• It is Undisputed

    Okay I am pretty sure that we all know that Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman does not even dispute the accusations against him for the murder of Trayvon Martin. The question in court now is 'Did he do it out of self defense?' Personally I think he should be charged with the murder of Trayvon simply because he was warned not to approach the boy and decided neglect the warning and take it into his own hands. The biggest argument here is that Trayvon was in a gated community. That to me is no reason to shoot the Kid or even approach him aggressively.

  • Zimmerman's definitely guilty of 2nd degree murder.

    I'm just gonna outline a couple of key points.

    1.) George Zimmerman is not/was not a police officer.
    2.) George Zimmerman often called the authorities multiple times about African American men that were walking around his neighborhood in the past.
    3.) When George Zimmerman called the authorities about Trayvon they instructed him NOT to follow, yet he deliberately disobeyed the dispatcher.
    4.) Prior to being followed, Trayvon had not put Zimmerman's life in danger.
    5.) "These assholes always get away"

    Essentially what it blows down to is the fact that George Zimmerman instigated the confrontation when it clearly could have been avoided. He was deliberately told that following Trayvon was unnecessary, but he went after Trayvon under the impression that Trayvon was "dangerous" when in reality that clearly wasn't the case at all.

    2nd Degree Murder is by definition--A non-premeditated killing, resulting from an assault in which death of the victim was a distinct possibility.

    Is 2nd degree murder still murder? Yeah.
    Was the killing premeditated? No.
    Was Trayvon assaulted? Well, he was approached by Zimmerman and he's dead now.
    Was his death a distinct possibility? Zimmerman had a gun, Trayvon had Skittles and Iced Tea, you tell me.

    I legitimately don't understand how people disagree.

    Sidenote: I personally don't condone Trayvon's behavior and I know that he wasn't the friendliest child, but I still don't think it was necessary to follow him and proceed to kill him when he reacted negatively.

  • Zimmerman was the aggressor

    I don't understand the argument that Zimmerman is innocent because of self defense. What were his (or anyone else's) options to address an armed citizen hunting him down for no reason? Trayvon Martin knew he was being pursued, and he -- not George Zimmerman -- stood his ground. This entire fiasco was caused by Zimmerman's overzealous behavior.

  • If you want to carry a gun and play hero become a cop or join the army.

    What about Trayvon Martin's rights? Why isn't he allowed to walk on the street and protect himself against being robbed, beaten or abducted? Zimmerman assumed Martin had done something wrong and wanted to believe he was a threat. I don't believe there was intent but Zimmerman must face the negative consequence of using his gun.

  • Race is an issue

    George Zimmerman killed sweet and innocent Treyvon Martin, because of his race not the crime he WAS NOT committing!!!! George Zimmerman was told to stop following Treyvon Martin and get in his car because their was no proof that Treyvon Martin did anything. And you are not supposed to explain someone on a report as their race, and George Zimmerman described Treyvon (a sweet boy) as black, not African american!!!

  • There is more than enough evidence to convict George Zimmerman

    This innocent person Trayvon Martin was just getting some skittles for his little brother. He wasn't high, wasn't trespassing on property. Also, in the video footage, why does Zimmerman continue to follow Trayvon when he was clearly told by police to stay away. I kind of find it very ironic and how screwed up the U.S. Justice system.

  • Evidence, evidence, evidence

    Besides the 911 call which clearly shows by the language that it was his intent to pursue Trayvon and confront him, there is the fact that he has training in both weapons and hand to hand combat. This is a man who clearly wants confrontation to be a hero. Furthermore he had the gun holstered at his waist behind his back. According to his story he shot Trayvon as he reached for the gun that he saw while straddling him on his chest, which is impossible visually, furthermore, impossible to grab a gun from a holster if you're sitting on it with 250 lbs man and boy. To conclude, if his story was true, then Trayvons DNA would be on his gun, which it isn't. Then theres the red herring. The scars on the back of Zimmerman's head, which look like they were lacerated and nails were dug in, yet no DNA under either Trayvon's nails or his sweater cuffs. What that appears to be is self inflicted. "Not guilty", I suspect not, if I were to paint the picture it would go that Zimmerman pursued Trayvon, demanded him to stop, and provoked the young teen, who resisted Zimmerman, who then brandished his gun causing the chase between the two. Zimmerman shoots Trayvon as he flees or turns to fight his aggressor.

