Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/

Zimmerman trial verdict predictions

  • 12-07-2013 08:11PM
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭


    So, closing arguments today.

    Predictions on the verdict?

    Zimmerman Verdict? 206 votes

    Guilty
    0% 0 votes
    No Guilty
    28% 58 votes
    Other (mis-trial/split decision)
    71% 148 votes


«13456722

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 9,396 ✭✭✭Frosty McSnowballs


    1-0


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    *Not

    Could a mod edit if possible thanks.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 310 ✭✭Osborne


    Guilty. But maybe that's just my opinion and not what I really think the outcome will be.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,862 ✭✭✭✭padd b1975


    Dylan rocks!!


    :cool:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,453 ✭✭✭jugger0


    Not guilty for defending himself from a little toerag, i wonder will the riots happen or is it all spoof.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,867 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    The evidence doesn't seem very clear to me. One witness contradicting another. Conflicting evidence on who is screaming on the 911 tape.

    In my opinion, no clear motive. You would hardly ring 911 and let them know you were tailing somebody if you had the intention of putting a cap in his ass.

    Zimmerman had injuries. Surely he would have shot the guy instead of getting into a fight with him, if his intention was to kill him.

    If the jurors don't buckle to all the race related crap, then I reckon he will be found not guilty.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 197 ✭✭theSHU


    Not guilty, clear cut case if ever there was one.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 17,082 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    Not guilty on the murder charge.

    Manslaughter is less definite, but I still suspect acquittal


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,867 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    Not guilty on the murder charge.

    Manslaughter is less definite, but I still suspect acquittal


    You are over there in the States. Are the guilty/not guilty camps split down the race divide?


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,823 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manach


    He might have been a tad reckless in tackling the youth but he did not have the mental purpose formed to kill him,my offhand reading of the evidence, so not guilty.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    You are over there in the States. Are the guilty/not guilty camps split down the race divide?

    Yeah it's spilt white/brown/black ;)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,674 ✭✭✭Mardy Bum


    So if you follow someone around after being told to stop by police and then chase them and then shoot them you are not guilty?

    The whole self defence argument was put to bed. No DNA was found.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,867 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    Mardy Bum wrote: »
    So if you follow someone around after being told to stop by police and then chase them and then shoot them you are not guilty?

    The whole self defence argument was put to bed. No DNA was found.

    Zimmerman was under no legal obligation to follow the advice of the police to stop following Trayvon Martin. Therefore, the fact that he was following him makes no difference. Legally, he wasn't doing anything wrong.

    On the DNA reference, one witness claims that they saw Martin on top of Zimmerman and another says that they saw it the other way around. Either way, one man was on top of the other, so therefore there was a struggle, regardless of whether there was DNA or not.

    Whether the shooting was merited, I'm not sure as I wasn't there. But one thing I'm sure of is that I can't say with 100% confidence that the shooting wasn't self defence.

    Guilt has to be proved beyond all reasonable doubt. The fact that they were seen by witnesses to be struggling leads me to have a fair bit of doubt in my mind.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,466 ✭✭✭Clandestine


    Mardy Bum wrote: »
    So if you follow someone around after being told to stop by police and then chase them and then shoot them you are not guilty?

    The whole self defence argument was put to bed. No DNA was found.
    The defence proved without much of a doubt he was acting in self-defence thanks to testimonies from the police, medical experts and evidence (such as head wounds)


  • Posts: 6,321 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    id say there'll be rioting.

    Crowds already gathering.( small group of people )

    Rumors that the New Black Panthers have bussed in supporters.

    http://cbs12.com/news/features/live-events/index.shtml?app_data={%22pi%22:%2232063_1373658397_442144003%22,%22pt%22:%22twitter%22}


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,466 ✭✭✭Clandestine


    Black Panthers are all talk. If it does come to a riot, the white people will fight back, just like the Koreans during 1992


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,674 ✭✭✭Mardy Bum


    The defence proved without much of a doubt he was acting in self-defence thanks to testimonies from the police, medical experts and evidence (such as head wounds)

    Martin ran away from Zimmerman. Zimmerman chased him. Zimmerman's DNA was not found underneath Martins fingernails. Martin's DNA was not on the gun.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,867 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    Mardy Bum wrote: »
    Martin ran away from Zimmerman. Zimmerman chased him. Zimmerman's DNA was not found underneath Martins fingernails. Martin's DNA was not on the gun.


    Are you suggesting that because no DNA was found on either person that no struggle took place?

    Because if you are, there are two eye witnesses who say otherwise.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,440 ✭✭✭The Aussie


    Mardy Bum wrote: »
    No DNA was found.

    Are we talking about the same case here...

    Was there any penetration in the case you heard about? :pac:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,674 ✭✭✭Mardy Bum


    BattleCorp wrote: »
    Are you suggesting that because no DNA was found on either person that no struggle took place?

    Because if you are, there are two eye witnesses who say otherwise.

    There was no DNA found under TM fingernails. Zimmerman said he had banged his head repeatedly off the the ground therefore either something extraordinary occurred and the DNA disappeared or Zimmerman lied.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,867 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    Mardy Bum wrote: »
    There was no DNA found under TM fingernails. Zimmerman said he had banged his head repeatedly off the the ground therefore either something extraordinary occurred and the DNA disappeared or Zimmerman lied.


    I'm not doubting when you say that there was no DNA. What I'm saying is what difference does it's absence make?

    If there was no DNA present and no witnesses, then I'd be suspect of Zimmerman's version of what happened.

