Do you think Zimmerman is guilty or innocent?

This isn't murder. At the most it's manslaughter. I've seen murder and manslaughter on rescue calls due to being a firefighter/EMT. This falls more in the line of someone shooting out of fear than premeditated murder. Zimmerman should've listened to the police and avoided this whole situation in the first place. But I doubt they will charge him with murder. This case is just another case that sparks the whole race card issue. Which I find funny seeing Zimmerman isn't even white. There was a 12 year black girl who was shot and killed by a black male in the city I work in and you don't see a public outcry coming from the people in the neighborhood like you do here. Her along with her family were hanging out in their own yard having a party when 2 males approached and shot 5 females point blank, killing a 12 year old girl and injuring 4 others. Funny how nothing is mentioned about race then. Another 19 year old black male was shot 6 times in the chest just the other night, my friend had the call and yet nothing about race. It's a fact that black people kill black people more than any other race. Please stop with the race bullshit. OJ got away with murder and black people were celebrating like they won the lottery. Now getting back to Zimmerman, yeah he's guilty of being a moron and committing manslaughter but he's no murderer.

@dernman: You need to relax. We have no say in the trial anyhow.

The irony in having a vote and the link is awesome.

@novarichrider: I am relaxed. You need to pay attention. The outcome of the trail is irrelevant. The only thing we were talking about was him showing intent.

@dernman: Carrying a loaded gun outside shows intent. You don't carry a loaded gun outdoors and approach someone you think may be "dangerous" if you don't have intent to use it. You call the police. This isn't the wild west anymore.

@novarichrider: Any yet you still haven't answered the question of what that intent was?

Did he intend to go and use the weapon or did he intend to have it for protection incase he needed it? Those are two different things that should and do matter.

@dernman: Nobody brings a loaded gun unless they plan to use it dude. Murder, protection, whatever. Zimmerman shot that kid cause he was angry and ashamed the kid beat his ass.

@dernman: I've answered you several times. I'm done.

This is just stupid the only reason it gets publicity is because Travon was black. Don't say I'm being racist either, white people get shot by black people too.

I was only referring to the bolded point.

I wasn't saying that he had intent to use it, I was saying that this could have all been avoided if he listened.

@novarichrider: No you haven't answered me. All you keep saying is it showed intent. You still have failed to say what that intent was, You implied it had a certain meaning but it doesn't until you determine what that intent was. Either stop dodging the question or your use of intent was wrong.

It's not whatever. Murder and protection yourself are entirely different things. If You can't see that then you have problems.

Zimmerman shot that kid cause he was angry and ashamed the kid beat his ass.

This is irrelevant and ignorant statement. Irrelevant because the discussion I was having with NRR had nothing to do with him being guilty or not. It only had to do with his point of using intent. Ignorant because you don't know the guy, his motives, emotional state and you were not there. He might very well be guilty and you comment still would be ignorant. You make a bunch emotional assumptions based on nothing more then something terrible happened.

Another thing is you have all seen pictures of this kid. Those pictures are of him when he's 13 not when he's 16 and 200 pounds! Also he didn't beat the kid the kid was beating him witnesses say called 911 and said Martin was beating Zimmerman.

100% agree.

Proof on the racist part?

@youngjustice:

I wasn't saying that he had intent to use it,

If you had said that then you said would have had some relevance to the discussion.

I was saying that this could have all been avoided if he listened

This is the part that didn't have any relevance to the discussion.

The point we are trying to get to in the discussion is what was his intent and what did it show. What was the point of mentioning that he could have avoided it all?

@dernman: continue, Mr. Dernman...

@digbykong:

Basically how I feel people see this because Trevon was younger.

@dernman: You are wasting your time with these people my friend. They have it made up in their minds that because Zimmerman "started the whole ordeal" that he is automatically guilty of murder.

i'd rather not comment. But, we are not entirely sure who confronted who first. How do we know that Zimmerman didnt threaten Martin and Martin responded with self defense. But i think this entire case is being blown out of proportion. The media only reported on this because he is black and got shot by a hispanic man. if the kid was white we probably wouldnt be debating this right now.

