Crime George Zimmerman found not guilty of murder in Trayvon Martin's death

[The Helper]

(CNN) -- George Zimmerman is not guilty of the murder of Trayvon Martin, a Florida jury decided late Saturday.

The fact that Zimmerman fired the bullet that killed Martin was never in question, but the verdict means the six-person jury had reasonable doubt that the shooting amounted to a criminal act.

The verdict caps a case that has inflamed passions for well over a year, much of it focused on race and gun rights.

The six-person jury -- all women -- basically had three choices: to find Zimmerman guilty of second-degree murder; to find him guilty of the lesser charge of manslaughter; or to find him not guilty.

The jurors deliberated for 16½ hours total, including 13 on Saturday alone, before delivering its verdict.

George Zimmerman found not guilty of murder in Trayvon Martin's death | CNN

George Zimmerman is not guilty of the murder of Trayvon Martin, a Florida jury has decided.

www.cnn.com

 

[Zakyath]

"I saw him, I stalked him, I shot him" - walks free. only in the us.

 

[Zerocaliber]

Finally, an outcome on one of these major trials that I am actually happy for.

 

[Ghan]

1. I don't understand why the media insists on covering stuff like this.
2. From what little I heard, there wasn't nearly enough evidence to convict.
3. I don't care much either way.

 

[Accname]

What is this about? Can somebody tell me? The article doesnt say anything...

Just read it up on wikipedia.

Wow, I would say he is guilty. After all, he shot a little kid, an unarmed little kid whom he was following.

 

[FireCat]

Hmm "true or false" I don't know. But defense attorneys said the case was classic self-defense. And Martin knocked Zimmerman down and was slamming his head against the concrete when Zimmerman fired his gun.
Well, he should have been convicted with manslaughter at least.

 

[Accname]

Thats what zimmerman said. As far as I read it up nobody can back up his statements. He wasnt harmed when the police found him and he wasnt bleeding either.
And neighboors heard the poor boy scream for help.

And by the way, if some strange old man is following you, you would be scared as fuck. I guess alot of teenagers would try to attack the guy just to be safe from some kind of pedophile.

 

[FireCat]

He wasnt harmed when the police found him and he wasnt bleeding either.

No?

New picture shows blood pouring down his head minutes after Trayvon Martin shooting

Read Moar Here.

Anyway, there were idiots on both sides !

 

[Ghan]

> And neighboors heard the poor boy scream for help.

That is hotly disputed. There was someone heard screaming on a 911 call made while the attack was happening, but we do not know for sure which one of them it was.

 

[Accname]

I just read the wikipedia article. Thats what it said there.

 

[FireCat]

You use Wikipedia as a source? LOL

 

[Dan]

Let court cases stay in court. Your personal opinion doesn't really amount to much when considering the fact that you have second hand information at best and were not part of the trial. As bad as you might think the justice system is; it was still a trial by jury, and a group of people were given the evidence and told to choose his sentence.

It is also important to note that "not guilty" doesn't mean that the man was in fact found free of the possibility of guilt; it means that they could not punish him without the possibility of being wrong.

 

[Zakyath]

Let court cases stay in court. Your personal opinion doesn't really amount to much when considering the fact that you have second hand information at best and were not part of the trial. As bad as you might think the justice system is; it was still a trial by jury, and a group of people were given the evidence and told to choose his sentence.

It is also important to note that "not guilty" doesn't mean that the man was in fact found free of the possibility of guilt; it means that they could not punish him without the possibility of being wrong.

the verdict is not the problem, the american laws are.

 

[Accname]

You use Wikipedia as a source? LOL

Didnt have a better source at hand, and, to be honest, I dont really care about this topic enough to really look for a better source.

Let court cases stay in court. Your personal opinion doesn't really amount to much when considering the fact that you have second hand information at best and were not part of the trial. As bad as you might think the justice system is; it was still a trial by jury, and a group of people were given the evidence and told to choose his sentence.

