Anyway, I find it to be quite an immature attitude to say that a GUILTY verdict won't be accepted as a sincere judgment of the jury the same as a NOT GUILTY verdict.

That is why we have higher courts to review errant decisions.

Anyway, I find it to be quite an immature attitude to say that a GUILTY verdict won't be accepted as a sincere judgment of the jury the same as a NOT GUILTY verdict.

That is why we have higher courts to review errant decisions.

Good luck with that. You're not on the jury and you think you know. That's a pretty arrogant attitude. Have you ever served on a jury? I have and I hung it. The other jurors wanted to lynch me. The U.S. justice system in action.

Post withdrawn.

He may walk.

I'll accept that.

But I'll still think of him as a murderer.

Will he get to carry a gun the same way as before if he walks?

If so, they should change the law so that isn't allowed.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2013/07/10/george_zimmerman_trial_trayvon_martin_s_shooter_is_probably_going_to_walk.html

On the subject of the injuries being minor in terms of medical needs. I can say from personal experience when my head was being bashed into the ground (not sidewalk) it felt like I was being badly hurt and scared me to the point if I had had a gun or knife I would have used it. Later I looked in the mirror and could not see any sign of my head being bashed.

Even the liberal media are coming to their senses. I am just afraid that the jury will unjustly convict on a lesser charge to prevent riots.

George Zimmerman Is Probably Going to Walk, and That’s Not a Bad Thing

Barring any unforeseen complications, George Zimmerman’s defense team is expected to rest its case this afternoon. While the trial’s not over yet, many observers have already made up their minds: Zimmerman will be found not guilty. Last weekend Washington Post writer Gene Weingarten tweeted, “I don't like George Zimmerman, & he caused this to happen, but from what I've read he will, and should, walk.” ABC analyst Dan Abrams wrote, “I just don't see how a jury convicts [Zimmerman] of second degree murder or even manslaughter in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin.” The Fort Lauderdale Sun Sentinel predicted that “unless the prosecution rallies, don’t be shocked if Zimmerman walks away totally free.”

I think they’re right. Over the past two weeks, trial-watchers have seen a lot of things: bad jokes, anguish, rage, odd disparagement of Zimmerman’s physical capabilities. But there’s one thing we haven’t seen: a compelling, factual rebuttal to Zimmerman’s account of what happened the night Trayvon Martin was killed.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2013/07/10/george_zimmerman_trial_trayvon_martin_s_shooter_is_probably_going_to_walk.html

The boy who could give such an account was MURDERED.

ALL OF THE EVIDENCE points to him attacking a man who killed him in self-defence.

ALL OF THE EVIDENCE points to him attacking a man who killed him in self-defence.

If so, why did the murder victim attack the murderer?

He had no history of attacking strangers.

Even if there was an attack, was the attack a threat on Zimmerman's life?

How do you know?

Zimmerman's word?

That's not fair.

Why didn't Zimmerman announce WHO HE WAS?

Even he said he didn't do that. That is outrageous.

He was a threat to the boy and didn't even say who he was.

Why didn't he?

Because he was arrogant lunatic cop wannabe. Because the murderer KNEW he was carrying a gun and the boy he was harassing was unarmed.

Yes it's about the gun. The gun he was not authorized to carry in his HOA watch role.

I still think he won't escape manslaughter. We'll see.

The murderer can't escape that a boy is dead because he was acting like an arrogant cop wannabe. An actual cop would have never murdered that boy. There was no need to murder that boy.

Trayvon attacked Zimmerman because he did not like an adult - especially a "creepy ass cracker" -watching him suspiciously. The evidence that the judge suppressed points to Trayvon being violent and a lawbreaker.

It is up to Zimmerman,whether he thought his life was in danger according to the law. I know that if a 6 foot thuggish looking teenager, that I did not know, attacked me for looking at him, broke my nose, injured my head and threatened to kill me, I would be in fear of my life.

Zimmerman was not a threat to Trayvon, unless Trayvon was doing something illegal.

Zimmerman had no way of knowing that Trayvon would attack him and he had no way of knowing that Trayvon was unarmed. If he wanted to kill someone, he would have had the gun out and shot Trayvon before being attacked.