I'm just gonna step away from this thread before I get banned again.

Not sure to be honest but he is guilty of something at least.

Okay the stand your ground law is what people are saying protects zimmerman. But and i may be wrong abou the specifics of the law, but should it also have protected martin if he felt he was in danger, and therefore acting in self defense against an armed assalint?

Either way Zimmermarn is guilty but n the end is most likely going to walk or get a slap on the wrist because our society is f'ed up

Actually the stand your ground law does not protect Martin, if he was on top of Zimmerman and pounding his head into the ground, but it also doesn't protect Zimmerman if he shot Martin while the to were separated.

From the evidence I've seen online they say the shot was from no more then 18" away, that falls in line with stand your ground, still within grappling and striking distance.

I also doubt Zimmerman will walk, the jury has been feed Martin's innocence since the news constantly flashed the picture of him when he was like 12. The problem the prosecution will have is that the witnesses for Martin had their stories constantly change. It also didn't help that some news outlets were caught doctoring the news feeds to make Zimmerman look guilty.

Innocent. This story was blown so far out of proportion. There are many black on white crimes and they never make it to the news. News far worse than this one.

Zimmerman isn't white either. Another media lie.

It doesn't matter, the media has painted him as a monster who killed a poor, innocent, little child who never did anything wrong in his entire life so good luck finding an unbiased jury and judge anywhere. That, and Zim's lawyer being a doofus doesn't help his case.

@pooty:

Not totally true is one was to follow you on to your property then it become something different. But who know who attacked first except for maybe like 15 people that looked out their window but don't wont to say anything. I need to see more evidence an testimonies before I make my own ruling. It could have been all self defense on Zimmermans side (but one could use that he kind provoked the attack by following him for so long. Or it could have been a total accident. Guess we'll just have to watch the case an see how it unfolds.

WOO Murder is a pretty big word to use in a case like this. Can you prove that he WANTED to kill Travon an did not do it as an act of self defense or in the spur of the fight because he was scared for his life maybe because if it is true that Travon said "now your gonna die" or what ever Zim said he said to him while they were fighting.

An hey you give me a bag of skittles an a Arizona Ice tea I bet I can make it dangerous.

An I would suspect the gun was for protection. There were a larger amount of break ins in his neighborhood than usual, an now a days who knows what anyone has on them. So you have to take that into account an it is not illegal to carry one as long as you have the right papers to do so.

If I could pick out just one ridiculous statement out of the plethora in this whole thread, just one, it would be...

......

lol

Definitely guilty.

Why shoot and kill a kid? I don't care if he's 10 or 17. You're an adult, you should know the value of life. Also, it's one thing to pull out a gun and shoot him to stop him. It's an entirely different thing to pull out a gun and KILL him. I'm not saying he should have used the gun in the first place, but if he was, why not aim for a non lethal spot? And "it was an accident" isn't even an excuse. If you aren't aware that shooting someone in a particular spot is going to kill him, you have no business having a gun in the first place, and are still guilty based on that alone. He shot to kill. That's how I see it.

I know nothing about this case nor the incident. So I plead ignorance and walk away.

I still can't believe people are defending this man. Again, I repeat the story that keeps going around.

Man follows kid in truck because he feels he looks suspcious. Continues in truck, which means he had to be slowly following Trayvon if Trayvon was just walking. Police dispatch TOLD Zimmerman to stop, and so should the suspcious thoughts from Zimmerman. But no, he continued. Apparently, at some point Trayvon walked a bit faster, which Zimmerman got ON FOOT and followed him. We know from there, Trayvon did attack. So, let's put two and two together. Zimmerman, is an adult [A rather creepy one, but whatever], following a kid. When you're that age, you're told not to trust strangers. So, a big adult was following a kid. The kid FOUGHT back, in his own defense because he had no idea what Zimmerman was doing. What, so now we're trying to say he was in the wrong for just not running away? That makes sense.

