Let's talk about Trayvon Martin, George Zimmerman, and how unbelievably fucked up this all is

yes, i will take the standard the jury applied to zimmerman over the standard that zimmerman applied to martin.

i agree that the burden of proof should always rest with the prosecutor. the thing is that in this case, when it was clear that zimmerman was the one causing the altercation, and that trayvon was not armed and didn't seem to pose a credible threat to cause serious harm to zimmerman -- dude probably could have backed him off just by saying that he had a gun i mean, come on -- it's strange to me that a self-defense plea would hold up. i don't really understand how you could ever disprove a claim of "self defense" in any manslaughter case unless there are witnesses under the precedent set by this case.

Zimmerman had the broken nose, the facial bruises and the cuts on his head. Without those he probably would be headed to prison.

i think it's okay to question a jury's verdict

i don't really understand how you could ever disprove a claim of "self defense" in any manslaughter case unless there are witnesses under the precedent set by this case.

― Treeship, Sunday, July 14, 2013 10:17 PM (1 minute ago)

it wasn't ever clear, from a legal standpoint, that "zimmerman was the one causing the altercation." everyone seemed to agree that zimmerman pursued and attempted to confront martin, but zimmerman claimed that martin started the fight (martin, of course, wasn't around to present his side of the story). and it doesn't seem so wildly unreasonable to think that an angry but unarmed man might pose a credible threat. after all, zimmerman claimed that he only reached for his gun as a last resort, as his head was being slammed into the pavement.

i don't buy zimmerman's story, not one word of it, i want to make that clear, but i don't think the jury was wrong to say that the prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.

i think it's okay to question a jury's verdict

― the late great, Monday, July 15, 2013 1:29 AM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

preferably in a way that doesn't boil down to "but this guy's an asshole!"

i think it's possible to think that zimmerman deserves to be in jail for one reason or another but still be ok with a not guilty verdict for second-degree murder (the manslaughter charge is another story and i still want to see this broken down tbh). the time for outrage was a year ago when zimmerman was walking free and the cops were bungling the evidence. the deck was stacked against a conviction from the get-go; my personal principles privilege trial rights above most else - and i'm cool with zimmerman skating on the murder charge just like i'm fine with any other criminal getting his case thrown out due to cop abuse/coerced statements, etc

also for those who want to focus on the real-world effects of the case rather than the legal particulars, how about how GZ has been basically unable to leave his house or jail for the past 16 months and has probably feared for his life, and his life will probably never be the same. that's something of a silver lining, if that's your sort of thing. i'd like to hope he learns something from all this but given the "support" he's got from the other side it's probably pretty unlikely, unfortunately

that there's an other side one of the most distressing things about all this

yeah i think this is all a recipe for even more deeply-entrenched beliefs on the part of the zimmermans and their supporters (they seemed like dubious folks to begin with, remember the whole thing with GZ's wife failing to report income to the court, not to mention brother and dad's racist invective?)

obviously the whole dramatic arc of a trial makes the moment of a verdict an inevitable as well as opportune moment to express righteous outrage, but like a lot of other folks on this thread, i think the stuff most worthy of outrage happened some time ago (the killing itself, the way evidence was/not gathered) or are pervasive parts of our culture (racism, the politics of gun culture).

but yeah in terms of "cosmic" justice zimmerman is basically always going to be walking in a prison of his own making, at least until he is forgotten (which may be a while).

I think you guys are underestimating how many places there are in America for someone like Zimmerman to hide.

my understanding is that stand yr ground laws lower the standard for self defense to a ridiculous easy level, that whereas before you had to prove that it was the last resort, that other avenues were closed to you, ie what any non-pacifist might recognize as a justifiable use of force, now you merely have to prove that you could reasonably feel threatened. would like to read some analysis of how this case would've played w/ the old, sane standard of self defense applied; from what i can tell the defense made some gesture of playing to this definition w/ the lawyers asinine claim that trayvon wasn't unarmed cuz he had fists.

I think you guys are underestimating how many places there are in America for someone like Zimmerman to hide.

― Fetchboy, Monday, July 15, 2013 2:11 AM (21 seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

otm. maybe he should hit up the people who helped harbor eric rudolph.

