Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Snake Alchemist

(3,318 posts)
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 09:02 AM Apr 2012

Will justice only be served if George Zimmerman is convicted?

I'm going to take the unpopular stance that I want to wait to see how the trial unfolds. I am anxious to hear the witness and coroner testimonies. I'm going to approach it with an open mind and see what comes to light.

128 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Will justice only be served if George Zimmerman is convicted? (Original Post) Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 OP
The whole thing has already been prejudged. dkf Apr 2012 #1
That will definitely be a key finding. nt Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #4
I agree completely! HIMYM Apr 2012 #99
Has Fox News convicted Zimmerman? nt greyl Apr 2012 #107
Since I am finding it extremely difficult to get the facts in this case rock Apr 2012 #2
Blackstone: Better 10 guilty go free than one innocent suffer ProgressiveProfessor Apr 2012 #3
It's based on his state of mind. dkf Apr 2012 #6
With the stand your ground law, he might be really not guilty. LiberalArkie Apr 2012 #5
Good point treestar Apr 2012 #7
How difficult should it be to claim self-defense? Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #8
Many states - it is an affirmative defense treestar Apr 2012 #120
My understanding of the law is that you can arthritisR_US Apr 2012 #30
I thought it meant though you could retreat, you don't have to treestar Apr 2012 #121
I may be wrong but I thought it only arthritisR_US Apr 2012 #122
It will be a step in the right direction BklnDem75 Apr 2012 #9
so regardless of what comes out in trial, you've Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #12
Yes BklnDem75 Apr 2012 #14
glad you are that confident. nt Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #21
Practice makes perfect BklnDem75 Apr 2012 #25
What about Casey Anthony, OJ, Duke Lacrosse, Reginald Denny? Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #40
There was no verdict in the Duke case because NoGOPZone Apr 2012 #42
Very true. But many were convinced of their guilt early on. nt Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #44
Those cases makes my point more, don't you think? BklnDem75 Apr 2012 #45
No. nt Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #46
So you believe justice was served in those cases? BklnDem75 Apr 2012 #50
Maybe. Hopefully, the jurors made the decision they thought was best. nt Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #51
Seriously? Caylee Anthony had justice with that verdict? BklnDem75 Apr 2012 #56
So you're sure she did not? nt Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #59
Once again, yes BklnDem75 Apr 2012 #60
Glad to know that you are better informed than many juries. You should sell your services. nt Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #61
Your mistake is thinking jurors are more informed simply because they're jurors BklnDem75 Apr 2012 #65
No. But I do believe they may be more informed than joe sixpack off the street. Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #67
Have you ever been a part of a jury pool? BklnDem75 Apr 2012 #69
yes. the media often is inaccurate. especially initially. nt Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #82
I was referring to live coverage, not speculation. BklnDem75 Apr 2012 #91
There was live coverage of the shooting? Then it should be a quick decision by the jury. nt Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #92
Mind sticking to the subject? BklnDem75 Apr 2012 #93
You said there was live coverage, no? nt Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #94
Of court cases, remember? BklnDem75 Apr 2012 #97
Oh, then I agree that if someone watches 100% of the live coverage and reviews 100% of the evidence Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #100
You're welcome BklnDem75 Apr 2012 #103
Wait, are you going to buy me a 4 million dollar ring? nt Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #104
I'm pretty confident myself WeekendWarrior Apr 2012 #27
Surprisingly, you are allowed to follow people. nt Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #34
I think if the police tell you not to and you're carrying a gun WeekendWarrior Apr 2012 #41
Does not mean you cannot do it though. Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #43
You're right, he doesn't have to, but WeekendWarrior Apr 2012 #53
In your mind? Hopefully, the trial will leave little room for doubt in whichever direction it takes Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #55
You're Kidding, Right? WeekendWarrior Apr 2012 #62
Confronting him? Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #63
Yes, and they sometimes get it wrong WeekendWarrior Apr 2012 #64
Hopefully, all evidence will be reviewed and the right verdict will be reached. Whatever that Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #66
I agree. And in my opinion WeekendWarrior Apr 2012 #108
I am, too. H2O Man Apr 2012 #127
Of course SaltyBro Apr 2012 #10
why do we even need a trial? nt Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #13
because that is how our country works SaltyBro Apr 2012 #17
