Zimmerman not guilty in Trayvon Martin death: Florida jury

[Chicog]

Most legal experts said the jury ruled the only way that they could if they were to follow the law. Second guessing them is pretty useless.

I would have been amazed if they'd ruled any other way given the evidence before them.

[Steely Dan]

I think those who are so keen to label Zimmerman a racist should consider the following, but let's face it Zimmerman and Martin are just pawns in the very undemocratic agenda of some zealots, for whom the end justifies any means regardless of truth, justice or due process.

http://www.examiner.com/article/ignored-by-media-zimmerman-voted-for-obama-tutored-black-kids

Researchable and legitimate source examples of Zimmerman's past history of working with and for blacks include:

• "He and a black friend opened up an insurance office in a Florida..."
• "He'd engaged in notably un-racist behaviour such as taking a black girl to his high-school prom..."
• "Not only does he have black relatives, he has reportedly donated his time to tutor black children."
• "He launched a campaign to help a homeless black man who was beaten up by a white kid."

[Scott]

Off-topic post and replies have been deleted.

[kikoman]

Juror B37 stated that she disregarded the lady that was on the phone with Trayvon because she was inadequate , uneducated with no communication skills, not on the evidence she testified to, The only part of the testimony she consider was the statement attributed to Trayvon "Creepy ass Cracka" She considered it because it was the truth! This was stated in the TV interview with CNN's. Anderson Cooper.

Also Juror B37 when asked did the answer Detective Serino gave if it influenced her, she answered "Yes Greatly", the host then showed the Judge ordering the answer stricken and for the Jury to disregard the answer, Juror B37 failed to disregard it as ordered by the Judge ( Same interview).

On May 10, 2013, in the State of Florida v. George Zimmerman filed "State's Motion To Limit/Exclude Improper Opinion Evidence"

"The State of Florida, by and thought the undersigned Assistant State Attorney, hereby files the Motion in the above-Captioned proceeding.

The Defendant has indicated via questioning in pre-trial proceedings that he apparently intends to attempt to argue or introduce opinion testimony from one or more witnesses as to their opinion, prior to and/or after Defendant's arrest, as to his guilt or the propriety of being criminal charged.

Such testimony (be it from Defendant's family members, civilians, or even law enforcement personnel) is improper."

Judge Debra Nelson granted the State's Motion. No opinion evidence pertaining to George Zimmerman's guilt, innocence, nor "the propriety of his being criminally charged) was allowed during the trial.

Juror B37 has reportedly signed with a "literary agent" and announced that she intends to write a book.,Sharlene Martin, President of Martin Literary Management, represents Juror B37 in obtaining a book deal.In her news release, Sharlene Martin has stated that the jury in the George Zimmerman case decided he was not guilty.... due to the manner in which he was charged and the content of the jury instructions,"

The jury based it decision on information not presented at Trial

Juror B37, or another juror able to persuade her, had already formed an opinion that George Zimmerman should not have been charged and therefore, the evidence presented by State prosecutors at trial was never going to be considered in determining the defendant's guilt or innocence.

By the jury deciding that George Zimmerman should not have been charged, he effectively did not stand trial to determine guilt or innocence. A decision of not guilty by a jury cannot be reversed. However, with the release of this information by Juror B37's literary agent. There should be an investigation that fraud was committed on the court to, and that, undermined the integrity of the judicial process.

Cheers:

Edited July 18, 2013 by kikoman

[Jingthing]

The jurors could relate to Zimmerman. They could not relate to his murder victim. Zimmerman may have gotten a fair trial by his peers. The boy he shot dead in cold blood didn't.

[SteeleJoe]

Juror B37 stated that she disregarded the lady that was on the phone with Trayvon because she was was inadequate , uneducated with no communication skills, not on the evidence she testified to, The only part of the testimony she consider was the statement attributed to Trayvon "Creepy ass Cracka" She considered it because it was the truth! This was stated in the TV interview with CNN's. Anderson Cooper.

Also Juror B37 when asked did the answer Detective Serino gave if it influenced her, she answered "Yes Greatly", the host then showed the Judge ordering the answer stricken and for the Jury to disregard the answer, Juror B37 failed to disregard it as ordered by the Judge ( Same interview).

On May 10, 2013, in the State of Florida v. George Zimmerman filed "State's Motion To Limit/Exclude Improper Opinion Evidence"

"The State of Florida, by and thought the undersigned Assistant State Attorney, hereby files the Motion in the above-Captioned proceeding.

The Defendant has indicated via questioning in pre-trial proceedings that he apparently intends to attempt to argue or introduce opinion testimony from one or more witnesses as to their opinion, prior to and/or after Defendant's arrest, as to his guilt or the propriety of being criminal charged.

