Zimmerman found not guilty of murder in Trayvon Martin's death
When he learned his fate, a quiet Zimmerman had little visible reaction. His face was mostly expressionless. He turned and shook the hand of one of his attorneys before sitting back down, only openly smiling after court was adjourned. His parents, Robert and Gladys Zimmerman, were seated nearby, but Martin's parents were not in the courtroom.
Defense attorney Mark O'Mara said a short time later that he and his team were "ecstatic" with the verdict.
"George Zimmerman was never guilty of anything except protecting himself in self defense," O'Mara said.
The response from NAACP President Benjamin Todd Jealous struck a far different tone.
John for JESUS wrote: 1) Not true. When did I say that? ...
Let us look at YOUR posts,
7/14/13 5:04 PM the only way the guilty went free is if he is lying about who started the altercation, otherwise it was self-defense.
7/14/13 8:53 PM Your definitely stated that Zimmerman attacked Martin
7/14/13 9:50 PM You stated that Zimmerman caused a fight
7/15/13 7:07 AM You stated that Zimmerman started a fight
7/15/13 5:06 PM This one is key, you stated in point 3 He lied; and by that time you and I were talking about who started the altercation(see point 1)
7/15/13 6:24 PM You said his witness (which would be himself) was invalid
7/15/13 10:20 PM you state that he apprehended Martin, which would mean he was lying about Martin attacking him.
hope that clears up the matter for you.
John Y, usually if you are in need of a lawyer for defense (which is the only reason I know that you would get a public defender)You would want the best one you could afford. If the attorneys who were regular public defenders were really great lawyers,more than likely they would be getting more money for their efforts than what the government pays. You get what you pay for. As for eating with friend remember it is more blessed to give th
Christopher000 wrote: As for public defenders/power attorneys, you simply get what you pay for. If your freedom is on the line, you hire the best you can get.
Isn't it better to save the money instead of wasting it on an attorney? I am very cheap with money. I am always looking for ways to get stuff for free instead of paying for it. Like I never offer to pay for meals when I go out with a friend. He is always paying for both our meals.
Unprofitable Servant wrote: 1) You say Zimmerman is lying about who started it, but that is your opinion, you don't know that for a fact. 2) Sure juries have been wrong, but are you saying you are always right when you are basing your opinion on news coverage and what you found on the internet? 3) You are correct it is not worth the time to discuss it. Good day sir
1) Not true. When did I say that? 2) I'm saying I'm right in this case. 3) Good...bye!
STEVE R... You said, "I'm interested in this case to the extent that so many American Christians are QUICKLY willing to ignore our systems basic legal principle of 'Innocent until proven guilty' to satisfy their opinion that Zimmerman is guilty. By any legal standard, he wasnt proven guilty(not even close)."
Legally he was and is innocent. I haven't ignored that fact, I believe he was proven guilty and the jury let him get away with murder.
San Jose John wrote: I heard that Zimmerman DID listen to and obey the dispatcher and disengaged his pursuit at that point but that Martin was already pissed-off by Zimmerman's initial pursuit and then proceeded to go after/ambush Zimmerman, who'd lost sight of Martin at that time. This whole scenario sounds like one of the dozens I used to read about on a monthly basis in an NRA magazine I used to get which listed "local" news reports where proper use of a firearm prevented further crime and/or saved someone's life. In this case, Zimmerman's. For some reason this one story out of so many thousands like it has garnered national attention and inflamed the passions of so many people.
I have heard same, but really no way of knowing for sure. There you go J4J, fair and balanced, and to think you didn't like FOX news.
S.F. John, I happened to catch a "Judge Judy," on t.v. yesterday. It must have been made right after this attack because here was another person who thought he was Wyatt Earp, (oh read the history of Mr. Zimmerman, This particular article on this site--which I have no info on--Martin-Zimmerman: Tragedy yields futile search for absolutes.
Oh, Judge Judy? She put the maximum fine on Wyatt Earp Jr., if memory serves, for not staying in his car and using his cell phone to call in the police. Anyway, S.F. John I found your comment interesting.
Christopher000 wrote: ...if Zimmerman had listened to the dispatcher, Martin would be alive today.
I heard that Zimmerman DID listen to and obey the dispatcher and disengaged his pursuit at that point but that Martin was already pissed-off by Zimmerman's initial pursuit and then proceeded to go after/ambush Zimmerman, who'd lost sight of Martin at that time.
This whole scenario sounds like one of the dozens I used to read about on a monthly basis in an NRA magazine I used to get which listed "local" news reports where proper use of a firearm prevented further crime and/or saved someone's life. In this case, Zimmerman's.
For some reason this one story out of so many thousands like it has garnered national attention and inflamed the passions of so many people.
Unprofitable Servant wrote: â€œNo doubt you are the people, And wisdom will die with you!(Job 12:2 NKJV) John it is what neither you nor I know that makes your assertion pure conjecture.
UP Thank you for providing J4J a well presented alternate view these last few days. I feel many here like myself agree. Further, Im interested in this case to the extent that so many American Christians are QUICKLY willing to ignore our systems basic legal principle of 'Innocent until proven guilty' to satisfy their opinion that Zimmerman is guilty. By any legal standard, he wasnt proven guilty(not even close). However, the divergence by so many from historic legal norms is troubling because this legal doctrine might be the last secular defense Christians have when the tyranny of the antigod majority rises against Christians in the last days.