But if we already know the correct verdict than maybe it is a waste of time. nt Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #35
Please stop it Becka2515 Apr 2012 #20
The poster didn't mention M1 obamanut2012 Apr 2012 #33
The post i replied too Becka2515 Apr 2012 #79
Justice will be served... HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #11
Barring some heretofore unknown, definitively exculpatory, evidence, yes. n/t Egalitarian Thug Apr 2012 #15
Probably a dumb question at this point, but was an autopsy performed on Trayvon? Lex Apr 2012 #16
The autopsy should answer many questions. OneGrassRoot Apr 2012 #22
Yes, the autopsy results will be key then. Lex Apr 2012 #26
Exactly. n/t OneGrassRoot Apr 2012 #28
I was thinking the same thing obamanut2012 Apr 2012 #36
The affidavit the prosecution filed during yesterday's hearing NoGOPZone Apr 2012 #38
In the Special Prosecutor's Affadavit of Probable Cause Trayvon was shot in the chest csziggy Apr 2012 #77
Of course not leftynyc Apr 2012 #18
Check out some of the posts above ours and you will see some will only be satisfied with one Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #37
Then some people are not interested in justice leftynyc Apr 2012 #47
People walk all the time for crimes they have committed RZM Apr 2012 #19
Most DUers wanted the victim to have a day in court Johonny Apr 2012 #23
The goalpost seems to be moving Life Long Dem Apr 2012 #24
Justice will be served when we know the facts of this case Skip_In_Boulder Apr 2012 #29
I think that's obvious. Marr Apr 2012 #31
Chased? Maybe. nt Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #39
Pursued, at least, AFTER being commanded not to do so. Lex Apr 2012 #48
He was commanded? nt Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #49
Told, instructed, advised. He pursued anyway. Lex Apr 2012 #52
I believe he was told it was not necessary. Far cry from a command. nt Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #54
Fact remains the 911 record shows he was in pursuit. Lex Apr 2012 #57
Yes, and you are allowed to do that. nt Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #58
I believe your not allowed to be the aggressor and then claim the SYG law as a defense. Life Long Dem Apr 2012 #72
I do not believe that the law considers following an Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #84
Stalking is a form of aggression. Life Long Dem Apr 2012 #96
I am not sure at what threshhold that it becomes stalking. nt Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #98
Could be a repetitive thing Life Long Dem Apr 2012 #102
Not maybe. This isn't in dispute. Marr Apr 2012 #71
following is not chasing. nt Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #81
Yes it is. Marr Apr 2012 #86
If p then q <> If q then p Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #88
So is it your contention that Zimmerman needed to "follow" Martin... bluesbassman Apr 2012 #95
No, merely that following is not always chasing. nt Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #101
Justice can only be served if he gets a fair trial Yo_Mama Apr 2012 #32
We are not the jury Kesiyu Apr 2012 #68
What proof of that "wound" do you have? What proof of Zimmy "was definitely under Trayvon" do you uppityperson Apr 2012 #70
The video enhanced by ABC News Kesiyu Apr 2012 #73
That is not proof of either of your assertions. Try again. uppityperson Apr 2012 #75
I guess the jury will have to decide if that's a wound Kesiyu Apr 2012 #109
If the police don't have any photos of Zimmerman's injuries then he has no evidence of injuries Life Long Dem Apr 2012 #78
How does that video prove Zimmy was under Trayvon? I don't see it, would you point it out for me? uppityperson Apr 2012 #80
I didn't say it proves it Kesiyu Apr 2012 #110
This message was self-deleted by its author BklnDem75 Apr 2012 #112
We just have to believe Zimmerman was tended to by paramedics... BklnDem75 Apr 2012 #74
Yeah... life-threatening damage that didn't even require a butterfly bandage. gkhouston Apr 2012 #76
You say "supposed gash" but it could be a welt Kesiyu Apr 2012 #111
All this is beside the point... cyberswede Apr 2012 #113
So far, everyone that went with the 'wound to the head' story BklnDem75 Apr 2012 #114
Never say "everyone" Kesiyu Apr 2012 #116
Actually if you read your own article, it's talking about the media, BklnDem75 Apr 2012 #117
Never say "never". uppityperson Apr 2012 #125
No Proud Liberal Dem Apr 2012 #83
+1 - Exactly what I wanted to say n/t MrBig Apr 2012 #87
You've been on the fence since the beginning of this Rex Apr 2012 #85
Very true. I have been on the fence. Snake Alchemist Apr 2012 #89
I really want to watch the trial. Rex Apr 2012 #105
Is justice a real thing, or is it just something we tell ourselves to make life seem less shity? nt ZombieHorde Apr 2012 #90
Depends on if a person believes in the concept of evil and good imo. Rex Apr 2012 #106
I believe good and evil are emotional reactions to perceived stimuli. ZombieHorde Apr 2012 #118
I don't really know. Rex Apr 2012 #119
Maybe, maybe not. H2O Man Apr 2012 #115
Only if he is found guilty by a jury based on evidence. Better Believe It Apr 2012 #123
Hopefully a fair trial chrisa Apr 2012 #124
He clearly shot and killed an unarmed teenager. alarimer Apr 2012 #126
my opinion is barbtries Apr 2012 #128
 