Such testimony (be it from Defendant's family members, civilians, or even law enforcement personnel) is improper."

Judge Debra Nelson granted the State's Motion. No opinion evidence pertaining to George Zimmerman's guilt, innocence, nor "the propriety of his being criminally charged) was allowed during the trial.

Juror B37 has reportedly signed with a "literary agent" and announced that she intends to write a book.,Sharlene Martin, President of Martin Literary Management, represents Juror B37 in obtaining a book deal.In her news release, Sharlene Martin has stated that the jury in the George Zimmerman case decided he was not guilty.... due to the manner in which he was charged and the content of the jury instructions,"

The jury based it decision on information not presented at Trial

Juror B37, or another juror able to persuade her, had already formed an opinion that George Zimmerman should not have been charged and therefore, the evidence presented by State prosecutors at trial was never going to be considered in determining the defendant's guilt or innocence.

By the jury deciding that George Zimmerman should not have been charged, he effectively did not stand trial to determine guilt or innocence. A decision of not guilty by a jury cannot be reversed. However, with the release of this information by Juror B37's literary agent. There should be an investigation that fraud was committed on the court to, and that, undermined the integrity of the judicial process.

Cheers:

If your post is a C&P of someone else's thinking, research and writing the correct thing to do is credit the source.

[SteeleJoe]

The jurors could relate to Zimmerman. They could not relate to his murder victim. Zimmerman may have gotten a fair trial by his peers. The boy he shot dead in cold blood didn't.

You are being silly now. Trayvon wasn't on trial. Your comment doesn't make any sense even metaphorically and even less in terms of US jurisprudence and arguably the very basis of western law (and the same goes for your previous ones about Trayvon not being able to testify etc)

And "in cold blood" is the sort of deliberately loaded rhetoric the other side likes to use but which is juts plain false: from all accounts there was nothing cold blooded about the killing and it was very much in the midst of a heated conflict.

I don't blame you a bit for feeling passionate about this or for feeling the situation is unjust, but - and I mean no offense - even if you are right, you discredit your self with this sort of post.

Edited July 18, 2013 by SteeleJoe

[SteeleJoe]

"I don't blame you a bit for feeling passionate about this or for feeling the situation is unjust, but - and I mean no offense - even if you are right, you discredit your self with this sort of post."

By the way, I could have said essentially the same thing to many of the Zimmerman supporters but I generally see no point in trying with such blind zealots. It is a measure of relative regard and the degree to which I share your view to some extent, that I say it to you.

[NeverSure]

Juror B37 stated that she disregarded the lady that was on the phone with Trayvon because she was inadequate , uneducated with no communication skills, not on the evidence she testified to, The only part of the testimony she consider was the statement attributed to Trayvon "Creepy ass Cracka" She considered it because it was the truth! This was stated in the TV interview with CNN's. Anderson Cooper.

Also Juror B37 when asked did the answer Detective Serino gave if it influenced her, she answered "Yes Greatly", the host then showed the Judge ordering the answer stricken and for the Jury to disregard the answer, Juror B37 failed to disregard it as ordered by the Judge ( Same interview).

On May 10, 2013, in the State of Florida v. George Zimmerman filed "State's Motion To Limit/Exclude Improper Opinion Evidence"

"The State of Florida, by and thought the undersigned Assistant State Attorney, hereby files the Motion in the above-Captioned proceeding.

The Defendant has indicated via questioning in pre-trial proceedings that he apparently intends to attempt to argue or introduce opinion testimony from one or more witnesses as to their opinion, prior to and/or after Defendant's arrest, as to his guilt or the propriety of being criminal charged.

Such testimony (be it from Defendant's family members, civilians, or even law enforcement personnel) is improper."

Judge Debra Nelson granted the State's Motion. No opinion evidence pertaining to George Zimmerman's guilt, innocence, nor "the propriety of his being criminally charged) was allowed during the trial.

Juror B37 has reportedly signed with a "literary agent" and announced that she intends to write a book.,Sharlene Martin, President of Martin Literary Management, represents Juror B37 in obtaining a book deal.In her news release, Sharlene Martin has stated that the jury in the George Zimmerman case decided he was not guilty.... due to the manner in which he was charged and the content of the jury instructions,"

The jury based it decision on information not presented at Trial

Juror B37, or another juror able to persuade her, had already formed an opinion that George Zimmerman should not have been charged and therefore, the evidence presented by State prosecutors at trial was never going to be considered in determining the defendant's guilt or innocence.

