The state of FL v. George Zimmerman

[Scopedog]

According to the Social Justice Keyboard Warriors, Rachel isn't stupid, it's the patriarchy who is.

http://skepchick.org/2013/06/ebonics/

The comments seem to be implying that Rachel Jeantel is not of below-average intelligence and not of below-average communication ability. I am very skeptical of this. Having a different dialect on one hand and having a limited vocabulary and limited ability to communicate reasonably complex ideas on another hand are two entirely different things. I sincerely doubt that Rachel Jeantel is capable of expressing any sort of sophisticated or intellectual thought in Ebonic, Spanish, or Haitian Creole.

 

[Bob001]

.....
From your comment I can see that you seem to have fallen into the narrative trap laid out by the media. He wasn't a vigilante. He didn't seek out the engagement, he was (for the most part) following the directions of the 911 operator of telling him where Martin was heading. This is not like Bernie Goetz where he was out and actively looking to hurt or kill someone who fit a certain profile. That's what a vigilante looks like.

Fair enough. He didn't set out to kill anybody. But I think it's highly likely that he followed TM and confronted him, something he certainly wouldn't have done if he hadn't been packing heat. I also don't believe that an ex-bouncer with mixed martial arts training (something he returned to three times a week soon after the killing, according to the nurse-practitioner's testimony) should reasonably have been scared to death (or of death) from a unarmed teenager. His instantaneous claims of self-defense -- at a time when most people who had truly been victims of a life-threatening attack would be in stunned shock -- also make me wonder if he had rehearsed the situation in his mind and thought about how he could portray himself in the most favorable light.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

Fair enough. He didn't set out to kill anybody. But I think it's highly likely that he followed TM and confronted him, something he certainly wouldn't have done if he hadn't been packing heat. I also don't believe that an ex-bouncer with mixed martial arts training (something he returned to three times a week soon after the killing, according to the nurse-practitioner's testimony) should reasonably have been scared to death (or of death) from a unarmed teenager. His instantaneous claims of self-defense -- at a time when most people who had truly been victims of a life-threatening attack would be in stunned shock -- also make me wonder if he had rehearsed the situation in his mind and thought about how he could portray himself in the most favorable light.

There is no evidence that Zimmerman initiated the physical confrontation but there is some evidence (from prosecution witness #8) that indicates that Martin did.

In the opening statements the defense said that they will be bringing in his gym instructor to say that he wouldn't put Zimmerman into a ring with anyone because he was so bad at it. Lets wait until then to judge whether or not he was as skilled as you think that he was.

The nurse practitioner also said that he stated that he was only taking that class because he was having trouble sleeping and was taking the class to tire himself out.

Who knows how anyone would react right after something like this? As you said one would probably be in shock and different people will react differently, sometimes way differently, than others when in shock.

Finally why wouldn't he say that it was self-defense if it actually was self-defense? Was he supposed to say something else? If so, what? The evidence so far presented gives credence to the claim that he was engaged in self-defense. Most gun owners know their local laws regarding when the use of deadly force is justified and probably know them better than most non-gun owners, this isn't suspicious it's just good common sense. I'd think that most people would be happy about this otherwise we might have a lot more uses of deadly force with many of them unjustified.

 

[Mister Earl]

I would say, though, that during the whole event leading up to the altercation, Zimmerman was the only one who chose every time to engage Martin, and Martin chose every time to avoid him. And we're supposed to believe that the roles suddenly reversed on Zimmerman's word alone?

 

[Newtons Bit]

I would say, though, that during the whole event leading up to the altercation, Zimmerman was the only one who chose every time to engage Martin, and Martin chose every time to avoid him. And we're supposed to believe that the roles suddenly reversed on Zimmerman's word alone?

W8, DD, Rachel Jeantel testified that Martin decided to confront Zimmerman.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

I would say, though, that during the whole event leading up to the altercation, Zimmerman was the only one who chose every time to engage Martin, and Martin chose every time to avoid him. And we're supposed to believe that the roles suddenly reversed on Zimmerman's word alone?