"IF YOU'RE BEING CHASED, JUST RUN AWAY. If you fight back, YOU'RE WRONG." Great message supporters of Zimmerman in this thread, great message. So, let's continue from there. Martin is beating up Zimmerman, and somehow the "witnesses" only see a kid beating on an adult. Note, their stories have apparently changed, what a shocker. Anyway, Zimmerman then shoots the kid with the gun. If Martin was beating down on him that bad, how did Martin just allow him to pull out the gun. Martin had to be off him, for allowing him to pull out the gun, and shot to kill him. It wasn't a shot to put down, it was a shot to kill.

Zimmerman brought this onto himself after he followed a kid, and the police dispatch told him to. The kid defended himself, and after he got off, Zimmerman shot him, which would seem more out of anger that he just got beat by the kid that he falsely accused of being suspecious.

LOL...

Does CV have a dumbest comment of the year contest?

I guess regardless of location, shooting someone will always kill them. Tell that to Curtis Jackson who got shot 3 times and still lives. lol. Can you comprehend the concept of shooting someone with the goal to incapacitate in mind? It's tough, I know.

Your "goal" when shooting someone is irrelevant. This isnt the comic book world, or an action movie. I dont know how old you are... maybe you think shooting a gun at someone in real life is just like a Hollywood movie, but it's not.

For those on this thread who think shooting people is like some cartoon, let me clarify some things:

1. You can die from being shot anywhere in the body. This "shoot to wound" thing is ridiculous. Even if no vital organs are hit, you can still bleed to death, or die from secondary injuries, or die from infections, or die from other things.

2. Regardless of whether you are "trying" to shoot someone to wound them, you will probably just miss or hit them somewhere other than where you intended. No one is good enough to reliably shoot a specific point on a fast-moving human body, especially in the heat of the moment in an altercation. Police understand this, as does anyone who's trained to fire weapons in combat. If you're shooing at someone, you're shooting to kill. If you dont, you will probably die instead. Even trained police, shooting for center-of-mass, often miss in real life shootouts with criminals.

3. Shooting someone is the last resort... especially for the reasons above. Shooting someone means they might or will probably die. Suggesting that it's ok to shoot someone because you're just trying to "stop him" is dumb, and will get you nowhere in court.

If what I said didnt convince you, them maybe you should read what police officers have to say about "shooting to wound".

http://www.pfoa.co.uk/110/shooting-to-wound

The experts we consulted agreed that advocates who push a shoot-to-wound agenda appear to understand little about human dynamics, ballistics, tactics, force legalities or the challenges officers face on the street. Chudwin has found that these critics of police practices can often be enlightened if they are invited to experience force decision-making scenarios on a firearms simulator.

Could you please try to make it sound like Martin wasn't 10 years old. He was 17, the first paragraph of your post makes it sound like he was in elementary school.

@sideburnguru: "IF YOU'RE BEING CHASED, JUST RUN AWAY. If you fight back, YOU'RE WRONG." Great message supporters of Zimmerman in this thread, great message

When being chased you think the best course of action is too fight back? Wouldn't you want to put as much distance between you and the stalker as possible?

I don't know and I don't care.

Thank you -- this is extremely informative and worth knowing about.

@pooty: When has running worked for the most part? Rape cases? That person usually tries running. Hell, I'll push it. Horror movies? Running usually does nothing. Fighting back should seem like the better solution.

Is that literally all you're going to say? Should I replace kid with minor, would that make you feel any better? It doesn't take away the point.

Disengaging from a dangerous situation is the first and best course of action, whether you are the victim without a weapon or the victim with a concealed pistol. In many crimes, like attempted rape, the criminal wants someone who wont try to run away. This is because they want to control the place of the attack. If the victim runs they could lead the criminal right into others who can help, or even to police, or whatever.

Also, by running or even walking away you're de-escalating the situation. If you try to fight right away, especially against someone who might have a weapon, you're putting yourself at risk of serious injury or death. In most situations where you're attacked the best option is to run away and yell for help.

Lastly, if you think that getting your lessons about how to resolve real-world situation from "horror movies" is a good idea... <sigh>

Anyway, what Martin should have done if he saw some strange guy following him and then approaching him is to run away and call the police. Maybe find a house and knock on the door for help. Turning and confronting him is stupid, and we see the results.

