off, but the reality is we have no way of knowing who threw the first punch. It's clear there was a physical struggle though, and it seems that enough to create reasonable doubt.

 

[LuchaShaq]

If he assaulted Zimmerman, he contributed to the situation that led to it.

If a nut job is following me I would attack him to unless I had access to a car, it is common sense. Not going to wait for the creeper to decide when to attack.



All this case does is let me know that I should fucking kill anyone who follows me at night time because the justice system has shown if I defend myself they can kill me and have no consequences.

 

[BrokenEchelon]

So you are saying that you wouldn't feel your life in danger on a dark, rainy night with a stranger tailing you?

I would be concerned, of course, but I wouldn't attempt to assault him. I'd try to quicken the pace, get to a well lit or crowded area, or generally get away from that person.

 

[Gattsu25]

Fuck. I already feel like I am on the verge of puking my guts out and this thread is not what I needed to see.

 

[CrankyJay]

So was Trayvon sort of lost in the neighborhood? All those houses look the same to me and he was new to the area, right?

 

[MThanded]

Yeah that's a little off, but the reality is we have no way of knowing who threw the first punch. It's clear there was a physical struggle though, and it seems that enough to create reasonable doubt.

I totally agree. I believe with the reasonable doubt surrounding a large majority of this case he gets acquitted. The interview implies thats now how she looked at the case though. She has the right to look at it through her lens. It is interesting to see what she was thinking.

So was Trayvon sort of lost in the neighborhood? All those houses look the same to me and he was new to the area, right?

This should be a good one.

 

[PuppetSlave]

Makes me fucking sick.

 

[Polari]

So you are saying that you wouldn't feel your life in danger on a dark, rainy night with a stranger tailing you?

What. Someone tailing you doesn't give you the right to self-defence. Someone assaulting you does.

I don't understand why you find this seemingly obvious distinction so difficult to grasp.

 

[Skeyser]

Lots of uneducated people out there, doesn't surprise me that juries can end up being a bunch of tools.

 

[travisbickle]

I don't know why people are so quick to take this out of context. He was a guy on the neighborhood watch, which means he was concerned about his neighborhood more than the average joe. I don't mean this in some as some sort of pat on the back, but rather that it needs to be taken into account that this guy was ok with spending his evening in a car, looking out for would-be criminals. Secondly, the neighborhood had suffered a recent crime spree. It isn't as if he based his decision on the sole factor that someone was walking down a street at night.

You're joking right?

I think this is why the case was lost. People think it's acceptable to sit in cars and chase kids around with guns because you know "previous crimes had happened in the area".

 

[Stet]

Also this thread title is some flamebait bullshit. She's saying "above and beyond" in a critical manner, not a complimentary one.

And yet she still acquitted him.

 

[kirblar]

I don't think he had the right to take his life. But he had the right to defend himself, and the problem is being in possession of a gun makes it too easy to take someone's life.

Martin had the right to defend himself IF Zimmerman attacked him, not if he was only following him. That's a pretty key distinction right there. As I said though, none of us know exactly how this played out.

If a man with a gun is stalking me, running away is not an option if a confrontation arises. I keep seeing the same terrible logic that school administators use when kids react to bullies over and over in these threads.

 

[Kitschkraft]

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.

.

 

[Wings 嫩翼翻せ]

Wow.

 

[MThanded]

You're joking right?

I think this is why the case was lost. People think it's acceptable to sit in cars and chase kids around with guns because you know "previous crimes had happened in the area".

Stop and frisk is the law of the land in NYC. Inevitably the right to profile, detain and search someone based on their looks is getting a foot hold with the everyday person.

Sums my thoughts up quite nicely.

What does?

 

[BrokenEchelon]

You're joking right?

I think this is why the case was lost. People think it's acceptable to sit in cars and chase kids around with guns because you know "previous crimes had happened in the area".

I never said I was for or against such actions, I was simply pointing out the fact that he was very invested, over-zealous if you will.

 

[CrankyJay]

This should be a good one.

Not sure what you mean by this.

 

[LiK]

What a fucking joke of a human being.

 

[fastford58]

I'm glad I live in Canada. The justice system in the USA makes me sick.

Yeah, because ours is so awesome *karla hamolka*.

 

[MThanded]

Not sure what you mean by this.

I wanted to see the replies to your post. I wasn't insinuating anything about your post. I think he was fairly new. He used to live with his Mom somewhere else I believe.

 

[Vilix]

Is anyone else bothered that the juror seems to be on a first name basis with the accused(though i suppose now he's the acquitted)?

Maybe because George was on trial and not Trayvon?

 

[Tacitus_]

my god

"Person of Color" seems to be the current PC phrase. No, I don't understand why either.

 

[Maninthemirror]

All i got from the interview is that the jury decided with mindset of how guilty TM was which resulted in his own death, not what Zimmerman did which resulted in him shooting TM even tho it was GZ who was in the defense not TM

 

[Wings 嫩翼翻せ]

Stop and frisk is the law of the land in NYC. Inevitably the right to profile, detain and search someone based on their looks is getting a foot hold with the everyday person.

What does?

I quoted an original post, and accidentally deleted it. Basically, I'm sick of the fact that she says "lesson learned!" Sickening.

 

[.GqueB.]

You know I meant the Jury System right? What did you think when I wrote "do something about it"?

Nothing. I was mocking the people who are complaining that will inevitably do nothing. I don't care about these things personally because they have yet to affect me. The only run in I've had with the cops was that one time I got pulled over like a decade ago. He was super nice.

 

[andycapps]

And yet she still acquitted him.

That is one of the horrible things about this. She feels that he went further then he should have, but she decides to not call it manslaughter because he's learned his lesson. The law isn't concerned with whether people have learned their lesson, it's in exacting justice for crimes.

 

[MThanded]

I quoted an original post, and accidentally deleted it. Basically, I'm sick of the fact that she says "lesson learned!" Sickening.

Oh ok I was confused. Not a problem.

 

[LuchaShaq]

If a man with a gun is stalking me, running away is not an option if a confrontation arises. I keep seeing the same terrible logic that school administators use when kids react to bullies over and over in these threads.

Yup, running will just get you shot or ran over, in a country where any psycho can get his hands on a gun the only rational actions to night time stalker are A. Get access to a car and drive away before they can get back to theirs. B. Attack them first before they can draw their weapon. C. Draw your gun first if you have one


Trayvon's only mistakes were.

A. Being Black.

B. Not beating Zimmerman to death before he could shoot him.