• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?[W:36]

Vote:


  • Total voters
    46

Josie

Come alive
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
54,052
Reaction score
27,774
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Yes, I know it's not over. Yes, I know there's more evidence to be shown. Yes, I know. :)

Just based on what you've seen so far in this trial, which way are you leaning?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

Yes, I know it's not over. Yes, I know there's more evidence to be shown. Yes, I know. :)

Just based on what you've seen so far in this trial, which way are you leaning?




I'm leaning towards letting the jury make the call.
 
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

Just flat out not guilty.

From everything I have seen and heard I'm still where I was a year ago. Both individuals made some bad decisions and it turned tragic but the criminal act was the assault and everything seems to indicate that Martin is the one who started that. The testimony of the young lady he was on the phone with only served to confirm that.
 
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

I have no trouble with letting a jury decide, but thus far there is nothing for them to decide. If the prosecution has a case he's yet to show it. Right now its a real head scratcher the judge doesn't throw it out for a total lack of evidence - but maybe the prosecution is saving their best for last?
 
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

Based on what's been presented so far, there is nothing solid what so ever that indicates Z was not acting in legal self defense.
 
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

I have no trouble with letting a jury decide, but thus far there is nothing for them to decide. If the prosecution has a case he's yet to show it. Right now its a real head scratcher the judge doesn't throw it out for a total lack of evidence - but maybe the prosecution is saving their best for last?

It's becoming more and more obvious that the case should have never been brought to trial in the first place... But the same political pressure that forced them to file charges against Zimmerman in the first place, is the same political pressure that will prevent the judge from throwing the case out... This thing will go the distance, no matter how ridiculous it gets.
 
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

I'm still leaning towards 2nd degree murder, but I am listening. I'm not one of these "I'm going to plug my ears and say *blah blah blah* until it's over." That being said, he was told not to follow the kid, and he did. The kid was running away, hiding, and he still went after him. That's what I have a problem with. Had he stayed his vigilante ass in the car, like he was told to do, this wouldn't even be happening.

But I am listening to all sides.
 
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

Failure. When he was told not to follow the kid (dispatcher said we don't need you to do that) he agreed. His claim is he was heading back to his car when TM attacked him. I believe if you listen to the disatch tape he does not disagree with the dispatcher when they tell him they don't need him to do that.


I'm still leaning towards 2nd degree murder, but I am listening. I'm not one of these "I'm going to plug my ears and say *blah blah blah* until it's over." That being said, he was told not to follow the kid, and he did. The kid was running away, hiding, and he still went after him. That's what I have a problem with. Had he stayed his vigilante ass in the car, like he was told to do, this wouldn't even be happening.

But I am listening to all sides.
 
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

I wish there were an option for Self Defense after being a ****ing idiot.
 
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

Failure. When he was told not to follow the kid (dispatcher said we don't need you to do that) he agreed. His claim is he was heading back to his car when TM attacked him. I believe if you listen to the disatch tape he does not disagree with the dispatcher when they tell him they don't need him to do that.

His claim. Of course he is going to say that he was going to listen to the dispatcher. Where was he when he called? I'd like to know that. Martin was running towards the back end of the complex - Zimmerman was parked at the front end. If he was near his car, when he called, he should not be where he was where Martin was shot.
 
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

Failure. When he was told not to follow the kid (dispatcher said we don't need you to do that) he agreed. His claim is he was heading back to his car when TM attacked him. I believe if you listen to the disatch tape he does not disagree with the dispatcher when they tell him they don't need him to do that.

Zimmerman responded with "OK"
 
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

Why does it matter where he was? Is it a crime to follow someone you don't know in your complex? When they are out in the rain? When you are part of the communities neighborhood watch? That is NO crime.


His claim. Of course he is going to say that he was going to listen to the dispatcher. Where was he when he called? I'd like to know that. Martin was running towards the back end of the complex - Zimmerman was parked at the front end. If he was near his car, when he called, he should not be where he was where Martin was shot.
 
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

Why does it matter where he was? Is it a crime to follow someone you don't know in your complex? When they are out in the rain? When you are part of the communities neighborhood watch? That is NO crime.

