not guilty

[JDavis]

 

 

 

I am shocked

I'm elated!

 

I'm curious, did you feel the same way when we learned that Kermit Gosnell was live birthing supposed abortions, who were mostly illegitimate black baby's, and then removing the babies heads with a pair of what amounted to tin snips as they squirmed around crying on the table?

 

 

no, that was more a feeling of repulsion

 

Though I did feel the same when the verdict came out, I was shocked they found him guilty on 1st degree murder.  Resorted just a small bit of faith in mankind.

 

By the way, since you seem confused here, I am not saying I disagree with the verdict, just that it was not the one I was expecting.

 

What were you expecting? There honestly was a flimsy case presented by the prosecution and as a noted Jurisprudence teacher Alan Dershowitz has noted, "The prosecutor should be brought up on charges of malpractice and be disbarred for even trying to prosecute Zimmerman."

 

We sincerely have to start taking our brains out and using them in this Nation rather than reacting according to what our emotions or flesh desires. That's not Justice, that's actuallly what leads to mob rule because the Rule of Law begins to be abandoned.

 

 

I was expecting guilty of manslaughter.  And yes, the case was weak and poorly presented.  But I did expect the jury to allow some emotion into the process.  It seems they did not, I am glad about that, but still surprised by it.

[George]

The tragedy is that a 17 year old died -- and another man was assumed guilty by a media who sentenced him before a fair trial by their own lies, deception, and outright fraud.  In the end -- NOBODY WON!

[WalkTheWay]

It appears that the Florida prosecutors were falling down on the job.  There were a lot of points they could have made to strengthen their case and they didn't; guess they knew what outcome they wanted.

[JDavis]

The tragedy is that a 17 year old died -- and another man was assumed guilty by a media who sentenced him before a fair trial by their own lies, deception, and outright fraud.  In the end -- NOBODY WON!

 

well said.

[other one]

The tragedy is that a 17 year old died -- and another man was assumed guilty by a media who sentenced him before a fair trial by their own lies, deception, and outright fraud.  In the end -- NOBODY WON!

 

George, I don't understand why everyone can't see the reality in your statement.

[missmuffet]

The tragedy is that a 17 year old died -- and another man was assumed guilty by a media who sentenced him before a fair trial by their own lies, deception, and outright fraud.  In the end -- NOBODY WON!

You are sooooo right George

[missmuffet]

 

The tragedy is that a 17 year old died -- and another man was assumed guilty by a media who sentenced him before a fair trial by their own lies, deception, and outright fraud.  In the end -- NOBODY WON!

 

George, I don't understand why everyone can't see the reality in your statement.

 

Well,take a look at our world.

[other one]

I found this very interesting information about little Travon.

 

BOYS IN THE HOODIES
Police buried Trayvon's criminal history
Exclusive: Jack Cashill exposes fact 'good kid' Martin should have been arrested twice
Published: 04/16/2013 at 7:40 PM  Jack Cashill

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/04/police-buried-trayvons-criminal-history/#Xs4AQ32YSseKDIOH.99
 

 

 

 year ago Feb. 26, neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman shot and killed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Fla., and within a month every sentient person on the planet knew “Trayvon” by name.

What they did not know was Martin’s background. Sanford Police Department (SPD) investigator Chris Serino, for instance, said publicly of Martin, “This child has no criminal record whatsoever.” He called Martin “a good kid, a mild-mannered kid.” The media almost universally sustained this tragically false narrative.

Martin had the seeming good fortune of attending school in the Miami-Dade School District, the fourth-largest district in the country and one of the few with its own police department.

For a variety of reasons, none of them good, elements within the SPD and the Miami-Dade School District Police Department, or M-DSPD, conspired to keep Martin’s criminal history buried.

See Jack Cashill’s stunning work, in “Deconstructing Obama,” “First Strike,” “Hoodwinked,” “Officer’s Oath” and more.

As part of its mission the M-DSPD was allegedly trying to divert offending students, especially black males, from the criminal justice system. As the Martin death would prove, the M-DSPD diverted offending students to nothing beyond its own statistical glory.

The exposure of M-DSPD practices began inadvertently on March 26, 2012, when the Miami Herald, the one mainstream outlet to do real reporting on the case, ran a story on Martin’s background.

The Herald’s headline, “Multiple suspensions paint complicated portrait of Trayvon Martin,” should have caused the other media to seek the truth about the very nearly sanctified Martin.

It did not. What it did do was to cause M-DSPD Police Chief Charles Hurley to launch a major Internal Affairs (IA) investigation into the possible leak of this information to the Herald.

At the end of the day, Hurley rather wished he had not. The detectives questioned told the truth about Martin and about the policies that kept him out of the justice system. Hurley would be demoted and forced out of the department within a year.

