-129 votes

Am I the only one on DP that thinks Zimmerman was guilty?

You know I think back to when this whole Trevon Martin shooting broke. People were outraged that Zimmerman was not charged. I mean whites and blacks alike.

Then something changed. Somehow this became a race issue.

Who was really standing their ground that night. Zimmerman who had a gun, or Trevon Martin.

A seventeen year old is dead. What did he do? How did Zimmerman end up in a physical fight with Trevon Martin? Martin wasn't looking for trouble, he hadn't robbed anyone. This kid who was walking along eating skittles blapping on his cell phone just decided he was going to beat Zimmerman to death.

No one will ever convince me that Trevon Martin instigated a fight that night. Zimmerman was a tough guy with a gun, and an vigilante mind set.

Zimmerman was looking for trouble that night and he found it, he just didn't expect that Martin was going to turn the tables on him.

How the hell did this issue get turned around?

No one knows what really happened that night. I do know that Trevon was on that property legally and unarmed, and I do know Zimmerman was told NOT to follow him.

I think he obviously ignored that advice, followed Martin and attempted to detain him and it got physical.

Martin got the better of him Zimmerman shot him.

Just think for minute how this would have turned out if Zimmerman had not pursued Martin. Martin would have made it to his destination and none of this would have happened, or what id Zimmerman was not armed? He would have gotten the shit kicked out of him and learned a dam good lesson and Trevon Martin would still be alive.

Now have fun down voting me but before you do think about the original facts and how this whole tragedy began.



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

If only I could downvote this more than once

nothing in this post is based on the facts and evidence of the case. Just feelings and assumptions. Shame on you for jumping to your preconceived conclusions.

Not to be rude...

but "...and attempted to detain him and it got physical." Is pure speculation on your behalf and contrary to testimony.

I did not mean to cause

such a shit storm with my post. It was just another point of view and my personal feelings about it.

I have been called names, and attacked repeatedly by posters for stating something that no one can refute. That is, we only heard one side of what took place that lead to Treyvon assaulting Zimmerman.

Now I am going to tell you a story about something that happened to me years ago. To this day I cannot explain why I did it, It was just instinct, I believe my choice saved my life.

I am 5'3" and weigh about 105lbs soaking wet. I lived at a complex with two roommates. The complex was an old tanning factory. This place was huge and our parking lot was a across from the building. The main door into the building had no lock, but there was another door that required a key, or you had to be buzzed in.

This night my roommate had a horrific UTI and I decided to run up the street to the 7 eleven to get her some cranberry juice. There were several reports that there was a peeping tom looking in the first floor windows and had also been seen masturbating while he was doing it. He never approached anyone, but that was about to change.

On this night I walked out of the building and a movement to my right caught my eye. There was a guy about 6 foot standing there in just shorts, no shoes no shirt. His shorts were pulled down in the front and his penis was is his hand. He was still masturbating when he was staring at me. I began to walk quickly toward the parking lot. I had to go through a maze of bushes to get to the street. I turned one more time and it appeared this guy had taken a few steps toward me.

I do not know why I decided to turn around and go back toward the building but I did. I remember thinking If he comes after me and gets me in the maze of bushes no one will hear me. I walked right by him and opened the first door to the building. I didn't take my key so I had to buzz the apartment so my roommate could buzz me in.

I could see his reflection in the door and he was going to attempt to enter into the front entrance way. Now this is were it got really funky. I can honestly tell you all my fear disappeared and what came over me was an incredible rage. I turned and when I did he had the door opened about a quarter of the way. I stepped forward and put my foot up against the door to keep him from opening it any further. I then leaned in and got right up to his face. I was as so close I could see the sweat on his upper lip. I told him if he took one step further I would kick him in the nuts and break his fucking fingers that he was still using to masturbate with.

He was totally taken off guard and stepped back. At that point the buzzer went off and I got into the building. I turned and looked back and he was still staring at me and still beating off.

I called the police and they came. I gave a description and I remember telling the officer that this guy was going to hurt someone. I knew, I felt it. I was right.

Three weeks later this guy got into the building and assaulted a girl in the back stairwell. She was able to get away. About two weeks after that he brutally raped and elderly women coming home from bingo. She ended up in the hospital from having her head bashed in with a rock. Where did he get her? In the maze of bushes that she had to walk through to get to the building.

