Lizzie Borden Society Forum

Are any of you following the trial? I am, and I was on the fence from the start as to whether it is murder or self defense? I am leaning towards manslaughter since George followed him and maybe started ther fight? Yes, he did get beat up, but did he start the problem? What are your thoughts?

I've only read bits and pieces about the trial. I guess it depends on whether trouble came to Zimmerman or Zimmerman went looking for trouble. In general, if he went looking for trouble while carrying a firearm, he was dead wrong.

The Prosecution's "Star" witness is not believable to me, she was caught in several inconsistent statements and is clearly a young lady who does not want to be involved in all of this. I only wish the 2 sides would not try to play the race card like in the OJ Simpson trial. I didn't get to follow the Jodi Arias trial so I am following this one. So far, I think the defense has the upper hand. Stay tuned.

I was following the Zimmerman case when he was first arrested, but then I lost track. He has a history of acting like Jr. Detective 101, and if you listen to the 911 call he made while he was following Trayvon Martin, it sure sounds like he is a racist. Zimmerman was a self-appointed neighborhood watch captain...he made dozens and dozens of 911 calls to police, fancying himself "one of them." I think I read that the # of calls was not allowed to be introduced as testimony, but I could be wrong.

The fact is, Trayvon Martin did nothing but go the store and buy a bag of Skittles and a bottle of ice tea. He ended up shot to death. He had no weapon, wasn't looking for trouble, was watching a baseketball game with either his dad or uncle, wearing a hoodie and kind of hunched down because it was raining out. Zimmerman was the one looking for a fight...at least that's my opinion so far.

I agree with you Nancydrew. George should have stopped following him after the police told him to stop. I guess it will boil down to what the jury decides. It is interesting to know that all of the jurors are female. The defense is trying to claim that Trayvon was the one who attacked George. If he had of just gone home, none of this would have happened.

Trayvon was trying to go home. He was headed in a pretty straight line. It was Zimmerman who approached him, not the other way around. I am not arguing with you, just continuing my previous train of thought ;) There is a recorded cell phone conversation in which Martin tells his girlfriend that a creepy guy is approaching him.

Zimmerman has a record...he assaulted a police officer, AND physically attacked a woman. That settles it for me. I don't tolerate men who abuse women--EVER. They don't get second chances, at least not with me. I don't care how much therapy they go thru...you put your hands on me, you are OUT for good.

All of those accusations were dismissed, and the domestic violence complaints came from both he and his girlfriend, so it was mutual. I still say the prosecution's case for the most part has helped the defense. They will rest their case on Friday, then the Defense has their chance.

The Prosecution rested today, and the Defense started. Both Mothers of the victim and the suspect testified they heard their son screaming for help in the 911 call.

It seems that quite a few of Zimmerman's friends identified his voice on the tape as the screamer. How did Zimmerman allow the situation to develop wherein he needed to scream for help?

I don't quite understand the authority Zimmerman had, was it a neighborhood watch group? Are they an adjunct to the local police department? Do they act in any sort of official capacity?

That is going to be a problem for the jurors I think. He was told by the police to NOt follow him, and he did. First mistake. Then it is unclear who started the confrontation, the screams on the 911 tape have been played throughout this trial. While it is clear there was a fight, the prosecution says Zimmerman started it, but the Defense says Zimmerman was attacked or ambushed by Trayvon if you will. I think the jurors will have to agree that no one can be sure who was screaming in that 911 call.

It may be that it doesn't much matter who was screaming. If Zimmerman was told explicitly to not follow Martin, then Zimmerman could have avoided trouble by doing what he was told. If Zimmerman hadn't followed Martin, there would have been no fight between them and no shooting as a result.

I agree with you Jeff, but I think the prosecution made a mistake charging him with 2nd degree murder. So far I believe it is manslaughter. I don't think Zimmerman had the intent to kill that night, but he was armed, and should have followed directions from the police. The defense has claimed and has many witnesses that testified it was George crying for help, and the pathologist corroborated his story that Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman when he was killed. There is a lot of reasonable doubt in this case, and I enjoy listening to the attorneys state their cases, maybe I should have studied law instead of Liberal Arts!

That's likely correct, Zimmerman probably didn't follow Martin with the intent to kill him, but he had the means to do so. Zimmerman was carrying a firearm and will probably be held to a higher standard of behavior than an unarmed citizen would, unless he was acting in some sort of official capacity. If Zimmerman started or escalated an altercation while armed and a shooting resulted, he's fighting a losing battle. That's why I was asking earlier if any mitigating factors might apply, but I doubt there were any. The fact that the cops told him to not pursue Martin implies that the cops didn't want to trust Zimmerman's judgment.

That's correct, because Zimmerman is not a sworn officer or deputy of the law. He took it upon himself to police the neighborhood, called 911 when he spotted a black guy in a hoodie, and then ignored the 911 dispatcher's instructions "we don't need you to do that." (follow him). It was the dispatcher, not the police, and the admonition should have been clearer: (for example "Mr. Zimmerman, stop your car and DO NOTHING. The police are on their way." But he didn't. He got out of his car, and approched Trayvon Martin. A fight ensued, and Zimmerman, carrying a loaded gun, shot Martin at pretty close range. Zimmerman's attorneys are claiming self defense.

Stepping back for a minute and examining the 911 dispatcher's words "We don't need you to do that." It is not the same as being told to "stand down." (which is also obscure, if you're a civilian.) "We don't need you to do that." is a statement, not a directive. If you listen to the entire call, Zimmerman didn't even seem to register the words, and they are weak words, in my opinion. "Do NOT approach this person, Mr. Zimmerman. Do you understand me?" would have been better.

I agree, the dispatcher, in watered down Yupanese, avoided responsibility admirably in his statement. "We" rather than "I", "need" rather than "want", designed to not offend anyone first, and convey a message second. Politically correct rather than absolutely correct. It isn't a directive, it's a suggestion, just like the "speed suggestion" signs along the highway, nobody takes them seriously, either! The problem is, it may be enough to allow Zimmerman to skate.

The more I think about it, the dispatcher isn't responsible for Zimmerman, although it was a very lame response to Zimmerman's call. Zimmerman made a fatal error in judgment when he left his car to pursue Martin while Zimmerman was armed. He chose to do that and put himself in the position of having to scream for help and for shooting Martin. It really doesn't matter who was screaming for help and what the dispatcher said, if Zimmerman had remained in his car and waited for the police, none of this would have happened.

I don't know how this will turn out. I see both sides, both made bad decisions. I am very glad Im not on that jury.

Verdict is in : Not guilty.

still not sure that is right, but there it is,

Here is the news report from foxnews.com:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/07/13/ge ... ing-death/

Incredible!

I agree, Jeff!