Florida jury instructions, before and after SYG

[_ldsfaqs]

Who was speaking on the Audio recordings?

All the witnesses, and Zimmerman..... The other recordings, testimony of Jeantel, etc. validate parts of Zimmerman's claims.

[_ldsfaqs]

My question "If Zimmerman had stayed in his car, as instructed, would Trayvon still be alive? Yes/No" is most definitely relevant.

Obviously, but the question is still irrelvant because free acts do not equate to responsible acts.
I gave you several examples which showed you the irrelevance of this line of logic, and you ignore it.

What was the risk factor had Zimmerman stayed in his car?
Well, history tells us that a house may have been burgled. But police were already on their way. Zimmerman didn't need to do anything more. He chose to get out of the car, he chose to carry a loaded weapon, he chose to place himself in a position where a confrontation was a possibility. Trayvon did nothing to precipitate Zimmerman's actions that went beyond ringing it in to the police.

If you had actually been paying attention to ANY of the evidence, Zimmerman was having trouble keeping and getting the right location for police to go to, and so he was both keeping an eye on Trayvon and trying to find the location he was last seen.

Those are not "responsible" actions. Your ignoring that doesn't change that fact.

So, is a kid ending up dead an acceptable collateral damage in the protection of that community? Yes/No

If No, what should the community where Trayvon was killed do now to prevent this type of thing happening again?
What should Zimmerman learn from this episode?

A kid ended up dead because he assaulted a man..... Period. How you people keep ignoring that direct fact for your fantasy's is telling.

What he learned is sometimes helping to protect the community is dangerous, which is why he had a gun, because he knew it could be. After the fact given the liberal slander machine, he might however from now on just leave anything to the police if he see's something.

But still, if Trayvon had been a murderer, a rapist, a burglar, he would have been held partially responsible for having let the person get away or commit his crime.

Why are you people holding a law abiding citizen responsible for the PART of his actions that were "due diligence" for a good citizen???? That due diligence was and is not immoral or wrong. The only immoral and wrong was Trayvon's actions that night. But as usual, liberals call good evil and evil good.

[_cinepro]

My question "If Zimmerman had stayed in his car, as instructed, would Trayvon still be alive? Yes/No" is most definitely relevant.

The answer is obviously "Yes".
What was the risk factor had Zimmerman stayed in his car?
Well, history tells us that a house may have been burgled. But police were already on their way. Zimmerman didn't need to do anything more. He chose to get out of the car, he chose to carry a loaded weapon, he chose to place himself in a position where a confrontation was a possibility. Trayvon did nothing to precipitate Zimmerman's actions that went beyond ringing it in to the police.

So, is a kid ending up dead an acceptable collateral damage in the protection of that community? Yes/No

If No, what should the community where Trayvon was killed do now to prevent this type of thing happening again?
What should Zimmerman learn from this episode?

I don't think anyone is arguing that Zimmerman acted wisely. He made many bad decisions that night. The problem is (for those that wanted him sent to jail), he didn't act criminally.

It's hard to comprehend how an unarmed teenager could be shot dead and the shooter doesn't end up in jail, but I wish the protesters would put a little more thought and energy into trying to comprehend it.


I also don't understand how the Trayvon Martin shooting has received so much more attention than the other black men who were shot last year. It's as if he were the only person shot in the United States in 2012. The problem of black people getting shot is much, much bigger than what happened to Trayvon Martin, and the problem overzealous mexican neighborhood watchmen.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... lack-crime

Startling statistics reveal that between 1980-2008, African-Americans were six times more likely than whites to be victims of gun violence and seven times more likely to kill with guns than whites, according to the Justice Department. African-Americans represent a mere 13% of the US population yet more than 50% of federal prisoners are black. You can claim racial bias in the judicial system, but that doesn't explain all of it.

Why aren't so-called black leaders outraged and marching over the recent shooting rampage in Chicago. During the 4 July holiday weekend, including the Wednesday leading up to it, 62 people were wounded by gun violence in Chicago and 12 others killed. The holiday shooting spree raised Chicago's homicide tally to 200 for the year. Last year about 500 people were killed, and most of those killing and being killed in Chicago are black. According to the Chicago Tribune, "blacks make up about 33% of the city's population, they accounted for nearly 78% of the homicide victims through the first six months of 2012".

With the mainstream media's national attention on the Zimmerman murder trail, I think it's stunning that scant, if any, attention was given to the violence raging in Chicago or other cities across the country. As I've said many times during this case, Americans, especially black Americans, have come to accept blacks killing other blacks as normal.

[_beastie]

I also don't understand how the Trayvon Martin shooting has received so much more attention than the other black men who were shot last year. It's as if he were the only person shot in the United States in 2012. The problem of black people getting shot is much, much bigger than what happened to Trayvon Martin, and the problem overzealous mexican neighborhood watchmen.

If you don't understand it's because you don't want to. It's been repeatedly explained.

