George Zimmerman's lawyers made one last attempt Friday to convince a jury the neighborhood watch volunteer shot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in self-defense, saying the prosecution's case for murder is built on "could've beens" and "maybes." The jury was expected to begin deliberations as early as Friday afternoon after receiving dueling portraits of Zimmerman: a wannabe cop who took the law into his own hands or a well-meaning volunteer who feared for his life in a struggle with the unarmed teenager who was slamming his head into concrete. Attorney Mark O'Mara told jurors the burden was on prosecutors, and said they hadn't proven Zimmerman's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. "If it hasn't been proven, it's just not there," O'Mara said. "You can't fill in the gaps. You can't connect the dots. You're not allowed to." Prosecutor John Guy followed with a rebuttal, accusing Zimmerman of telling "so many lies." He said Martin's last feeling was fear as Zimmerman followed him in a neighborhood on a rainy night Feb. 26, 2012. "Isn't that every child's worst nightmare, to be followed on the way home in the dark by a stranger," Guy said. "Isn't that every child's worst fear?" One juror, a young woman, appeared to wipe away a tear as Guy said nothing would ever bring back Martin. Guy said Zimmerman violated the cornerstone of neighborhood watch volunteer programs, which is to observe and report, not follow a suspect. Zimmerman's account of how he grabbed his gun from his holster at his waist as Martin straddled him is physically impossible, Guy said. "The defendant didn't shoot Trayvon Martin because he had to, he shot him because he wanted to," Guy said. "That's the bottom line."

Okay, even though this doesn't have a link, it's been going on for so long. might as well keep, and stuff.

Also bump off shit.

>>1 Trayvon deserved it.
He shouldn't have thought he was a hardcore ghetto banger.
Because those scum never live long.

/justice4zimmerman

Been following this for a while, and I still don't think Zimmerman did wrongly. If I were in his situation, I would have shot the kid as well. Sure, he violated the neighborhood watch's half-spoken rule of not following a suspect, but again, were I in his situation and thought that the kid was a part of a dangerous gang or whatever, I probably would have followed him as well. How many cops are going to respond to you reporting a "possible dangerous individual" when you have no proof? There's no point of observing without following. That's like telling a babysitter they have to watch the kids and call if anything goes wrong, but the babysitter can't move from the couch. What if the kid goes in the other room and does something wrong?

Enough of that, though. I still think this was a case of self-defense. You don't have to be armed to be dangerous. If your head was being bashed into the concrete by someone at an angle where you couldn't hit them back but could reach your gun, would you shoot them? I would. Yeah, he could have shot a less vital area and simply disabled him without killing him. But... in the heat of a fight where you never know if/when the kid is going to pull a knife or get a strong enough hit to crack your skull on the concrete, do you really give a fuck whether your attacker is disabled or killed?

He may have even shot him in a vital spot because he wanted to. However, there's no damn proof of that; what there is proof of is that a fight took place, and a member of the goddamn neighborhood watch was at the receiving end at some point prior to the kid getting shot.

Unless I'm ignorant or missed some point of the trial, from what I see, Zimmerman didn't do anything wrong.

>>4 He was born white, according to Twitter and the like.

I have no hope for the future generations.

>>5 I don't remember mentioning anything about race .__.

All the kid was doing was going back home from going to the store to get some skittles! And just cause Zimmerman did not recognize him was no excuse to follow him around in his car and then on foot and then when the kid is close to home try to go up to him and confront him!

I mean come on, just imagine it! Your 17 years old, walking home from the store when you notice a car is following you, and it continues to follow you for some time, then all of a sudden a full grown man steps out of the car and starts to follow behind you on foot by now you are pretty nervous but your almost home when suddenly he is upon you! By now your in a panic you may or may not see his gun, your panicking and your adrenaline is rushing! If you see his gun you know you can't get away and will some how have to fight your way out of this! Or you don't see his gun yet but your still in a panic, and the panic is clouding your mind and you may not even think to run until its to late...

Well...he's been let go now. The jury decided that he was not guilty. And while I wasn't there on the night of the shooting or anything...I am now extremely scared to be an African-American in the United States.

this all sounds familiar from somewhere...

>>6 I said according to Twitter.
The joke is he's not even white.

>>7 Sure, Z-man had some bad planning.
But let's face it, Trayvon was an asshole, little kid and if the Zimmer didn't put it down on him someone else would have.

>>8 There is no need to bring race into this.
That's being racist, dude.