Here is the point I am trying to make. No one knows how this confrontation began between Zimmerman and Treyvon. The choice Treyvon made to confront Zimmerman that was following him just may have been instinctive. I know first hand the rage that can come from nowhere when your survival instincts kick in.

I can tell you for sure that I was ready to fight for my life that night. The circumstance of course are much different but who is to say what Treyvon Martin felt. If it was anything comparable to what I felt at that moment then I can clearly understand the beating he was giving Zimmerman.

Zimmerman doesn't have a lily white reputation that's for dam sure. He is also a liar.

So now you know why I question what happened that night, and what may have motivated Treyvon to turn on Zimmerman. If it could happen to me, it could happen to anyone. Lastly, we do not know what really happened that night. Only Zimmerman does. Quoting him as gospel truth is just not rational.

Zimmerman wants to be a cop. He also has a history of violence. Do we really need someone like Zimmerman with a gun patrolling our streets. GOD help us.

Peggy R - I hear you

I understand the response to being victimized and glad you fought back...

As far as getting any validation from Zimmerman defenders as you can see it's a losing battle...What amazes me is that the complete lack of tolerance and ensuing venom- for disagreeing with any other opinion other then the popular:

1. Zimmerman is innocent and Trayvon was a thug

What is more astounding, is that THERE ARE ONLY TWO PEOPLE WHO KNOW THE TRUTH and one of them is dead. But when you read the posters emphatically exclaiming Zimmermans innocence, you would think each of them must have been there to witness the entire event....

Those who so viscously defend Zimmerman state that they have the "facts" when they are opinions that are based on beliefs of what they have seen, read and heard.... just as you are basing your opinions on what you have seen, read and heard....

What also shocks me (speaking for myself) is the lack of understanding that if one thinks Zimmerman has at least some culpability for what happened, that it translates to meaning that you also think Trayvon was racially profiled and that he was a saint who deserves martyrdom...

That there is a third rail of opinion or perception, is impossible for folks posting here to tolerate...or to engage in a rational debate with put downs, name callings and other juvenile attacks by supposedly independent thinking people...who want to bully you into agreement them....they have become the MSD the "mainstream DP'ers"

Daily Paul sure isn't what it use to be.....perhaps the trolls have outnumbered the independent thinkers who care about what freedom is about...There are much better sites out there where folks can disagree and learn from each other without the venomous attacks....

Time to move on from this site...it's clearly a waste of time....

Peace...Rock on Peggy R.

Would you be blaming the watchman in your complex...

...if a similar incident had occurred then?

Would you have had the same problem with your neighborhood watchman following and reporting a suspicious fellow wandering thru the yards at night where he didn't belong, especially given the recent problems with the peeping tom?

Had a similar incident occurred with the neighborhood watchperson and the suspicious person, as did with Zimmerman and Martin, would you have carried on like you're doing here trying to make it out like the suspicious person was simply killed for walking down a street?

If the suspicious person in your complex went from lurking where he didn't belong to actually going after people and attacking them, why are you so doubtful or defensive of fight-loving Trayvon Martin (as verified by the text messages) turning on Zimmerman?

Would you have ignored the suspicious person's propensity for violence as you are doing here and made your neighborhood watchman out to be the bad guy for following him?

And all irrelevant

What you fail to understand is what the law says. The instructions on self defense are clear as day.

So assume Zimmerman's story doesn't exist. All you have is a dead teen and an eyewitness telling us that Martin was hitting the hell out of Zimmerman. This is the end of the story. Martin hitting Zimmerman is a felony if not done in self defense. Seeing as he was on top of Zimmerman self-defense is not likely. But even if it was possible we would have to assume the same for Zimmerman. So at best we don't know and at worst the felon was Martin. Both options make Zimmerman not guilty.

Pure speculation bullshit.

Sorry to hear about your encounter years ago with a completely disturbed individual. However Zimmerman was not disturbed, a pervert, or even looking for a fight that night. He was doing his job as a volunteer neighborhood watch. There isn't just "one side" to this story. There were witnesses who were there who also testified that they saw Zimmerman getting beaten (abet from a distance)that still doesn't change the fact that (what's his name?) was on top beating him. I will not dignify that worthless wanna be thug with his name. He's gotten far too much media attention and sympathy for his skin color alone.