dkf

(37,305 posts)
1. The whole thing has already been prejudged.
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 09:07 AM
Apr 2012

Personally I want to know what the autopsy shows about who was where then the shot was fired. If Zimmerman was on top that screams guilty to me. If he was underneath then I'd listen more to what he has to say. But all this stuff coming out is ridiculous if we want an impartial jury.

 

HIMYM

(12 posts)
99. I agree completely!
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 03:49 PM
Apr 2012

the all and powerful media has already convicted Zimmerman.

and despite how much people hate the media, they tend to listen when their statements are the same as theirs.

Lets let the trial tell us the facts and not the media.

rock

(13,218 posts)
2. Since I am finding it extremely difficult to get the facts in this case
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 09:08 AM
Apr 2012

I too, want to suppress any pre-judgement and wait to see what evidence is presented.

ProgressiveProfessor

(22,144 posts)
3. Blackstone: Better 10 guilty go free than one innocent suffer
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 09:19 AM
Apr 2012

Though I have serious doubts how this could be justifiable.

 

dkf

(37,305 posts)
6. It's based on his state of mind.
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 09:56 AM
Apr 2012

I'm not sure how a persons own bias would affect that. I imagine someone who is generally more nervous would find it reasonable while someone who isn't would think it was too much.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
7. Good point
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 09:59 AM
Apr 2012

the worst part about this law is that it makes is so easy to claim self defense and standing your ground - really an ill advised law that could lead to a lot of deaths/beatings that might not have happened.

arthritisR_US

(7,283 posts)
30. My understanding of the law is that you can
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 11:30 AM
Apr 2012

stand your ground if you are approached aggressively and there is no alternative open to retreat. Here Zimmerman did the approaching, against advisement not to do so and wait for the police. It strikes me that in applying this law it would be Trayvon who could claim it's usage not Zimmerman, IMO.

treestar

(82,383 posts)
121. I thought it meant though you could retreat, you don't have to
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 08:01 PM
Apr 2012

Which really caters to anyone spoiling for a fight.

arthritisR_US

(7,283 posts)
122. I may be wrong but I thought it only
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 08:18 PM
Apr 2012

applied to a no choice situation. Otherwise, what you would have is open season for anyone with a grudge, be it race, gender or orientation.

BklnDem75

(2,918 posts)
9. It will be a step in the right direction
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 10:55 AM
Apr 2012

Even if a shitty law condones murder, it's still murder, not justice.

BklnDem75

(2,918 posts)
14. Yes
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 11:07 AM
Apr 2012

Just like with Sean Bell, Rodney King, Amadou Diallo and countless other verdicts, you don't need a jury to know an injustice was done.

BklnDem75

(2,918 posts)
65. Your mistake is thinking jurors are more informed simply because they're jurors
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 01:18 PM
Apr 2012

How do you feel about overturned cases? Was justice served until it wasn't?

 

Snake Alchemist

(3,318 posts)
67. No. But I do believe they may be more informed than joe sixpack off the street.
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 01:21 PM
Apr 2012

I do not believe cases should be overturned unless their is evidence indicating they should.

BklnDem75

(2,918 posts)
69. Have you ever been a part of a jury pool?
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 01:25 PM
Apr 2012

Where do you think these juries come from? Unless there's a media blackout, we all get the same information.

BklnDem75

(2,918 posts)
97. Of court cases, remember?
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 03:48 PM
Apr 2012

Jurors and non-jurors getting the same information? Do you need to reread the thread? I'm in no rush, take your time.

 

Snake Alchemist

(3,318 posts)
100. Oh, then I agree that if someone watches 100% of the live coverage and reviews 100% of the evidence
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 03:51 PM
Apr 2012

exhibits then they may have a valuable opinion concerning the verdict.

