What did you think of the Zimmerman verdict?
From a US perspective, Tim Dees has summed this question up nicely. From a UK perspective I will simply add that Zimmerman would have been convicted, possibly for murder with intent. Certainly for Manslaughter.Obviously certain variables come into play such as pistols are illegal in the UK etc. If we disregard those for a minute and replace pistol with legal weapon Zimmerman still would have been convicted. The UK has a precedence of punishing individuals who attempt to use unreasonable force. It is relatively unreasonable to believe Trayvon would have killed Zimmerman with his bare hands. A defence of I was fearing for my life would not stand up to scrutiny when the defendant is in possession of weapon that can be used to threaten an attacker. Across the pond, the general legal consensus (I can only speak for my Law School and Legal Society/Forums but it is broadly reflective) is that - By following the victim, Zimmerman was unnecessarily attempting to conduct a law enforcement action after being advised not to. Had Zimmerman remained in his car, Trayvon would still be alive.It cannot be forgotten that prior to his death and at the time of his death Trayvon was not guilty of a crime. Allegations of assault against Zimmerman remain unproven. It cannot be held that Trayvon caused his own death. Individuals reserve the right to challenge those that display suspicious behaviour towards their person. Trayvon was within his rights to question Zimmerman's motives. Lastly, given the prior actions of Zimmerman (intent to interfere) and the prior actions of Trayvon (walking peacefully) it can be reasonably held that Trayvon did not escalate the conflict. He even took the time to make a call indicating his unease at being followed. An unease which later turned out to be accurate as Trayvon was shot by the man he was suspicious of.In Scotland the verdict may have been similar to that in the United States since Scotland maintains the 'Not Proven' verdict. In the rest of the UK, Zimmerman would go to jail. Based on my cultural upbringing I find it appalling that the verdict has been returned the way it has, I find it an indictment of the legal system which values a loophole over reasoning. A clear example of the letter of the law versus spirit of the law. Zimmerman should have gone to jail.Alas, he didn't. Unless Federal charges are levied, the judgement must stand and Zimmerman is innocent.
Do you think George Zimmerman will testify?
My bet is no. From what I have seen, he made enough statements pre trial. So many, in fact, that the police and or prosecutors initially declined to prosecute. Much of this is going to come in without him taking stand. If he takes the stand, he will be subject to an ugly cross examination regarding the statements he already made. From what little I have seen, he made a lot of these earlier statements without the benefit of counsel. Often times this results in a poorly constructed version of events with a lot of holes and inconsistencies stated ad hoc, not subject to critical review for hard questions prior to talking to the police. However, whatever he said, it was successful in initially convincing law enforcement not to prosecute. By taking the stand, he compounds the problem, because he subjects himself to cross examination on these statements. Really, taking the stand is like walking into quicksand where he is going to struggle with everything he said in the past. While Cliff has a point about limiting the direct testimony, it seems like an impossible line to walk with prior statements attempting to create a self defense claim.
Do you think if George Zimmerman DID NOT have a gun he would have followed Trayvon Martin?
Yes. I think he was what we called when I was a medic a "roger rescue." By this I mean someone who seeks out the gratification of being "a hero" by emulating police and public safety professionals but without actually going through the rigorous training to have developed any sensible judgement or deeper understanding of the considerations actually made by professionals.This kind of personality is very common in the field. You encounter people with cars loaded up with radios or lights, who carry equipment they are only roughly knowledgeable about, and who often make situations worse or even dangerous. Sometimes their motive is simply misguided desire to assist, but more often this type does not appear to have the same personality as real rescuers or cops, they are playing a role, and the hero in their make-believe is themselves.This kind is very different from many volunteer services, in that they don't adhere to training (if they ever get any) or the logic behind it, instead they act like someone would on TV.The "roger rescue" types who are fixated on cops are dangerous. Cops carry weapons, so they do too. But cops get very rigorous training and endless practice on how to avoid using deadly force. It's easy to carry a gun. It's harder to carry a gun, face a dangerous or frightening situation, and to handle that situation without ever drawing it. It takes training, and an adult playing at being a cop to fulfill a fantasy role for themself is dangerous indeed.But all that said, when that person gets themselves into a situation where they are flat on their back and are being beat up on, the law says they may use deadly force.I should also point out that there is another common self-deluded type on the streets. Teens who think of themselves as tough guys and who are quick to confront and get in fights with nutty people who might just be carrying a gun.Loose cannons, meeting to each others detriment.Both chose to confront the other, had either had the sense to simply avoid contact the situation need never have escalated.
What do you think about the Trayvon Martin case? Is Zimmerman guilty or not guilty?
