Imagine if Treyvon Martin and George Zimmerman looked liked this

[DC Al Fine]

So for all those claiming Zimmerman would've been executed, does anyone even care to address the point I made, or are you just pulling this execution thing out of your bums?

Their hands are rather smelly if that's any indication.

[Sbane]

So for all those claiming Zimmerman would've been executed, does anyone even care to address the point I made, or are you just pulling this execution thing out of your bums?

He would be in jail though. Do you disagree with that?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

So for all those claiming Zimmerman would've been executed, does anyone even care to address the point I made, or are you just pulling this execution thing out of your bums?

He would be in jail though. Do you disagree with that?

I disagree with it, but I'd at least say it was potentially possible.  I wouldn't have been overwhelmingly surprised if Zimmerman had gotten the manslaughter conviction in the current case, and changing his race wouldn't change that.  But the people blankquoting that he'd be on death row are being hacks, quite honestly.

[Sbane]

So for all those claiming Zimmerman would've been executed, does anyone even care to address the point I made, or are you just pulling this execution thing out of your bums?

He would be in jail though. Do you disagree with that?

I disagree with it, but I'd at least say it was potentially possible.  I wouldn't have been overwhelmingly surprised if Zimmerman had gotten the manslaughter conviction in the current case, and changing his race wouldn't change that.  But the people blankquoting that he'd be on death row are being hacks, quite honestly.

Manslaughter is the most appropriate conviction, yes. There's about a million different things Zimmerman could have done which would have led to Trayvon still being alive today. I think the assumptions many people here are making (mostly blue avatars sadly or unsurprisingly) is that Trayvon started the fight. There is no evidence to suggest who started the fight and yet certain people are assuming Martin did. Why is that? Because he is black.

[Torie]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which is precisely why Zimmerman is not guilty, sbane. The burden of proof is on the prosecution, and beyond a reasonable doubt (95% certainty), to boot. Here the odds that Zimmerman committed the first crime in the saga, e.g., by throwing a punch, are at 50% odds at most. This is not a close case. 

[Sbane]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which is precisely why Zimmerman is not guilty, sbane. The burden of proof is on the prosecution, and beyond a reasonable doubt (95% certainty), to boot. Here the odds that Zimmerman committed the first crime in the saga, e.g., by throwing a punch, are at 50% odds at most. This is not a close case. 

Zimmerman did start it by pursuing Martin though, which led to the confrontation regardless of who started that phase. That would at least make him guilty of manslaughter, no? I don't think he is a murderer of course.

Also, is stalking someone legal? Zimmerman most certainly started this. The episode started before the fight occurred, and we know without a shadow of doubt that it was instigated by Zimmerman which is why I feel he should be guilty of something.

[Torie]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which is precisely why Zimmerman is not guilty, sbane. The burden of proof is on the prosecution, and beyond a reasonable doubt (95% certainty), to boot. Here the odds that Zimmerman committed the first crime in the saga, e.g., by throwing a punch, are at 50% odds at most. This is not a close case. 

Zimmerman did start it by pursuing Martin though, which led to the confrontation regardless of who started that phase. That would at least make him guilty of manslaughter, no? I don't think he is a murderer of course.

Following someone is not a crime. The issue is who committed the first crime. That means assault and battery in this instance.

[Sbane]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which is precisely why Zimmerman is not guilty, sbane. The burden of proof is on the prosecution, and beyond a reasonable doubt (95% certainty), to boot. Here the odds that Zimmerman committed the first crime in the saga, e.g., by throwing a punch, are at 50% odds at most. This is not a close case. 

Zimmerman did start it by pursuing Martin though, which led to the confrontation regardless of who started that phase. That would at least make him guilty of manslaughter, no? I don't think he is a murderer of course.

Following someone is not a crime. The issue is who committed the first crime. That means assault and battery in this instance.

What are the possibilities of a civil case against Zimmerman? The bastard caused this to occur and he should definitely not be able to get rich from this.

[Torie]

That is the 50%+ standard (more likely than not for a civil wrongful death cause of action), so a closer case. Too bad Zimmerman is impecunious. Thus, the civil suit will never happen.

[Lief 🗽]

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/07/15/2297541/self-defense-zimmerman/?mobile=nc

Once again, the burden of proof is very different in this country when the defendant is black. That's a reality.

[Sbane]

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/07/15/2297541/self-defense-zimmerman/?mobile=nc

Once again, the burden of proof is very different in this country when the defendant is black. That's a reality.

