GEORGE ZIMMERMAN

[Choir Loft]

The question before us today is whether we as a nation shall be ruled by the law or by the lynch mob.

At what point is Mr. Zimmerman assumed to be guilty? Is evidence sufficient to convict beyond a reasonable doubt (that is the method of law)? Did the unanimous vote of the jury provide ample justice of innocence?

Does a man have the right to defend his own life with lethal force?

At what point does race and ignorance decide an issue instead of law, evidence and formal trial?

Does the Federal government have real jurisdiction in this case according to law or can it insinuate itself into the debate simply because it has the military power to do so?

At what point did forgiveness become an obsolete term?

[keithprosser3]

At what point does race and ignorance decide an issue instead of law, evidence and formal trial?

When the police decide, not a court?

[Dantalion]

Of course the result of the jury vote is to be respected, even if I'm not convinced they made the right call here.

[keithprosser3]

At least now we have a jury result to respect. It seems a lot of people didn't think that was important.

[Angel]

Accidental double post.

[Angel]

The question before us today is whether we as a nation shall be ruled by the law or by the lynch mob.

At what point is Mr. Zimmerman assumed to be guilty? Is evidence sufficient to convict beyond a reasonable doubt (that is the method of law)? Did the unanimous vote of the jury provide ample justice of innocence?

I am not a supporter of Zimmerman and admittedly, I sympathize more with Trayvon, but I'm also willing to admit that the prosecution did not prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, going by current laws, I agree with the not guilty verdict.

Does a man have the right to defend his own life with lethal force?

I believe everyone has the right to defend themselves against physical harm but if you were the initiator, you should be charged with assault, at the least.

At what point does race and ignorance decide an issue instead of law, evidence and formal trial?

Well I don't know if race or ignorance was an issue with the jury, but I'd rather point most of my disagreement on the law. Following someone should be made illegal and should be considered a threat, especially if the person following someone has a gun.

At what point did forgiveness become an obsolete term?

After Zimmerman confesses and repent - assuming he did anything wrong. I also don't believe that punishment and forgiveness are incompatible. So if Zimmerman did something wrong, then I'd hope he'd get some form of punishment and in the meanwhile people can also forgive him.

[scourge99]

[Replying to post 1 by Choir Loft]

Based on the evidence I've read/heard about Zimmerman I'm fairly certain he is innocent of murder 2. Innocent of manslaughter? Not so sure about that one.

[Philbert]

What exactly happened?

I know Zimmerman was following Martin from a distance.

Who closed that distance and brought them face to face?

All the coverage, and I still don't know....

[scourge99]

What exactly happened?

I know Zimmerman was following Martin from a distance.

Who closed that distance and brought them face to face?

All the coverage, and I still don't know....

According to Zimmerman, he saw someone suspicious walking through the neighborhood so he followed him in his car. Trayvon starts to run when he knows he's being followed at which point Zimmerman loses track of him and gets out of his car to find him. Zimmerman fails to find him and while walking back to his car is confronted by Trayvon. Some words are exchanged and Trayvon attacks Zimmerman, mounts him and begins slamming Zimmermans head against the pavement. Zimmerman, fearing for his life, pulls out his gun and fatally shoots Trayvon.

That's Zimmerman's story. The only eyewitness story we have. Its possible that Zimmerman provoked or attacked Trayvon in any number of ways which would make it manslaughter.

[Philbert]

Zimmerman fails to find him and while walking back to his car is confronted by Trayvon.

To me, this seems the heart of it, who confronted who?

Was this question a focus of the trial, does anyone know?