Trial experts say its going to be hard to convict George Zimmerman

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

On the subject of riots, there is a great chance there will be one but keep in its not going to be so much from the community but people using it as an opportunity for looting.

When I look back at the Oscar Grant case, there were people pouring in to Oakland from far away just to steal.

Yep. Same thing with the Rodney King riots. Of course, I blame LAPD for both creating the impetus for the riots, and being such wimpass cowards for fleeing the area, once the looting began.

[Darnell 8,478]

I really hope it's the Million Man March into Sanford FL.

Then when they finish the march, raze the white parts of the city to the ground.

That'd be a plus, all the way round.

I blame moral decay......AYE!!

Exactly !! Yay !

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I really hope it's the Million Man March into Sanford FL.

Then when they finish the march, raze the white parts of the city to the ground.

That'd be a plus, all the way round.

The city of Sanford is fairly integrated. The surrounding unincorporated areas of Seminole county are much whiter by contrast.

[Darnell 8,478]

Yup, I know that.

But if the 'white parts' of Sanford are razed to the ground, then more AA folk from the North will come in, buy up these 'areas' and Sanford will become a 'totally black enclave'.

That's a good thing, all the way round, for future generations ...

Edited June 4, 2013 by Darnell

[RGinWA 816]

This case is far from cut & dry. I believe GZ was wrong for following TM after being told not to by police dispatch, but nobody except GZ really knows what happened after that. Perhaps it was TM that elevated the dangerous situation by attacking GZ and he beared the responsibility of his actions?

Without the "confrontation" there would be no fight and subsequent shooting.

No matter what happened, GZ decided to get involved on his own. That's the cut and dry part.

GZ should have just called the police and let them harass the kid, but he wanted to be a hero. That makes him responsible for the outcome. That's just my opinion.

[Teddy B 17,252]

We don't even know what happened after the police told GZ not to follow TM. He may have ignored the advice or he may have done as he was told. We don't know the whole story and we most likely never will. Does GZ deserve jail time if we're not sure what happened?

I really wouldn't want to be on that jury.

I believe the recording of the 911 call by GZ has him stating that he would not stop following TM, because "they always get away". If TM attacked GZ for following him, then TM bears a lot of the blame.

[Teddy B 17,252]

Without the "confrontation" there would be no fight and subsequent shooting.

No matter what happened, GZ decided to get involved on his own. That's the cut and dry part.

GZ should have just called the police and let them harass the kid, but he wanted to be a hero. That makes him responsible for the outcome. That's just my opinion.

Right, and who confronted who? The only thing that is known as fact is that GZ was following TM, that much does noit make GZ responsible for TM's death.

Edited June 4, 2013 by Teddy B

[decocker 7,198]

I believe the recording of the 911 call by GZ has him stating that he would not stop following TM, because "they always get away". If TM attacked GZ for following him, then TM bears a lot of the blame.

if tm attacked gz for following him, wasn't he standing his ground without the benefit of a weapon?

[Teddy B 17,252]

if tm attacked gz for following him, wasn't he standing his ground without the benefit of a weapon?

Possibly, but we don't have the benefit of knowing what was going through TM's mind at the time. Did he feel legitimately threatened, or did he feel he was going to teach GZ a lesson for following him?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Possibly, but we don't have the benefit of knowing what was going through TM's mind at the time. Did he feel legitimately threatened, or did he feel he was going to teach GZ a lesson for following him?

There doesn't seem to be a distinction made by certain folks in the perpetrator's case, why should there be one in the victim's case?

Edited June 4, 2013 by The Patriot

[Teddy B 17,252]

There doesn't seem to be a distinction in the perpetrator's case, why should there be one in the victim's case?

Because without one, GZ walks. It's that innocent until proven guilty thing.

Edited June 4, 2013 by Teddy B

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

not the same thing. not at all.

Yes it is. You can easily predict future actions in many cases by past actions. We already had nation wide protests because GZ was not arrested fast enough. How much more so if the evidence proves him innocent.

Do you honestly think if GZ is proven innocent, the race baiters will just shrug and go ok. Be serious.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Because without one, GZ walks.

The victim is not on trail, the perpetrator is.

[B_J 2,752]

I believe the recording of the 911 call by GZ has him stating that he would not stop following TM, because "they always get away". If TM attacked GZ for following him, then TM bears a lot of the blame.

Actually, Z was still giving directions to the police when he mentioned the part about them always getting away. He then gave more directions and then TM ran. That's when he started chasing him - running after him. After he was told that they didn't need him to chase him, he said okay and they began talking about where Z would meet the police. He didn't say anything even close to meaning that he wouldn't stop following him.

Of course, that doesn't mean he told the truth, but we'll never know.

http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/326700-full-transcript-zimmerman.html

Edited June 4, 2013 by B_J

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Because without one, GZ walks. It's that innocent until proven guilty thing.

Not in a self defense case. The perpetrator already admitted to shooting and killing the victim. The burden of proof is on him to prove it was self defense.