Trayvon Martin's last photo - Graphic

[Darnell 8,479]

i'm dreading the verdict, actually. i mean i want all this to end, but i'm weary the fallout (here, i don't expect the apocalypse or anything)

I'm hoping for race riots in Sanford, FL. Lots of property destruction and what-nots.

Yes, Yes, I'm a war-profiteer, you betcha.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

If memory serves me correct, didn't he say he was about 19 during the call to the police?

He said "late teens" and later in that same call referred to him as "the kid".

[spookyturtle 9,466]

That's the real tragedy of it. Well said.

I sincerely mean that. It is upsetting enough under the usual circumstances, car accidents and the like. But all of these drive by shootings and pre teens being killed is tragic. Maybe TM hadn't been a model of perfect behavior, but he didn't warrant what some here have said about him. But then again, consider the sources of the most idiotic statements.

He said "late teens" and later in that same call referred to him as "the kid".

I call people in their 20's kids. I guess that makes me guilty too?

Edited July 13, 2013 by spookyturtle

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

The injuries resulted from the fight that occurred. They were minor. That's not some extreme or fanatic view, that was the medical testimony at trial. That was what both a medical examiner and the RNP that evaluated Zimmermann testified to. That is what is clear to anyone that has ever been medically tended to by a first response unit. That's a fact. There is no dispute that they were involved in a scuffle. There is no dispute that Zimmermann took a blow to his nose. There are three incompatible and - among those - one impossible way in which Martin allegedly initiated the attack on Zimmermann. The most fantastic of those being the one where the teen is jumping out of a bush that doesn't even exist. How can you believe anything that Zimmermann claims in terms of how that altercation started?

And for the 100th time and as explained by the judge, the severity of his injuries has nothing to do with act of self defense or the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt.

You keep repeating the same old wrong information. odd for a comprehension expert.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

And for the hundredth time, no one has claimed he suffered severe injuries. Not even George himself. I'll bet I can bash your head and knock you out with nary a scratch. You're out cold, but no severe injury, correct?

And how can you not believe anything he says? His account of the events was satisfactory for 40+ days. No charges would ever have been filed if the DA didn't cave to public pressure. If it is as obvious as you and the other TM fanatics like to think, he would have been charged very early on. But of course you guys will pretend like that didn't happen. But you are open minded.

Trevor Dooley was arrested and charged following public pressure. And he was eventually convicted by a jury of manslaughter. The fact that Zimmermann was not immediately arrested and charged does not mean that he should not ever have been arrested for and charged. And the fact that he was not immediately arrested and charged does not make his varying accounts any more consistent with each other or with the available evidence.

[spookyturtle 9,466]

I wish I could copy and paste the pertinent parts of the jury instructions. I highly recommend reading them in their entirety.

Trevor Dooley was arrested and charged following public pressure. And he was eventually convicted by a jury of manslaughter. The fact that Zimmermann was not immediately arrested and charged does not mean that he should not ever have been arrested for and charged. And the fact that he was not immediately arrested and charged does not make his varying accounts any more consistent with each other or with the available evidence.

You are obtuse. I think you even beat out Steven.

[Karee 4,191]

I'm hoping for race riots in Sanford, FL. Lots of property destruction and what-nots.

Yes, Yes, I'm a war-profiteer, you betcha.

Check out Chernobyl. I bet land is cheap there as well.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

And for the 100th time and as explained by the judge, the severity of his injuries has nothing to do with act of self defense or the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt.

You keep repeating the same old wrong information. odd for a comprehension expert.

There you go again refuting claims I did not make. My post was specifically in response to the ridiculous speculation that Martin wildly bashed Zimermann's head into the concrete and pounded him repeatedly. There is NO physical evidence - none - that supports that account of the defendant. Remember: Context. It's the foundation for reading comprehension. But you're a lost cause on that.

Now, justifiable use of deadly force (from the very instructions given to this jury): ...to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force.

And lastly, here's what reasonable doubt means: A reasonable doubt is not a mere possible doubt, a speculative, imaginary or forced doubt. Such a doubt must not influence you to return a verdict of not guilty if you have anabiding conviction of guilt.

So the prosecution doe snot need to prove beond the most ridiculous doubt but only beyond a reasonable doubt. So if the jurors believe, beyond a reasonable doubt that the use of deadly force by Zimmermann was not justified based based on the above, then they must find him guilty. And that they will.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I wish I could copy and paste the pertinent parts of the jury instructions. I highly recommend reading them in their entirety.

I have. I even pasted a couple of interesting parts in a previous post. Seemed time to remove the fantasy that all it takes is for Georgie to get his panties in a wad to justify his killing the teen. That's not enough. The bar is higher than that. It requires that a reasonably cautious and prudent person would feel that use of deadly force is the only way to avert danger to oneself. And it is also important to remember that not every doubt is a reasonable doubt. The instructions are very clear on that as well.