Yeah, it is sad that you don't need 95%+ certainty to convict a black. Even on here some people are jumping to the conclusion that Martin started the fight. Again, that is due to one reason.

[barfbag]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which is precisely why Zimmerman is not guilty, sbane. The burden of proof is on the prosecution, and beyond a reasonable doubt (95% certainty), to boot. Here the odds that Zimmerman committed the first crime in the saga, e.g., by throwing a punch, are at 50% odds at most. This is not a close case. 

Zimmerman did start it by pursuing Martin though, which led to the confrontation regardless of who started that phase. That would at least make him guilty of manslaughter, no? I don't think he is a murderer of course.

Following someone is not a crime. The issue is who committed the first crime. That means assault and battery in this instance.

What are the possibilities of a civil case against Zimmerman? The bastard caused this to occur and he should definitely not be able to get rich from this.

His family can still file a civil suit against Zimmerman like O.J. Everyone who if found not guilty on the news gets rich and famous over it and it's unfortunate.

[Sbane]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which is precisely why Zimmerman is not guilty, sbane. The burden of proof is on the prosecution, and beyond a reasonable doubt (95% certainty), to boot. Here the odds that Zimmerman committed the first crime in the saga, e.g., by throwing a punch, are at 50% odds at most. This is not a close case. 

Zimmerman did start it by pursuing Martin though, which led to the confrontation regardless of who started that phase. That would at least make him guilty of manslaughter, no? I don't think he is a murderer of course.

Following someone is not a crime. The issue is who committed the first crime. That means assault and battery in this instance.

What are the possibilities of a civil case against Zimmerman? The bastard caused this to occur and he should definitely not be able to get rich from this.

His family can still file a civil suit against Zimmerman like O.J. Everyone who if found not guilty on the news gets rich and famous over it and it's unfortunate.

Like I mentioned in the other thread, Zimmerman should not be able to profit from this. Regardless of who threw the first punch, him following another person is what led to the altercation.

[DC Al Fine]

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/07/15/2297541/self-defense-zimmerman/?mobile=nc

Once again, the burden of proof is very different in this country when the defendant is black. That's a reality.

Lief, you have to work on your close reading skills. All three cases have a very different set of facts than Zimmerman's. The words "black" and "gun" do not make a case a reverse Zimmerman.

[Lief 🗽]

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/07/15/2297541/self-defense-zimmerman/?mobile=nc

Once again, the burden of proof is very different in this country when the defendant is black. That's a reality.

Lief, you have to work on your close reading skills. All three cases have a very different set of facts than Zimmerman's. The words "black" and "gun" do not make a case a reverse Zimmerman.

Yeah, there are a few differences. Like witnesses corroborating the defendants' stories. Or the people the defendants shot being home invaders armed with weapons, instead of people walking down the street with a bag of skittles. Or, in the first case, the defendant not actually killing anyone. Or, in the third case, the defendant only accidentally shooting off his gun.

And yet they were all found guilty, on cases much weaker than that against Zimmerman, because they were black.

[Torie]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Which is precisely why Zimmerman is not guilty, sbane. The burden of proof is on the prosecution, and beyond a reasonable doubt (95% certainty), to boot. Here the odds that Zimmerman committed the first crime in the saga, e.g., by throwing a punch, are at 50% odds at most. This is not a close case. 

Zimmerman did start it by pursuing Martin though, which led to the confrontation regardless of who started that phase. That would at least make him guilty of manslaughter, no? I don't think he is a murderer of course.

Following someone is not a crime. The issue is who committed the first crime. That means assault and battery in this instance.

What are the possibilities of a civil case against Zimmerman? The bastard caused this to occur and he should definitely not be able to get rich from this.

His family can still file a civil suit against Zimmerman like O.J. Everyone who if found not guilty on the news gets rich and famous over it and it's unfortunate.

Like I mentioned in the other thread, Zimmerman should not be able to profit from this. Regardless of who threw the first punch, him following another person is what led to the altercation.

If Zimmerman can get rich going forward, he would be well advised to BK himself now, if a civil lawsuit is filed. The odds are low that a verdict against him could be obtained civilly that would be non-dischargeable in bankruptcy.

[DC Al Fine]

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/07/15/2297541/self-defense-zimmerman/?mobile=nc

Once again, the burden of proof is very different in this country when the defendant is black. That's a reality.