When a police officer lied and told Zimmerman that there was a camera that caught everything Zimmermans response was (thank god) Yeah sounds like someone who went out looking for a fight to shoot and kill someone. *that's sarcasm in case you couldn't pick up on it*

I don't know what is worse, your lack of intelligence, or your complete ignorance to what happened with wall to wall 24/7 coverage and countless resources on-line.

Zimmerman was not racist, him and his wife tutored young blacks, he has black family members (his grandmother was Peruvian born). He even helped get an officer fired in the Sanford police department for beating a BLACK homeless man.

I don't know where you get your info, or even how you form your decisions. But clearly you are either being misled, or aren't intelligent enough to form your own opinions outside the scope of media control.

I'm tired of discounting individuals for their lack of research and intelligence. It's sad really that some here consider themselves intelligent and everyone else is a "sheep" like being here is some type inclusive Mensa club.

The only sheep I see here, or elsewhere are those who believe Zimmerman was guilty of murder, or manslaughter. When the jury who was at the trial and got to see the evidence for themselves gave the correct verdict of not guilty on all counts. Because anyone who actually looked at the EVIDENCE would of come to the same conclusion. What's his name started the fight, and it ended up costing him is life. Too bad, so sad. But go ahead keep beating the drum of Zimmerman being guilty if only to placate your own doubt and racial prejudices.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/04/zimmerman-demanded-discipl...

I'm glad that the guy didn't

I'm glad that the guy didn't hurt you, that story's so creepy! Sad that he hurt other people unfortunately.

Regarding the Trayvon case, you mentioned that Zimmerman wanted to be a cop as if that's automatically a negative thing, but didn't say anything about how Trayvon wanted to be a gangster and his older brother wanted him to teach him how to fight (because trayvon was apparently quite good at it) It just seems like you already made up your mind about Zimmerman regardless of what the evidence shows or would have shown. Zimmerman was also relieved when he was told that there was video taken of the fight. Liars aren't relieved when someone tells them that. I just think it's so sad when people try hard to send a guy that isn't guilty 'beyond a reasonable doubt' to jail as if that's justice or something.

You can't

go off of "reactions" because you don't know all aspects. Zimmerman might have known they would say that. By that logic we could just give people lie detector tests to determine guilt/innocence (lie detectors can be beaten).

You are right about

survival instinct. I will support gun rights until I die. That won't change.

But we have an unarmed kid that had no beef with Zimmerman dead. Zimmerman may not be guilty of an existing law but he's guilty of something.

You are right dead men tell no tales. We only have one side of the story. When someone follows you that's a threatening action. I watched the video of that dog that got shot by police. The dog didn't jump out of the car until a third officer went toward his owner. It must have looked like ganging up on him. There are common natural survival laws. Not every law is on the books.

Miss Peggy

In the insurance claims business, a common phrase uttered from an adjusters mouth is, "well, fortunately for you, stupidity is not a policy exclusion". See, if one lights a fire under the living room curtains and burns his house down, the policy is null and void, but if one leaves hot oil on the stove and burns their house down, the policy is valid. It's about breaking the law.

As the prosecutor pointed out, wearing a hoodie is not against the law, or walking through a neighborhood or eating skittles. Neither is following somebody walking through your neighborhood at night, or getting out of a car, or as in this case, even being armed.

The actions of both Martin and Zimmerman may have been "stupid" under the circumstances, but the facts indicate that neither one of them broke any LAWS until Martin attacked Zimmerman. Trial is about the law, not emotions. The jury made the right decision.

As with the prosecution, you reasoning if full of holes. One simply can't debate a book if they only read the first chapter.

I'll say this for the 10th time

I have no problem with the jury's verdict.

I have a problem with Zimemrmans rendition of what happened. If you and the jury believe it happened exactly like Zimmerman said it did then its your opinion.

I wasn't on the jury, I think Zimmerman was culpable, maybe not in a court of law since they can only make a decision based on what is presented.

My reasoning is not full of holes. Its an opinion. You can can choose to believe that Zimmermans version is the whole truth, or you can believe that only his side was told.