Listen, think about it this way. It's like the Casey Anthony case. The court put its foot down because there simply was not enough non-circumstantial, unbiased physical evidence linking them to doing anything wrong. There was no way to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that anything ill-intentioned was done by the specific suspects. Yeah, they did a lot of other shit wrong, but those shitty things they did don't automatically make them murderers in the eye of the court. Unlike your personal opinions, the court has standards :L Now she's going through a life of absolute hell because of what people like you assume without proof. I guess you assholes should be happy to know that this guy is probably going to go through the same thing on a smaller scale. Your biased "justice" will be served one way or another.

>>11 This.

Keep that shit out of here. It wasn't a race kill. Plenty of white guys get killed by black guys every year, but when a black guy gets killed by a white guy, it's suddenly some fucking racially charged attack? That's bullshit.

All i can say is i wasnt there i dont know what happened that night,but im happy its over. Maybe people will look back on this and learn and move on.

Can we not contain all this shit in just one thread?

>>12 Exactly.
Race has nothing to do with it, and to say it does is being...racist. :)

>>15 You should have seen /pol/
There were at least 20 threads about it at all times.

I do not believe that Zimmerman is in the right at all, but too damn lazy to explain my opinion.

Basically, instigating the circumstances for a murder and then claiming it was in self defence is never right.

>>17 Quit being lazy, damn it. I want to drag this whole thing out just a little bit more.

Zimmy may have instigated the conflict, but Traytray could have handled the situation like a rational person.

>inb4 wut 17yo iz ration?

None of them.
But that doesn't mean he had to attack Zim.
He could have handled the situation 1000% better.

Then again...I wasn't there so maybe the Zimmah is a racist cunt that just wanted to shoot himself a fuuuuccckkkiiiinnnggg coooon.

All I can really say for sure is that I would have shot him as well, had I been in the situation.

The "canon" situation.
Not the racist one.
Racism is for gays.

Let me just say...
Asian for the win.
Please ignore me.
I'm bored.

>>18 Okay, I will explain a bit.

Basically, just because Martin is in the wrong, doesn't mean Zimmerman was in the right. They both did not act how they should have, just because one of them got the best in the fight does not mean he should leave unscathed.

As I said earlier, Zimmerman instigated this entire event. HE was the one who followed, HE was the one that shot a vital spot and HE is the one that should pay the consequences. The kid was on the way back from the candy store for fucks sake, just because he was a little punk does not mean he deserved to die at all.

People say that Zimmerman was in the heat of a fight plus in danger when he shot, and for accidentally killing the target he should not be blamed. Where the fuck is the logic in that? Once again, he followed the suspect so he should have been prepared anyway, he should have known how to handle a gun better and he should have avoided getting into that position. Zimmerman is far from doing the right thing. Of course a lot of the issues with the gun is America's whole gun control mess but we should avoid getting into that now.

You must pay the consequences for your actions, there are a 100 different ways that situation could of come out better but it didn't, and some of that is his fault. That is why the courts are in place, right? So when somebody does something wrong they can be punished? Are we forgetting what the whole judicial system is for?

God dammit, too many fucking movies/games that glorify crime and violence these days, if you ask me. Don't get me wrong, I love a good play of GTA every once in a while but these days it's like the studios are flooded with them, and the sheep that seek them out are often the most easily influenced.

Ok, so... this thing.

Overall, I feel that all things considered, Zimmerman was within the legal right to do what he had done. Sure, he shouldn't have played hero by keeping an eye on Martin, but him telling Zimmerman to leave him alone would have just been as easy, so just a bunch of what ifs at this point. Regardless, the events that went on made it clear that the truth is far from the "an unarmed boy was shot in cold blood with only candy and ice tea in hand" story the media has been hounding on ad nauseum. Let's not forget that just because one is "unarmed" doesn't mean one can't fight with their fists, as the only injuries Martin had sustained up until his death were on his knuckles, which would be consistent to this point. The evidence strongly supported Zimmerman's account of being the ground attacked initially without a gun at hand, and any evidence the prosecutors had were dubious at best, immediately disproven, or simply fell flat on its face. For a better insight on this case, watch Stefan Molyneux's video on it here: www.youtube.com/watch?v=bF-Ax5E8EJc . Remember, just by saying that he's guilty until your head falls off doesn't mean he'll instantly become so, which a good chunk of people don't seem to realize as the last few days all over the internet and out on the streets have shown.