Lief, you have to work on your close reading skills. All three cases have a very different set of facts than Zimmerman's. The words "black" and "gun" do not make a case a reverse Zimmerman.

Yeah, there are a few differences. Like witnesses corroborating the defendants' stories. Or the people the defendants shot being home invaders armed with weapons, instead of people walking down the street with a bag of skittles. Or, in the first case, the defendant not actually killing anyone. Or, in the third case, the defendant only accidentally shooting off his gun.

And yet they were all found guilty, on cases much weaker than that against Zimmerman, because they were black.

That's simply incorrect. If you had bothered to research these cases more than reading single paragraphs from a left wing site, you'd know that. No, scratch that. There are differentiating facts in the article itself. Did you just read the headline or something?

Marissa Alexander allegedly feared for her life, ran out of the house, got her gun, went back in and then shot her ex-husband. Different from Zimmermann

John McNeil shot the other guy while he was running away. Different from Zimmermann.

The only one that seems like a Zimmermann is John White and even in that case a black juror voted to convict. If it was really a case of racist railroading instead of inadequate laws, we'd expect a hung jury.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/07/15/2297541/self-defense-zimmerman/?mobile=nc

Once again, the burden of proof is very different in this country when the defendant is black. That's a reality.

Yeah, it is sad that you don't need 95%+ certainty to convict a black. Even on here some people are jumping to the conclusion that Martin started the fight. Again, that is due to one reason.

Zimmerman's lawyer was very effective and the prosecution sucked?

[Lief 🗽]

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2013/07/15/2297541/self-defense-zimmerman/?mobile=nc

Once again, the burden of proof is very different in this country when the defendant is black. That's a reality.

Lief, you have to work on your close reading skills. All three cases have a very different set of facts than Zimmerman's. The words "black" and "gun" do not make a case a reverse Zimmerman.

Yeah, there are a few differences. Like witnesses corroborating the defendants' stories. Or the people the defendants shot being home invaders armed with weapons, instead of people walking down the street with a bag of skittles. Or, in the first case, the defendant not actually killing anyone. Or, in the third case, the defendant only accidentally shooting off his gun.

And yet they were all found guilty, on cases much weaker than that against Zimmerman, because they were black.

That's simply incorrect. If you had bothered to research these cases more than reading single paragraphs from a left wing site, you'd know that. No, scratch that. There are differentiating facts in the article itself. Did you just read the headline or something?

Marissa Alexander allegedly feared for her life, ran out of the house, got her gun, went back in and then shot her ex-husband. Different from Zimmermann

John McNeil shot the other guy while he was running away. Different from Zimmermann.

The only one that seems like a Zimmermann is John White and even in that case a black juror voted to convict. If it was really a case of racist railroading instead of inadequate laws, we'd expect a hung jury.

I think you're the one that needs to read better, guy.

Alexander didn't shoot her husband. She fired a warning shot into the wall.

McNeill shot the guy not while he was running away, but while he was running towards him with his hand in his pocket pulling out a knife.

And I guess black people are completely impervious to racism and racial stereotyping. Very sound logic.

[Down the Gurney]

snip

It all depends upon if black Zimmerman had lawyers. State prosecuters are used to dealing with schmucks whos only lawyer was a guy from legal aid who looked at the case for fifteen minutes and then spilled his coffee on the case files. As OJ Simpson showed, if you have the right lawyers, then anyone, regardless of color or creed, could get the White Man's Justice.
http://www.nlada.org/Defender/Defender_Gideon/Defender_Gideon_5_Problems

A-hem.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

When it comes to the John White case, he was convicted because he used an unlicensed gun. That throws self-defense out the window in NY, which has some of the strictest gun laws in the country.

NY and Florida might as well be different countries.

[Down the Gurney]

When it comes to the John White case, he was convicted because he used an unlicensed gun. That throws self-defense out the window in NY, which has some of the strictest gun laws in the country.

NY and Florida might as well be different countries.

It's as steep as the difference between North Korea and Isreal.

[The Free North]

How would it have gone differently?

Probably not, if white trayvon had still beat up zimmerman

[ingemann]

How would it have gone differently?

I guess if Martinb really had been 12 year old, Zimmerman would likely have been in prison, as no one would have taken it serious that 30 year old man felt endangered by a unarmed pre-teen.

[barfbag]

By law the jury made the right decision. We are a nation of laws.