• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Forum moderator applications are now open! Click here for details.
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

Jury Finds George Zimmerman Not Guilty

Gyardosamped

entering snake habitat
1,462
Posts
18
Years
A Florida jury finds George Zimmerman not guilty.

Zimmerman, 29, said he was acting in self-defense when he shot the unarmed Trayvon Martin, 17, in the chest during an altercation in a gated community of Sanford, Fla., on Feb. 26. 2012.

He was not charged for 44 tumultuous days in which the case generated large protests in several cities, turned a hooded sweatshirt like the one Martin wore into a symbol of solidarity, and drew the attention of President Obama, who said, "If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon."

As debate over race, guns and Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law swirled, a special prosecutor appointed by the governor announced April 11, 2012 that Zimmerman was being charged with second-degree murder – a move that his supporters said was meant to quell the public outcry.

Zimmerman pleaded not guilty throughout the case to the charges against him.

When the trial unfolded a year later, prosecutors argued the volunteer neighborhood watchman was a wannabe cop who "profiled" Martin as the teen walked back from buying Skittles at a 7-Eleven, and then followed him against the advice of the police dispatcher he called to report a suspicious person.

Link

This case has caused a media frenzy for over a year now. Thoughts? What do you think should have been the verdict?
 

Purple Materia

Shape the future!
785
Posts
13
Years
  • Age 29
  • Seen Apr 12, 2014
I thought this was absolutely unacceptable.

I didn't follow the case very closely, but I do remember that tons of the evidence was in Trayvon's favour.
 

Mr. X

It's... kinda effective?
2,391
Posts
17
Years
Not that suprised really.

Murder 2nd wasn't going to stick, but I was expecting a hung jury over manslaughter.

Anyway, given the comments that many people made about what they would do if Zimmerman goes free, and what had happened before he was arrested, I'm expecting rioting over this though. I'm hoping that it won't reach the level that police are preparing for and some of the media predicting, but some rioting over this verdict is a very definite possibility.

Edit @ Purple Materia

A lot of people forget the part about reasonable doubt. If no reasonable doubt exists, then it's a guilty verdict. If reasonable doubt exists, then it's a not guilty verdict. As much as people hate to admit or realize this, a lot of trials pretty much come down to how good of a speaker the prosecuting attorney and defense attorney are.
 
Last edited:

FreakyLocz14

Conservative Patriot
3,498
Posts
14
Years
  • Seen Aug 29, 2018
I thought this was absolutely unacceptable.

I didn't follow the case very closely, but I do remember that tons of the evidence was in Trayvon's favour.

You remembered wrong. The prosecution's case had more holes in it that a block of swiss cheese. This innocent man has received justice today, showing that our legal system isn't completely lost... yet.
 

Sir Codin

Guest
0
Posts
MSNBC is up in a storm about it right now. Comments range from "justice was served, you f***ing commies" to "justice is now dead, you ****ing rednecks", among other things such as accusations of racism, someone singing Queen's "We Are The Champions", calling Florida the 'land of acquitted murderers', someone declaring it 'open season on blacks in Florida', to lauding/berating/death threatening the jury, and oh God, now people are bringing abortion into the picture (WHAT?).

As for the trial, I don't know whether I should agree with it or not. I honestly forgot about it until today, but apparently the media was really trying to whip people into a frenzy about this one.

It really doesn't matter what I think the verdict should be. What's done is done. That said, I agree completely with what this cop said:

"We will not tolerate anyone who uses this verdict as an excuse to violate the law," Sheriff Donald Eslinger said.

Remember the L.A. riots? Let's not go back to that again.
 
Last edited:
2,138
Posts
11
Years
Certain political figures, such as Jesse Jackson and newsmedia outlets made accusations and overbearing speculation that incited outrage without proper legal examination.

Those who did not watch the court proceedings or understand the Florida criminal laws to which the facts of the case were applied should not be making any judgment calls about this jury's decision. Further, some who did follow the court closely had already been exposed to biases or only followed bias news summaries of the court proceedings.