  • George Zimmerman is GUILTY!

    George Zimmerman was following a YOUNG MAN he immediately thought of as "suspicious". Trayvon could have been a visitor, a man taking a stroll or simply a resident (which he was), but Zimmerman automatically labeled Trayvon as "suspicious". Also, Zimmerman followed Trayvon in his car AND on foot. This means he left his car making the decision to bring his gun!

    Meanwhile, his story makes NO sense! How does a guy from neighborhood watch not know the name of the streets (of which there were only THREE)! Also, how does one "looking" for a street sign miss a street sign right in front of them (a street sign he so easily pointed out during a taped interview). He also said he was looking for an address but he passed by numerous houses with addresses on them! How many coincidences do we offer Zimmerman before we question his story!?

    Also, his "life-endangering" experience was not endangering enough because afterwards he only required minor medical attention (band-aids), was able to conduct an interview fluently, and even eye witnesses say that he was "calm and collected" IMMEDIATELY after this "fight for his life". He is lying to everyone!

    I do not believe he went out that day looking for a black kid to kill, I do believe he saw Trayvon, profiled, followed , and then killed an unarmed, innocent teenage boy. He took a life, and for that he needs to face the consequences.

  • He killed someone, even if it was self-defense

    Unless Zimmerman was being shot a by a .50 cal machine gun, I don't think it was necessary to kill in self-defense. He could have easily used non lethal techniques to stun and escape from the other guy. If what I hear is correct, Martin ran away. There was absolutely no need to pursue him and kill him.

    “Nonviolence is a weapon of the strong.”
    ― Mahatma Gandhi

  • His Actions Speak Louder Than His Words!

    Zimmerman was instructed to back-off. He did not. This probably led to the confrontation. I live in a multi-racial neighborhood, in a small Southern city. If I see a Black kid, in a hoodie, it just doesn't bother me. Duh. Some of my neighbors are Black. But if a guy in his mid to late 20's was following me, it would scare the crap out of me. I'd be calling 911 & reporting him. For the record, my neighborhood has a Watch Program. Nobody carries guns. The latter just isn't the norm.

    Once the trial began, we heard Zimmerman's interview with police after the shooting. He told authorities he'd never heard of "Stand Your Ground". Then, we discover he's taken Criminal Justice courses including one that was specifically on that law. Lying to law enforcement is illegal. He obviously knew that too (from those CJ courses), but he did it anyway. Ask yourself: Why?

    I am not against the Second Amendment. But this kid was not a threat to anyone. He was a skinny, unarmed teen. He was walking down the street ... Minding his own business. If Zimmerman had just done what the dispatcher told him to do -- and backed off -- the kid would be alive today. He was obviously obsessed with young, Black kids ... "Punks" as he called them. He had already made numerous calls to 911, but none ever materialized into an actual arrest (at least we haven't heard one). Maybe, he even had a bit of paranoia feeding the situation? For these reasons, and others, I feel Zimmerman is guilty. Since Martin was no threat, it's murder.

  • Zimmerman is a HERO who took out the thug that attempted to murder HIM.

    Trayvon would be alive today if....

    1) He wasn't on suspension from school for the FIFTH TIME and was 300 miles from home visiting his father.

    2) Wasn't loitering in the middle of the night (while high) in the rain looking for houses to break into.

    3) Hadn't STARTED THE FIGHT with Zimmerman and hadn't smashed his head into concrete in an attempt to murder him.

    George Zimmerman is an American hero. Trayvon Martin was a thug zero.

  • More than a reasonable doubt.

    There is simply not enough evidence in the Zimmerman trial to suggest that George Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin.