No it's not a crime to follow someone but it is a crime to shoot them. He was told to leave it alone. He didn't. That's why I am trying to find out where he was. The kid was shot very far away from where Zimmerman's truck was parked. Was Zimmerman truly "leaving it alone" as he was told to do, or did he continue to pursue Martin? It's no surprise that Zimmerman wanted to be a cop. That's what I am wondering - was he trying to fulfill his lifelong fantasy of being a cop, by pursuing someone in his neighborhood?
 
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

No it's not a crime to follow someone but it is a crime to shoot them. He was told to leave it alone. He didn't. That's why I am trying to find out where he was. The kid was shot very far away from where Zimmerman's truck was parked. Was Zimmerman truly "leaving it alone" as he was told to do, or did he continue to pursue Martin? It's no surprise that Zimmerman wanted to be a cop. That's what I am wondering - was he trying to fulfill his lifelong fantasy of being a cop, by pursuing someone in his neighborhood?

Your post rests on emotionalism not on the evidence or the law

A lot of quasi-legal arguments at there but, the fact is... both *Z and M* did nothing illegal...up to

M attacking Z without adequate provocation is what sealed M's fate

That's where, the law was broken
 
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

Your post rests on emotionalism not on the evidence or the law

A lot of quasi-legal arguments at there but, the fact is... both *Z and M* did nothing illegal...up to

M attacking Z without adequate provocation is what sealed M's fate

That's where, the law was broken

I am the first to admit that part of my argument has to do with emotion. However, I'm still looking for proof that M attacked Z first. I mean, other than Z's statement.
 
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

He was told to leave it alone. He didn't. That's why I am trying to find out where he was. The kid was shot very far away from where Zimmerman's truck was parked. Was Zimmerman truly "leaving it alone" as he was told to do, or did he continue to pursue Martin?

I don't believe Zimmerman followed Martin after the 911 dispatcher said, "we don't need you to do that." Zimmerman parked his car at the crosswalk at the bend in Twin Trees Rd. We can hear him running in the 911 tape. The wind picks up as he does so and the 911 dispatcher said this was one of his reasons for suspecting Zimmerman was following Martin. This only lasts for 15-20 seconds. After Zimmerman is told he doesn't need to follow, that noise disappears after a few seconds and is no longer heard on the tape.

Judging by 15-20 seconds of running/hustling, this puts Zimmerman at the t-intersection. This is logical because it offers a view down the backyards and Zimmerman still wants to inform the police where Martin is. It is also where Zimmerman claims he was. From that moment, 4 minutes pass before the other 911 calls are made, from John Good, Jenna Lauer, etc. Zimmerman claims to use this time by going East to look for an address to give the police officers that would give them a better location, then turn around and head back to his truck. (He also probably looked down Retreat View Circle to see if Martin ever appears down the block). At the end of this 4 minute period, Martin and Zimmerman are fighting 30 feet South of the T-intersection. So the fight probably happened 3.5 minutes after the 911 dispatcher's message. In 3.5 minutes, Zimmerman moved South by 10 yards. This includes any steps toward Martin he would have taken when Martin called out to Zimmerman (this is in both Zimmerman's and Jeantel's stories). This also includes any grappling or retreating made by the fighting parties. So including the movement in the fight, Zimmerman moved at (30 ft/3.5 min) 0.043 miles per hour towards Martin's house.

Martin told Jeantel that he had lost Zimmerman, and Zimmerman told the 911 operator he lost Martin when he was at the t-intersection. So it doesn't seem Martin was hiding in the bushes the whole time at the t-intersection. Either Martin turned back toward Zimmerman, Martin somehow made a wrong turn when he was only a half city-block from his house, or this was the slowest pursuit in the history of pursuits.
 
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

I don't believe Zimmerman followed Martin after the 911 dispatcher said, "we don't need you to do that." Zimmerman parked his car at the crosswalk at the bend in Twin Trees Rd. We can hear him running in the 911 tape. The wind picks up as he does so and the 911 dispatcher said this was one of his reasons for suspecting Zimmerman was following Martin. This only lasts for 15-20 seconds. After Zimmerman is told he doesn't need to follow, that noise disappears after a few seconds and is no longer heard on the tape.