You can read the whole book and come to your conclusion. I'm saying there are some chapters missing.

Facts are facts and investigators follow them....

which is why they didn't charge him in the first place. I'm not going to argue or debate this, in fact, I paid very little attention to the whole thing once I realized it was just another dog and pony show. Let me just leave you with this irony:

If Zimmerman wasn't armed, it's quite possible it would have been Martin on trial.

Here are some facts the media

Here are some facts the media just happened to leave out of most of their nightly news reports on this case.

Stefan Molyneux addresses the case with actual facts to back up his points. You are clearly basing your assumptions on emotions and profiling as well by assuming Zimmerman, with a gun was a vigilante and out looking for trouble. You also are assuming Martin was completely innocent of any wrong doing when the evidence shows the opposite. Martin showed no signs of damage to his body except the gun shoot wound, while Zimmerman had black eyes, broken nose, and impact damage to the back of his head.


http://youtu.be/bF-Ax5E8EJc

Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto. - T. Jefferson rЭVO˩ution

"Everyone wants to live at the expense of the state. They forget that the state wants to live at the expense of everyone.” - BASTIAT

Your own post is self-defeating.

"Am I the only one on DP that thinks Zimmerman was guilty?"

Followed by, "No one knows what really happened that night." EXACTLY. That is how the courtroom works. The case against Zimmerman was so weak that the prosecuting attorney left out the photos showing Zimmerman's wounds. Literally the case against him was that bad, they had to lie.

Now I'm not saying anyone does know which person or persons were actually at fault that night. What I'm saying is that when there is conflicting reports and evidence the only possible outcome is an acquittal. I hope you can realize if you were in the same position that you would want the same privilege afforded to you.

Pottawattamie County Iowa

"Capitalism should not be condemned, since we haven't had capitalism." -Dr. Ron Paul

When did the conflict begin?

This is a conflict that escalated, so at what point do you determine that it began? If you look just at the point where the two were in close physical proximity, then it is true that we don't know exactly what happened, but we do know when the chase began and who initiated the chase, and I personally consider Zimmerman as having been the aggressor in the conflict, no matter what Martin's actions later.

Had some stranger clearly been following me, I know I would have feared for my own safety, and I think there is evidence that Martin feared for his.

I think someone who initiates a conflict loses any right to claim self defense when the conflict turns sour on him.

Your assertion that we don't know who was at fault that night is absurd to my way of thinking.

And if you don't think Zimmerman was on the hunt, go listen to the police tape of him when he gives his last name and you can hear in the background the round being chambered in his KelTec. He was loaded for bear and on the hunt.

"Bend over and grab your ankles" should be etched in stone at the entrance to every government building and every government office.

Nope.

Irrelevant. It is legal to ask someone what they are doing.

I love that you say "i personally believe...." You believe it because you choose to believe a narrative. I choose to believe no narrative because there is no evidence to support either while proving the other one to be untrue. Hence acquittal.

Pottawattamie County Iowa

"Capitalism should not be condemned, since we haven't had capitalism." -Dr. Ron Paul

Not a privilege but a Right

small correction but an important one.

We all have a basic human right to defend ourselves even if the powers that be begin to ignore that fact

Why is this downvoted so

Why is this downvoted so hard?

Southern Agrarian

because the evidence was heard, the prosecution was proven to

have hidden evidence, and one should err in favor of an accused rather than against.

"Hence, naturally enough, my symbol for Hell is something like the bureaucracy of a police state or the office of a thoroughly nasty business concern." ~~C.S. Lewis
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

True

I feel it is better that a guilty person go free than an innocent person be prosecuted. If Zimmerman is guilty of anything he will have to answer for it to a much higher Judge. I personally don't think he was guilty as charged anyway.

At what point when I am being

At what point when I am being assaulted am I allowed to defend myself (with a gun) and if it has to be life threatening at what point do I know that it would stop?

Peggy

You appear to be a person who has a lot of emotions. And that is good in that it leads to compassion and understanding which is always needed in our world. Yes, it is tragic that a young 17 year old boy needlessly lost his life as a result of momentary human misjudgements (on both parties). It is also sad that our communities need watchers to feel safe, or that people need to carry weapons for self defense. Or that our government is corrupt.
All is not well in paradise.