It is also important to note that "not guilty" doesn't mean that the man was in fact found free of the possibility of guilt; it means that they could not punish him without the possibility of being wrong.

I let it stay in court. I didnt go there and slapped the judge or the jury for the verdict. I didnt attack somebody nor did I file a lawsuit or anything.
I just said my personal opinion. If you dont want to read it, dont go to a public forum.

 

[Blackveiled]

Well, according to what he says I can see any person defending themselves in a situation like this. Who really wants to go to jail for murder? It's funny how people are so insensitive for the defendant, and it always goes this way. As for the victim of the crime, it's a shitty situation but he may have not reacted in a way that could have prevented him from being killed. If he was being aggressive and the shooter felt like his life could be threatened (how do you know this guy doesnt have a gun/knife on them?) then he could probably feel the need to shoot, especially if he has never been in any situation like that before.

I don't know what happened in detail...but I haven't really been able to read any evidence not supporting self defense and his story has been pretty consistent, he also admitted he killed him as well. That's why this trial is going so well for him, and even after everything is done with it doesn't even matter if he goes to jail or not he will still be looked at as a criminal by the public and that will be worse than going to jail. He will be at more risk if anything now that he won't be going to jail for this.

 

[Accname]

I am pretty sure he defended himself. But in my opinion some random guy who is not part of the police has no right to follow an innocent boy and shoot him.
That boy must have been really scared; some creepy white guy is following him. Maybe the gun of the shooter was even visible to the boy. And there are so many stories about pedophiles and kidnapping going around.

The boy probably thought he had a better chance of surviving if he tried to do the first move. Children always overestimate things.
And just imagine the case, that the white guy actually was a kidnapper and the boy beat him down and survived: he would have been a hero and hailed by the press. In the mind of a little kid this can be a very difficult decision.

I dont doubt the good intentions of the shooter, nor do I doubt, that he was attacked or anything. But I still dont think a man should be able to legally run around with a loaded weapon, follow children and shoot them when the children try to defend themselfs.

 

[Blackveiled]

I am pretty sure he defended himself. But in my opinion some random guy who is not part of the police has no right to follow an innocent boy and shoot him.
That boy must have been really scared; some creepy white guy is following him. Maybe the gun of the shooter was even visible to the boy. And there are so many stories about pedophiles and kidnapping going around.

The boy probably thought he had a better chance of surviving if he tried to do the first move. Children always overestimate things.
And just imagine the case, that the white guy actually was a kidnapper and the boy beat him down and survived: he would have been a hero and hailed by the press. In the mind of a little kid this can be a very difficult decision.

I dont doubt the good intentions of the shooter, nor do I doubt, that he was attacked or anything. But I still dont think a man should be able to legally run around with a loaded weapon, follow children and shoot them when the children try to defend themselfs.

He is 17 years old, still a teenager but hes not really that young.

 

[Accname]

You know how many stupid 17 year olds are running around? I would say 17 year olds are probably even more stupid then a 7 year old. At least when it comes to trying to be a badass and stand your ground.
A young kid would have run away and cried for his mother; a teenager thinks he is a power ranger and attacks the stranger who is following him.
Not saying that a stupid kid shouldnt be punished, but shot dead?

The white guy has no right to shoot a kid, even if the kid attacked him without a reason.
Sure he can fight back, but shoot him?! Can you not fight without killing people?
What is that guy? A disabled person? Could he not wrestle down a teenager?

You want somebody this weak to patrol the streets? Somebody who couldnt even defend himself from an unarmed kid?

 

[FireCat]

The white guy

Zimmerman isn't even white.. Just saying
But I do agree "he shouldn't have shot him the way he did"

 

[KMilz]

Just a shitty situation. I think they reached the only truly reasonable outcome given the way our justice system is designed, but it's just shitty that a kid lost his life over it. Also pretty shitty how much attention the media has put onto the case considering how often situations similar to these tend to occur... almost makes you wonder what's so special about this one.

And, just read that there may be a civil suit to follow for Zimmerman.