By the jury deciding that George Zimmerman should not have been charged, he effectively did not stand trial to determine guilt or innocence. A decision of not guilty by a jury cannot be reversed. However, with the release of this information by Juror B37's literary agent. There should be an investigation that fraud was committed on the court to, and that, undermined the integrity of the judicial process.

Cheers: alt=wai2.gif width=20 height=20>

Yes, you should give credit to were you get your information.

Your lack of understanding of American jurisprudence in appalling.

As the trial begins, the judge instructs the jury on the law. The jury may form opinions about the charges, legally, from that.

Again just before the jury deliberates, the judge again gives the jury instructions on how to deliberate and on what the law is.

These are the things you are quoting, especially in bold, showing your lack of understanding of how things work.

Get over it. The trial is over, the jury has ruled, and Zimmerman is not guilty.

[SteeleJoe]

Juror B37 stated that she disregarded the lady that was on the phone with Trayvon because she was inadequate , uneducated with no communication skills, not on the evidence she testified to, The only part of the testimony she consider was the statement attributed to Trayvon "Creepy ass Cracka" She considered it because it was the truth! This was stated in the TV interview with CNN's. Anderson Cooper.

Also Juror B37 when asked did the answer Detective Serino gave if it influenced her, she answered "Yes Greatly", the host then showed the Judge ordering the answer stricken and for the Jury to disregard the answer, Juror B37 failed to disregard it as ordered by the Judge ( Same interview).

On May 10, 2013, in the State of Florida v. George Zimmerman filed "State's Motion To Limit/Exclude Improper Opinion Evidence"

"The State of Florida, by and thought the undersigned Assistant State Attorney, hereby files the Motion in the above-Captioned proceeding.

The Defendant has indicated via questioning in pre-trial proceedings that he apparently intends to attempt to argue or introduce opinion testimony from one or more witnesses as to their opinion, prior to and/or after Defendant's arrest, as to his guilt or the propriety of being criminal charged.

Such testimony (be it from Defendant's family members, civilians, or even law enforcement personnel) is improper."

Judge Debra Nelson granted the State's Motion. No opinion evidence pertaining to George Zimmerman's guilt, innocence, nor "the propriety of his being criminally charged) was allowed during the trial.

Juror B37 has reportedly signed with a "literary agent" and announced that she intends to write a book.,Sharlene Martin, President of Martin Literary Management, represents Juror B37 in obtaining a book deal.In her news release, Sharlene Martin has stated that the jury in the George Zimmerman case decided he was not guilty.... due to the manner in which he was charged and the content of the jury instructions,"

The jury based it decision on information not presented at Trial

Juror B37, or another juror able to persuade her, had already formed an opinion that George Zimmerman should not have been charged and therefore, the evidence presented by State prosecutors at trial was never going to be considered in determining the defendant's guilt or innocence.

By the jury deciding that George Zimmerman should not have been charged, he effectively did not stand trial to determine guilt or innocence. A decision of not guilty by a jury cannot be reversed. However, with the release of this information by Juror B37's literary agent. There should be an investigation that fraud was committed on the court to, and that, undermined the integrity of the judicial process.

Cheers: alt=wai2.gif width=20 height=20>

Yes, you should give credit to were you get your information.

Your lack of understanding of American jurisprudence in appalling.

As the trial begins, the judge instructs the jury on the law. The jury may form opinions about the charges, legally, from that.

Again just before the jury deliberates, the judge again gives the jury instructions on how to deliberate and on what the law is.

These are the things you are quoting, especially in bold, showing your lack of understanding of how things work.

Get over it. The trial is over, the jury has ruled, and Zimmerman is not guilty.

He deliberately left out a key segment of the bolder statement. In its entirety, it was:

"The reader will also learn why the jurors HAD NO OPTION but to find Zimmerman not guilty due to the manner in which he was charged and the content of the jury instructions," Martin had said Monday. (emphasis mine)

Moreover this was a statement made when Martin had rescinded her offer to represent and the decision had been made to NOT write the book.

An article in USA Today - which has some of the same stuff Kikoman passed off as his own - also said:

"But she added that she and other jurors nevertheless felt a lot of sympathy for what happened to Trayvon and that she wished she could have given his family "the verdict they wanted."

"I don't want people to think that we didn't think about Trayvon Martin," she said, her voice appearing to crack with emotion. "We did."

She said that the jury deliberations were intense. She said she and others wanted to find something they could convict Zimmerman of, but there was nothing legally that they could do.