This is truly one of the worst things that certain self-proclaimed civil rights advocates have done to racial relations in the United States in decades, as Carchar alluded to this issue. This case should have never centered around race, let alone have been a national concern.

And Purple Materia, you have exemplified this mindset. To believe one is guilty of a crime despite not being informed to make such a proclamation. It's an equivalent to humans in the past proclaiming that the Earth is flat because they just knew it and some of their acquaintance felt the same way. Evidence, or known truths and facts, allow for man to have a fair justice system, sentiments and speculation will bring us back to the Salem Witch Trials and a flood of injustice.
 

nimbo

~*~*~*~*~*~*~
131
Posts
10
Years
  • Age 30
  • Seen Jul 16, 2016
Very happy with the outcome, it was definitely self defense. The media blew this case up so much, I will not be surprised if there are riots. But it was the right call, to me at least.
 

Mr. X

It's... kinda effective?
2,391
Posts
17
Years
Facebook is awash with Zimmerman comments.

Most of them about how someone is going to kill him, someone is going to kill the jurors. That kinda stuff.

Anyway, here's what I put on fb about it, since pretty much everyone else is doing the same thing.

And the Zimmerman verdict is in... Not guilty.

I was surprised on this one really. Not guilty on murder 2nd was no surprise, but I was expecting a hung jury over manslaughter.

Anyway, all the people raising **** about how the verdict should have been guilty, and how easy it should be to see that he was? They don't realize what the verdicts really mean. The verdicts are shortened to guilty and not guilty, but the full versions would be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and not guilty due to reasonable doubt.

Now, whats interesting about reasonable doubt is that the evidence doesn't always establish it one way or the other. While people believe or like to think it does, most of the times reasonable doubt is open to interpretation.

What reasonable doubt comes down to is how the attorney interprets the evidence. It's a sad fact but a lot of trials are decided by whichever attorney is the better speaker, or to some people, the better bull****ter.

Interpretation and reasonable doubt go both ways however - It's the prosecutors job to interpret the evidence to remove reasonable doubt and the defense attorneys job to interpret the evidence either preserve or create reasonable doubt. It's this reason why a lot of people have a dislike or hatred of lawyers and attorneys.
 
5,983
Posts
15
Years
I dunno, grown man with a gun versus a kid. Unless Trayvon knew some crazy ninja stunts and pressure points and all that, Zimmerman had all the advantage in the fight, especially when it goes to the ground. Even given that Travyon was a young punk, I'm not sure when a gun should've entered the picture, but it did. That's my verdict >>
 

Tyrael

This is a Sailor's Prayer
373
Posts
11
Years
I am very happy with the outcome.

@Freakylocz: Zimmerman was given a stress voice test quite sooner after the shooting. He was asked if he confronted the man he saw lurking in his neighborhood and also if he was in fear of his life when he shot. Both results came back NDI, which means No Deception Indicated. And what that means is that he was telling the truth.

More evidence in Zimmerman's favor.. On the night of the shooting, when he was examined by medical professionals. He suffered a broken nose and scrapes on the back of his head. On Martin's autopsy, the only wound he had other than the gunshot was a cut on his left knuckle. So, from just these two small bits of evidence, he seems pretty innocent to me.

EDIT: Zimmerman answered No and then Yes on the stress test questions.
 

Black Ice

[XV]
610
Posts
18
Years
  • Seen Oct 4, 2023
i have a feeling that truth indicators aren't always accurate

the jury wasn't wrong to make the decision. you can't say someone is guilty when there is reasonable doubt

the media paid more attention to this case than it should have
 
14,092
Posts
14
Years
I am very happy with the outcome.

@Freakylocz: Zimmerman was given a stress voice test quite sooner after the shooting. He was asked if he confronted the man he saw lurking in his neighborhood and also if he was in fear of his life when he shot. Both results came back NDI, which means No Deception Indicated. And what that means is that he was telling the truth.