WeekendWarrior

(1,437 posts)
27. I'm pretty confident myself
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 11:25 AM
Apr 2012

I heard the 911 recording:

Are you following him?

Yes.

We don't need you to do that.

OK.

Yet he went forward anyway. He was pursuing an unarmed kid and carrying a gun. That kid is now dead.

If anyone could claim self-defense, it's Trayvon Martin. Do you think he would have been given the same benefit of the doubt?

WeekendWarrior

(1,437 posts)
41. I think if the police tell you not to and you're carrying a gun
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 12:19 PM
Apr 2012

you should probably listen to them and get the fuck back in your car.

Zimmerman did all he needed to do. Notified the police. Anything beyond that is on him. And a young man is dead because of it.

WeekendWarrior

(1,437 posts)
53. You're right, he doesn't have to, but
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 12:53 PM
Apr 2012

look what happened. A man wound up dead. At his hand. And he was the only one carrying a gun.

And, to my mind, if Trayvon lashed out in any way, HE was the one defending himself. HE was the one standing his ground.

Your concern for Zimmerman is noted, however.

 

Snake Alchemist

(3,318 posts)
55. In your mind? Hopefully, the trial will leave little room for doubt in whichever direction it takes
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 12:57 PM
Apr 2012

Also, I have no love for Zimmerman, but having been burned before I am willing to wait to see how everything unfolds.

WeekendWarrior

(1,437 posts)
62. You're Kidding, Right?
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 01:11 PM
Apr 2012

Trials are FULL of doubt. The outcome of most trials doesn't come down to the evidence but to the skill and likeability of the attorneys involved and their ability to sway a jury despite what the evidence might say. That justice is sometimes served is a mere by-product of the process. So this belief that a trial will clear anything up is a dubious one.

In this case, however, based on that 911 recording alone, Zimmerman did what he shouldn't have been doing—following what he thought was a "thug" and confronting him. After he had been told not to do that. And despite what you think about the words on the recording, Neighborhood Watch people are ROUTINELY told NOT TO PURSUE, MERELY REPORT. For their own safety. And because Zimmerman was the neighborhood watch captain, he would know this.

And your own personal bias—having been burned—has nothing to do with this particular case.

He followed an unarmed boy who was merely walking home from the store and shot him. There is no justification for what he did.

WeekendWarrior

(1,437 posts)
64. Yes, and they sometimes get it wrong
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 01:17 PM
Apr 2012

Hopefully, in this case they won't and Zimmerman will be convicted. And maybe his conviction will be a warning to all the gun happy idiots out there who take to the streets trying to play hero.

WeekendWarrior

(1,437 posts)
108. I agree. And in my opinion
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 04:25 PM
Apr 2012

—which is all anyone here has to offer—the right verdict is guilty. I'm not beholden to the law in assuming that a man is innocent until proven guilty. That's a legal concept.

SaltyBro

(198 posts)
17. because that is how our country works
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 11:13 AM
Apr 2012

we're a democracy and we have a bill of rights. the right to a fair trial is one of them.

 

Becka2515

(58 posts)
20. Please stop it
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 11:16 AM
Apr 2012

You or I don't know precisely what went on that night and what was going through Zimmerman's mind at the time, I think him guilty of Manslaughter at the very least but there is no credible facts that point to 1st degree murder.

 

Becka2515

(58 posts)
79. The post i replied too
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 02:11 PM
Apr 2012

sounded like Zimmerman committed M1, stalking and executing sure sounds like M1. I dont believe that happened that night.

 

HooptieWagon

(17,064 posts)
11. Justice will be served...
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 10:59 AM
Apr 2012

... if there is competent prosecutors, competent defense, competent judge, and a competent jury that examines the evidence presented to them and renders a verdict.

Lex

(34,108 posts)
16. Probably a dumb question at this point, but was an autopsy performed on Trayvon?
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 11:12 AM
Apr 2012

And (if there was one) did it show if he was shot in the back or in the chest or what?




OneGrassRoot

(22,920 posts)
22. The autopsy should answer many questions.
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 11:17 AM
Apr 2012

From what I can tell, the results are still sealed.

I was also wondering how valid the funeral director's comments were. I didn't realize he actually spoke with someone in a fairly public, official way about what he saw:


The funeral director who prepared Trayvon Martin's body for burial told a TV anchor that Martin had no injuries to his hands or arms that would indicate a fight had occurred.