If Trayvon had attacked a cop he would not have let him get close and would have killed him long before Trayvon had time to strike the first blow.

If Zimmerman had prevented a rape by getting out of his car and keeping his eye on someone that he thought might be a criminal, he would be getting awards.

That's absurd. If cops killed every "suspicious" looking black kid, there would be millions of dead black kids. You do not murder black kids for looking suspicious!

No wonder this trial has been politicized.

If Z-man walks I wouldn't blame people for RIOTING.

If Z-man was black and he murdered an unarmed white kid, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

The "law and order" gun rights people would be on the side of CONVICTING. You can bet on that.

Hogwash. Cops would shoot any suspicious looking black kid who attacked them - just like Zimmerman did.

If Zimmerman was black and a white kid attacked him for no reason, I would support him as much as I do the Hispanic Zimmerman. just like most people would.

Hogwash. Cops would shoot any suspicious looking black kid who attacked them - just like Zimmerman did.

If Zimmerman was black and a white kid attacked him for no reason, I would support him as much as I do the Hispanic Zimmerman. just like most people would.

No they do not. Real cops only kill LEGALLY when they are threatened with deadly force. The kid has SKITTLES. I'm pretty shocked by the lack of caring for the dead kid, a kid who was not looking for any kind of fight that night.

The boy who could give such an account was MURDERED.

there was no boy present however there was a young black man with a bad attitude present

Hogwash. Cops would shoot any suspicious looking black kid who attacked them - just like Zimmerman did.

If Zimmerman was black and a white kid attacked him for no reason, I would support him as much as I do the Hispanic Zimmerman. just like most people would.

No they do not. Real cops only kill LEGALLY when they are threatened with deadly force. The kid has SKITTLES. I'm pretty shocked by the lack of caring for the dead kid, a kid who was not looking for any kind of fight that night.

Attack a cop and see what happens. Martin ATTACKED an innocent man and he paid for it. If Zimmerman had not been armed, he might be the one that was dead.

Nobody seriously believes Zimmerman would be dead. That is so outrageous. Zimmerman wouldn't have acted so recklessly if he didn't know he was packing. That is so obvious. I see the prosecution now is going for lesser charges. Great!

The boy who could give such an account was MURDERED.

there was no boy present however there was a young black man with a bad attitude present

17 is a BOY. Zimmerman faces more time because he murdered a CHILD.

The good judge has allowed manslaughter to be considered in the jury instructions. That's fantastic. Much better chance of nailing the killer.

Also under consider is this 3rd degree murder related to CHILD ABUSE.

The judge is still considering whether to allow that.

Hopefully, she will.

The more charges to consider, the better chance of some kind of conviction.

ALL OF THE EVIDENCE points to him attacking a man who killed him in self-defence.

If so, why did the murder victim attack the murderer?

He had no history of attacking strangers.

Even if there was an attack, was the attack a threat on Zimmerman's life?

How do you know?

Zimmerman's word?

That's not fair.

Why didn't Zimmerman announce WHO HE WAS?

Even he said he didn't do that. That is outrageous.

He was a threat to the boy and didn't even say who he was.

Why didn't he?

Because he was arrogant lunatic cop wannabe. Because the murderer KNEW he was carrying a gun and the boy he was harassing was unarmed.

Yes it's about the gun. The gun he was not authorized to carry in his HOA watch role.

I still think he won't escape manslaughter. We'll see.

The murderer can't escape that a boy is dead because he was acting like an arrogant cop wannabe. An actual cop would have never murdered that boy. There was no need to murder that boy.

Never followed this case as I can't quite understand how it caught the national attention. Seems like a local thing to me. That said, I need to disabuse you of your notion that " An actual cop would have never murdered that boy.". In America now, the local police forces are militarized. Cops will murder just about anyone, with impunity, for no reason whatsoever and will in almost all cases be exonerated of the murder.

A trained cop would have never been in a situation where he would have "had" to murder the unarmed Martin. First of all, he would be identified as a cop. Zimmerman who had an official role and was packing a gun against the rules of his HOA, never even bothered to identify himself. He is GUILTY. There is a dead boy and if he had not acted so recklessly there wouldn't be.