More evidence in Zimmerman's favor.. On the night of the shooting, when he was examined by medical professionals. He suffered a broken nose and scrapes on the back of his head. On Martin's autopsy, the only wound he had other than the gunshot was a cut on his left knuckle. So, from just these two small bits of evidence, he seems pretty innocent to me.

EDIT: Zimmerman answered No and then Yes on the stress test questions.

And we're basing the outcome of the case on very shaky pseudoscience at best. Which is what polygraphs, etc, are. That's very reassuring.

And none of Zimmerman's DNA was found on Martin's corpse. And let's not forget Zimmerman pursued Martin preceding the altercation. You're not "defending yourself" or "fearful for your life" if you're the one initiating the conflict.
 
2,138
Posts
11
Years
I dunno, grown man with a gun versus a kid. Unless Trayvon knew some crazy ninja stunts and pressure points and all that, Zimmerman had all the advantage in the fight, especially when it goes to the ground. Even given that Travyon was a young punk, I'm not sure when a gun should've entered the picture, but it did. That's my verdict >>

Zimmerman has grass stains on the back of his clothing and lacerations on his head which corroborated his personal statement which claimed that Trayvon had him pinned between his thighs with Zimmerman on his back, and slammed his head into the pavement, which, if I was in the situation, I might assume that great bodily harm or death could be bestowed upon myself. Thus, I should be able to resort to using a fire arm if under such conditions.

Zimmerman was wrong to disregard law enforcement not to question Trayvon about his apparently suspicious behavior, as even a witness on the prosecution had corroborated the suspicious behavior of walking through private property under the eaves of several homes in the night. Rather than casually walking home with some skittles from the store as several media sources had claimed.
Though, you cannot be charged with manslaughter on the basis that you were physically confronted when questioning someone engaging in suspicious, and yes, illegal behavior of trespassing on private property.

The whole idea that race was a factor in the media portrayal is preposterous. ABC even edited Zimmerman's 911 call to make him appear to be racially driven. Then, in court, they aired the entire dialogue, and the statement was completely altered. Who's to say Zimmerman would not have been concerned if a Latino or White young man had been behaving in that manner.

There was little to no physical evidence that corroborated the claim that Zimmerman was race-driven, was the aggressor, or used excessive force. In order to be found guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt requires around 75-90% of the evidence in favor of the prosecutor as the burden of proof. The prosecutor had less than half, his witnesses continuously corroborated Zimmerman's account or were self-contradictory. How can we convict a man of a crime when there is no evidence to support it? Like any case, high visibility cases tend to drive the public to label the defendant guilty prematurely. with the false reporting of media news sources, given that they were revealed as fabrications given the evidence shown in the trial, this contradicts what a proficient justice system should entail. Further, given the lack of evidence to charge, the fabrication and public outcry forced the arraignment, which would not have occurred without such fabrication and attention given there was inadequate evidentiary support.

The whole facebook hostility is ridiculous and undermines the justice system, and therefore the law of the land which establishes stability. There needs to be reforms made to newsmedia reporting and fabrication involving criminal proceedings. They should not have free speech to perpetuate false information. They may give any opinion they please, but the evidence and summary of proceedings cannot remain free of consequence as it detracts from the public good disjointing judicial outcome based on fact with sentiment based on sensationalism.
 

Tyrael

This is a Sailor's Prayer
373
Posts
11
Years
And we're basing the outcome of the case on very shaky pseudoscience at best. Which is what polygraphs, etc, are. That's very reassuring.

And none of Zimmerman's DNA was found on Martin's corpse. And let's not forget Zimmerman pursued Martin preceding the altercation. You're not "defending yourself" or "fearful for your life" if you're the one initiating the conflict.

He got out of his truck to find what cross street he was on when he was asked by the 911 operator.