If by engage you mean watch Martin and talk to the police telling them where he was then yes I agree. None of that however is illegal and as testified by the 911 operator these are usually desired actions as it helps the police to do their job. Zimmerman was following the phone operators request to keep an eye on him. He only stopped when he was asked to do so (by not chasing after him). At that point he had lost visual contact with Martin and so wasn't engaged with him in any manner. That was his choice to make as testified to by the police operator.

And no, if the prosecutions own witnesses are to be believed then Martin did not avoid him every time. If he had he would have been at home instead of confronting Zimmerman. The person on the phone with him testified that he said he was "Near" or "Right by" his house at one point. If that's true then Martin had to have turned around and backtrack to get to where the confrontation started.

 

[Mister Earl]

W8, DD, Rachel Jeantel testified that Martin decided to confront Zimmerman.

"Confront" as in asking "Why are you following me?" or "Confront" as in ambushing the guy and trying to kill him?

Zimmerman was following the phone operators request to keep an eye on him.

"Sir, you don't have to do that."

At the point Zimmerman got out of the car, he had already "won". The cops were on their way, there were only two ways out of the area, and if Zimmerman's goal was really dealing with a suspicious person in the neighborhood, then hadn't he already achieved victory here? He could have done nothing and won. Either the cops would have caught up or the kid would've left the area. I still don't understand the rationale behind persuing him on foot, if his intentions were honorable.

 

[Newtons Bit]

"Confront" as in asking "Why are you following me?" or "Confront" as in ambushing the guy and trying to kill him?

He went back to Zimmerman from his house. Why he choose to do that is kind of the point of the trial.

 

[RandFan]

I think a better question might be why did they charge him with second-degree murder? Making an armed adult who kills an unarmed teenager prove to a jury that it was reasonable to think his life was in danger doesn't seem like a stretch to me, but voluntary manslaughter seems like a more appropriate charge, and easier for a jury to reach. I think GZ is a vigilante thug who belongs in prison, but even I have trouble with a murder charge.

I've not seen any evidence that I think is compelling for a charge of second-degree murder. Reckless endangerment I get. I don't think many people would have much problem with figuring out that the stupidity and reckless actions of GZ resulted in the death of an innocent person. No brainer. If I were on his jury I would have to vote to acquit. It would piss me off but Zimmerman is not guilty of the charges. He is simply an incompetent idiot who should not be trusted to carry a firearm. He is an object lesson for why it would be very bad if every person in America were armed.

 

[Mister Earl]

He went back to Zimmerman from his house. Why he choose to do that is kind of the point of the trial.

That is something I'm unware of. So Trayvon reached a destination, left it, and went back to Zimmerman? Which house? And is this confirmed by anyone, or is this just Zimmerman's word?

I don't think many people would have much problem with figuring out that the stupidity and reckless actions of GZ resulted in the death of an innocent person. No brainer.

Agreed.

He is simply an incompetent idiot who should not be trusted to carry a firearm. He is an object lesson for why it would be very bad if every person in America were armed.

Also agreed.

If I were on his jury I would have to vote to acquit. It would piss me off but Zimmerman is not guilty of the charges.

Gonna have to agree as well. Not up on my legalese, but from what I'm reading of the folks who know the details better than I, the prosecution is failing to meet the standard required for conviction.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

"Confront" as in asking "Why are you following me?" or "Confront" as in ambushing the guy and trying to kill him?

That is for the jury to decide. That being said unless they have a witness to the very start of the confrontation when the two met the rest of the evidence that has been presented so far points to Martin as the aggressor seeing as he was seen on top of Zimmerman "MMA Style" while appearing to the witness to be doing what was described as "A ground and pound" on Zimmerman's head as Zimmerman was crying out for help.

 

[RandFan]

Who knows how anyone would react right after something like this? As you said one would probably be in shock and different people will react differently, sometimes way differently, than others when in shock.