Emotions help us relate to situations and to empathize with other human beings. But emotions are not reliable in a court of law nor can jurors rely on emotions in their decision. Reason and emotion are two distinctly different and separate avenues of thinking.

Aristotle's declaration of "The law is reason, free from passion." should guide the philosophy of our legal system.

One cannot ignore evidence, nor change facts to force them into compatibility with our emotions. That often leads to such problems as parents who refuse to accept the fact that their child has committed a wrong. Or biased rulings by a jury.

Perhaps your views being opposite of the consensus of the DP patrons on this issue is due partly to your emotional viewpoint whereas most DPers are rational thinkers who insist on actual evidence being the determining factor in the court room. Doesn't mean they don't have compassion for the death of a young boy or the pain felt by his family. They also extend compassion for Zimmerman and his family who also suffered. True compassion and fairness is extended to every one involved in such a tragedy.

In a tragedy one person is never totally wrong and one person is never totally right - that's why it is called a tragedy. Zimmerman did not, with malice, kill Trayvon. Most DPers, though they find Zimmerman not guilty of the stated charges, can admit he probably made a few errors in judgement. So did Trayvon.
One must use compassion for understanding but reason for difficult decisions.

Interesting

There were 6 jurors that, by all accounts, were extraordinarily attentive during the entire trial. The rule of law demands that the prosecution PROVE guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The jurors deliberated for over 13 hours (I believe that is right without taking the time to go back and check) and, in the end, came back with a unanimous verdict of not guilty. Meaning that, as far as they were concerned, the Prosecution did NOT prove guilt! So many people pushed for Zimmerman to be arrested, charged and tried (against the better judgment of the police that investigated and the prosecuting attorney that originally got the case) and, when that happens and the system runs it's course, now they want to scream injustice? That is absurd and goes against everything that a libertarian should stand for. What would you rather have happened? Maybe just skip the trial and form a lynch mod? Just hang him high? After all, he is guilty as hell right? WRONG! We have a rule of law and a justice system for a reason! It's to TRY to keep innocent people from being punished for something they didn't do. This case actually gives me a glimmer of hope that, if I'm ever unjustly arrested and tried, MAYBE the system will work to protect me. And, EVERYONE should hope for the same and support the rule of law. If I'm ever attacked by a thug, I want to know that I can defend myself without fear of prosecution/persecution. What a shame that this man's attempt to defend his life has COST him his life. He will NEVER be able to live in peace. He probably still has a few years of fighting the system (civil cases and, possibly, a civil rights case) and, when all that is over, he's still a marked man and carries the burden of the labels that the media and race-baiters wrongfully affixed to his back. Like Mr. West said, it's a TRAVESETY! The media and the government put this man through hell and destroyed his future because he shot a thug that was attacking him. Even if he was a "creepy assed cracker", that didn't give Martin the right (legally or morally) to attack him with physical force. Martin chose to attack rather than call 911 or go home. It was Martin's choice that was MOST responsible for the outcome.

You are correct about the jury

Plus, both attorneys signed off on the jurors selected. If the prosecution had thought any of the jurors would have been biased, they would've had them removed. This is the jury they chose to try the case, hoping for the outcome they desired.

People are comparing

the Zimmerman trial to Casey Anthony and OJ Simpson. There are common threads in all three cases.

None of the three are career criminals with rap sheets as long as my arm. None had been involved on this level with the criminal justice system in the past. This is important because career criminals have been through the system and the smart ones can work it to their advantage. Police and prosecutors understand they better have their ducks in a row before charging them with a crime and entering a courtroom. When the trial starts, jeopardy attaches. They get one bite of the apple. They have one chance at trial to take a career criminal off the streets.

In the three cases above, the MSM started pounding the drums, the public became outraged and prosecutors felt compelled to bring criminal charges, secure an arrest warrant and take all three to trial (where jeopardy attaches). The outcome was that all three individuals were found not guilty by a jury of their peers. Why? Because the investigations were short circuited or "hijacked" is the word Bill Lee used. I agree with Bill Lee.