"I wanted to find him guilty of not using his senses, but you can't fault anybody," she said of Zimmerman. "You can't charge him with anything because he didn't do anything unlawful." "

However:

"Late Tuesday, the 18th Judicial Circuit court in Florida issued a statement from four other jurors in the Zimmerman case, who said juror B-37's opinions "were her own, and not in any way representative" of their views."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/07/16/george-zimmerman-juror-book-drops-plan/2520159/

[JLCrab]

Going so soon? I wouldn't hear of it. Why my little party's just beginning. -- The Wicked Witch of the West in The Wizard of Oz

Here's what may be upcoming for those who choose to linger:

A possible US Federal Civil rights trial against G. Zimmerman for violating the deceased's civil rights

A possible wrongful death civil suit by Mr. Martin's Family *

A boycott of the State of Florida's tourism and cruise industry

A boycott of orange juice processed in Florida (even though most of it comes from Brazil)

The refusal of black and maybe other entertainers including Stevie Wonder to perform in Florida and other states with stand-your-ground laws

These are items actually mentioned in mainstream news stories -- I could probably anticipate a few others but, for now, the above should suffice.

* Under Florida's wrongful death statute, a decedent's family might be responsible for lawyers fees and court costs etc. if they lost in court, but some wealthy benefactor might become available to guarantee the Martin family's costs should there be such an outcome.

Edited July 18, 2013 by JLCrab

[Ulysses G.]

One little known fact is that there was one possible black juror. The prosecution rejected him because he admitted that he sometimes watches Fox News.

[SteeleJoe]

"The FBI report on George Zimmerman which found that the Florida neighborhood watchman was not racist but did have a hero complex."

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/little_document_pursues_zimmerman_uAQjdqGhtH6RVcBFemuPyK

- A possible US Federal Civil rights trial against G. Zimmerman for violating the deceased's civil rights

Good luck. Zimmerman isn't a racist and he didn't go after Martin because he was black. An FBI investigation has shown that he isn't racist.

-A possible wrongful death civil suit by Mr. Martin's Family

Sure why not? In America, suing people is a right. Will be interesting because the defense will be allowed to go through Trayvon Martin's dirty laundry.

-A boycott of the State of Florida's tourism and cruise industry

-A boycott of orange juice processed in Florida (even though most of it comes from Brazil)

Yeah good luck with that also. I really don't see Florida getting hit by any boycotts that will hurt them but whatever.

-The refusal of black and maybe other entertainers including Stevie Wonder to perform in Florida and other states -- with stand-your-ground laws

Yeah entertainers make a whole chunk of their income from concerts and Florida isn't the only stand your ground state. People can talk the talk and say oh poor Trayvon Martin blah blah blah. But when their pockets are hurt, I'm sure they can do the concert and then dedicate it to Trayvon Martin haha

Going so soon? I wouldn't hear of it. Why my little party's just beginning. -- The Wicked Witch of the West in The Wizard of Oz

Here's what may be upcoming for those who choose to linger:

Going so soon? I wouldn't hear of it. Why my little party's just beginning. -- The Wicked Witch of the West in The Wizard of Oz

Here's what may be upcoming for those who choose to linger:

A possible US Federal Civil rights trial against G. Zimmerman for violating the deceased's civil rights

A possible wrongful death civil suit by Mr. Martin's Family

A boycott of the State of Florida's tourism and cruise industry

A boycott of orange juice processed in Florida (even though most of it comes from Brazil)

The refusal of black and maybe other entertainers including Stevie Wonder to perform in Florida and other states -- with stand-your-ground laws

These are items actually mentioned in mainstream news stories -- I could probably anticipate a few others but, for now, the above should suffice.

These are items actually mentioned in mainstream news stories -- I could probably anticipate a few others but, for now, the above should suffice.

Over and over I have seen this , "FBI investigation has shown that he isn't racist." Or versions thereof. Until I've not bothered to express my interest in this extraordinary claim. Can I have a source for the non-racist certification from the FBI?

(I knew it was an impressive agency but it's remarkable that they can prove something like that and are will to say so).

The only thing I know of is:

"(MIAMI HERALD) — After interviewing nearly three dozen people in the George Zimmerman murder case, the FBI found no evidence that racial bias was a motivating factor in the shooting of Trayvon Martin..."

Which is, of course, quite different.

Sorry. Inaccurate New York Post headline not withstanding, that is not the FBI saying Zimmerman is not a racist.

[Scott]

Quite a few off-topic posts have been deleted and a very large number of replies to those posts.

Stick to the topic and the topic is not gun laws, Stand-Your-Ground laws etc., etc., etc..

[SteeleJoe]

By the way, the person who said Zimmerman was not a racist? Well, that's the police officer who also said that the conflict was avoidable by Zimmerman, that there was no evidence of Martin doing anything wrong, that Zimmerman reached an incorrect judgment about Martin before the confrontation, that Zimmerman's action was the sole instigation...