We now know what the detectives revealed thanks to a recently fulfilled Freedom of Information Act request filed by the dogged researchers at a blogging collective known as The Conservative Treehouse. The “Treepers” have literally done more good work on the Martin case than all the newsrooms in America combined.

On Feb. 15, 2012, 11 days before Martin’s death, the Miami-Dade County Public Schools put out a press release boasting of a 60 percent decline in school-based arrests, the largest decline by far in the state.

“While our work is not completed, we are making tremendous progress in moving toward a pure prevention model,” Hurley told the Tampa Bay Times, “with enforcement as a last resort and an emphasis on education.”

Hurley’s detectives, all of them veterans with excellent records, told a different story under oath when questioned by Internal Affairs. They knew the shell game was about to be exposed upon first learning that Martin was one of their students and outside agencies would be requesting his records.

“Oh, God, oh, my God, oh, God,” one major reportedly said when first looking at Martin’s data. He realized that Martin had been suspended twice already that school year for offenses that should have gotten him arrested – once for getting caught with a burglary tool and a dozen items of female jewelry, the second time for getting caught with marijuana and a marijuana pipe.

In each case, the case file on Martin was fudged to make the crime less serious than it was. As one detective told IA, the arrest statistics coming out of Martin’s school, Michael Krop Senior, had been “quite high,” and the detectives “needed to find some way to lower the stats.” This directive allegedly came from Hurley.

“Chief Hurley, for the past year, has been telling his command staff to lower the arrest rates,” confirmed another high-ranking detective.

When asked by IA whether the M-DSPD was avoiding making arrests, that detective replied, “What Chief Hurley said on the record is that he commends the officer for using his discretion. What Chief Hurley really meant is that he’s commended the officer for falsifying a police report.”

The IA interrogators seemed stunned by what they were hearing. They asked one female detective incredulously if she were actually ordered to “falsify reports.” She answered, “Pretty much, yes.”

Once the top brass understood that the Martin case had the potential to expose the reason for the department’s stunning drop in crime, they told the detectives “to make sure they start writing reports as is; don’t omit anything.”

“Oh, now, the chief wants us to write reports as is,” said a Hispanic detective sarcastically, “and not omit anything, as we have been advised in the past?”

The IA investigation delved into the paranoid concern that the M-DSPD was sharing information about Martin with other relevant police departments as it routinely did in other multi-jurisdictional cases.

The one detective who sent information to the Sanford PD came under heavy fire. He was appalled. “Currently, our department is functioning and operating out of fear,” he told the IA. “It is tragic to see that I’ve been disciplined at the direction of Chief Hurley.”

As it turned out, Hurley need not have worried about the SPD. As the Conservative Treehouse reports, the information sent by the M-DSPD “disappeared down the rabbit hole and was not included in the final victimology report filed by Sanford Detective Serino.”

Serino was the Martin-friendly detective who had insisted that Martin “has no criminal record whatsoever,” calling him, “a good kid, a mild-mannered kid.”

In Hurley’s defense, school districts across the country had been feeling pressure from the nation’s race hustlers to think twice before disciplining black students. Last year, the White House formalized the pressure with an executive order warning school districts to avoid “methods that result in disparate use of disciplinary tools.”

Jesse Jackson brought this nonsense home to Sanford during a large April 1, 2012, rally. He implied that Martin had been profiled by his high school for being a black male and suspended for the same reason. “We must stop suspending our children,” Jackson told the crowd.

In a way, Jackson was right. Martin should not have been suspended. He should have been arrested on both occasions. Had he been, his parents and his teachers would have known how desperately far he had gone astray.

Instead, Martin was “diverted” into nothing useful. Just days after his non-arrest, he was allowed to wander the streets of Sanford high and alone looking, in Zimmerman’s immortal words, “like he’s up to no good or he’s on drugs or something.”

At the end of the day, Martin had avoided becoming an arrest statistic, only to become a statistic of a much graver kind.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/04/police-buried-trayvons-criminal-history/#Xs4AQ32YSseKDIOH.99

 

 

 

 

[Burning_Ember]

 

 

Its entirely possible that she was hearing zimmerman yelling get off get off. She was panicked and may have misheard. Also, being so connected, she may have lied to protect her boyfriend, with his character, I wouldnt be surprised if he chose a girlfriend who was less then reputable. Also keep in mind there is always evidence that they dont release to the public.

So because you eblieve Trayvon is of poor character it's possible the she was of poor character therefore she could be lying. That's a couple logical fallcies of Ad Hominem and Guilt by Association.

 

Really though, if we're deciding this based on character, George Zimmerman was convicted of Domestic abuse, he claimed that him attacking his ex fiance was to "stop her from attacking him". (Sound familiar?) His cousin just filed a statement saying that he molested her for 13 years.