Because none of the three are career criminals, somewhere down the line, if the investigations are allowed to run their natural course, and assuming all three committed the crimes, I can guarantee you, they will mess up. It's called a guilty conscience. Five years into the investigation, OJ may have retrieved the knife he used to slit his ex-wife's throat and the police will find it in his possession, Casey Anthony may have admitted to a friend that she killed her daughter and here's where the evidence of the crime was hidden, and George Zimmerman may have been on the phone and the police (with a warrant) wiretapped his conversation where he went into a racial tirade and admitted he went out that night to shoot a black kid (sometimes this may take 10-15-20 years for the evidence to surface). The police will have the last piece of the puzzle, they'd wrap up the case, give it to prosecutors and with this evidence, the prosecutors will secure a guilty verdict. Prosecutors have evidence of guilt, that, in its totality, is beyond reasonable doubt.

Let me say at this point that all three parties were found not guilty by a jury of their peers. I'm not saying any were guilty of the crimes they were charged with, only that I'm proposing scenarios that may have happened had the investigations been allowed to run their natural course. What people should keep in mind going forward is when the MSM starts pounding the drums and attempting to enrage the public, more times than not, the investigation is being short circuited or "hijacked." The outcome might be that one day, in another high profile murder case, a truly guilty party will go free.

3 big pieces of evidence that proved him innocent of murder

1. His bloody face and back of head. This corroborates his story that he was pinned against the concrete taking a beating.

2. Cries for help which Martin's Father originally admitted were not Martin. Zimmerman had at least 5 witnesses who testified it was his voice.

3. Eyewitness testimony that stated Martin was on top of Zimmerman when he was shot.

Should Zimmerman have followed? No. I don't believe he wanted to shoot Martin that night. It was a sad situation where he felt his life was being threatened.

This is what I have gathered after observing the evidence from numerous sources.

"Once you become knowledgeable, you have an obligation to do something about it."- Ron Paul

It's a hopeless case.

No one who was there is still alive except Zimmerman and it will always be a mystery to everyone except him.

So, for the whole nation to be led by constant media bombardment into "taking sides," when fundamentally no one can know what happened, just shows how easily we are manipulated. To say it's a race thing only warps the issue further.

I will be honest...

Looking at a lot of comment regarding this case since the jump, I have read a lot of questionable a looooooooot of people (still waiting on the violent riots to protest a "hero" expected by most..smh), but I will leave this here. This is a sad fact in the world that we live in but race is still an issue. No matter how you choose to go deal with it (i.e covering your eyes so you want see it, your ears so you won't hear it, or displacement by telling yourself it doesn't exist), it is still there. Truth be told, many here wouldn't understand because in any life, they probably would have never had to go through it. Have you ever had to ask yourself, "I know that Lincoln took a major crap on the Constitution and destroyed states rights as visioned, but if he didn't, would I be in a field considered 3/5 a human?" I have. Or have you ever had to look someone in the eye that didn't like you because you were born darker? Yes, I've been there too.

People here say that race never played an issue in this trial do totally overlook the fact that Zimmerman profiled Martin on the same 911 call that phone are using to saying that Martin snuck up on him. That's not a media spin but from the horses mouth. *sigh* But I've never thought about the what if the shoe was on the other foot issue, because how many believe that OJ got away with double murder? But anywho..

I knew they were reaching with 2nd Degree Murder. The prosecution deserves all of they strife that they are getting. With that being said, what do we do moving forward? There will always be a difference of opinion regarding this and I can guarantee that laws are going to change in Florida but what can we do as a nation with the division? No matter if it was media spin, that seed is planted and emotions are there. I can care less about the verdict because I never put emotion into it like some did, never looked for justification on either side of a tragedy like others did, or made this about something that it wasn't.(gun rights?) But what I do see is the aftermath and that is what we have to deal with.

*OAN, if you decide to downvote me, at least respond with logical reasoning to my comment..thanks.*

How did he profile him?

He was asked a question by the 911 operator what race the "suspicious person" was. He answered black.

Have you listened to the 911 call in its entirety?

Have you read the background of what was going on in the neighborhood prior to this incident?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/25/us-usa-florida-sho...

Do you know Zimmerman's history of how he treated people of other races previously?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ama-yawson/george-zimmerman-tr...

Don't let your experiences cloud facts. This case had nothing to do with race.

"Once you become knowledgeable, you have an obligation to do something about it."- Ron Paul