    The fact that two witnesses saw a struggle take place, then this has to give some credibility to his claim of self defence. Witnesses saw a struggle and this is possibly where Zimmerman's injuries happened.

    Another point on no DNA under Trayvon Martin's nails. No DNA doesn't mean that they didn't struggle. If one person punched another person with a closed fist, then there would be no DNA underneath the fingernails.

    It's not the lack of DNA here that is important as the two witnesses negate the need for DNA evidence to give credibility to Zimmerman's version of events.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭CormacPR8


    Mardy Bum wrote: »
    There was no DNA found under TM fingernails. Zimmerman said he had banged his head repeatedly off the the ground therefore either something extraordinary occurred and the DNA disappeared or Zimmerman lied.

    I do not think you have a clear understanding of this case. The absence of DNA does not mean anything, but the existence does- DNA is a forensic tool but not even close to a science. Secondly, it is not unlawful to follow someone, even if the dispatcher (which isn't a police officer by the way so you are wrong about that) advises not to. Clearly self-defense, as there is not enough direct evidence to support otherwise.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,674 ✭✭✭Mardy Bum


    CormacPR8 wrote: »
    I do not think you have a clear understanding of this case. The absence of DNA does not mean anything, but the existence does- DNA is a forensic tool but not even close to a science. Secondly, it is not unlawful to follow someone, even if the dispatcher (which isn't a police officer by the way so you are wrong about that) advises not to. Clearly self-defense, as there is not enough direct evidence to support otherwise.

    Zimmerman tells police TM banged his head against the ground 25 times. Yet there is no DNA on TMs fingernails. You are telling me that if DNA is absent then it can still possible that TM banged Zimmermans head against the ground continuously?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,867 ✭✭✭✭BattleCorp


    Mardy Bum wrote: »
    Zimmerman tells police TM banged his head against the ground 25 times. Yet there is no DNA on TMs fingernails. You are telling me that if DNA is absent then it can still possible that TM banged Zimmermans head against the ground continuously?


    Anything is physically possible. I'm sure that there are rape cases where no DNA evidence was recovered.

    Zimmerman doesn't have to prove that TM banged his head 25 times against the ground. He only has to prove that a struggle happened. And I go back to my original point, two witnesses saw a struggle take place.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Mardy Bum wrote: »
    Zimmerman tells police TM banged his head against the ground 25 times. Yet there is no DNA on TMs fingernails. You are telling me that if DNA is absent then it can still possible that TM banged Zimmermans head against the ground continuously?

    You doubt the possibility of not getting DNA under your nails in a struggle?

    This isn't CSI:Florida where there is always DNA


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭CormacPR8


    Mardy Bum wrote: »
    Zimmerman tells police TM banged his head against the ground 25 times. Yet there is no DNA on TMs fingernails. You are telling me that if DNA is absent then it can still possible that TM banged Zimmermans head against the ground continuously?

    Yes, yes I am. And I think most sane people would agree. First off, the cutting of the fingers was done incorrectly as stated by Mr. Bao when asked by Don West under oath. Secondly, DNA is an extraordinary evasive "substance" that can easily be deteriorated. If you have studied law anywhere you would know that the absence of DNA doesn't mean anything substantial. The Golden Rule about DNA is that the existence is telling, but the absence is up for speculation and does not prove against anyone or for anyone. I cannot believe you actually arguing that point. Out of all of the circumstantial evidence brought forth after over a year, there are some better points to argue even I would assert.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 197 ✭✭theSHU


    Mardy Bum wrote: »
    Zimmerman tells police TM banged his head against the ground 25 times. Yet there is no DNA on TMs fingernails. You are telling me that if DNA is absent then it can still possible that TM banged Zimmermans head against the ground continuously?

    If there is 1 gun present in a scuffle between 2 people, both persons have access to the gun. GZ was on the ground been beaten up by TM, he feared for his life and he shot him in self-defence. Witnesses verified this. Case cased.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,674 ✭✭✭Mardy Bum


    CormacPR8 wrote: »
    Yes, yes I am. And I think most sane people would agree. First off, the cutting of the fingers was done incorrectly as stated by Mr. Bao when asked by Don West under oath. Secondly, DNA is an extraordinary evasive "substance" that can easily be deteriorated. If you have studied law anywhere you would know that the absence of DNA doesn't mean anything substantial. The Golden Rule about DNA is that the existence is telling, but the absence is up for speculation and does not prove against anyone or for anyone. I cannot believe you actually arguing that point. Out of all of the circumstantial evidence brought forth after over a year, there are some better points to argue even I would assert.

    I'm no legal eagle so I'll leave that to you so. Thanks for that.


  • Posts: 6,321 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Chris Farley.. I mean the Judge, just called another damn recess. Jury question order of evidence, or sumtin like that...


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 112 ✭✭CormacPR8


    Mardy Bum wrote: »
    I'm no legal eagle so I'll leave that to you so. Thanks for that.

    No worries. This case is frustrating though because he is a clearly innocent man and I truly feel bad for the guy. As his attorney stated, his life is ruined either way. He might as well move to another country or to some remote rural area in the states, especially because the people that want him dead have nothing to lose. The State tried to paint him as a cop wanna-be, but disallowed Trayvon's texts and social media where he boasted about drugs, guns, and fighting. If anything, I would consider TM a wanna-be thug. Plus, there was a minor amount of marijuana in his system, can you imagine if George had that in his?


Advertisement