Read an argument on FB re:stand your ground that the SYG defense should've been applied for Martin's use of pavement as a weapon against Zimmerman, since he was clearly creeped out by being stalked by a dude who turned out to be carrying a loaded gun. Where does that line get drawn?

my takeaway is that whoever survives wins

at this point i'm just hoping that he does fade away and doesn't somehow use this notoriety as his ticket to greater glory. allen west rode kinda beating war crimes charges to the house of representatives.

xpost crut otm, if you want to kill someone in florida this case provides you w/ a very easy blueprint w/ how to do it and have it legally sanctioned.

yeah this is what I dont get - assault is not ok, shooting with a gun is!? xpo

allen west rode kinda beating war crimes charges to the house of representatives.

true but where is allen west now?

my takeaway is that whoever survives wins

― crüt, Monday, July 15, 2013 1:20 AM (4 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

yup

Also "he started it" apparently stands up in court.

even if he did not, in fact, start "it"

like what if the verdict was guilty? would everyone here on ilx be insisting the evidence wasn't there for a conviction, and much as we hate it, zimmerman shoulda walked? obviously no. so whatever verdict is reached, somehow its ok because it was reached by a jury, and that makes it a magical thing sprinkled with juridical fairy dust.

I expected a not guilty verdict because it didn't seem like burden of proof would be met. If he had been found guilty, I'd have been puzzled but satisfied that he was punished because imo he was responsible for TM's death (responsible vs guilty, 2 distinct things). Thing about the legal system is that a jury verdict IS a magical thing sprinkled with fairy dust. You can disagree with it, question it, whatever, but as a society this is how we've decided to settle these matters. That's why "somehow it's ok". You're wanting courts and the legal system as a whole to be something that it just isn't.

Manslaughter apparently wasn't hung on him because it needs to get past same self-defense hurdle as murder.

Trials aren't moral surrogates. They're statutes, juries, a judge making rulings, advocates warring over jury instructions, and their ground zero is a fierce and noble standard we must protect and defend even when it makes us weep: "the guilt of the accused must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt".

That oh-so-rigorous measure is one of the most beautiful things there is about this complicated thing we call America. Criminal court is the church of that One Sacred Commandment -- not a justice mob, a community council of concerned mothers, nor a Truth & Reconciliation Commission, even when we most want those things.

http://www.quora.com/George-Zimmerman-Trial-June-July-2013/Do-you-agree-or-disagree-that-George-Zimmerman-should-have-been-acquitted-and-why

Zimmerman should have been found guilty of at least manslaughter at trial, but the trial that would have produced that verdict didn't and couldn't occur. Here are the assholes as I see them:

1. Zimmerman, for being a murderous racist coward with a gun.
2. The Florida legislature and everyone involved in the passing of the SYG law.
3. The Sanford Police Department, for failing to perform an even half-assed investigation of the crime scene nor an arrest of Zimmerman. (These are the prize assholes of the whole shebang, the primary destroyers of justiice and protectors and defenders of the racist system, the ones who deserve to be getting the most shit thrown and them and the ones that I hope against hope the Justice Department are actually looking into.)
4. The prosecution, for filing a seriously lame case that was designed to be an alibi for the White Authorities of the State of Florida and nothing more and which only succeeded as such
5. Zimmerman's defense team, for taking an easily winnable case and using it as an opportunity to raise a burning cross of racist righteousness over the whole fucking farce
6. Sterling, for declaring that a failure to rise up and scream Rage Against the Machine lyrics is to support the status quo in the US.

7. balls for baiting sterling

"this isn't about race, stop bringing race into this! this is about an honorable man doing his duty who got attacked by a drug-crazed thug"

Start your own list. Sterling wants to call me a running dog and a Monday morning quarterback, he can fuck himself until it hurts.

"this isn't about race, stop bringing race into this! this is about the rule of law in court" too

The problem with going after the verdict as a failure of the judicial system (as opposed to the executive system) is that any reforms you could make to the judicial system to rule out verdicts like this one in this situation (which is only unique by virtue of the attention paid to it) would give more power to the police and prosecutors. As if they were the least racist, most objective part of the screwed-up system!

