Trayvon Martin Trial

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
So what lesson you all should be learning from this is…[/quote]

being “white” is the new black
calling someone a “creepy ass cracker” is perfectly acceptable
having your nails did for court is more important than being able to speak or read
if you’re dead son becomes famous, trade mark his name and make that paper
avoid everything in florida that isnt a beach, or Gatorland. [/quote]

Not sure when Cracker became a curse? I mean hell Ritz Crackers, Cracker barrel, soup and Crackers. Is it really something you convict a person for if so then Ritz owes some white dudes a lot of cash.

But the fat chick was a sad display. [/quote]

Why are you denying that it is a racial slur?

Do you think it is okay to call folks Kike or WOP?

[quote]beachguy498 wrote:
If you own a firearm, it becomes your responsibility to know the laws that go with it. This includes walking around as an HOA neighborhood watch representative.

Rob[/quote]

He knew the law. He did not do anything illegal. He was also off duty. You don’t need to be a HOA neighborhood watch rep to just check what’s going on, especially given that there had been over 400 break in, within that past year.

Asking someone, that’s wandering around very early in the morning, that you’ve never seen before in your gated community, what they’re doing is not illegal in any shape or form.

A dispatcher has no legal authority. The words “we don’t need you to do that” do not mean “don’t do that”.

Also, mr. Zimmerman got out of his car to find an address, he was ambushed on his way back to his car by Martin.

Mr. Zimmerman did NOTHING WRONG. Not legally, and not morally. He was well within his right to be suspicious of someone walking around in his gated community, extremely early in the morning, when there had recently been a significant number of break-ins. He is much more a victim than Martin.

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]beachguy498 wrote:
If you own a firearm, it becomes your responsibility to know the laws that go with it. This includes walking around as an HOA neighborhood watch representative.

Rob[/quote]

He knew the law. He did not do anything illegal. He was also off duty. You don’t need to be a HOA neighborhood watch rep to just check what’s going on, especially given that there had been over 400 break in, within that past year.

Asking someone, that’s wandering around very early in the morning, that you’ve never seen before in your gated community, what they’re doing is not illegal in any shape or form.

A dispatcher has no legal authority. The words “we don’t need you to do that” do not mean “don’t do that”.

Also, mr. Zimmerman got out of his car to find an address, he was ambushed on his way back to his car by Martin.

Mr. Zimmerman did NOTHING WRONG. Not legally, and not morally. He was well within his right to be suspicious of someone walking around in his gated community, extremely early in the morning, when there had recently been a significant number of break-ins. He is much more a victim than Martin.[/quote]

It was 7:15 in the evening. It is also pure speculation he was ambushed.

[quote]Testy1 wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]beachguy498 wrote:
If you own a firearm, it becomes your responsibility to know the laws that go with it. This includes walking around as an HOA neighborhood watch representative.

Rob[/quote]

He knew the law. He did not do anything illegal. He was also off duty. You don’t need to be a HOA neighborhood watch rep to just check what’s going on, especially given that there had been over 400 break in, within that past year.

Asking someone, that’s wandering around very early in the morning, that you’ve never seen before in your gated community, what they’re doing is not illegal in any shape or form.

A dispatcher has no legal authority. The words “we don’t need you to do that” do not mean “don’t do that”.

Also, mr. Zimmerman got out of his car to find an address, he was ambushed on his way back to his car by Martin.

Mr. Zimmerman did NOTHING WRONG. Not legally, and not morally. He was well within his right to be suspicious of someone walking around in his gated community, extremely early in the morning, when there had recently been a significant number of break-ins. He is much more a victim than Martin.[/quote]

It was 7:15 in the evening. It is also pure speculation he was ambushed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin[/quote]

I stand corrected on that matter, then.

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
Mr. Zimmerman did NOTHING WRONG. Not legally, and not morally. He was well within his right to be suspicious of someone walking around in his gated community, extremely early in the morning, when there had recently been a significant number of break-ins. He is much more a victim than Martin.[/quote]

Suspicious of someone black no doubt, because he knew that every burglary was committed by a black teen.

What were Trayvon’s rights? Was he not within his rights to be suspicious of a creepy fat man who, for all he knew, was a pedophile? But let’s put all the blame on the child instead of the adult, who was armed, and who should have known better.