In the end, a better approach by people like Zimmerman (community watches) needs to be taken so that such an incident never happens again. But the tragedy remains: Trayvon Martin is dead, and George Zimmerman will have to live the rest of his life in fear. It's a case where no one wins.

>>20 Somebody told me about a kid in the neighborhood that might be prostituting to pay off some debts to a local gang. Wanting to see if this was true or not, I decided to tail her for a little while, and when there wasn't really enough proof, I hopped out of the car and talked to her, figuring I'd find out from her reaction whether it was true or not, maybe even get some other names. After sharing what I head heard with her, it was clear I must have exposed a secret, for she immediately started hitting me. I knew I had a knife in my back pocket and should have been ready to use it. I should have. But I didn't expect to get hit, to get my face thrown down on the pavement before I even got to talking to her. I never hit her - only tried to figure out what was going on. She was just a young teenager, after all; she didn't look strong, and she was on her way back from the local ice cream store.

However, I was mistaken. The feel of the blood pouring off my face and the pain covering my body in that split second assault was enough to tell me that she was strong, that she didn't want me alive because I knew more than I should have. I couldn't fight back. I'm strong, but fist fights aren't my specialty; this kid has more experience than I do. One thing, though... I could reach my knife. I only had a split second of my own to counter her no matter what I did - if I waited another minute, she might get me first. What if she has a knife in her own pocket that she's saving for me? What if she has a gun under her shirt?

I grabbed my knife.

What were the consequences? I could put myself in a compromising position to just slice her in a less dangerous area or just show it off to scare her... what if she wasn't scared? The consequence of not pulling a fatal blow would be a fatal blow to me. I swung my arm back and dug the knife into the side of her neck; it ripped through several arteries on its course. My head was spinning when I looked at her. The knife would and the blood on her own knuckles were the only wounds she had, while my own face was bloodied and bruised. I didn't think it would escalate to this... I know I was stupid, but what else could I have done? there's a kid here bleeding out. It's my fault. I would have been the one bleeding out otherwise, though. Oh god...

All I wanted to do was help. Then all I wanted to do was live. Now all I want to do is move on with my life. I'm so sorry, I am, I'm sorry it got this far, but I didn't kill her out of hate; I didn't want her to die; I was only trying to save myself at that point. Please, I'm not a murderer to be locked up. The guilt will pay my dues itself without prison. I have to live the rest of my life with this. I don't need everybody screaming at me that I'm in the wrong or that I'm a racist or a horrible person just because I wanted to live to see another day.

Sorry for the typos. Anyway, there's no way to know exactly what happened, but if I were in that situation (>>24), I would have done the same. I don't think he should pay the consequences for defending himself, whether in the end, he shot a fatal spot out of spite or not. He was the one being attacked. There is no evidence of his mentality during the crime to suggest he killed him out of spite. Like >>23 said, most of the prosecution's evidence was just not adding up. They were trying to make a case out of biased, circumstantial evidence that simply fell through during the trial.

There was no proof beyond a reasonable doubt that he came with the intention of killing Tray. If he intended to kill him, he only had to drive by and shoot him, and he didn't. He would have had his gun ready when he walked up to him. There is not an ounce of evidence suggesting that he did anything other than protect himself, and that is that. The law will be the law. Maybe he wasn't a great person, maybe he made bad decisions, maybe he even killed him intentionally, but there is not enough proof of it to convict him of anything.

One other thing I should put out there, in all honestly, if somebody started attacking me, saving their life would be the last thing on my mind. If some guy came up and started hitting me, I'd be aiming for his balls to temporarily stop him then eyes/neck to traumatize him from continuing and if there was anything heavy enough nearby, I'd probably break his legs so he couldn't chase me. I don't care about his pain, no matter his age or ethnicity - you attack me, you get a near-death experience. I think that's why this case is bothering me so much; I know I could have been in his shoes several times if I were the type to keep a gun on me.

>>25 See, there is a special law in Florida called the "Stand Your Ground Law" that pretty much gives you a ticket to shoot/kill anybody under the grounds of self defence. Seeing as usually when that type of thing happens it is just the victim and the shooter, they can easily claim sanction off that law. This is the law that zimmerman used.

>>24 That is a powerful story, but not the same situation. Zimmerman followed the kid because "He didn't think he fit into the neighbourhood." Coincidentally, Trayman was black. You don't think that's racist? He followed a kid on the way back from the candy store because he was black that is the reason why Trayman is dead right now, because of Zimmerman's mild racism.

