Posted on 07/09/2013 11:46:40 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
*On Monday (7/8) the defense attorneys in the George Zimmerman trial brought forth testimony from a parade of witnesses who vouched that the screams for help on the 911 tapes were those of Zimmerman and not Trayvon Martin.
Legal analysts called it a victory for the defense, claiming the testimony of Trayvon’s father Tracy Martin was weak and contradictory. However, the father did raise one simple question that seems to be largely overlooked – why did Zimmerman leave his car in the first place to go after his son?
It would seem the prosecution’s best strategy would have been to camp on the 911 call where the dispatchers clearly instructed Zimmerman not to pursue Trayvon stating “We don’t need you to do that.” What was the timeline from that directive to the fatal shot? Zimmerman’s claim that he was looking for the name of the street location is weak. For someone who has lived on that complex for three years – to be as diligent and concerned a watchman as he portrays – and not know the location he was patrolling is incredible. Reportedly, there are only three street names throughout the entire complex.
To claim that he could not gather his thoughts through all the excitement and adrenaline flowing doesn’t add up as police and other witnesses reported that they found him to be too calm and collected for someone who had just shot another human being.
So it appears the prosecution should have focused on Zimmerman’s neglecting to follow the instruction of law enforcement professionals – that’s the cut bank where the defense would erode.
The Florida Supreme Court defines negligence as follows:
“Negligence is the failure to use reasonable care. Reasonable care is that degree of care which a reasonably careful person would use under like circumstances. Negligence may consist either in doing something that a reasonably careful person would not do under like circumstances or in failing to do something that a reasonably careful person would do under like circumstances.” (Florida Standard Jury Instructions, 4.1).
Zimmerman’s case should be likened to a drunk driver who rear-ended another vehicle resulting in loss of life. Zimmerman was intoxicated with his own agenda and ambition, plain and simple. The trial should be focused on the initial impact – that is how Trayvon was impacted once he realized he was being followed by someone who did not identify himself as he should have.
By the way, in identifying who in fact is screaming “help” on the 911 tape, I’m reminded of a story I once heard where upon viewing her dead husband’s body a woman thought it did not resemble him and complained to the funeral director, “That’s not my husband” to which the director replied “How do you know…you’ve never seen him dead before!” So I ask, how can anyone be sure of who is in fact screaming on the tape when they’ve never heard what the person in desperation may sound like in the face of death?
So we should believe Trayvon’s mother when she says it is her son, but NOT the many other witnesses who said it was Z
And we should ignore that his own father originally said it was NOT Saint Skittles screaming.
I was thinking about this yesterday when it came up- my 3 daughters were outside playing and screaming with their friend and I could clearly pick out my 3
Trayvon’s mom is a liar. She does not care her young thug was at fault.
Zimmermann did not call 911.
There's the difference; Zimmerman had an ambition, the thug - none.
Hence “Creepy ass-cracker”.
I am sick and tired of these racists trying to defend criminals.
Nobody ever mentions that the burglaries in the neighborhood stopped after Martin was shot.
I don't know Florida law, but looking at this case the best the state/prosecution should have sought would have been something akin to negligent involuntary manslaughter in the first place. Thats not second degree murder.
A strong case could be made (and is being made, it seems) that GZ was using reasonable care in trying to head off and reduce crime in his neighborhood. A reasonable person, good citizen, could be expected to do the same. He was not neglectful.
And this is not a negligence case. The burden is proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
***Unfortunately for GZ, this will become a negligence case when the family sues him.
Good grief, next thing ya know they’ll be saying he killed TM just for the fame of it.
Answer to the question.
A: Lots of robberies. Trevon fit the profile.
(Sorry, libs, but that’s sort of how pattern recognition works. Oh, forgot, pattern recognition is for grownups, not femlib nazis and other libarts marshmallow majors.)
Which was my earlier point; this case was overcharged from the start. If the state wanted to file charges with a reasonable chance of being successful (and fair for that matter), it would have to be a negligence case, not Murder 2.
Of course she is a liar, the parents didn’t even realize it was Martin that was killed, because it was not unusual for him to wonder off for days at a time.
His parents are using his death for financial gain, and will join the ranks of Jackson and Sharpton as race mongers, regardless of the verdict.
They are probably organizing the riots right now.
Martin was hopped up on drugs, had been using a broadcasting his use on twitter, suspended from school for drug use, and position.
He was not that 12 year old in the picture.
I can' tell you how may times I've now discussed the case with black people only to have them conclude that...
Zimmerman profiled Martin... so Zimmerman is guilty of murder.
Or Zimmerman followed Martin... so Zimmerman is guilty of murder.
Or Zimmerman disregarded the dispatcher's suggestion to remain in place... so Zimmerman is guilty of murder.
After the hundredth time explaining that even if we accept those statements to be true, that alone is not dispositive of Zimmerman being guilty of murder. That's usually when the other party becomes even more incredulous and emotional. It's not worth arguing. The black community sees the case (and other aspects of American life) differently than all others, you're not going to change their mind, so why argue.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.