Guilty 2nd degree murder. That's what I think he is. Not sure what the jury will decide. There are major flaws with his story. First, he claims he feared Martin. If that's true, why did he follow him? His story of the alleged fight doesn't fly either. He claims Martin broke his nose. If that's true, why wasn't his blood all over his shirt? He didn't see a doctor right away, but claims his head was bashed into the sidewalk repeatedly, even though his injuries don't support that. Why did he refuse medical attention - especially with an alleged broken nose? Why did he refuse to go to a specialist? He claims that Martin was sitting on his chest, pinning his arms, while bashing Z's head into the ground. Yet Z claims he was able to pull out the gun (then why didn't he stop Martin?) and shoot Martin in the chest. Try it and you will see the angle is all wrong. He could have shot Martin in the side, but not in the front. And if he did that, why was there no Martin blood on his shirt? Finally, he claims he rolled Martin off of him. If that's true, why was Martin found face down on the ground. If you roll someone off you whom you just shot, they would be face up, not face down. He also claims he stretched Martin's arms out. Why? That was also a lie; his arms were found under him. He also, from the very beginning, had no reason to suspect Martin. The kid was just walking home. He said it was suspicious that he was looking around, but most people look around when they are walking. Especially late at night. With all his lies, I can't believe anything he said and the evidence points to Z shooting Martin while they were standing up, which means he was not bashing Z's head into the ground.
Do you think George Zimmerman will kill himself or get murdered?
The concept that George Zimmerman (no relation, I promise) was guilty lives solely on the left, which has a habit of being particularly violent of late.I give it a 10% chance George Zimmerman is murdered at some point for his political views, whatever they are, and 90% that it was his own doing for how out of control he’s become.The man had his entire life destroyed, was found not guilty, and then continued to be harassed to this day for a crime he apparently didn't commit. I don’t blame him for going a bit crazy. He needs to get some help and try to balance things out though.
Why do people think George Zimmerman is innocent?
Here's how I see it: 1. Trayvon Martin wasn't doing anything, yet George Zimmerman responded as if he was. 2. Despite not seeing a crime Zimmerman called the police and followed behind. Then he starts saying Trayvon looks like he's on drug, has a problem, looks like he's a burglar and looks like he has a weapon. We later find all of that untrue. He had no weapon, he looked fine minutes early and the store clerk said he was normal, and no one else ever said or reported that Trayvon was casing the place. 3. On the 911 tape he says Trayvon ran away and he lost him, then he says he's following him. Why on earth would you pursue someone that you didn't see commit a crime and they are now running away from you? 4. Trayvon running away and taking shortcuts to lose Zimmerman is consistent with Jeantel's testimony and Zimmerman's 911 tape call. 5. Why would Jeantel lie, she made Trayvon look bad, whats her motive to lie? 6. From what Jeantel heard, it sounds like Zimmerman grabbed or pushed Trayvon, which caused Trayvon to respond that way. 7. Why would Trayvon randomly attack Zimmerman and he has no history of being that way, yet Zimmerman has a aggressive past. He was aggressive with officer and at the time he already had a restraining order on him, and a ex co-worker said he was aggressive at times. Yet the focus is on Trayvon's behavior, which not one person who knew him ever said he was that way. 8. Why on earth would Trayvon run away if he wants to bet him up?
Why does Zimmerman keep getting portrayed as a cop when discussing police shootings?
Why does Zimmerman keep getting portrayed as a cop when discussing police shootings?Does he? I’ve never once encountered this when discussing police shootings.
How is George Zimmerman guilty?
The prosecution has done a poor job in my opinion. Would anyone make a compelling argument why George Zimmerman is guilty. Here is what I'm aware of; 1. Zimmerman is the neighborhood watch person. He is aware that there have been many burglaries. 2. Zimmerman sees Trayvon walking behind people's houses. It's raining, yet Trayvon continues to stroll around the neighborhood. He looks suspicious. (This is NOT racial profiling) 3. Zimmerman calls the cops. He get's out of his car and looks for a street name sign. Trayvon believes Zimmerman is trying to stalk him. 4. Trayvon confronts Zimmerman and breaks his nose and bangs his head on the concrete. 5. Out of self defense, Zimmerman shoots Martin. I believe that this is a self defense case. Zimmerman was obviously injured by Martin and needed to use force to save his life. What evidence is there that Zimmerman murdered Trayvon??? What evidence is there that Zimmerman racially profiled Trayvon?
Did George Zimmerman kill Trayvon Martin, yes or no ?
Yes. He got out of his car, after being instructed not to by 911 operatives. He followed Trayvon around and confronted him. The only 'suspicious activity' Trayvon was guilty of was WWB -walking while black. He was in his own neighbourhood, walking home from the store, carrying candy. He was doing NOTHING wrong. Zimmerman still decided he was a no-good-thug and called the cops on him, followed him, confronted him, and shot him. Eyewitnesses have conflicting stories as to who was beating on who, but you can't question that Zimmerman's was the first act of aggression, in stalking Martin. Trayvon Martin is dead, by George Zimmerman's hand. Yes, he murdered him.