Judging by 15-20 seconds of running/hustling, this puts Zimmerman at the t-intersection. This is logical because it offers a view down the backyards and Zimmerman still wants to inform the police where Martin is. It is also where Zimmerman claims he was. From that moment, 4 minutes pass before the other 911 calls are made, from John Good, Jenna Lauer, etc. Zimmerman claims to use this time by going East to look for an address to give the police officers that would give them a better location, then turn around and head back to his truck. (He also probably looked down Retreat View Circle to see if Martin ever appears down the block). At the end of this 4 minute period, Martin and Zimmerman are fighting 30 feet South of the T-intersection. So the fight probably happened 3.5 minutes after the 911 dispatcher's message. In 3.5 minutes, Zimmerman moved South by 10 yards. This includes any steps toward Martin he would have taken when Martin called out to Zimmerman (this is in both Zimmerman's and Jeantel's stories). This also includes any grappling or retreating made by the fighting parties. So including the movement in the fight, Zimmerman moved at (30 ft/3.5 min) 0.043 miles per hour towards Martin's house.

Martin told Jeantel that he had lost Zimmerman, and Zimmerman told the 911 operator he lost Martin when he was at the t-intersection. So it doesn't seem Martin was hiding in the bushes the whole time at the t-intersection. Either Martin turned back toward Zimmerman, Martin somehow made a wrong turn when he was only a half city-block from his house, or this was the slowest pursuit in the history of pursuits.

Thank you. Thanks for a well thought-out, logical, well-spoken answer.
 
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

Yes, I know it's not over. Yes, I know there's more evidence to be shown. Yes, I know. :)

Just based on what you've seen so far in this trial, which way are you leaning?

I haven't really watched. I started assuming Zimmerman would be found not guilty; after awhile I came to believe he would probably be found guilty of something; but what I have heard today about the eye witness that I did not know existed, I have decided I don't know.
 
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

I've been leaning toward not caring sweet **** all since it all began.
 
Last edited:
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

No pre-physical altercation scenario has ever been postulated that gives Martin the legal right to kill or maim Zman. If one listens to the testimony and views the evidence, it presently appears that it was Martin's intent to cause great physical harm to Zman.

That continued deadly action by Martin reasonably put Zman in fear for his life and legally gave Zman the right to use lethal force to stop Martin. If Trayvon would have simply stopped when he had neutralized his opponent or stopped when he heard Zman's terrible screams or stopped when Witness Good told him to stop or stopped when Witness Good said he was calling the police, Zman would never have pulled his weapon. The beating reached a point where Martin left Zman no choice.

Apparently Zman held out for forty long seconds of beating, held out when no one would come to help him, but Martin wouldn't stop hurting him. It's hard to imagine someone so cold that they would cause those horrifying screams of fear and pain and then continue to hurt another even worse.
 
Last edited:
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

Who are the witnesses saying that Zimmerman was on top of Martin? I don't recall hearing that testimony.
 
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

Good was saying it today, but yesterday, one of the witnesses said they saw a man with a black and red coat on top, and Z was wearing a black and red jacket. Two different witnesses, two different answers.
 
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

What would the "lesser charge" be?
 
Re: Which way are you leaning pertainingt to the verdict of this trial?

Who are the witnesses saying that Zimmerman was on top of Martin? I don't recall hearing that testimony.

One of them was Jeannee Manalo. I'm not sure who the other one was.

Jeannee Manalo did not state who was on top or bottom in her original statements. Wednesday's testimony was the first time she claimed that the 'bigger' person was on top. Under cross-examination, she admitted to O'Mara that she based her new claim on the photos she saw in the media. She also admitted that the photos of Trayvon Martin she referenced were those taken when he was 12-13 years old. In reality, Martin was taller and Zimmerman was heavier, so the 'bigger' person is disputable.

But it should be known that Zimmerman's account has him both on top and on bottom, so witness statements to the effect of, "the person on top in the fight stood up" don't conflict with his story. According to Zimmerman, his head was being pounded into the concrete while he was on his back, then they both went for his gun. Zimmerman gained control of it and shot once. That enabled Zimmerman to throw a now dying Martin off of him, flip him over, and hold him down, as he wasn't yet sure of the extent of Martin's injuries.
 
Back
Top Bottom