[quote]Love Nike wrote:

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]Aggv wrote:

[quote]Quasi-Tech wrote:
So what lesson you all should be learning from this is…[/quote]

being “white” is the new black
calling someone a “creepy ass cracker” is perfectly acceptable
having your nails did for court is more important than being able to speak or read
if you’re dead son becomes famous, trade mark his name and make that paper
avoid everything in florida that isnt a beach, or Gatorland. [/quote]

Not sure when Cracker became a curse? I mean hell Ritz Crackers, Cracker barrel, soup and Crackers. Is it really something you convict a person for if so then Ritz owes some white dudes a lot of cash.

But the fat chick was a sad display. [/quote]

Why are you denying that it is a racial slur?

Do you think it is okay to call folks Kike or WOP? [/quote]

Was it meant as a Racial Slur by Martin to the chick on the phone, Sure, but would it have been worse or better if he said Motherfucker?

I don’t even care if Zimmerman called Martin a Niger, his actions are what fucked him up that night not his vocabulary.

Now back to the Cracker word, come on in the realm of “slurs” that is pretty weak. I mean call me when they have Kike or Wop Barrel stores

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
Mr. Zimmerman did NOTHING WRONG. Not legally, and not morally. He was well within his right to be suspicious of someone walking around in his gated community, extremely early in the morning, when there had recently been a significant number of break-ins. He is much more a victim than Martin.[/quote]

Suspicious of someone black no doubt, because he knew that every burglary was committed by a black teen.

What were Trayvon’s rights? Was he not within his rights to be suspicious of a creepy fat man who, for all he knew, was a pedophile? But let’s put all the blame on the child instead of the adult, who was armed, and who should have known better. [/quote]

They both had the same rights. Why didn’t Martin call the police? If he was in trouble, why didn’t he run home instead of attacking Mr. Zimmerman? Mr. Zimmerman, it seems, wasn’t looking to attack Martin, but to ask him wtf he was doing there, since he had never seen him before in his gated community. All Martin had to do was ask Mr. Zimmerman wtf HE was doing, following him, and everything would have been fine. Instead he decides to jump Mr. Zimmerman.

Suspicious of someone black, maybe. Though I fail to see why this has any correlation with anything? If 100% of the crimes committed in that gated community were perpetrated by blacks, then how is it racist if it’s obviously the blacks that were committing the crimes?

Whether you are packing heat or not does not mean you can’t ask someone what they are doing. It’s not like just because you have a handgun that now you can’t have any sort of human contact or confrontation because by virtue of having a firearm on you, you bust behave in a holy manner. The purpose of that handgun was for self defense, that’s all there is to it.

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
Mr. Zimmerman did NOTHING WRONG. Not legally, and not morally. He was well within his right to be suspicious of someone walking around in his gated community, extremely early in the morning, when there had recently been a significant number of break-ins. He is much more a victim than Martin.[/quote]

Suspicious of someone black no doubt, because he knew that every burglary was committed by a black teen.

What were Trayvon’s rights? Was he not within his rights to be suspicious of a creepy fat man who, for all he knew, was a pedophile? But let’s put all the blame on the child instead of the adult, who was armed, and who should have known better. [/quote]

They both had the same rights. Why didn’t Martin call the police? If he was in trouble, why didn’t he run home instead of attacking Mr. Zimmerman? Mr. Zimmerman, it seems, wasn’t looking to attack Martin, but to ask him wtf he was doing there, since he had never seen him before in his gated community. All Martin had to do was ask Mr. Zimmerman wtf HE was doing, following him, and everything would have been fine. Instead he decides to jump Mr. Zimmerman.

Suspicious of someone black, maybe. Though I fail to see why this has any correlation with anything? If 100% of the crimes committed in that gated community were perpetrated by blacks, then how is it racist if it’s obviously the blacks that were committing the crimes?

Whether you are packing heat or not does not mean you can’t ask someone what they are doing. It’s not like just because you have a handgun that now you can’t have any sort of human contact or confrontation because by virtue of having a firearm on you, you bust behave in a holy manner. The purpose of that handgun was for self defense, that’s all there is to it. [/quote]

Well, NO. “packing heat” means you must be aware that your actions could EASILY end up killing someone or in court.