    Here are the facts:

    1. George Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin.
    2. Martin did attack George Zimmerman, fracturing his nose and giving him a collection of bruises and welts.
    3. Zimmerman had been following Martin before the shooting.

    The only possible conclusion that could even begin to point to Zimmerman's guilt is if Trayvon attacked him out of self-defense, thinking Zimmerman was out to do him harm. That simply cannot be proved. In this case, the reasonable doubt is, in my opinion, the reasonable conclusion.

  • George Zimmerman acted in self-defence.

    Fact 1: Trayvon Martin was trespassing onto a gated community where he had no business being.
    Fact 2: Trayvon Martin attacked and physically beat George Zimmerman.
    Fact 3: George Zimmerman, in fear for his life, shot and killed Trayvon Martin.

    The only person who broke the law that night (two laws in fact) was Trayvon Martin.

    George Zimmerman did not break any laws that night (there is no law against following someone who you suspect may have or may be in the progress of committing a crime).

    Based upon the facts and injuries sustained by Zimmerman it is clear that he is not guilty.

  • It's only an issue because of media hysteria

    Imagine that a youth gets high and breaks into a bank. One of the guards in the bank sees him. Obviously, the guard will follow the youth because that is his duty. Then , the youth attacks the guard and the guard, very understandably fires his gun at the youth, killing him. I don't think anyone would claim that the bank security guard was a murderer.

    This is exactly the same as the Trayvon Martin situation. Zimmerman was a neighborhood watch coordinator. It was his responsibility to defend the neighborhood. When he saw a youth who was indeed high, enter the gated community, it was his duty to follow that youth. When he was attacked he justifiably acted in self defense.

    This only became a national issue because later, the irrelevant fact that Zimmerman is racist was discovered, and NBC and other major media sources deliberately falsified some of the phone calls that he had made to the police.

  • There is no way.

    Okay, first of all, Trayvon Martin was trespassing in a gated community, while high, and on his 5th school suspension. Zimmerman opened himself up to some charge by intending to follow him, however, Martin brutally attacked Zimmerman, slamming his head into a wall, and straddled him while punching him (the bullet hole in his sweater and the bruises on Zimmerman prove this). You'll never truly know for sure if the killing was premeditated, but I can almost guarantee that killing Trayvon was not Zimmerman's intention. In the spur of the moment, we make clouded decisions. It was an impulsive shot at Martin because Zimmerman was in grave danger. I don't even think it's 2nd degree murder. I think it's something in between murder of the 2nd degree, and self defense, whatever that is in the state of Florida. But this really does go all back to the gun control issue, if you're going to let people carry concealed weapons, why are they on trial for murder when they are used for their entire purpose: to save yourself from imminent death. Something to think about.

  • Classic Self Defense

    Anger is the path to the Dark Side. Do not let your emotions get the best of you in this case. Look at the facts of the case, and look at the way our legal system works. Take a step back from your position and consider this. Martin was currently under school suspension for fighting and drug use. Martin was under the influence of Marijuana. He was walking back to his fathers house from 7/11 in the rain and dark. Zimmerman was driving to Target to buy groceries and he was carrying a concealed handgun legally. Other than the Marijuana, so far neither side has committed a crime. Zimmerman notices Martin and calls the police. Martin notices Zimmerman and thinks the guy is following him. Still no crimes. Zimmerman continues to follow Martin. Martin begins to walk down the sidewalk the T. Zimmerman gets out of his vehicle either to pursue Martin on foot, or look for a street sign to relay to the police. The dispatcher tells Zimmerman they do not need him to get out of the car and follow. The dispatcher holds no legal precedence, thus Zimmerman is not legally required to do what he says. Even so Zimmerman says he will comply. Martin has a total of 4 minutes to either go home or hide until Zimmerman goes away from when Zimmerman tells the dispatcher that he lost sight of Martin. Zimmerman is now walking back in the direction of his vehicle and Martins location is unknown. And again, at this point there is absolutely NO crimes being committed by either party (with the exception of Martin having Marijuana in his system). As Zimmerman continues back to his car Martin emerges and confronts Zimmerman. This is when the fight starts. Before the gunshot, Martin has no injuries other than on his knuckles. Zimmerman has a broken nose, and injuries all around his head. At the moment of the Gunshot witnesses say Martin is on top wailing down punches. Zimmerman fears for his life/fears of great bodily harm especially when Martin notices Zimmerman has a weapon. At this point Martin has committed aggravated assault with a deadly weapon (cement) and Zimmerman has committed no crime. Zimmerman pulls out his weapon and shoots Martin. Zimmerman has now acted in Self Defense. After this moment nothing else matters. Self Defense is grounds for acquittal. Now to the burden of proof. It is the Prosecutions job to prove the above theory is false beyond any reasonable doubt. If they cannot, Zimmerman by law should go free. Zimmerman need not prove the above theory, as it is the Prosecutions case. Zimmerman by law and logic, should go free under Self Defense.