You wouldn't be one of the posters who claimed the contrary to all of that, would you?

Edited July 18, 2013 by SteeleJoe

[gl555]

I stand by what was written. Good luck with Eric Holder trying to charge Zimmerman when even his own FBI can't find any dirt. Besides which, this courtesy of Steely Dan's post should show he isn't a racist.

From Steely Dan

http://www.examiner.com/article/ignored-by-media-zimmerman-voted-for-obama-tutored-black-kids

Researchable and legitimate source examples of Zimmerman's past history of working with and for blacks include:

• "He and a black friend opened up an insurance office in a Florida..."
• "He'd engaged in notably un-racist behaviour such as taking a black girl to his high-school prom..."
• "Not only does he have black relatives, he has reportedly donated his time to tutor black children."
• "He launched a campaign to help a homeless black man who was beaten up by a white kid."

"The FBI report on George Zimmerman which found that the Florida neighborhood watchman was not racist but did have a hero complex."

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/little_document_pursues_zimmerman_uAQjdqGhtH6RVcBFemuPyK

- A possible US Federal Civil rights trial against G. Zimmerman for violating the deceased's civil rights

Good luck. Zimmerman isn't a racist and he didn't go after Martin because he was black. An FBI investigation has shown that he isn't racist.

-A possible wrongful death civil suit by Mr. Martin's Family

Sure why not? In America, suing people is a right. Will be interesting because the defense will be allowed to go through Trayvon Martin's dirty laundry.

-A boycott of the State of Florida's tourism and cruise industry

-A boycott of orange juice processed in Florida (even though most of it comes from Brazil)

Yeah good luck with that also. I really don't see Florida getting hit by any boycotts that will hurt them but whatever.

-The refusal of black and maybe other entertainers including Stevie Wonder to perform in Florida and other states -- with stand-your-ground laws

Yeah entertainers make a whole chunk of their income from concerts and Florida isn't the only stand your ground state. People can talk the talk and say oh poor Trayvon Martin blah blah blah. But when their pockets are hurt, I'm sure they can do the concert and then dedicate it to Trayvon Martin haha

Going so soon? I wouldn't hear of it. Why my little party's just beginning. -- The Wicked Witch of the West in The Wizard of Oz

Here's what may be upcoming for those who choose to linger:

Going so soon? I wouldn't hear of it. Why my little party's just beginning. -- The Wicked Witch of the West in The Wizard of Oz

Here's what may be upcoming for those who choose to linger:

A possible US Federal Civil rights trial against G. Zimmerman for violating the deceased's civil rights

A possible wrongful death civil suit by Mr. Martin's Family

A boycott of the State of Florida's tourism and cruise industry

A boycott of orange juice processed in Florida (even though most of it comes from Brazil)

The refusal of black and maybe other entertainers including Stevie Wonder to perform in Florida and other states -- with stand-your-ground laws

These are items actually mentioned in mainstream news stories -- I could probably anticipate a few others but, for now, the above should suffice.

These are items actually mentioned in mainstream news stories -- I could probably anticipate a few others but, for now, the above should suffice.

Over and over I have seen this , "FBI investigation has shown that he isn't racist." Or versions thereof. Until I've not bothered to express my interest in this extraordinary claim. Can I have a source for the non-racist certification from the FBI?

(I knew it was an impressive agency but it's remarkable that they can prove something like that and are will to say so).

The only thing I know of is:

"(MIAMI HERALD) — After interviewing nearly three dozen people in the George Zimmerman murder case, the FBI found no evidence that racial bias was a motivating factor in the shooting of Trayvon Martin..."

Which is, of course, quite different.

Sorry. Inaccurate New York Post headline not withstanding, that is not the FBI saying Zimmerman is not a racist.

[Scott]

A post with messed up quotes has been deleted as well as a reply.

[SteeleJoe]

I stand by what was written. Good luck with Eric Holder trying to charge Zimmerman when even his own FBI can't find any dirt. Besides which, this courtesy of Steely Dan's post should show he isn't a racist.

So you stand by "what was written" (by YOU - just thought I'd emphasize that since you carefully avoided that part) even though it was inaccurate; a person of integrity would have conceded error, I would have thought.

As for the rest:

* I have no position on any potential action (or lack thereof) by the AG.

* I have no knowledge that Zimmerman is a racist (and no one can know for certain).

* Whether he is a racist or not, that neither makes him guilty or innocent.

PS: Any comment on the other input from the detective you inadvertently credited?

[geriatrickid]

I am not reading "poisonous left wing blogs" Rather, I paid attention to the evidence as it related to the pathology testimony.