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
Mr. Zimmerman did NOTHING WRONG. Not legally, and not morally. He was well within his right to be suspicious of someone walking around in his gated community, extremely early in the morning, when there had recently been a significant number of break-ins. He is much more a victim than Martin.[/quote]

Suspicious of someone black no doubt, because he knew that every burglary was committed by a black teen.

What were Trayvon’s rights? Was he not within his rights to be suspicious of a creepy fat man who, for all he knew, was a pedophile? But let’s put all the blame on the child instead of the adult, who was armed, and who should have known better. [/quote]

They both had the same rights. Why didn’t Martin call the police? If he was in trouble, why didn’t he run home instead of attacking Mr. Zimmerman? Mr. Zimmerman, it seems, wasn’t looking to attack Martin, but to ask him wtf he was doing there, since he had never seen him before in his gated community. All Martin had to do was ask Mr. Zimmerman wtf HE was doing, following him, and everything would have been fine. Instead he decides to jump Mr. Zimmerman.

Suspicious of someone black, maybe. Though I fail to see why this has any correlation with anything? If 100% of the crimes committed in that gated community were perpetrated by blacks, then how is it racist if it’s obviously the blacks that were committing the crimes?

Whether you are packing heat or not does not mean you can’t ask someone what they are doing. It’s not like just because you have a handgun that now you can’t have any sort of human contact or confrontation because by virtue of having a firearm on you, you bust behave in a holy manner. The purpose of that handgun was for self defense, that’s all there is to it. [/quote]

Well, NO. “packing heat” means you must be aware that your actions could EASILY end up killing someone or in court.
[/quote]

That is the hook that gets him into the manslaughter charge. The final jury instructions have been posted and I read them online earlier today. Is manslaughter a good fit?

I believe the jury is to be deliberating the charges later today. The judge seems to be antsy to git 'er done by the weekend.

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/Zimmerman_Final_Jury_Instructions.pdf

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
Mr. Zimmerman did NOTHING WRONG. Not legally, and not morally. He was well within his right to be suspicious of someone walking around in his gated community, extremely early in the morning, when there had recently been a significant number of break-ins. He is much more a victim than Martin.[/quote]

Suspicious of someone black no doubt, because he knew that every burglary was committed by a black teen.

What were Trayvon’s rights? Was he not within his rights to be suspicious of a creepy fat man who, for all he knew, was a pedophile? But let’s put all the blame on the child instead of the adult, who was armed, and who should have known better. [/quote]

They both had the same rights. Why didn’t Martin call the police? If he was in trouble, why didn’t he run home instead of attacking Mr. Zimmerman? Mr. Zimmerman, it seems, wasn’t looking to attack Martin, but to ask him wtf he was doing there, since he had never seen him before in his gated community. All Martin had to do was ask Mr. Zimmerman wtf HE was doing, following him, and everything would have been fine. Instead he decides to jump Mr. Zimmerman.

Suspicious of someone black, maybe. Though I fail to see why this has any correlation with anything? If 100% of the crimes committed in that gated community were perpetrated by blacks, then how is it racist if it’s obviously the blacks that were committing the crimes?

Whether you are packing heat or not does not mean you can’t ask someone what they are doing. It’s not like just because you have a handgun that now you can’t have any sort of human contact or confrontation because by virtue of having a firearm on you, you bust behave in a holy manner. The purpose of that handgun was for self defense, that’s all there is to it. [/quote]
Trayvon was a kid so to expect him to think like an adult is silly. People here expect him to have shown more common sense and maturity than they themselves probably possessed at his age and maybe even now. They expect him to have had more common sense than Zimmerman.

“If 100% of the crimes” is irrelevant since no one knows, including Zimmerman, the number.

Yes, by carrying a gun you need to be more aware of your actions and behaviors. When you carry you look to avoid situations in which you might end up using it rather than invite those situations. After all, he isn’t a cop; he just played one in the neighborhood. And that gun was not for self-defense but rather he carried to make himself feel empowered. He doesn’t carry his manhood around in a holster, he doesn’t go running around thinking he’s Batman. He didn’t carry for when trouble came looking for him but for when he went looking for trouble. If an action is ill-advised when unarmed it probably still is when armed.