Richard Kurtz told CNN's Nancy Grace on Wednesday that Martin had a gunshot wound to his upper chest, but any other injury would have been difficult to detect because an autopsy was performed on the teen's body before he received it.

"As for his hands and knuckles, I don't see any evidence he had been fighting anybody," Kurtz said.

http://www.nbc12.com/story/17286084/trayvon-martins-autopsy-still-under-seal

Lex

(34,108 posts)
26. Yes, the autopsy results will be key then.
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 11:24 AM
Apr 2012

I was slightly worried that they hadn't done one because of how badly bumbled (perhaps intentionally) things have been.

The special prosecutor has seen the results of the autopsy before deciding to file 2nd degree murder charges, and they've been sealed, so there must be some very interesting things in that autopsy report.

obamanut2012

(26,047 posts)
36. I was thinking the same thing
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 12:14 PM
Apr 2012

Because I thought the charge would be Manslaughter, but if the autopsy reports show some "interesting" things...

NoGOPZone

(2,971 posts)
38. The affidavit the prosecution filed during yesterday's hearing
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 12:14 PM
Apr 2012

indicates that Trayvon was shot in the chest. See third paragraph from the end in the following document. Autopsies are routinely performed in cases of violent deaths. That's one thing Sanford got right.

http://media.trb.com/media/acrobat/2012-04/69353440.pdf

 

leftynyc

(26,060 posts)
18. Of course not
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 11:15 AM
Apr 2012

and I suspect you're merely wanting to stir people up with even asking this ridiclulous question. If it's a fair and public trial and no jurors have been paid or threatened, they will have done their jobs and whatever their decision is is what it is. I don't have to agree with the jury in order to say justice has been done (I think OJ is guilty as sin).

 

Snake Alchemist

(3,318 posts)
37. Check out some of the posts above ours and you will see some will only be satisfied with one
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 12:14 PM
Apr 2012

conclusion. I used to think OJ and Casey Anthony were guilty as sin. Now I'm not 100% positive for either one.

 

leftynyc

(26,060 posts)
47. Then some people are not interested in justice
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 12:29 PM
Apr 2012

Justice is a fair trial - all many people were asking for Mr. Martin and his family. If that SYG law is seen by the jury as an acceptable defense, then so be it. Work to change the law - we cannot bend the laws to fit our worldview.

 

RZM

(8,556 posts)
19. People walk all the time for crimes they have committed
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 11:16 AM
Apr 2012

It's part of the game.

That being said, I haven't seen all the evidence and I'm not a lawyer, so I really can't say whether or not Zimmerman committed second degree murder. That's what the trial is for I guess.

Johonny

(20,819 posts)
23. Most DUers wanted the victim to have a day in court
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 11:20 AM
Apr 2012

I don't think any DUer will know how the court case will turn out. Other high profile cases have surprised in the past.

In true metaphysical sense "justice" is beyond knowing or reaching a conclusive definition on internet boards. For starters some think justice can never be served unless the dead kid can pop back to life... defining what justice means to people compared to the justice process is in the US is likely a murky topic.

 

Life Long Dem

(8,582 posts)
24. The goalpost seems to be moving
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 11:21 AM
Apr 2012

First it was for justice that he have a trial. Now this is being expanded to a conviction. I myself am still in the camp of innocent until proven guilty. So I'll wait until trial, and hold any mob mentality at bay until then.

 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
31. I think that's obvious.
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 11:37 AM
Apr 2012

Zimmerman chased and murdered an unarmed boy-- that's not even in dispute. So yes, I think it's fair to say that justice will only be served if he's convicted and sentenced.

But these things aren't about justice. They're about law, and those are completely different things. A jury will decide whether there's a case to convict Zimmerman on the charges, not what is "just".

Lex

(34,108 posts)
57. Fact remains the 911 record shows he was in pursuit.
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 01:03 PM
Apr 2012

And that is exactly where a jury will place weight.






 

Life Long Dem

(8,582 posts)
102. Could be a repetitive thing
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 03:52 PM
Apr 2012

But I think GZ would have a hard time claiming the SYG law when he pursued Trayvon.

 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
71. Not maybe. This isn't in dispute.
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 01:54 PM
Apr 2012

He pursued Martin after being informed he didn't need to do that. He said Martin was running, and followed. That's chasing.

 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
86. Yes it is.
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 02:58 PM
Apr 2012
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/chase?s=t

to follow in pursuit: to chase after someone.