Wouldn't it be great if people could be punished for their reckless actions that resulted in death of innocent people? Martin had broken no laws. Martin wasn't committing a crime. Martin is dead because of the reckless actions of someone who never had any formal training in law enforcement. Folks like that ought not be playing law and order. That's how innocent people die.

 

[Newtons Bit]

That is something I'm unware of. So Trayvon reached a destination, left it, and went back to Zimmerman? Which house? And is this confirmed by anyone, or is this just Zimmerman's word.

No. I'm only talking about things that have already been brought up / testified to in the trial. This is all part of Jeantel's testimony. She's the woman who was on the phone with Martin.

 

[Mister Earl]

No. I'm talking only talking about things that have already been brought up / testified to in the trial. This is all part of Jeantel's testimony. She's the woman who was on the phone with Martin.

Ok. Appreciate the info.

I'd have to say, if it were shown with reasonable enough certainty that Martin did in fact engage and assault Zimmerman first, then Zimmerman is clearly not guilty of the charges under the law. Though I definitely want to stress my complete agreement with Randfan up there. This death was needless.

 

[RandFan]

That is for the jury to decide. That being said unless they have a witness to the very start of the confrontation when the two met the rest of the evidence that has been presented so far points to Martin as the aggressor seeing as he was seen on top of Zimmerman "MMA Style" while appearing to the witness to be doing what was described as "A ground and pound" on Zimmerman's head as Zimmerman was crying out for help.

Perhaps Martin was in fear of his life. It's possible. Or, perhaps not. Only Zimmerman could have been in fear of his life, right? Perhaps as a society we ought to send the message that playing cop ought to be left to professionals. If you see someone that you are suspicious of you ought not be worried that the "******* always get away with it". Life's a bitch. It's unfortunate that bad guys get away with bad things but the answer to that isn't turning every citizen into a police officer. Letting incompetent idiots roam the streets with guns isn't an answer to anything.

 

[RandFan]

Ok. Appreciate the info.

I'd have to say, if it were shown with reasonable enough certainty that Martin did in fact engage and assault Zimmerman first, then Zimmerman is clearly not guilty of the charges under the law. Though I definitely want to stress my complete agreement with Randfan up there. This death was needless.

And the actions of Zimmerman were reckless. Show me how many people after analyzing the evidence would acquit Zimmerman of stupidity. I'm guessing not many.

 

[Mister Earl]

And the actions of Zimmerman were reckless. Show me how many people after analyzing the evidence would acquit Zimmerman of stupidity. I'm guessing not many.

I agree with you completely. We are on the same page.

 

[RandFan]

Just to be clear, voice analysis and comparison is a very real and very scientific field. It is a part of general audio analysis and comparison.

The existence of a woo branch does not mean that the entire field is woo.

Thank you.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

"Sir, you don't have to do that."

At the point Zimmerman got out of the car, he had already "won". The cops were on their way, there were only two ways out of the area, and if Zimmerman's goal was really dealing with a suspicious person in the neighborhood, then hadn't he already achieved victory here? He could have done nothing and won. Either the cops would have caught up or the kid would've left the area. I still don't understand the rationale behind persuing him on foot, if his intentions were honorable.

Why did you skip over the rest of what I said which addressed that. Namely:

He only stopped when he was asked to do so (by not chasing after him).

And Zimmerman seems to have stopped as evidenced by the changing sounds in the background of the recorded call. At that point Zimmerman was no longer in sight of Martin and wasn't engaged with him at all. Then Martin came back and confronted Zimmerman. Why did he do that when he was in the free and clear? Zimmerman had no idea where he was at that point.

Again, so far there has been no evidence given that shows that Zimmerman did anything illegal up to that point other than perhaps violate some parking laws (I haven't seen the parking job that he did) and talking on a cell phone while driving (if that was illegal in Florida back then). That's it.

 

[ABC10]

No. I'm talking only talking about things that have already been brought up / testified to in the trial. This is all part of Jeantel's testimony. She's the woman who was on the phone with Martin.

I though Rachael's testimony that Martin was near his Daddy's house confirmed that.