[spookyturtle 9,466]

JUSTIFIABLE USE OF DEADLY FORCE
An issue in this case is whether George Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It is a defense to the crime of Second Degree Murder, and the lesser included offense of Manslaughter, if the death ofTrayvon Martin resulted from the justifiable use of deadly force.
“Deadly force” means force likely to cause death or great bodily harm.

A person is justified in using deadly force if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself.
In deciding whether George Zimmerman was justified in the use of deadly force, you must judge him by the circumstances by which he was surrounded at the time the force was used. The danger facing George Zimmerman need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, George Zimmerman must have actually believed that the danger was real.

If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

In considering the issue of self-defense, you may take into account the relative physical abilities and capacities of George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin.
If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether George Zimmerman was justified in the use of deadly force, you should find George Zimmerman not guilty.

However, if from the evidence you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that George Zimmerman was not justified in the use of deadly force, you should find him guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

JUSTIFIABLE USE OF DEADLY FORCE

An issue in this case is whether George Zimmerman acted in self-defense. It is a defense to the crime of Second Degree Murder, and the lesser included offense of Manslaughter, if the death ofTrayvon Martin resulted from the justifiable use of deadly force.

“Deadly force” means force likely to cause death or great bodily harm.

A person is justified in using deadly force if he reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself.

In deciding whether George Zimmerman was justified in the use of deadly force, you must judge him by the circumstances by which he was surrounded at the time the force was used. The danger facing George Zimmerman need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, George Zimmerman must have actually believed that the danger was real.

If George Zimmerman was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

In considering the issue of self-defense, you may take into account the relative physical abilities and capacities of George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin.

If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether George Zimmerman was justified in the use of deadly force, you should find George Zimmerman not guilty.

However, if from the evidence you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that George Zimmerman was not justified in the use of deadly force, you should find him guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved.

As many of us have said over and over and over. This is the law. The extent of his injuries, if he followed etc etc have nothing to do with the law.

Some people can not comprehend or can't understand or read or whatever .

[spookyturtle 9,466]

PLEA OF NOT GUILTY; REASONABLE DOUBT; AND BURDEN OF PROOF
George Zimmerman has entered a plea of not guilty. This means you must presume or believeGeorge Zimmerman is innocent. The presumption stays with George Zimmerman as to each material allegation in the Information through each stage of the trial unless it has been overcome by the evidence to the exclusion of and beyond a reasonable doubt.

To overcome George Zimmerman’s presumption of innocence, the State has the burden of proving the crime with which George Zimmerman is charged was committed and George Zimmerman is the person who committed the crime.
George Zimmerman is not required to present evidence or prove anything.
Whenever the words "reasonable doubt" are used you must consider the following:

A reasonable doubt is not a mere possible doubt, a speculative, imaginary or forced doubt. Such a doubt must not influence you to return a verdict of not guilty if you have an abiding conviction of guilt. On the other hand if, after carefully considering, comparing and weighing all the evidence, there is not an abiding conviction of guilt, or, if having a conviction, it is one which is not stable but one which wavers and vacillates, then the charge is not proved beyond every reasonable doubt and you must find George Zimmerman not guilty because the doubt is reasonable.

It is to the evidence introduced in this trial, and to it alone, that you are to look for that proof.
A reasonable doubt as to the guilt of George Zimmerman may arise from the evidence, conflict in the evidence, or the lack of evidence.
If you have a reasonable doubt, you should find George Zimmerman not guilty. If you have no reasonable doubt, you should find George Zimmerman guilty.

It's all right here:

http://www.ktvu.com/news/news/national/document-instructions-george-zimmerman-jury/nYnqZ/

[spookyturtle 9,466]

As many of us have said over and over and over. This is the law. The extent of his injuries, if he followed etc etc have nothing to do with the law.

Some people can not comprehend or can't understand or read or whatever .

I think they choose to ignore anything that doesn't fit their neatly wrapped version of what happened. Some of the jury instructions really bother them, they fear that the jury may actually be impartial and objective people, unlike their biased selves. So they ignore the the parts that they don't like and dismiss them without logic.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

As many of us have said over and over and over. This is the law. The extent of his injuries, if he followed etc etc have nothing to do with the law.

Some people can not comprehend or can't understand or read or whatever .

...to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force.

I don't see how that applies to Zimmermann.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

I think they choose to ignore anything that doesn't fit their neatly wrapped version of what happened. Some of the jury instructions really bother them, they fear that the jury may actually be impartial and objective people, unlike their biased selves. So they ignore the the parts that they don't like and dismiss them without logic.

As I have said a million times, he would walk if I was on the jury and I think he should. However i can say that I think he may not. If he does not , we all need to move on as a nation.

If he does walk.,same thing. Accept the verdict and let's move on.

I do think if somehow he gets 2nd degree it will be over turned quickly