But you're making a legal argument here, when you began with a question of justice. Zimmerman may very well legitimately avoid legal prosecution. That has nothing to do with justice.

Given the uncontested information available, I think a reasonable person could say that justice would not be served if Zimmerman walked.

bluesbassman

(19,361 posts)
95. So is it your contention that Zimmerman needed to "follow" Martin...
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 03:42 PM
Apr 2012

in order to fulfill his duties as a Neighborhood Watch Captain?

Yo_Mama

(8,303 posts)
32. Justice can only be served if he gets a fair trial
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 12:05 PM
Apr 2012

Since we don't know all the evidence, esp. the most important stuff, no one of us can truly "know" now that he is guilty of murder two. Granted, we have highly reasonable suspicions. Until the trial we don't know if they are well-founded. Under our system, crimes have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a court. Sometimes that lets the guilty go free or be convicted of lesser charges, but it's still better than shifting the system so that more accused people are convicted of crimes they didn't really commit. Enough are already.

Ultimately the "justice" in a justice system isn't true justice. There's no victim compensation fund that can give the Martin boy his life back, or let his parents get even one more chance to hug him. It's all gone. The only thing we can give the parents now is the knowledge that we all did care about what happened to their son. But that's not justice.

A justice system can only be a search to find the truth and to penalize the truly guilty, but it doesn't provide true justice, and most of us here believe that the goal is not to inflict damage on the guilty comparable to what they inflicted on their victims. Really. we believe in attempting to correct the correctable, and in attempting to defend against further wrongs.

I think the closest we can come to abstract justice is to protect the rights of the accused, and conduct ourselves so that we reiterate to ourselves and all society that the wrongful death of or wrongful injury to any one of us is an offense to all of us. That would be progress, compared to a century ago.

But we shouldn't fool ourselves about justice. There's no way we can make this whole. There's no justice that can be rendered in a true sense.

I don't know why such bad stuff often happens to such good people. What I've seen of the parents is heartrending.

 

Kesiyu

(6 posts)
68. We are not the jury
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 01:25 PM
Apr 2012

Let's not forget Trayvon Martin inflicted a wound in the back of Zimmerman's head. Many of us progressives originally thought Martin had not hurt Zimmerman at all, but that was not the case. Zimmerman was definitely under Trayvon Martin on the ground, contradicting initial (false) claims that a slim, weak Martin could not have outpowered the large gorilla that Zimmerman was (gorilla he isn't, because recent pictures do not show him as being nearly as heavy as we thought).

Let's wait and see what the jury has to say.

uppityperson

(115,677 posts)
70. What proof of that "wound" do you have? What proof of Zimmy "was definitely under Trayvon" do you
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 01:46 PM
Apr 2012

have?

 

Kesiyu

(6 posts)
73. The video enhanced by ABC News
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 02:00 PM
Apr 2012

"ABC News on Monday aired what it said was an enhanced version of a police video taken the night of the shooting that appeared to show wounds or welts on the back of Zimmerman's head."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/media-takes-on-police-like-role-in-trayvon-martin-case-by-analyzing-911-calls-enhancing-video/2012/04/02/gIQAr1HYrS_story.html

uppityperson

(115,677 posts)
75. That is not proof of either of your assertions. Try again.
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 02:07 PM
Apr 2012

Zimmy "may" have had a welt on the back of his head. He may not. That in no way proves your allegations that Trayvon inflicted a wound OR that Zimmy was "definitely under Trayvon". An editorial saying that many qualifiers in no way proves either of those.

"Let's not forget Trayvon Martin inflicted a wound in the back of Zimmerman's head. Many of us progressives originally thought Martin had not hurt Zimmerman at all, but that was not the case. Zimmerman was definitely under Trayvon Martin on the ground, "

Do you think Trayvon attacked Zimmy? Do you think Zimmy should be in prison or out on bail?

 

Life Long Dem

(8,582 posts)
78. If the police don't have any photos of Zimmerman's injuries then he has no evidence of injuries
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 02:11 PM
Apr 2012

Forget about using some blurry enhanced video that you really can't tell if there is any injury or not. If the police didn't take photos then there were no injuries. Or no evidence of any injuries anyway. You could enhance the video to show no injury as well.

uppityperson

(115,677 posts)
80. How does that video prove Zimmy was under Trayvon? I don't see it, would you point it out for me?
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 02:12 PM
Apr 2012

thankyou

 

Kesiyu

(6 posts)
110. I didn't say it proves it
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 04:59 PM
Apr 2012

It is my opinion that I don't think he hit himself in the back of the head or trip.