BTW, a manslaughter conviction in Florida involving a gun (don't complain, Zimmerman thought he was responsible enough to carry one and he clearly was not, evidenced the corpse he created) is THIRTY years (at least). So manslaughter isn't chopped liver.

The 3rd degree murder/child abuse carries at least TEN YEARS.

A trained cop would have never been in a situation where he would have "had" to murder the unarmed Martin. First of all, he would be identified as a cop. Zimmerman who had an official role and was packing a gun against the rules of his HOA, never even bothered to identify himself. He is GUILTY. There is a dead boy and if he had not acted so recklessly there wouldn't be.

I'm not saying he's not guilty. He probably is, of manslaughter, I should think, but as I say, I haven't followed it. I'm just saying if he was a cop, nothing at all would be happening now.

OK, the 3rd degree murder option has been denied. So basically this is about manslaughter. There won't be a 2nd degree murder conviction.

The momentum has now changed.

The prosecution's closing statement was very powerful.

They were able to expose several lies of Zimmerman and well establish he was STALKING and FOLLOWING the murder victim, and that the murder victim was actually the one who was AFRAID and RUNNING from his stalker.

A conviction seems probable.

The prosecution has peaked at the right time.

Their strategy which before seemed a train wreck was all in the plan, to have the ammunition for the closing statement.

The "momentum" has not done anything. Bernie did his best to distort the facts in his closing speech and today the defense - with a much better lawyer - will respond. SELF DEFENSE rules out 2nd degree murder or manslaughter and this was a clear cut case of self-defense.

False anger, bad acting, swearing and conspiracy theories from someone who is supposed to prove murder beyond a reasonable doubt do not win a case if the jury are doing their job..

The "swearing" you allude to were quotes from the murderer.

The momentum has definitely changed.

Self defense, it's a crock. Zimmerman PROVOKED the boy because he had a GUN.

There is no evidence at all to support your accusations, but plenty that Trayvon was the aggressor.

There is no evidence at all to support your accusations, but plenty that Trayvon was the aggressor.

No way is the jury going to believe the murder victim who had picked up SKITTLES to go watch a sporting event with a younger relative was looking for a fight with an arrogant cop wannabe who had falsely profiled him as a CRIMINAL, that didn't even bother to say WHAT OFFICIAL ROLE HE WAS PLAYING. The passion to keep this child killer out of jail amazes me.

He was a criminal. He attacked someone for nothing illegal, broke his nose, injured his head and also allegedly threatened to kill him.

He was a criminal. He attacked someone for nothing illegal, broke his nose, injured his head and also allegedly threatened to kill him.

It is not rational to assume the murder victim "attacked" the murderer without cause. The injuries were trivial. The murderer clearly lied about chasing the victim even saying that the murder victim had been SKIPPING, not running a way. Clearly a lie. Clearly the murderer is a liar who was schooled in the law about self defense as a pathetic cop wannabe. Allegedly threatened to kill him? The only person who said that is the liar ZImmerman. That is proof of nothing.

They were in a fight. Clearly the murderer provoked an innocent boy walking home with skittles. You don't get to shoot a boy in cold blood with a gun because you were losing a regular fight that YOU provoked without getting serious jail time. That's where this killer is headed, a long term in jail on a MANSLAUGHTER conviction.

There is no evidence at all that Zimmerman provoked the fight, but there is plenty of evidence that Trayvon broke Zimmerman's nose and injured his head. Breaking someone's nose is very painful. It is only "trivial" to someone that it has not happened to.

If Zimmerman had not stopped Trayvon's attacks, he may have been killed. Zimmerman acted legally in every way. Trayvon was the one who broke the law. It is sad that Travon is dead, but if you viciously attack someone that you don't even know, simply for looking at you, there are consequences.

I am sure we have all been bothered by the actions of others at some point in our life. Most of us have not made the choice to physically attack our offender. Martin may have been a minor but he was big and a bully and a bad boy who made the decision to beat up the wrong spic.