Anyway, you are saying the prosecutor's evidence doesn't add up, neither does the defences. If Zimmerman was in the position he claims to have been in with his head being bashed against the ground, it would not have been possible for him to pull his gun and shoot.

But Zimmerman has been acquitted despite the out-roar about it across the country. The general populous seems to agree with me. But, as I mentioned before, that law got him free. Somehow I don't think this is the end of it however.

Here is a brief video from the guardian about the protests.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2013/jul/16/la-protests-george-zimmerman-acquittal-video

And here is one last article I just stumbled across that talks more about the Stand Your Ground Law and it's flaws to do with the Zimmerman trial. He didn't call immunity based on that because he would then have to prove his justifiable force, apparently. Actually found the article super interesting.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2013/07/15/202418599/stand-your-ground-laws-under-scrutiny-post-zimmerman-verdict

>>26 No, it's not the same situation. It was only an example of self-defense with similar details. Whether he's a racist or not, that doesn't make the situation any different. Who cares what the reason that he followed him was? The point is that Tray was on top fighting him and only had wounds on his knuckles other than the bullet wound, meanwhile Zimmerman had several wounds on his face.

I completely agree with the Stand Your Ground law, and he had every right to use it whether what he did was right or wrong. He wasn't doing anything illegal taking the situation into hand. Racist or not, he did not go against the law, and just because he's racist doesn't mean he should be in prison when said situation was, again, inside the law, as you admitted.

You may not think it's the end of it. Legally, I believe this is the end of the trial. The court would be too embarrassed to turn back on it with this huge uproar. Now, if new evidence came out and there /wasn't/ a huge uproar, they'd be perfectly fine giving him a second trial. But because everyone was so dramatic... yep. I believe this has happened with several large cases in the past. People need to stop getting so heavily influenced and hyped up by the media.

And you know what, maybe he wasn't racist? Maybe there was something that ticked him off. Maybe he just had a hunch. Mayvbe he's a goddamn psychic. Obviously, whatever instinct he had that told him--racist or not--that there was an issue with the kid was right considering the injuries he sustained prior to doing anything to the kid.

Again, I believe this is ending like the Casey Anthony trial. Everybody hates him now because of what they're assuming about his character. He's going to have a horrible life and might as well be dead because of all the real racists who are assuming he's anti-black because he had a feeling the kid wasn't from around there. He'll probably have to go into a protection program taking all the riots into consideration. Be happy. Be overjoyed! He's going to suffer for the rest of his life because of a simple trial that the media over played.

>>30 Ahhh, yes he did go against the law. One, he was not authorised to take action and two, even the neighbourhood watch simply observes and reports, not stalks and marks. You aren't getting the fact that literally all of this is Zimmerman's fault in your head. If you believe in self defence then Trayman was defending himself, he was being followed by a stranger for god's sake.

The Stand Your Ground Law has good principals but it is completely flawed. It is way too easy to manipulate and cheat off, as long as there were no witnesses and it's kind of credible for you to say it was self defence, you can claim complete invincibility. Do you see nothing wrong with that? He ended a life, that isn't something to just say "Oh he was attacking you, off you go then" to.

The mother is seriously considering taking him to court on a civil trial, so it really isn't the end of it. Now the general public has clearly chosen it's side too, so this might have a different outcome.

He had a hunch about what? Trayman wasn't doing anything! How can you say he wasn't racist?? He followed a black kid in a white neighbourhood because he didn't seem right, the kid lived near there but he was still followed. If that isn't judging, generalising and using prejudice based of racial characteristics, I don't know what is.

I just think you don't understand the gravity of shooting and killing somebody. This isn't just some statistical case you debate over the internet. This is a kid that was followed, shot and killed after quite possibly attacking to defend himself.

>>32 So, if you're being followed, you should go after the person who's following you? That doesn't make sense. If you're being followed, and afraid that the person who is following you is going to do something to you, why would you go towards them? Why would you go toward someone you are afraid of? That goes against both logic and instinct. If I thought I was being followed, at first I'd just continue on my way and see what the other person did. If it was seeming more and more likely that they were following me, I'd probably pick up my pace, and keep evaluating the situation as I go.

