Comment: Here's the way to approach this

(See in situ)


Here's the way to approach this

Unfortunately, the only way to discuss this with anyone is if that "anyone" allows you to talk, uninterrupted, for a few minutes to make the actual point. So if you're lucky enough that this is your situation, here's my take:

1. It sucks that Trayvon is dead. He was unnecessarily followed (harassed or stalked, maybe) by Zimmerman for, what it appears to be non-racial reasons. Even if it WAS for racial reasons, it doesn't change the fact that Zimmerman stupidly, and unnecessarily followed Trayvon.

2. If Trayvon was not killed by Zimmerman, he could very likely sue Zimmerman for harassment and probably also for physical harm and maybe even for attempted murder.

3. But Trayvon is dead, and the only witness can remember seeing Trayvon beating the crap out of Zimmerman.

4. The jury IN THIS CASE was instructed ONLY to decide whether Zimmerman was defending his life during this confrontation. That's it.

5. If Zimmerman did actually fear for his life, EVEN IF HE WAS THE ONE THAT INITIATED THIS WHOLE FIASCO, he was justified by the law for initiating violence in self-defense.

6. If Trayvon killed Zimmerman, he might also be found not-guilty if a jury of his peers felt that Trayvon truly feared that HE might be killed or seriously injured. In this hypothetical situation, I would not have a problem with the verdict.

7. For this reason, I do not have a problem with the verdict in this situation. Zimmerman is guilty of being a vigilante, perhaps guilty of being a wanna-be cop, guilty of following Martin, and (in my opinion) of making some really stupid decisions.

8. But the jury was not asked to rule on these issues. Did Zimmerman, at the time of the confrontation, fear his life? Yes? Then it's self-defense.

9. The whole situation sucks, but that's the law.

That's my view on this case. Let me know what you think.