Throughout this entire trial I have thought many times to myself what I would have done in that neighborhood with all the breakins. 3 large protective pitbulls roaming my yard and house would do nicely as it does at my home +1 great dane. If they don’t know you and I don’t call them off and you decide to wander up near my house, you will get fucking eaten.

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

Yes, by carrying a gun you need to be more aware of your actions and behaviors. When you carry you look to avoid situations in which you might end up using it rather than invite those situations. [/quote]

And when the situation throws a right hood and breaks your nose with out you knowing he was there? Does not sound like Zimmerman went looking to shoot Trayvon. Trayvon went looking for a fight.

This is the issue with this entire trial. Who started the attack? If it was Trayvon then Zimmerman is Innocent. If Zimmerman attacked Trayvon then Zimmerman is Guilty. If Zimmerman shot in self defense then he is innocent on all charges.

From Zimmerman’s (Hannity Interview, and yes that was put into evidence, so Zimmerman actually testified) and all testimony given it was Zimmerman’s life that was in danger. It was self defense. Not Guilty.

[quote]dmaddox wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

Yes, by carrying a gun you need to be more aware of your actions and behaviors. When you carry you look to avoid situations in which you might end up using it rather than invite those situations. [/quote]

And when the situation throws a right hood and breaks your nose with out you knowing he was there? Does not sound like Zimmerman went looking to shoot Trayvon. Trayvon went looking for a fight.

This is the issue with this entire trial. Who started the attack? If it was Trayvon then Zimmerman is Innocent. If Zimmerman attacked Trayvon then Zimmerman is Guilty. If Zimmerman shot in self defense then he is innocent on all charges.

From Zimmerman’s (Hannity Interview, and yes that was put into evidence, so Zimmerman actually testified) and all testimony given it was Zimmerman’s life that was in danger. It was self defense. Not Guilty.[/quote]

Not really, I don’t think either left the house thinking I’m going to get into a life and death struggle tonight. Only Zimmerman knew he had the tools to end a life it it came to it. And with that knowledge in hand his Actions leading up to the confrontation can and DiD come into play in court.

Make no mistake I do think Zimmerman shot him because he was scared his ass was on the line. But he went out of his way to escalate a situation he knew could end bad.

Here’s a whammy for y’all.

At the end of any big trial, we get to know the identity of each juror, since it’s a matter of public record. I’m sure we all saw cases like Casey Anthony and of course OJ… “hi, I was juror #8 and this is how I voted…”.

How would you like to let this creep skip out from all charges scot-free and everyone knows where to find you? On the other hand, give him manslaughter and there will be no riots and nobody will be looking for you. The state will be happy too, win, win all around… almost all around.

Rob

[quote]zecarlo wrote:
Trayvon was a kid so to expect him to think like an adult is silly. [/quote]

I expected him to act with some sense, given he was 17 fucking years old. Within a year he would have been able to vote and a plethora of other things that adults do. If someone is following me, I either confront them or I start running like hell.

So what would you have done, as a 17 year old? Jump Mr. Zimmerman?

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

Yes, by carrying a gun you need to be more aware of your actions and behaviors. When you carry you look to avoid situations in which you might end up using it rather than invite those situations.[/quote]

Is this your personal opinion, or the law? I’m pretty sure following someone isn’t illegal, if you think they’re up to no good. Nor is asking them what they’re doing illegal.
Martin has a long history of violent crime/behaviour.

Irrelevant.

Baseless assumption.

More baseless assumptions. Read the following CAREFULLY:

From the wiki (Killing of Trayvon Martin - Wikipedia):

-Statements then read that Zimmerman then called the Sanford Police Department to report Martin’s behavior as suspicious, stating “This guy looks like he’s up to no good, or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about” and “looking at all the houses”

-The Retreat at Twin Lakes is a 260-unit gated townhome community in Sanford, Florida.[84][85] The population in the development at the time of the shooting, was about 49% non-Hispanic white, 23% Hispanic(of any race), 20% black, and 5% Asian, according to Census figures.

