Tell me what you think went the wrong with Trayvon Martin case.

perception

treyvons witness was perceived a certain way that made her testimony(the most valuable and honest in my opinion) to be disregarded

meanwhile the so called 'experts' testifying for the prosecution were likewise disregarded for the better known 'expert' that testified for the defense

the expert who never really viewed zimmermans injuries except through photos was asked the right questions about what may be 'consistent' with the defenses version and his credentials made that 'expert' opinion become the reality the dominant jurors believed(remember it wasn't unanimous originally, I think it was three jurors who were eventually PERSUADED towards the not guilty verdict)


the jury was bombarded with witnesses all painting old George as a perfect hero,,,,it was over stimulation in favor of the defense,,,,


I also think the jury was given confusing and ambiguous jury directions that weren't cleared up for them,,,,

,, its like a football game/ offense and defense

the defense hired better perceived teammates,, and they stole the game

NOT ONE THING! You have a right to watch your neighborhood without some punk kid jumping on you and trying to beat your brains out, it was justifiable self defense in all ways. The media stirred this one up by showing him as a little kid in the pictures, he was much bigger and older than the photos showed, and a bad *** punk.....justifiable self defense, and we need stand your ground to stay put...shoot to kill...not aim to mame!! Color and prejudice did not play here, one was Hispanic, one was Black, both minorities, so quit playing the race card! He was a punk troublemaker and that is all!

much bigger? lol

The medical examiner's report on the death of Trayvon Martin indicated that the deceased was actually 5'11" and weighed 158 lbs.,
Read more at http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/martin.asp#tbIAw7vAkU4UjYH8.99

and since race is mentioned

bottom line, it was easy to believe the gangsta MAN LIKE teen story because he was a black kid and his main witness was black and came across uneducated

even though she was most likely the most honest and 'uncoached' testimony that happened

"... and they stole the game."

You weren't there.

Theres no way i could have said it better.THANK YOU,,,,

the trial was televised,,,

as far as the events of that night, no one here was, yet we all continue to have an opinion,,,,

Probably best thing would be for all law enforcement to wear body cameras to avoid these type of "he did this" "she did this" dilemmas.

I agree with this, but Zimmerman was not a police officer, so it wouldn't have been a factor in that case. Actually, in the places where cameras are used, there is no reduction in violent altercations between police and citizens, but the police are exonerated more often.

As for the Stand Your Ground law, I love the "it's racist" argument. The truth is, black Floridians are more likely to be exonerated because of the law. And by a significant margin. So let's take away their right to self defense. And it was a non issue in the Martin/Zimmerman case. Zimmerman claimed it was straight up self defense, not Stand Your Ground. A jury of his peers agreed. Let's also keep in mind the media twisting the story from the start.

One media outlet edited the 911 call so Zimmerman was saying, "there is a suspicious looking guy in the neighborhood. He looks black," as if he was suspicious of just a black kid.

Reality had the call going more like this.

"There is a suspicious looking guy in the neighborhood..." followed by a description of Martin's actions and no mention of race until the dispatcher asked, "is he black, white, or Hispanic?" Zimmerman then said, "he looks black."

To me, "he looks" indicates that Zimmerman didn't know his race. Not every incident between a black person and someone of another race (Zimmerman is biracial) is a racist incident. It would be greatly appreciated if that accusation would not be thrown every time.

I think the questionable part of the tape was where he says its a black male, claims he is staring at him(possibly wondering why z is staring at him), states that he is 'holding something in his hand'(possibly implying he could be armed) and then stating that t

these (expletive) always get away

and that he was 'running' (probably inciting even more to do something so he wont 'get away')




all kinds of things were bogus and suspicious in his version of events,,,,but the jury gave their verdict and its a lesson about how far the 'right to stand your ground' really goes if its just two people and one has a gun

Again, Stand Your Ground was NOT a factor. That's a false narrative. Zimmerman was on his back with his head being bounced off the ground. He had no ground to stand. Stop conflating this case with Stand Your Ground because Zimmerman did not use that as his defense. If it had been a Stand Your Ground case, there wouldn't have been a trial.

As for Martin having something in his hands, he was informing the dispatcher of what he saw. He did not say there was a weapon. It was dark. All he saw was something. It could have been a weapon, it could have been a phone, it could have been the tea he apparently bought a short while before that.

"These (expletive) always get away." What was that expletive? No one has said with any certainty. Did he say these n!**ers? These f**kers? These bastards? No one has ever said definitively what was said. Keep in mind, Zimmerman had a history of doing work with black youth. Hardly something that one would expect of the avowed racist that Zimmerman was painted to be.

you are correct, they did not use stand your ground

the thread is mistitled but the first post asked an interesting question,,,

many people do work with groups they are bigoted against,,,thats how bigoted cops get into work in black communities,,,



its questionable how much of this good work he actually did, as opposed to his wife,,,

and none of that really matters to his apparent character and bullying tendencies, nor his actions that night,,,

Can we stop accusing racism for EVERY situation involving people of different races? And why is it OK to focus on the relatively rare white on black (Zimmerman was is biracial, as I pointed out earlier, but he doesn't have a Spanish name so the Hispanic part of his lineage doesn't count?) violence, but the daily black on black we can ignore? Why? If "black lives matter," and they do (ALL lives matter! I realize it's racist to say all, but that's true) then why do Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, and all these protesters ignore the young black men gunned down EVERY DAY in Chicago, Detroit, Washington, Cleveland, and cities from coast to coast? The White Man is NOT the biggest threat to young black males, and neither are the police. Young black males are the biggest threat to young black males. That is the truth.

no one ignores it but the press, they choose how to present it

black communities , AND SHARPTON work daily to find ways to do something about the crime in their communities

there is no reason they cant be concerned about BOTH what is happening between each other and what happens between themselves and others

no one said white man was biggest threat, and not all of anything is called racism

these are diversionary questions people bring up as a way to avoid addressing the issue that is just as relevant of any of those others they insist should be addressed 'instead'

lets feel free to address any and all of them,,,shall we?

Sharpton (and others, but he's the most prominent offender) seeks out racism where none exists, and interject race into whatever he thinks will get his picture on my TV screen. Meanwhile, I have not heard him address one time the black on black violence that is the single greatest threat to black youth. In fact, he himself has a long history of racism. I won't say he is a black supremacist, but he doesn't speak out against those who are. The fact that I like hockey and not basketball, drive a pickup instead of a Caprice on oversized rims, and listen to country music instead of rap, doesn't make me a threat to young black men, but you wouldn't know from Sharpton's rhetoric.

Sharpton gives others a voice, and a spotlight, who may have just otherwise gone swept under the rug

when there is appearance of the POSSIBILITY of racism, he asks for that possibility to be considered

you have not heard him address crime because he addresses it where it happens,, do you go to your neighbors to keep them updated about what happens in your house?

but would you go to them if they messed with someone in your house?

that the press chooses not to cover what he does in addressing 'black on black' crime is more about the press than about Sharpton

I have no idea what the last sentence you posted is about and I doubt Sharpton cares what sport you like, car you drive, or music you like

he is more concerned with the SYSTEM , not individual people and their personal interests,,,

My point is according to Sharpton himself, and others, I'm evil because my ancestors are not from Africa and I didn't vote for the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Sharpton gives a voice to Sharpton. He's against realizing MLK's Dream, and actively works against the Dream for his own relevance.