  • Did not break any laws

    He followed: not illegal
    He carried a loaded weapon with a permit: not illegal
    The gun used hollow point bullets: again not only not illegal but preferred to use to control collateral damage
    Then he was attacked, this was the only crime committed, and it was committed by Trayvon Martin
    He used self defense to save his life. Show me where the crime happened

  • Manslaughter, not murder

    Zimmerman acted inappropriately after his call to the police. My guess is that he got out of his car, asked TM what he was doing here, was met by a "FCK YOU" and then approached TM. This is IMHO enough to justify TM attacking Zimmerman. The call to the police easily contains evidence that Zimmerman was looking for a fight. The fight escalated, and Zimmerman shot TM.

    The shooting was more than likely not intended, and given the escalation of the fight (one that Zimmerman more than likely is quite responsible for instigating), was the best method Zimmerman thought he had to contain a bad situation.

  • The evidence is clearly in his favor.

    The dude was getting his head smashed into the concrete. Nuff said. The bullet was fired while Trayvon was on top of him. All the circumstantial evidence the state has offered is extremely weak. Zimmerman had a reasonable suspicion that he might die. In conclusion, I think it's sad that this has become so politicized,

  • They do not have enough evidence to convict him of second degree murder or manslaughter.

    Zimmerman's testimony is backed up by his injuries in the back of his head and also the injuries in his nose. He claims self defense and based on his injuries and Trayvons lack of injuries he will be acquitted. It is obvious that Trayvon started the fight and Zimmerman shot him because he thought his life was in imminent danger since Trayvon was beating him up pretty bad. The question is... Was Trayvon going to continue slamming his skull against the pavement and beating him up or was he gonna stop once he saw Zimmerman was pretty beaten?

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
fortinbras says2013-07-09T21:26:11.503
Oops. Some words were left out. I did not mean to write "slamming his head ... MMA style", but slamming his head into the concrete and punching him MMA style.
Ragnar says2013-07-11T16:45:52.607
He's suspect, but the hype seems to be due to an ugly man killing a cute kid (regardless of other facts).
AnonyFeline says2013-07-14T00:13:44.263
Zimmerman should definitely have stayed in the vehicle and not have profiled or approached his suspect, but he did. Martin should have gone home and not have approached him, but he did. These are two crucial choices that escalated the event into a confrontation. One man was committing an act of violence against another. Self defense was necessary.

Disclosure: I was originally completely of the opinion that Zimmerman was the assailant and Martin the victim. After hearing the arguments through the televised proceedings, it is clear that Zimmerman is not guilty of murder, and perhaps even involuntary manslaughter, but was acting in self defense. Is he innocent of profiling? Probably not. Is he guilty of striving to be a good citizen on the path to law enforcement? Probably.
spec24 says2013-07-14T00:32:22.050
There is no law against profiling - at least for a citizen. There is also no law against being involved in a "confrontation" - although there is no evidence that Zimmerman confronted Trayvon - only his word and a lack of any evidence that he did anything other than follow Martin to see where he was going and then went back to his truck.