‏@DennisThePerrin
"Fucking punks. These assholes. They always get away." Zimmerman just before he killed Trayvon Martin and irony at the same time.

Stupid concealed carry laws starting to make sense (in this context) to me: they're an insidious way to retroactively negate intent. Like, you might assume that anyone carrying a gun might have it in their mind to actually one day kill someone. It's like intent by default. So thanks, NRA, for transforming walking around with a lethal weapon into a mundane act. "Oh, that's just George, he carries a gun." Further factor in Stand Your Ground, and wow, would it be hard to convict someone (white) for shooting someone with malice, especially since the law is designed to protect the not-shot person.

god help us dennis perrin otm

this isn't about race, stop bringing race into this! this is about the rule of law in court" too - who said anything remotely like this btw? the ppl who were remotely happy about the verdict had no problem saying this was about race. the way the right was giddy about the possibility of riots and the resulting opportunity to enact their own personal zimmerman scenarios was pretty telling of where their mind really is right now (ie the esp ott insane paranoid racism of the past five years wasn't just some partisan device, they meant it man), the gop turned into charlie manson w/ a hard-on for helter skelter.

I'm done with the fig leaf of confirmation bias, GZ said "fucking coons" on that tape and I cannot believe that little fact has just been swept under the rug.

I thought he said "fucking punks"?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/15/george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin-and-legal-bias.html

there's some definite bullshit in this (i'm not sure i see any signs of 'progress' from this, esp since 'whites are the real victims, blacks are the real racists' has been an active meme since selma at a minimum), but some useful numbers and telling quotes.

You're joking, right, Treeship?

like what if the verdict was guilty? would everyone here on ilx be insisting the evidence wasn't there for a conviction, and much as we hate it, zimmerman shoulda walked? obviously no. so whatever verdict is reached, somehow its ok because it was reached by a jury, and that makes it a magical thing sprinkled with juridical fairy dust.

This point sticks with me. I think there's a danger of letting 'Well, the evidence just wasn't there' turn into an after the fact way to make ourselves feel less bad about this, because as that quote says we wouldn't be protesting lack of evidence if they had convicted him.

Also, there's not enough evidence because he killed the only witness. So it's not like the normal not being enough evidence, is it, I mean in the legal sense, yeah, but not in the sense that would make it alright.

No, for the 47,000th time: there wasn't evidence because the fucking cops did not do their fucking job, and that's probably because they are racist scum.

we know the rest of his family is ott racist, i highly doubt that the psychopath member of the family than went out at night stalking children w/ a gun cuz he wished he was a cop had more nuanced views.

The only way to say 'well there wasn't enough evidence' is to get pissed off all the other times there's not enough evidence and someone does get convicted - do we do this? Some of us do, but I don't do it enough to justify myself sitting back with 'ah well, there wasn't enough evidence'

No, for the 47,000th time: there wasn't evidence because the fucking cops did not do their fucking job, and that's probably because they are racist scum.

Didn't mean to negate this angle, I agree with it

the ppl who were remotely happy about the verdict had no problem saying this was about race. the way the right was giddy about the possibility of riots and the resulting opportunity to enact their own personal zimmerman scenarios...

^ i have a coworker, a young white liberal environmental activist, who shares these views. when i came in this morning, he was loudly proclaiming to a group of undergrad interns that trayvon martin had a gun. when i told him this wasn't true, that the only gun belonged to zimmerman, the only survivor, he proudly responded, "the innocent survivor. then went on about how there were riots going on everywhere, cities in flames. i said that it was just oakland, probably anarchist kids as much as anything else. he harrumphed and rolled his eyes.

i don't know if you could describe that guy as a "liberal," really, if that's how he thinks about this

ostensibly liberal, i guess

and, well, it's maine

now now, we all know there are plenty of racist liberals

methinks my facebook wall doth protest too much of this verdict

xp lol yeah all of them amirite?

heyo!

but seriously there's lots of otherwise-liberals that are completely tone-deaf when it comes to race, it's sad

Little hope of changing SYG.