-From January 1, 2011 through February 26, 2012, police were called to The Retreat at Twin Lakes 402 times.[72] During the 18 months preceding the February 26 shooting, Zimmerman called the non-emergency police line seven times. On five of those calls, Zimmerman reported suspicious looking men in the area, but never offered the men’s race without first being asked by the dispatcher.[87][88][89]

-In September 2011, the Twin Lakes residents held an organizational meeting to create a neighborhood watch program. Zimmerman was selected by neighbors as the program’s coordinator, according to Wendy Dorival, Neighborhood Watch organizer for the Sanford Police Department.[6][6][91]

-Zimmerman had been licensed to carry a firearm since November 2009. In response to Zimmerman’s multiple reports regarding a loose pit bull in the Twin Lakes neighborhood, a Seminole County Animal Services officer advised Zimmerman to “get a gun”, according to a friend, rather than rely on pepper spray to fend off the pit bull, which on one occasion had cornered his wife.[64] Although neighborhood watch volunteers are not encouraged to carry weapons, Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee acknowledged that Zimmerman had a legal right to carry his firearm on the night of the shooting.[72]

-Zimmerman was accused of being motivated by racism[4][170] and of having racially profiled Martin.[4][129][282][307] During early media coverage of the incident, Zimmerman’s call to the police dispatcher was edited by NBC, shortened such that it appeared that Zimmerman had volunteered Martin’s race. The unedited audio recording proved that the police dispatcher specifically asked about Martin’s race, and only then did Zimmerman reveal that Martin was black.

-According to his family, some of Zimmerman’s relatives are black.[57] Zimmerman’s former lawyer Craig Sonner stated that Zimmerman is not a racist, and that he had mentored black youths in the past.[309] Joe Oliver, a former television news reporter who is acquainted with Zimmerman,[310] noted “I’m a black male and all that I know is that George has never given me any reason whatsoever to believe he has anything against people of color.”[311]

-In early April, an anonymous letter to the NAACP, which was signed “A Concerned Zimmerman Family Member,” said Zimmerman had been one of the few to take any action to protest the 2010 beating of Sherman Ware, a black homeless man, by the son of a Sanford police officer. Zimmerman reportedly distributed fliers in the black community trying to get others involved too, and helped organize a January 8, 2011, Sanford City Hall community forum to protest the incident.[312] Zimmerman’s father confirmed his son’s efforts on Ware’s behalf.[313]

-In the course of Zimmerman’s recorded interviews, Detective Chris Serino questioned aspects of Zimmerman’s account, such as Zimmerman’s statement that he didn’t know the name of a street in the Twin Lakes community where he had lived for three years. Zimmerman said in response that he had a bad memory and takes medication for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder.[190] Investigators also questioned the extent of his injuries and why he didn’t identify himself to Martin as a Neighborhood Watch coordinator. Zimmerman said he didn’t want to confront Martin.[190][193]

What we get from this:

  • Of the 402 calls to the police by residents of The Retreat at Twin Lakes, 7 of them were by Mr. Zimmerman. That means less than 2 percent of all calls were Mr. Zimmerman. This shows he is not a wanna-be-cop/vigilante.

-Mr. Zimmerman acquired a handgun due to a pitbull that had been loose, after being suggested to do so, by Seminole County Animal Services officer. Again, not a wanna-be-cop/vigilante.

-Thinking Mr. Zimmerman racially profiled Martin is bullshit because: 20% of the gated community is black, Mr. Zimmerman has black relatives, has mentored black individuals; and was among the few that protested the beating of a black homeless man by police. For the calls he made concerning suspicious behaviour/individuals, he never gave the person’s ethnicity/race, unless asked by the dispatcher.

Your main arguments, that of racism and vigilantism, have been utterly destroyed.

pics:

[quote]beachguy498 wrote:

[quote]four60 wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:

[quote]zecarlo wrote:

[quote]legendaryblaze wrote:
Mr. Zimmerman did NOTHING WRONG. Not legally, and not morally. He was well within his right to be suspicious of someone walking around in his gated community, extremely early in the morning, when there had recently been a significant number of break-ins. He is much more a victim than Martin.[/quote]

Suspicious of someone black no doubt, because he knew that every burglary was committed by a black teen.