Response to Kesiyu (Reply #110)

BklnDem75

(2,918 posts)
74. We just have to believe Zimmerman was tended to by paramedics...
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 02:02 PM
Apr 2012

but they purposely ignored dressing up a supposed gash to back of his head. Riiiight.

gkhouston

(21,642 posts)
76. Yeah... life-threatening damage that didn't even require a butterfly bandage.
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 02:07 PM
Apr 2012

Wish I'd landed on that kind of sidewalk the last time I tripped on uneven pavement.

 

Kesiyu

(6 posts)
111. You say "supposed gash" but it could be a welt
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 05:01 PM
Apr 2012

By saying it's supposed to be a gash, you pretend that he had to have his wound closed. Where do you get gash from?

cyberswede

(26,117 posts)
113. All this is beside the point...
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 05:10 PM
Apr 2012

there is no reason why he shot a kid to death.

Do you think he was justified?

 

Kesiyu

(6 posts)
116. Never say "everyone"
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 05:14 PM
Apr 2012

Because blanket statements will likely embarass you. Are you really going to claim that all people described the wound as a gash when talking about the wound? I'd love to believe you, but can't. Why did the AP writer (who is one of the people you cite) not say it was a "gash"? You exaggerate.

BklnDem75

(2,918 posts)
117. Actually if you read your own article, it's talking about the media,
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 05:44 PM
Apr 2012

citing ABC News' enhanced video as an example. It's not actually RUNNING with anything, but thanks for your concern.

To save you from an all out search, since it's so important to you, I'll amend my claim to what I've read so far.

Proud Liberal Dem

(24,396 posts)
83. No
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 02:42 PM
Apr 2012

If Zimmerman is duly acquitted in a court of law that is managed appropriately, then justice will have been served IMHO. The point of seeking "justice" via a trial is not to necessarily convict somebody. It's to examine the facts in a given case in order to determine whether or not a crime was committed and judge accordingly.

 

Rex

(65,616 posts)
85. You've been on the fence since the beginning of this
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 02:55 PM
Apr 2012

no reason to change now. I don't mean that as an insult, I admire you unwillingness to bend to public opinion.

I don't really know- if there is no conviction then where is the justice for the dead kid? If there is a conviction, was justice really served or was Zimm used as a 'sacrificial lamb'. IMO, there are many many people personally involved in this and could face possible convictions themselves if it comes to light that the PD was involved in a cover-up.

My personal feelings on this case are that justice will not be served or if it is, then probably bare minimum justice while maybe some of the other collaborators go scott free.

So no...no matter what happens I do not think justice will be fully served in this case. Too many things have happened that are abnormal in what was police procedure on that day.

 

Snake Alchemist

(3,318 posts)
89. Very true. I have been on the fence.
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 03:06 PM
Apr 2012

I could go either way at this point. I really want to see what the eye witnesses have to say on the stand.

H2O Man

(73,510 posts)
115. Maybe, maybe not.
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 05:14 PM
Apr 2012

It's impossible to say how the trial will go, or if it will even go to trial. There may be a plea deal, or there is a slight chance of the case being dismissed.

What can be said with absolute certainty is that "justice" is being served, now, today. More, both the prosecutor and defense attorney appear to be class acts, which has already brought a dignity to the legal case that was certainly missing.

 

Better Believe It

(18,630 posts)
123. Only if he is found guilty by a jury based on evidence.
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 08:24 PM
Apr 2012

We don't know most much less all of the facts in this case.

Until we do it's just speculation.

chrisa

(4,524 posts)
124. Hopefully a fair trial
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 08:41 PM
Apr 2012

That determines whether he's guilty or innocent of whatever they're charging him with.

I think it's a dangerous mindset to be 100% sure that someone is guilty or innocent without all of the facts.

alarimer

(16,245 posts)
126. He clearly shot and killed an unarmed teenager.
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 09:09 PM
Apr 2012

The only thing to determine is whether it was murder or not.

barbtries

(28,769 posts)
128. my opinion is
Fri Apr 13, 2012, 10:38 PM
Apr 2012

that justice will only be served if he is convicted and sentenced to serious prison time. there is a teensy tiny chance that evidence revealed during the course of the trial will change my mind. i don't expect that however.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Will justice only be serv...