One drug is for temporary insomnia. One is for ADHD and they can be used for mild cases as well as more severe ones. Why would you suggest that Zimmerman was using the drugs illegally? There is no evidence of that at all. They were prescribed by his doctor.

The use of the amphetamines for obesity is not necessarily illegal. It would be an off label prescription. This is permitted. However, the combination of an anxyliotic and adderall, is potent and questionable. It is not a drug regime, stable well balanced people take. Temazepam is supposed to be prescribed for short term use only. Historically, Adderall was used exclusively to treat children and adolescents. Its approval for use with adults was relatively recent and was intended to meet the needs of a small group of patients that did not respond well to other medications. It is not supposed to be prescribed to obese patients particularly those with the possibility of heart disease. Typically, adderall is prescribed to females, not males because the mental health conditions it is used for are associated with females and not males. (Read the product monographs and recommended dosing regimen.)

I don't doubt for a minute that the prescription basis will have been to treat a patients severe form of anxiety, obsessive compulsive behaviour and its associated sleep pattern disruption. I am also quite certain the prescription was legal. Unfortunately, Florida is known for its lax surveillance and inappropriate prescriptions. The next trial if there is one, may look closely at this aspect of the case. It will not be something the pill pushing clinics or the pharmaceutical manufacturer will welcome.

There is a possibility that Zimmerman's mental state was worsened by the drugs he was taking. However, if he was being treated for obsessive compulsive disorder, anxiety and had insomnia, there is a string likelihood, that he would not be alert and not have clarity of thought. In plain language, his thought process would not be "normal". Such a person, should not have been driving, let alone have a permit to carry a concealed weapon. He could, because in Florida, the law does not exclude that.

My point in all this is that Zimmerman's behaviour in large part can be explained by his mental health state. I don't think he was a racist, nor was he targeting afro americans because of their skin colour. Rather, IMO he saw everyone as a threat, as suspicious. (And yet, he was allowed to carry a firearm.). IMO, the drug regimen dulled his ability to think rationally and to react appropriately.The drugs intended to manage an underlying mental illness instead contributed to causing harm.

In the coming months we may read some detailed analysis of the significance of the drugs. It is not a subject that some vested interests will want to discuss as it will touch upon the over use of potent drugs, the easy access to fire arms and mental health in general. There may very well be a tacit consensus to keep quiet as it would open a Pandora's box. It is easier to focus on other aspects of the case because they are simpler and play to various interest groups.

My view is that Zimmerman was a functioning mentally ill man prescribed medications that have serious side effects. One can have mental illness and still function, albeit in a reduced manner. He was allowed to carry a firearm and to engage in an activity that required clarity of thought, an ability to follow instructions and active reflexes. I don't think he had the ability for that.

[SteeleJoe]

I stand by what was written. Good luck with Eric Holder trying to charge Zimmerman when even his own FBI can't find any dirt. Besides which, this courtesy of Steely Dan's post should show he isn't a racist.

So you stand by "what was written" (by YOU - just thought I'd emphasize that since you carefully avoided that part) even though it was inaccurate; a person of integrity would have conceded error, I would have thought.

As for the rest:

* I have no position on any potential action (or lack thereof) by the AG.

* I have no knowledge that Zimmerman is a racist (and no one can know for certain).

* Whether he is a racist or not, that neither makes him guilty or innocent.

PS: Any comment on the other input from the detective you inadvertently credited?

[gl555]

Yes I stand by what was written. If you choose to see the article as 'inaccurate', that's your interpretation.

While I cannot read minds and know what's truly inside George Zimmerman's heart, I'm pretty sure he isn't racist from his actions alone.

And while in this particular case, him being racist doesn't make him guilty or innocent, I'm rebutting all the people who are hoping and wishing that the Federal government goes after him for civil rights violations. Him being racist or not is a big deal if Holder decides to go after him.

I stand by what was written. Good luck with Eric Holder trying to charge Zimmerman when even his own FBI can't find any dirt. Besides which, this courtesy of Steely Dan's post should show he isn't a racist.

So you stand by "what was written" (by YOU - just thought I'd emphasize that since you carefully avoided that part) even though it was inaccurate; a person of integrity would have conceded error, I would have thought.

As for the rest:

* I have no position on any potential action (or lack thereof) by the AG.

* I have no knowledge that Zimmerman is a racist (and no one can know for certain).

* Whether he is a racist or not, that neither makes him guilty or innocent.

PS: Any comment on the other input from the detective you inadvertently credited?

Edited July 18, 2013 by gl555

[SteeleJoe]

Yes I stand by what was written. If you choose to see the article as 'inaccurate', that's your interpretation.

While I cannot read minds and know what's truly inside George Zimmerman's heart, I'm pretty sure he isn't racist from his actions alone.