What were Trayvon’s rights? Was he not within his rights to be suspicious of a creepy fat man who, for all he knew, was a pedophile? But let’s put all the blame on the child instead of the adult, who was armed, and who should have known better. [/quote]

They both had the same rights. Why didn’t Martin call the police? If he was in trouble, why didn’t he run home instead of attacking Mr. Zimmerman? Mr. Zimmerman, it seems, wasn’t looking to attack Martin, but to ask him wtf he was doing there, since he had never seen him before in his gated community. All Martin had to do was ask Mr. Zimmerman wtf HE was doing, following him, and everything would have been fine. Instead he decides to jump Mr.
Zimmerman.

Suspicious of someone black, maybe. Though I fail to see why this has any correlation with anything? If 100% of the crimes committed in that gated community were perpetrated by blacks, then how is it racist if it’s obviously the blacks that were committing the crimes?

Whether you are packing heat or not does not mean you can’t ask someone what they are doing. It’s not like just because you have a handgun that now you can’t have any sort of human contact or confrontation because by virtue of having a firearm on you, you bust behave in a holy manner. The purpose of that handgun was for self defense, that’s all there is to it. [/quote]

Well, NO. “packing heat” means you must be aware that your actions could EASILY end up killing someone or in court.
[/quote]

That is the hook that gets him into the manslaughter charge. The final jury instructions have been posted and I read them online earlier today. Is manslaughter a good fit?

I believe the jury is to be deliberating the charges later today. The judge seems to be antsy to git 'er done by the weekend.

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/Zimmerman_Final_Jury_Instructions.pdf[/quote]

WOW, the Manslaughter charge only had to things to consider
1- Martin is dead

Damnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn!!!

2- Zimm intentionally caused the act or acts that caused the death.

I really did think it would be more to consider than that, WOW.

[quote]Bauber wrote:
Throughout this entire trial I have thought many times to myself what I would have done in that neighborhood with all the breakins. 3 large protective pitbulls roaming my yard and house would do nicely as it does at my home +1 great dane. If they don’t know you and I don’t call them off and you decide to wander up near my house, you will get fucking eaten.[/quote]

Well, I would have moved. And yes dog food is deserved for people breaking into a home. Maybe I over think situations but If I know this is a high crime area I’m never thinking one guy, I’m always thinking ok this guy might have friends.

Reading over that it looks like at best you could say he was negligent which according to that, means he is not guilty of either manslaughter or murder 2. It really baffles me as to how murder 2 ever even made it to trial.

[quote]four60 wrote:

Make no mistake I do think Zimmerman shot him because he was scared his ass was on the line. But he went out of his way to escalate a situation he knew could end bad.

[/quote]

You first sentence is what makes it Self Defense and he is innocent.

The second sentence is not true. Zimmerman did not go out of his way to kill Trayvon. Zimmerman is head of the neighborhood watch. They are suppose to go check out stuff if something is happening in that gated community. How did Trayvon get into that gated community? Did he hop a fence, or walk in behind a car that just went through the gate? Is that Tresspassing? These are questions we will never know. I am not saying Trayvon went looking to get killed, but he did feel like he was disrespected and he was going to make Mr. Zimmerman pay. Trayvon’s history of fighting was not allowed in court, but you and I were privy to that information. Trayvon does not run he fights.

If Trayvon knew Zimmerman had a gun do you think he would have tried to beat him up or run? Trayvon made Zimmerman use that gun. Just like if someone breaks into my house, they don’t know I have a shotgun, but they will meet a 12 gauge shotgun blast to the face.

[quote]jbpick86 wrote:
Reading over that it looks like at best you could say he was negligent which according to that, means he is not guilty of either manslaughter or murder 2. It really baffles me as to how murder 2 ever even made it to trial. [/quote]

I am going to be brutally honest. 2nd degree Murder was wanted by the Civil Rights leaders and the Black Community.

Get ready if Zimmerman is acquitted the DOJ under Holder will go after Zimmerman Civilly for Violating Trayvon’s Civil Rights. I guess this country cares more about a “White-Hispanic” killing a black man than a Black man killing another Black Man. No man should ever kill another man. I am not naive enough to think it does not happen.

This has gotten way too out of hand. We have been pitted against each other based on the color of our skin and our socio-economic status. This is not America any more. We are all suppose to come together to fix this crap, but there is no forgiveness any where. It just keeps escalating. “You whities will pay, and you rich people will pay.” “You blacks are lazy and do nothing.” What has happened to this Great Country of ours? What happened to us working together?