When this initially happened, the police barely investigated the event at all. They were largely willing to take GZ at his word. THAT is what created the intense interest in this case.

[_Brackite]

I don't think anyone is arguing that Zimmerman acted wisely.

ldsfaqs has.

[_Brackite]

When this initially happened, the police barely investigated the event at all. They were largely willing to take GZ at his word. THAT is what created the intense interest in this case.

Well is has now been investigated thoroughly along with the FBI investing this and coming out stating that there was no evidence of racial bias in George Zimmerman's history. It is now time to move on to other things.

[_ldsfaqs]

I don't think anyone is arguing that Zimmerman acted wisely.

ldsfaqs has.

I've argued that he acted "reasonably", not inappropriately. "Wise" or not is really not for us to decide, because he had every right to do what he did at every step.

People would say getting involved in a fight between two people, to stop it etc. is not "wise", but is it RIGHT, is it reasonable?
YES IT IS!!!

Most of the same people who cry that Zimmerman shouldn't have been a proactive citizen would be the same people complaining that people act like "bystanders" when a criminal or otherwise act, event, or person is occurring.

Hypocrites.

[_Bazooka]

A kid ended up dead because he assaulted a man..... Period. How you people keep ignoring that direct fact for your fantasy's is telling.

A kid ended up dead because he assaulted an armed stranger who was following him in a suspicious manner.

If Zimmerman had stayed in his car then Trayvon Martin would be alive today and the Zimmerman family would not have been sentenced to a life running away from public recognition.

Did Zimmerman act criminally? Clearly not, in the eyes of the law.

Did Zimmerman act sensibly? Clearly not.

Did Zimmermans action precipitate the situation to the point it became confrontational and potentially deadly (he carried a loaded weapon)? Clearly yes.

That Zimmerman comes away from this blameless in the eyes of the law is a bit of a travesty of justice in my eyes. At the very least he should be on some form of probation, banned from participating in neighbourhood watch schemes and banned from carrying a firearm. He has proven himself irresponsible, irresponsibility which resulted in the death of an unarmed, innocent passer by.

[_Bazooka]

Most of the same people who cry that Zimmerman shouldn't have been a proactive citizen would be the same people complaining that people act like "bystanders" when a criminal or otherwise act, event, or person is occurring.

Hypocrites.

Most people would say that Zimmerman acted wholly properly and responsibly as a proactive citizen, right up to the point when he exited the car.
He was then acting irresponsibly, and that irresponsibility by Zimmerman cost Trayvon Martin his life. It is that irresponsibility that he is being castigated for, not the fact that he thought Trayvon was suspicious and needed reporting to the police.

ldsfaqs, you need to understand that Trayvon wasn't doing anything wrong.
He wasn't committing any criminal act.
He wasn't robbing a house, hurting another individual, threatening anyone.
There was no criminal act taking place.
Zimmerman had no need to intervene above and beyond reporting the individual to the police and then letting them deal with it.
It's Neighbourhood Watch, not Neighbourhood Pursuit.

[Guest]

Two problems with your judgment....

1. Trayvon was engaging in suspicious behavior, walking about looking at houses, etc. (in other words casing houses to rob).

2. In another thread I responded to a post prior to mine of a link which clearly shows that the Dispatcher INSTRUCTED Zimmerman to keep an eye on Trayvon and report his activity. It was only LATER at the end of the call did the dispatcher recommended not to follow Trayvon. Zimmerman was already out of the car etc. well BEFORE that time.

3. As you can see, you people judge on your feelings, not the actual facts. Further, your feelings that Zimmerman shouldn't have left his car is irrelevant. A person has the right, period. Trayvon Martin was the sole cause of his own death, period. Even if Zimmerman was suspicious to Trayvon, which I'm sure he was also, that doesn't change who was at fault. Innocent people don't generally beat up people simply because they are being "checked out". Guilty people do that. Further, Trayvon was guilty because he committed a violent assault when there was no evidence he was going to be assaulted. And the fact that Zimmerman was beat up so much and on the ground straddled, as well as ZERO evidence of blows to Trayvon demonstrates that he was "surprised" and had not actually confronted Trayvon, but that Trayvon had jumped him.

Also, your statement about it being Neighborhood Watch and not neighborhood pursuit is just dumb.
In order to "watch", if the suspect moves you keep watching, which means you follow as long as it seems safe for you to do so. Yes, and Zimmerman had a gun, which does mean he felt safer than the average citizen, but that's not "guilt". Even security guards are trained to FOLLOW suspicious character's and activity. Observe and report. If suspects move, you follow them. You have to in order to be able to "observe" them.

I know what I'm talking about. I not only did two years of Criminal Justice, learning from primarily retired police officers and police academy trainers and the director, and having worked with law enforcement, I also trained a three month classroom and on the job training program for security, being certified, as well as trained another program in private investigation at another time, being certified. I've also worked as a security officer and supervisor in all kinds of scenario's.

I think I know better than you what a person's duty is in "watching", what it entails.