And while in this particular case, him being racist doesn't make him guilty or innocent, I'm rebutting all the people who are hoping and wishing that the Federal government goes after him for civil rights violations. Him being racist or not is a big deal if Holder decides to go after him.

I stand by what was written. Good luck with Eric Holder trying to charge Zimmerman when even his own FBI can't find any dirt. Besides which, this courtesy of Steely Dan's post should show he isn't a racist.

So you stand by "what was written" (by YOU - just thought I'd emphasize that since you carefully avoided that part) even though it was inaccurate; a person of integrity would have conceded error, I would have thought.

As for the rest:

* I have no position on any potential action (or lack thereof) by the AG.

* I have no knowledge that Zimmerman is a racist (and no one can know for certain).

* Whether he is a racist or not, that neither makes him guilty or innocent.

PS: Any comment on the other input from the detective you inadvertently credited?

I never claimed the article was inaccurate - and I doubt you are so unintelligent as to not be able understand that from reading (but that would leave only deliberate and dishonest twisting of my words...).

YOUR statement was inaccurate. I have interpreted nothing, rather I have pointed out what was actually said and by whom.

[Ulysses G.]

This pointless bickering about some tiny detail is why I usually just try to ignore your attempts to start an argument. Pretty much everything gl555 said was correct, but the headline of the acrtcle he quoted from was slightly misleading. The point is that the FBI investigation did not find any signs that Zimmerman was racist and either did the lead detective. Why continue to nitpick about it?

[Johpa]

By the way, the person who said Zimmerman was not a racist? Well, that's the police officer who also said that the conflict was avoidable by Zimmerman, that there was no evidence of Martin doing anything wrong, that Zimmerman reached an incorrect judgment about Martin before the confrontation, that Zimmerman's action was the sole instigation...

You wouldn't be one of the posters who claimed the contrary to all of that, would you?

Maybe I would be. Zimmerman may not be the brightest crayon in the box, but there is indeed no evidence that he was a racist. On the contrary he had excellent relations with his Black neighbors. The ultimate physical conflict was of course avoidable by Zimmerman and it was also avoidable by Martin. Martin indeed did not appear to be violating any laws up until the point he began physically thrashing Martin who himself had not yet violated any laws per se. Alas, two dull crayons from the box of humanity meet on a dark and rainy night and the combination of their mediocre decisions result in the death of one of them. The other is an outcast from society for life. Due process was followed: the legal system did work. I personally am far more disturbed by the US courts continuing to rule that corporations are people than by this sideshow.

[Scott]

Off-topic post deleted.

Stay on topic.

[kikoman]

Juror B37 stated that she disregarded the lady that was on the phone with Trayvon because she was inadequate , uneducated with no communication skills, not on the evidence she testified to, The only part of the testimony she consider was the statement attributed to Trayvon "Creepy ass Cracka" She considered it because it was the truth! This was stated in the TV interview with CNN's. Anderson Cooper.

Also Juror B37 when asked did the answer Detective Serino gave if it influenced her, she answered "Yes Greatly", the host then showed the Judge ordering the answer stricken and for the Jury to disregard the answer, Juror B37 failed to disregard it as ordered by the Judge ( Same interview).

On May 10, 2013, in the State of Florida v. George Zimmerman filed "State's Motion To Limit/Exclude Improper Opinion Evidence"

"The State of Florida, by and thought the undersigned Assistant State Attorney, hereby files the Motion in the above-Captioned proceeding.

The Defendant has indicated via questioning in pre-trial proceedings that he apparently intends to attempt to argue or introduce opinion testimony from one or more witnesses as to their opinion, prior to and/or after Defendant's arrest, as to his guilt or the propriety of being criminal charged.

Such testimony (be it from Defendant's family members, civilians, or even law enforcement personnel) is improper."

Judge Debra Nelson granted the State's Motion. No opinion evidence pertaining to George Zimmerman's guilt, innocence, nor "the propriety of his being criminally charged) was allowed during the trial.

Juror B37 has reportedly signed with a "literary agent" and announced that she intends to write a book.,Sharlene Martin, President of Martin Literary Management, represents Juror B37 in obtaining a book deal.In her news release, Sharlene Martin has stated that the jury in the George Zimmerman case decided he was not guilty.... due to the manner in which he was charged and the content of the jury instructions,"

The jury based it decision on information not presented at Trial

Juror B37, or another juror able to persuade her, had already formed an opinion that George Zimmerman should not have been charged and therefore, the evidence presented by State prosecutors at trial was never going to be considered in determining the defendant's guilt or innocence.