Honestly, I think the whole thing could have been prevented if both Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman had exercised more prudence. I just described in the previous paragraph how Martin could have done so. I think Zimmerman could have been more prudent by keeping distance, but still following Martin, until either Zimmerman was more assured that Martin was not suspicious or until Martin got home. I'd think that if you saw Martin going up to his front door and unlocking it and going inside like any person would who is arriving at their house on foot, for many people their suspicions would have been greatly alleviated and it would have been a complete non-issue. Also, if that happened, but Zimmerman was still suspicious, he could have taken note of the house number, gotten a neighborhood directory, and called to make sure everything was okay.

In short, I think that both George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin made incredibly stupid choices, resulting in one person's death and another person's life becoming miserable.

>>30 George was suppossed to stay in his car as told by the authorities and becouse he didn't someone's kid is now dead.
why didn't he follow instructions and instead start following him? If there was a real problem why didn't he let the authorities handle it? George has a history of starting trouble

>>35 It was a 911 dispatcher that told him not to pursue, which is a standard thing they say for liability reasons and is not legally binding. If someone was hanging by a cliff and you are right there watching him hang on, they will say the EXACT same thing, which is don't do anything, even though you will likely act against this advice.

TBH I don't know a lot about this case but as far a I'm concerned, someone died. It's not a question of race or anything, to me. It's just a dead body.
But from what I've gathered, George Zimmerman should have been charged with some degree of manslaughter. He shot someone and that person died. That's it.

>>37 Yeah, manslaughter is what I think to. No matter how you look at it, it is because of his actions that Trayman is dead. Murder is too extreme however, he quite possibly had no intent to kill.

>>38 Too* Damn my grammar has been getting unintentionally sloppy laterly.

>>32 He was not authorized to follow him, but it wasn't against the law for him to do so. It's not like he's been stalking the kid for months. It's not stalking if you just tail somebody home one day. (Trust me, I've had relatives go through honest stalking before, and that's not it.) Just because he didn't follow the neighborhood watch's rules doesn't mean he broke the law; private rules =/= laws.

"It is way too easy to manipulate and cheat off, as long as there were no witnesses and it's kind of credible for you to say it was self defense, you can claim complete invincibility."
Tray didn't have any wounds other than on his knuckles and the gunshot wound. In this case, evidence is clearly supporting that he was the aggressor in the physical assault. Even if Trayvon lived and said that he was the one who was attacked, there would be zero physical evidence to support that claim.

"He had a hunch about what? Trayman wasn't doing anything! How can you say he wasn't racist??"
You obviously don't understand what a hunch is. It's an idea that has no basis. You just get a feeling that something isn't right, and you act on it. Sometimes you just /know/ that something is wrong. Whether you're right or wrong, it's a feeling you can get.

"He followed a black kid in a white neighbourhood because he didn't seem right,"
The neighborhood that I used to live in had no African Americans. The longest I saw a black family live there was a few months, including the family of my closest friend who moved by me for a while. Maybe it's because there were a lot of racists; maybe it's just because it was awkward living between a bunch of white people. I don't know why. But if I were a cop and saw a black kid walking through the neighborhood at night, I would probably be curious as well. That's not racism. If it's a fact that not a lot of people of that nationality live there, then how is it racist to question whether or not they're from the area?

"I just think you don't understand the gravity of shooting and killing somebody."
Perhaps so. I feel no sympathy towards someone who takes the initiative to attack someone first (whether that person was following them or not). I always have the rule to never be the first hit, and it may be immature to apply that rule as a moral unto others, yes; it doesn't change that I feel that way. But perhaps, equally so, you don't understand the gravity of trying to defend yourself from death, lost in your sympathy for a dead child.

>>38 Manslaughter I could see being alright of a charge - if that state didn't have the Stand Your Ground law. Because they do, I couldn't see that charge being legally applied.

And yeah, murder is far too extreme a charge with the circumstantial case against him.

>>41 Shall we agree on a compromise of manslaughter then? It seems to be a good meeting point for our different opinions.

>>42 Yeah, seems like it's right where we overlap, so :I
/compromise

bump

>>44 It was already on top...

>>43 Acceptance of other viable opinions *rainbow sparkles in background*

>>45 It wasn't I ninja edited all threads in the News section because someone bumped the bieber thread up, so I had to put everything back together

>>46 Ahhkay, thank you in that case.

this is all George Zimmerman falt if he had just stayed in the car, this would have never happened.

Bump.

Too much caring over this. Whether or not your personal morals dictate what you feel over this doesn't matter. Legally he is in the right. Morally, no. Legally yes.

Thus this shouldn't even matter anymore.

>>50 Relative speaking a lot of things don't matter enough to be discussed, yet they still are.

Bump to cover