 

So you're judging Trayvon based on an assumption of Rachels character based on assumptions about Trayvon... But Zimmerman doesn't get the same treatment?

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am as well,  JDavis.  I believe Zimmerman, while not guilty of murder, is guilty of provoking a confrontation.  Even if the Martin kid was being a typical mouthy teenager he didn't deserve to die for it.  Lives have been devastated and one lost forever here.  But the jury has spoken and we have to respect their verdict.

 

Zimmerman was jumped and beaten by the kid.  How, exactly, does that translate into provoking a confrontation?  If Zimmerman had been black, and the kid killed was white or Hispanic, the case never would have gone to trial and he probably wouldn't have been charged at all. So your concept of "justice" and my concept of justice are not the same.  You are advocating that an innocent man be held responsible and punished for something that he didn't do.  Would that work for you, if the shoe were on your foot?

 

I would say that getting out of your car and following Martin could be construed as provoking a confrontation.

 

There's no law against observing someone you think is suspicious nor even asking them what their intentions are. Doing something legal cannot be considered a provocation.

Rachel testified at the trial that Zimmerman followed Trayvon, that Trayvon asked why Zimmerman was following him, that the headset was knocked from Trayvon's ear, followed by Trayvon shouting "Get off, Get off!"

 

The evidence seems to suggest that Trayvon was assaulted first, and that he defended himself.

 

Really, the fact that a broken nose is a justification for shooting someone through the heart, when the person who gave them a broken nose was defending themselves is a shocking disregard for human life by the law.

 

 

You can't choose which witness to believe arbitrarily. Another witness, an eye witness, who was an absolute independent observer (he was actually a prosecution witness) said that he came outside and saw martin on top of zimmerman. The burden of proof is on the prosecution in a murder case. Criminal justice is not set up to convict people who may be guilty or are probably guilty, it's set up to convict people who are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt (i.e. who have been proven to be guilty beyond by a mass preponderance of the evidence). There was, clearly, too much conflicting testimony. Nobody claimed a broken nose was a justification for shooting somebody through the heart. An expert witness testified that when the shooting took place the victim was on top of the defendant and was leaned over. In other words he was in a position of superiority. There were gashes on the back of the defendant's head. You painted it as if he shot the victim in retaliation for getting his nose broken. There was plenty of evidence presented that the conflict was still ongoing at the time of the shooting and that damage was still being done to the defendant at the time of the shooting. You are looking past the burden of proof issue here. This is not about whether a person shot another person in malice. This is about whether it was proven that one person shot another person in malice and it simply was not proven. The fact that even prosecution witnesses backed up parts of the defendant's version of events pretty much shows that the burden was too great for the prosecution to meet.

Even if it was not proven, that's why manslaughter was there.

 

And this is why we have disproportionate force law in Canada. Because getting a punch in the nose is not sufficient justification for killing someone. Regardless of whether a broken American Criminal Justice System conficts someone or not, the killing was still, unjustified, wrong, and hideous. From personal experience... A broken nose is not an excuse to kill someone.

Again you say that Zimmerman did all this over a broken nose-but the fact is the facts don't support this. Zimmerman's injuries were far more extensive then that, and quite frankly doesn't even line up with your story that Zimmerman struck first.

 

I was in a car crash once, and I walked away from it. I had more severe injuries than what Zimerman had.

You know whats really frightening though? Being mugged at knifepoint. Because someone mugging you at knifepoint isn't just going to stab you once, they're going to stab you multiple times. THAT is life threatening. The idea that Zimmerman was in a life threatening situation where he needed to shoot someone through the heart, because if he didn't, he would be dead, is absurd.

 

My central point, really, is that Zimmerman was not in a life threatening situation where he needed to use lethal force. That regardless of Zimmermans justifications, the killing of another human being like that is unjust. Had he not profiled Trayvon and pursued him, and treated him like any other person walking down the street, or simply stayed in his car and not acted like a wannabee-policeman, then this never would have happened.

 

BE, was Martin walking down sidewalks are walking in people's yards?

Trayvon was running away from Zimmerman, because apparently being followed by someone in a truck and on foot is pretty darn creepy.

 

I have a question for you. Do you think if Trayvon was white with blonde hair, wearing no hoodie, bike shorts and having a frozen yogurt, do you think that Zimmerman would have pursued him?

[The_Patriot21]

you know, here you are bringing race into it again. From the getgo, there was never any evidence this was a race crime. Even a 35 member team of FBI agents (federal) couldnt find any evidence of it being a race thing. The only people saying its a race thing is president Obama-which I wont go into, but I cant say as I trust, and a media which has had an obvious agenda from the getgo. There is no evidence this was a race thing, at all-and it was pathetic the media has been throwin that term around just to get their way, and its still pathetic.