I'm not even going to get into it with you about your other statement. If the shoe would have been on the opposite foot you would be claiming how they should have just listened to the polygraph when he failed it. If you deny that, I would have to say you're the dumbest excuse for a human i've ever met.

Actually, I will go ahead and get into this with you. You claim it's a "pseudoscience" at best. But after it being tested multiple thousands, if not millions of times, with very favorable results indicating that it is able to be used to distinguish between truth and lies.. It would seem like it's quite a bit more than just something that has no proof to back it up.
 
5,983
Posts
15
Years
Actually, I will go ahead and get into this with you. You claim it's a "pseudoscience" at best. But after it being tested multiple thousands, if not millions of times, with very favorable results indicating that it is able to be used to distinguish between truth and lies.. It would seem like it's quite a bit more than just something that has no proof to back it up.

No, that's just plain speculation. Polygraphs don't have favourable results, in fact the NAS have determined that there is little basis that polygraphs have high accuracy. It's not quite a bit more than no proof, it's rectum-derived.

You can beat polygraphs by just being confident, or in his case, unconfident and worked up. Just because he was worked up does not mean he had a legitimate reason to be worked up. We all know people who get wayy too excited under stress for no good reason. That's why Zimmerman is described as overzealous, that he would see a kid as a threat. He's not lying when if he says he saw Trayvon as a threat, I'm sure he believed that. But his judgment would then be questionable.
 

Purple Materia

Shape the future!
785
Posts
13
Years
  • Age 29
  • Seen Apr 12, 2014
You remembered wrong. The prosecution's case had more holes in it that a block of swiss cheese. This innocent man has received justice today, showing that our legal system isn't completely lost... yet.

Like I said, I didn't follow it. So I wouldn't really know.
 

Keiran

[b]Rock Solid[/b]
2,455
Posts
12
Years
You remembered wrong. The prosecution's case had more holes in it that a block of swiss cheese. This innocent man has received justice today, showing that our legal system isn't completely lost... yet.

The prosecution did fine. I do not understand the ignorant claim that the prosecution failed. The testimony of every medical examiner was enough to convict Zimmerman. He only got away with self defense because racism turned the case into a black kid giving someone a bloody nose (which was the only proven event of self defense in the entire scenario, and was in Trayvons/the states favour). Self-defense should not be an option for the one who started the conflict, especially when advised not to, especially when armed vs. unarmed, and most especially when they pursued the victim because of racial profiling.

But your right, Freaky, our legal system can't fail people it never was meant to, or intends to, protect.
 
10,078
Posts
15
Years
  • Age 32
  • UK
  • Seen Oct 17, 2023
One thing that I feel hasn't been mentioned in this thread...

Are there any witnesses? I haven't heard of any on the BBC or reading comments. If so, it is just the words of one man against a dead boy who can not defend himself.

Whilst there may be doubt that he can be convicted for murder, I certainly feel like there should be repercussions for killing someone. As many have said, this isn't clear-cut self defense.


Also:
Spoiler:
 
14,092
Posts
14
Years
He got out of his truck to find what cross street he was on when he was asked by the 911 operator.

I'm not even going to get into it with you about your other statement. If the shoe would have been on the opposite foot you would be claiming how they should have just listened to the polygraph when he failed it. If you deny that, I would have to say you're the dumbest excuse for a human i've ever met.

Actually, I will go ahead and get into this with you. You claim it's a "pseudoscience" at best. But after it being tested multiple thousands, if not millions of times, with very favorable results indicating that it is able to be used to distinguish between truth and lies.. It would seem like it's quite a bit more than just something that has no proof to back it up.

Oh boy


There's a reason polygraphs aren't widely used anymore. Because, buddy, it's dated. News flash, it's not 1950 anymore. And it's very, very far from being a perfected science. It may be able to deduce deception to a degree, but not perfectly. That's a fact.

So no, if the shoe was 'on the other foot', I would not be basing the crux of my argument around a 90 year old lie detection method. Something modern and more fool-proof, like DNA, perhaps.
 
Back
Top