By the jury deciding that George Zimmerman should not have been charged, he effectively did not stand trial to determine guilt or innocence. A decision of not guilty by a jury cannot be reversed. However, with the release of this information by Juror B37's literary agent. There should be an investigation that fraud was committed on the court to, and that, undermined the integrity of the judicial process.

Cheers:

I have a copy of the May 10, 2013 "STATE MOTION TO LIMIT/EXCLUDE IMPROPER OPINION EVIDENCE" Judge Debra Nelson granted the states motion" I have been trying to attach a copy to my post without success. The old attachment process is not available.

Do not believe the Pro-Zimmerman Nay-Sayers, they know nothing.

The Feds will go after the profiling of Trayvon, as it would be easy to prove, he was merely walking home when Zimmerman profiled him as a criminal solely based on his looks.

I also see the case investigated for Jury/Jurors misconduct, freely admitted to on CNN by Juror B37 and B37 agents news release.

TV's self appointed Perry Mason, Disagrees What else is new!

As I could care less.

Members of the legal community within Florida are also calling for Federal intervention in this case.

When I learn how to post the page and a half State motion, I will post it.

Cheers:

Edited July 18, 2013 by kikoman

[SteeleJoe]

This pointless bickering about some tiny detail is why I usually just try to ignore your attempts to start an argument. Pretty much everything gl555 said was correct, but the headline of the acrtcle he quoted from was slightly misleading. The point is that the FBI investigation did not find any signs that Zimmerman was racist and either did the lead detective. Why continue to nitpick about it?

Someone made a false claim that had been repeated by many (including perhaps yourself). I pointed it out. He insisted it wasn't false and even tried to show evidence. I showed using that same source that it was. He still says he stands by it even after it's shown to be false.

That's all.

(As for what you claim you usually do and you inference about my posting...well, you're the same one who earlier in the thread made a false accusation about me and then faded away when I called you on it. So...credibility? Not so much. You "ignore" when you can't rebut.)

[Publicus]

However, they never presented this theory in court because they lacked evidence.

This is the only part of your post with any importance. As far as theories go, it is pretty obvious that the guy who was getting the heck beaten out of him would be the one who was screaming. It stopped when the attacker was neutralized.

Prosecutors vary in their competence but they are professionals who deal in crime and punishment, the law, each and every day. This is their stock and trade. It is their responsibility to devise a theory of a case, motive, who likely did what and when, to whom, etc.

Yes, there weren't any witnesses. However, there is a sound and plausible theory as developed by the prosecutors concerning the crime. Their theory is based on their best analysis of events, principals, witnesses of any nature (aural in this instance) and everything else. Prosecutors have to decide the viability of the theory and whether or not proving the theory is possible.

The only missing piece is an eyewitness. The only eyewitness is the defendant, the murderer himself. You know, the gunman murderer who can say anything that gets him off the hook on the charge of 2nd degree murder.

[gl555]

A sound and plausible THEORY. You just said it yourself. THEORY. Not fact.

The jury didn't buy the theory.

However, they never presented this theory in court because they lacked evidence.

This is the only part of your post with any importance. As far as theories go, it is pretty obvious that the guy who was getting the heck beaten out of him would be the one who was screaming. It stopped when the attacker was neutralized.

Prosecutors vary in their competence but they are professionals who deal in crime and punishment, the law, each and every day. This is their stock and trade. It is their responsibility to devise a theory of a case, motive, who likely did what and when, to whom, etc.

Yes, there weren't any witnesses. However, there is a sound and plausible theory as developed by the prosecutors concerning the crime. Their theory is based on their best analysis of events, principals, witnesses of any nature (aural in this instance) and everything else. Prosecutors have to decide the viability of the theory and whether or not proving the theory is possible.

The only missing piece is an eyewitness. The only eyewitness is the defendant, the murderer himself. You know, the gunman murderer who can say anything that gets him off the hook on the charge of 2nd degree murder.

[Jingthing]

He had a long pathetic history of wasting 911's time. He was basically a PEST. REPEATED numerous calls about young black boys in his community. One case of a VERY YOUNG black boy. False alarms as was the boy he killed. OF COURSE he was racially profiling young black boys! That is a known fact. Yes there was crime in his community and yes the crims were largely black, but don't act like he wasn't profiling young black boys. Because he was. If you want to be honest, say it was LOGICAL to do that, not play games that he wasn't doing that.

...and it's a well known fact that unruly, uneducated black youths from the ghetto are angels.

Granted..they never seem to bother liberals in their ivory towers, but they do bother working/lower middle class families ,unlucky to live near them..

Citizens don't get to act as vigilantes and shoot unarmed boys. But the message of this trial verdict is they do.