One key observation I made is that Zimmerman is being held to a DIFFERENT standard. Constantly he is critiqued like a Police Officer profiling and making an illegal arrest. But GZ isnt a Peace officer. My guess Christians too will be held to some different standard(perhaps the Mosiac Law) making our mass persecution legally possible
I have a comment to relate that can be applied to a particular aspect of the trial:
Zimmerman was a member of a boxing gym, according to the owner. The owner of this gym said that he could never get George into the ring with a sparring partner because he was a softie...afraid and timid. As a member of the gym, all George was capable of was punching the bag, according to the owner.
No matter what though, if Zimmerman had listened to the dispatcher, Martin would be alive today.
John for JESUS wrote: Unprofitable Servant... It is hardly the first time a jury has been wrong...
â€œNo doubt you are the people, And wisdom will die with you!(Job 12:2 NKJV)
John it is what neither you nor I know that makes your assertion pure conjecture. We don't know who started the fight. You say Zimmerman is lying about who started it, but that is your opinion, you don't know that for a fact. Sure juries have been wrong, but are you saying you are always right when you are basing your opinion on news coverage and what you found on the internet? You are correct it is not worth the time to discuss it. Good day sir
You're probably right Mike they will never have the good sense or be sufficiently Christian to attempt to stop the slaughter and reduce the crime rate.
"I wonder if America will ever have the good sense to remove the thousands of arsenal like gun stores on every street corner and shopping mall, to cut out and eradicate the gun shop mentality and irrelevant out dated ideologies such as the so called 'right to bear arms.'"
Unprofitable Servant... It is hardly the first time a jury has been wrong. Do you think juries are always right?! I don't have to witnesses Zimmerman getting out of his vehicle to know that he did, I don't need to witness him getting in a fight with Martin to know that he did, I don't have to see the gun Zimmerman used to shoot the teenager to know that Zimmerman shot him, these are all things Zimmerman admits to and forensic science shows, along with the 911 call and testimony. That's how we can know. If you don't know then why argue about it? I can't predict what Zimmerman will do, I just wouldn't be surprised with his history of violence. He may even use the same gun that the police are giving him back. That is if he doesn't sell it to some loon or mount it on the wall as a trophy.
J4J, on your 2nd point, you know this because you were there--oh wait that is not true. You know this because you heard all the evidence at the trial--oh wait that isn't true either. Two jurors who DID hear the evidence wanted to convict Zimmerman of something but chose to acquit him after reviewing the evidence are not as insightful as someone who sat hundreds of miles away with no access to the evidence, yeah right. Plus now you are an expert on Zimmerman's future behavior???
John Yurich USA wrote: 1) Why would a criminal defendent want to spend their own money for an attorney? 2) Fox News Channel is a conservative Republican news channel. And thus there is nothing wrong and evil about Fox News Channel. However NBC, CBS and ABC Networks are liberal and thus evil.
1) Perhaps the defendant feels like they would be better represented by a non state funded attorney. 2) Fox News has some conservative people on it, but that doesn't mean they are always right. I definitely wouldn't say there is nothing wrong or evil about it! I don't have cable so maybe they have changed from when I used to watch it. Is Bill O'Reilly still on it? Lol, jk. I believe there is enough evidence that Zimmerman should have been convicted. I believe there is probable cause that he lied about getting out of his car to see the street sign because he lived there for four yrs and there are only three streets in the neighborhood. I believe his words to the 911 operator that he felt like those punks always get away, so he got out his car to apprehend Martin so he wouldn't get away and then shot him, thus the boys screams for help stopped, Trayvon died, no way George thought he missed. I wouldn't be surprised if George kills again.
J4J, I admire your tenacity. Legal experts at time of the indictment, mainly Dershowitz, said that it was a faulty indictment and could not win in court. Legal experts quoted on ABC (not conservative) stated during the trial before the jury convened that if the decision was based on the presentation of the evidence and the parameters of the law, Zimmerman would be acquitted. The prosecuting attorney got the judge to include the lesser charge of manslaughter as a possible conviction and even wanted him to consider child abuse and felony murder. She apparently realized the case was a failure. None of us were at the trial to hear the evidence, none of us witnessed the incident. Only God, George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin know the real events. You asked why would one consider Zimmerman not to be lying, because our justice system says a man is innocent until PROVEN guilty. Whether you like it or not it cannot be proved that Zimmerman did anything more than get out of his truck, there is no proof he went after Martin. I will stand by the jurors and say they did what was right in the eyes of the law. Because this discussion is going in circles, I will break off my part and concede you are more than entitled to your version and that it may even be correct.
Unprofitable Servant wrote: 1)So, here it is from a non-fox news site http://weaselzippers.us/2013/07/15/liberal-harvard-law-professor-alan-dershowitz-zimmerman-prosecutor-conduct-borderline-criminal-should-be-disbarred/ 2)If you chose not to believe him that is fine, that does not change the fact that there is NO PROOF for your side of the story. 3) I am not saying Zimmerman is telling the truth, I am saying there is NO PROOF that he isn't. Thus you have a jury deciding the case on facts not feelings.
1) I still don't care that Alan Dershowitz (a liberal?) agrees with you. 2) What proof do you think there is for Zimmerman calling 911, for Zimmerman being told to stop pursing Martin, for Zimmerman getting out of his vehicle, and for Zimmerman shooting to death an innocent kid? Is there really NO PROOF? Am I making up a story? 3) If there is NO PROOF that Zimmerman isn't telling the truth then why believe that he is?
MIKE... If only this abortion took place 17 years earlier, then maybe you would care.
John for JESUS wrote: You sent me a link to Greta Van Susteren at Fox News Insider. So I assumed you did. Facts do exist, as stated before, real factual 911 audio, real murder weapon, real trigger man, real murdered teenager. All facts!
The jury disagreed. Deal with it. If you don't like the jury system, write to the president. Maybe he'll issue an executive order eliminating it, and institute feelings based courtroom decisions.