TRAYVON Martin??

One, jurors a speaking to the media right now saying that he was absolutely innocent because he absolutely felt for his life.

Two, Zimmerman doesn't have to justify himself to anyone, he's innocent until proven guilty...a fact that some of you are conveniently ignoring. Having to "hide" from the public because you're innocent of a crime is illustrating how fucked up you people are in the head...

Again, crawl back until your holes until next month when the next big media sensation trial can pop up that your opinions will be irrelevant in...

innocent of a crime Originally Posted by Wakeuр

Actually, the jury verdict found him "not guilty" rather than innocent. They were not convinced by the prosecution of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to overcome the "presumption" of his innocence. However, there was enough evidence presented to cause 3 jurors to initially vote to convict.

LMAO.

Then why is he in hiding, cowering in a cave like the punk ass bitch that he is?

If you know you're innocent, you'll be proud to say it.

Blacks kill dozens of blacks every week. If Zimmerman had been black we would have never even heard of this.

If the idiot black leaders want to make an actual difference they should be talking to their own youth since they kill each other at a hugely disproportional rate. They won't do that, though, because they care more about stirring the race pot than preventing young black men from getting killed. Originally Posted by linux

While one could argue the validity of this statement, there would be no point. This is merely one circumstance come to head from the myriad of social problems that exists in this very complex country we live in.

This is the same as any politics, and everyone has strong views. I will say this, and anyone who has children will probably agree the real and true victims are his mother and family. No matter the outcome that poor woman has lost a child. I would be destroyed, my parents went through it, and it almost killed our family. Just a horrible tragedy!!!

The jury found him innocent because they DIDN'T find him guilty...he was, and is right now, innocent. The fact that these militant black people around here want to hurt him says more about them then it does about Zimmerman...

Just sayin'...

If you know you're innocent, you'll be proud to say it. Originally Posted by Rambro Creed

He did..."Not guilty, your Honor"...'nuff said...

The jury found him innocent because they DIDN'T find him guilty...he was, and is right now, innocent. The fact that these militant black people around here want to hurt him says more about them then it does about Zimmerman...

Just sayin'... Originally Posted by Wakeuр

He is "NOT GUILTY", not "INNOCENT". I don't believe this trial should have ever gone to trial in the first place and believed from the very start that he would be found "NOT GUILTY", but as others have mentioned, this does not equate to GZ being innocent.

The problem stems from the fact that different states have different laws. I can guarantee you that he would have been found guilty of manslaughter in New York, Massachusets, and other more liberal states. In Texas, Florida, Arizona, and other states with Stand Your Ground laws, it is very difficult to successfully prosecute a case like this when there's absolutely no evidence against the defendent. All extremely circumstantial evidence.

I just wish the majority of TM supporters would sit down and look at the evidence and look at the laws. If any reasonable person would do this, there just wasn't enough evidence to convict. You either believe 1) GZ acted in self-defense or 2) he waved his gun around and shot TM in cold-blood. The evidence doesn't support #2 and it is highly possible that #1 happened. That's all this case boils down to.

I don't think the Feds will bring Civil Rights charges against GZ. This never was a case about race and the juror even said she didn't believe GZ was racist. It will be interesting to see if a civil suit will come to trial. But in a civil suit, the whole world will see TM is no angel and all the inadmissable stuff about TM in the criminal trial will come out in the civil suit trial. But the burden of proof is considerably lower in a civil trial.

I wish the liberal media, NAACP, Sharpton, Jackson would just cool it with the race card and stop flaming the fans.

I wish the liberal media, NAACP, Sharpton, Jackson would just cool it with the race card and stop flaming the fans. Originally Posted by HoustonMatt

They never help in situations such as this. This is not the '60s. The same tactics don't work like they used to.

The jury found him innocent because they DIDN'T find him guilty...he was, and is right now, innocent. Originally Posted by Wakeuр

The jury did not give a verdict of "innocent" rather it was "not guilty." The prosecution failed to convince this particular jury (the one that matters) of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. There is a difference between not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and innocent. However, we can agree to disagree.

[QUOTE=htownhammer;1053404951]

The jury found him innocent because they DIDN'T find him guilty...he was, and is right now, innocent./QUOTE]
The jury did not give a verdict of "innocent" rather it was "not guilty." The prosecution failed to convince this particular jury (the one that matters) of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Originally Posted by Wakeuр

Got to LOVE the semantics! The jury only had three options: (1) Guilty of 2nd degree murder, (2) Guilty of manslaughter, (3) Not Guilty.

By inference, if he is Not Guilty, he is Innocent.

[QUOTE=TheJudge69;1053404974]

Got to LOVE the semantics! The jury only had three options: (1) Guilty of 2nd degree murder, (2) Guilty of manslaughter, (3) Not Guilty.

By inference, if he is Not Guilty, he is Innocent. Originally Posted by htownhammer

Just like Casey Anthony.

If you listened to the Juror's interview on CNN, sounds like the jury did a good job following the Court's instructions and deliberating on the evidence presented. Fact is, only two people know exactly what happened and Zimmerman invoked his constitutional 5th amendment right. Obviously, the evidence presented was not sufficient "beyond a reasonable doubt" to find Zimmerman had not acted in self defense and/or shot Martin with intent and malice. The juror so much as said this was the basis of the verdict. She also said she thought Zimmerman overreacted.

Had there been a charge of Negligent Homicide, perhaps that may have been a basis for a conviction. Don't know if Florida has such a statute. Probably not, or the prosecution would have included that in the charges.

The verdict does not mean that Zimmerman did not shoot Martin with intent and malice, simply that there was not enough evidence to prove so. Sometimes guilty people are found "not guilty" and innocent people are found "guilty" ... it isn't a perfect system.

For one, I think Zimmerman bears responsibility for Travon's death and think there will indeed be a civil trial. This ain't over by a long shot.

And, Zimmerman is basically fucked for life ... I suspect he'll be hiding under a rock for quite some time.

I love Bill Maher....

The Marine didn't have THC in his system so the Media or anyone else could care less.



http://www.reagancoalition.com/artic...rine-beat.html