orly

Covers the start of the sequence of events. Read up on what happened in the other few minutes until the shooting occurred.

bats

And your point is?

jimf

There doesn't seem much doubt that the verdict was correct. The only suprise is that it was brought to trial in the first case.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/george-zimm...ry?id=19598422

bats

I said as much in post 5

jimf

Looking at your post you don't seem to have said that at all. You suggested there were no witnesses but that wasn't the case at all. The witness closest to the incident was able to describe the situation at the time of the shot which seems to have confirmed Zimmerman's account.

orly

Following and getting out of the car was irrelevant in the end.

Mikeypm

But why call 911, be directed by 911 operator to stay put and yet he gets out of car and follows Trayvon. It does not make sense

Shard

According to the ABC news article posted, he got out of the car to write an address down or something of that nature.

I suppose the question is whether Martin was goading Trayvon, and if so, that may be what the black community is objecting to. The fact that they are often "profiled" and seem to have limited recourse (especially where "Stand Your Ground" applies). If Trayvon was verbally provoked into a fight, for example, that would put a different spin on the self-defence defence (not legally, but morally).

bats

There were two conflicting witnesses watching from a distance and neither saw who threw the first punch.
I said there was 'doubt and so....' the ellipsis which was intended to imply that reasonable doubt meant that there had to be a not guilty verdict. Apologies if this is beyond your comprehension.

bats

I agree with you and think that following someone is also goading. The shame is that the black community is often profiled in this way and gets worse sentences when convicted, the understandable assumption is that this is what happened in this case. We don't really know though and it isn't helped by Obama pitching in.

Edit. Have been looking for facts on Zimmerman racially profiling Martin and found this article

://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/16/opinion/zimmerman-prosecutors-duck-the-race-issue.html?pagewanted=all

jimf

You first said there were no "real" witnesses - now you say there were two "conflicting" witnesses. I'd suggest the witnesses were both real and gave conflicting accounts so it comes down to the credibility of the witnesses. Trayvon's father seemed rather unsure as to whether it was his son calling for help and the jury decided it was Zimmerman.

bats

I don't see that 'conflicting' and 'real' in this instance are mutually exclusive, especially as neither of them saw the whole fight, who started it, head being banged on the floor.

Shard

Interesting article.

orly

It doesn't make sense because you're totally off with the timeline established during the case. It's easy to make it sound like he was told not to follow while inside his car and then say he exited the car after being told this but it's simply not accurate.

He was asked if he was following long after he was out of the car. At this point he was actually nowhere near Martin who had left and was in a different area.

After being told not to follow he stopped and began walking back towards his car. This is where the altercation occurred after Martin, having reached the house he was staying at to the south (established by his own words on a phonecall he made), magically doubled back and traveled ~100m in the wrong direction to actually initiate the direct confrontation. Note it's Martin who starts the fight and witnesses confirm him beating Zimmerman on the ground.

That's why the only person convicted of anything during the case was Martin and not Zimmerman.

It's easy to see people being manipulated by the media here. Just like "MillieF" talking about Stand Your Ground...which wasn't actually relevant or used in either the Zimmerman or Alexander cases as far as I'm aware.

dbd33

What was Martin convicted of during the case that started with his death?