@willpayton said:

Did you miss the part where I said "I'll push it", meaning I acknowledge it was ridiculous? Or did we skip that part? Who the hell are you to claim that's the bad way of doing it? Who is anyone?

I've guess we seen different cases, because I feel if people would fight back more, they might have more of a chance. I get the situation of rape, but I'm saying in some cases, fighting back MAY have been the answer, suggesting of course you actually know you CAN fight, in which this case apparently Trayvon did.

So, I'm gonna add in something else. Know what the results were? Trayvon was intimidated by a man following him in a truck for a long time, then chasing him. Before he got back in the truck to either A. Leave, or B. [From something I heard] Follow him some more, he took him down. Apparently, good enough that witnessess had to call in on the beat down, and that he left with a bruised face. Isn't it also told that Trayvon's fists weren't even bloody, to suggest it wasn't THAT bad? I'm not too sure on that exact part, so I'll leave it. So actually, it did work out for him. The only way Zimmerman had the chance to shoot him was AFTER the fact. Trayvon wouldn't have let him get the gun out if the "beat down" was as bad as people are making it out to be. On that note, are we really punishing Trayvon for fighting back? Is this REALLY how low we are today?

"THAT KID FOUGHT BACK AFTER HE WAS AFRAID OF SOME GUY FOLLOWING HIM FOR ______ LONG. HE DEFINITELY DESERVED IT." This is basically how I see half these comments. Acting as if though Trayvon standing up for himself, which.. SHOULD be in the "Stand Up For Yourself" or "Defend Yourself" law everyone is talking about, SHOULD qualify as, not shooting someone after the fact, but whatever.

On a side note, this comment is ignorant as hell.

I saw your last comment, and any shot WON'T kill if the gun is in the hands of someone with experience. Zimmerman had no experience. It shows. He shot to kill.

If CV had an ignorant comment of the year though, maybe we'd get a winner.

Given the verdicts of so many of these high profile court cases in recent years, I won't be surprised if he is found innocent...though I wish he were found guilty. I lost faith in the justice system (and police as well) a long time ago.

If this was a black guy that killed a white guy he'd already be rotting in jail.

They executed a black man last year with insufficient evidence and now you got people sending Zimmerman money for his lawyer fees??? People think racism is dead are sorely mistaken

And if I wasn't clear before let me clarify. This man is guilty. Similar case in Illinois a few years back. Black girl shot a white man. I sat in a court room and watched her get 17 years. As well she should have. If Zimmerman gets off. That injustice would disgust me

@sideburnguru: Can you show any evidence or that confronting the stalker is recommended? Confronting them goes 100% against what leading authorities say. I posted links below.

Great points. and EVERY SINGLE website i looked up supports NOT CONFRONTING THE STALKER.

http://www.esia.net/safety_tips.htm

http://www.gcsu.edu/womenscenter/projectcare/stalking.htm

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/identify-deal-stalker-forensic-psychiatrist-michael-welner/story?id=9801963#.UcnEI5x0kSk

If you truly are in danger, according to Welner creating distance is the most important step to take -- either by moving yourself, bringing in the authorities or getting the person locked up.

I think people are taking the race thing too far. I doubt it had to do with race and more of some type of authority complex taken too far mixed with excessive self defense. I'm Hispanic (just in case) and when a White person shoots a minority it is usually made a way bigger deal than when a White man is shot by a black/latino man. And Zimmerman identifies as Hispanic.

Yeah, that's nice.

Pooty, just stop discussing things with me on here, ESPECIALLY here. I'm glad you showed links to these sites. I'm saying, some people were taught to fight back. That shouldn't be considered a crime if you know how to fight back, and you defend yourself in that form. But you know what, sure. That kid TOTALLY deserved to get shot because he defended himself against a way YOU don't exactly support. It's how some kids are raised to deal with strangers following them, but whatever. It's nothing personal, but the fact you're trying ENDLESSLY to defend Zimmerman, is just nonsense to me. Especially, since how the story goes.

Trayvon defended himself in the way he knew, and now that's a crime for fighting back. So here's the lesson kids. "Don't ever fight some fat loser who is stalking you, or you apparently deserved to get shot."