# George Zimmerman - In the news again **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 31, 2014, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480 "2014-07-31T13:26:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 76
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2020, 4:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/1501 "2020-02-26T16:01:23Z")
> [@DirkHardly](#): > > It continues to baffle me that people can’t even allow for the possibility that Martin, a 17-year-old male, started the fight. Allow for the possibility!? I DO think he started the fight. I think Zimmerman was too much of a pussy to throw the first punch. Of course, he SHOULDN’T have started the fight, but 17-year-olds make bad decisions sometimes. That’s why it’s our responsibility as adults _not to put teenagers in situations in which their bad decisions can have deadly consequences_. George Zimmerman failed as an adult and as a decent human in that regard. He put an innocent teenager in a situation where the teenager’s dumb decision cost him his life, all because he was _wrong_ in his assessment of a young black man walking in his own neighborhood. He’s a piece of shit for that, and it fucking sucks that “the law” doesn’t have a provision for punishing people who fail to be decent adults, fail to correctly assess a situation, and those failures result in someone being dead. It. fucking. sucks. Fuck George Zimmerman and anyone who continues to defend him. ---
**Author:** ![DirkHardly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/6a8cbe/32.png) [@DirkHardly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DirkHardly)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2020, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/1502 "2020-02-26T16:17:24Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > Yes, if you dismiss the evidence that might demonstrate that Martin reasonably felt threatened by Zimmerman, there’s no evidence. Funny how that works. What evidence? Are you actually accusing me of ignoring evidence that you yourself have not specified or proved the relevance of? Are you convinced you have pertinent evidence or legal arguments that the Prosecution ignored/mishandled? > [@Gyrate](#): > > Which is irrelevant to determining the reason why that might have happened, a reason which is _entirely relevant to the point_. No, that is the only relevant fact. If no evidence exists that Martin was justified in his use of force then the automatic presumption is that he was committing a crime. Speculation without evidence is meaningless in terms of logic and the law when we have a rebuttable presumption with no legitimate rebuttal. > [@Gyrate](#): > > Is it, though? He took up a weapon and followed an unarmed man who was committing no crime despite direction from the 911 dispatcher not to. Had Martin been armed and shot Zimmerman instead, he’d have had a pretty solid case under Stand Your Ground laws, particularly given Zimmerman’s background. > > But he couldn’t make that case, because he wasn’t armed and because he’s now dead. So what? None of that is criminal or justifies Martin responding with force. And none of that would justify Martin “standing his ground” either. Because for the Nth time, simply following someone at night and even confronting them and asking questions does not come even close to justifying a legal claim of self-defense. “Stand your ground” or otherwise. You are simply wrong. And do you somehow think Martin was aware of Zimmerman’s background or could use it for justification after the fact in your little hypothetical? Because, in that case, your analysis went from “bad” to “completely off the rails.” > [@Gyrate](#): > > I didn’t say you personally had. Then why did you bring it up when talking directly to me? > [@Gyrate](#): > > Because the only person able to make that legal argument regarding Martin’s state of mind and the level of threat he felt would have been Martin. Who is dead. Again, funny how that works. > > You are very carefully threading semantic and legal needles in order to obscure the application of a blatant double standard. I don’t need to thread any needles. I have the basic law and a verdict on my side. And yes, one of the limitations of our legal system is it can only examine evidence it possesses. Do you have some solution to that? And what possible double standard are you referring to? ---
**Author:** ![DirkHardly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/6a8cbe/32.png) [@DirkHardly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DirkHardly)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2020, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/1503 "2020-02-26T16:25:36Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > Allow for the possibility!? I DO think he started the fight. I think Zimmerman was too much of a pussy to throw the first punch. > > Of course, he SHOULDN’T have started the fight, but 17-year-olds make bad decisions sometimes. That’s why it’s our responsibility as adults _not to put teenagers in situations in which their bad decisions can have deadly consequences_. George Zimmerman failed as an adult and as a decent human in that regard. He put an innocent teenager in a situation where the teenager’s dumb decision cost him his life, all because he was _wrong_ in his assessment of a young black man walking in his own neighborhood. He’s a piece of shit for that, and it fucking sucks that “the law” doesn’t have a provision for punishing people who fail to be decent adults, fail to correctly assess a situation, and those failures result in someone being dead. It. fucking. sucks. > > Fuck George Zimmerman and anyone who continues to defend him. Do you think Zimmerman would have shot Martin if he simply punched Zimmerman? If so, do you think Zimmerman would have been convicted? And see, that’s the difference between you and me. My personal feelings for Zimmerman or Martin, my emotional reaction to a teenager dying, or the actions of either party not relevant to the case, don’t ever enter into it. It’s called objectivity. You and some of the others here should look into it. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2020, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/1504 "2020-02-26T16:28:20Z")
> [@DirkHardly](#): > > I have the basic law and a verdict on my side. What you don’t have are witnesses, one who didn’t see nor hear the violent altercation described by Zimmerman and two who testified that the person on top got up and walked away. One of whom also testified that she had later seen Zimmerman pacing with his hands on his head, classic behavior of someone panicking: _I killed him! I killed him! Need to come up with a story and quick!_ ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2020, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/1505 "2020-02-26T16:28:26Z")
> [@DirkHardly](#): > > And see, that’s the difference between you and me. My personal feelings for Zimmerman or Martin, my emotional reaction to a teenager dying, or the actions of either party not relevant to the case, **don’t ever enter into it**. It’s called objectivity. You and some of the others here should look into it. Don’t ever enter into what? What are you talking about? Your personal feelings for Zimmerman don’t enter into your personal feelings for Zimmerman? The trial was ages ago and you’re not a juror, you’re allowed to call him a piece of shit. Christ, nut up and have an opinion on a shitty person who did a shitty thing. It’s OK. ---
**Author:** ![Chingon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chingon/32/17645_2.png) [@Chingon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chingon)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2020, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/1506 "2020-02-26T16:33:18Z")
Meh, the “I’m going to pretend I’m a human robot and don’t have emotions” is a favorite tactic of many lawyers. Bricker was a champ at this. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2020, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/1507 "2020-02-26T16:55:30Z")
> [@DirkHardly](#): > > What evidence? Are you actually accusing me of ignoring evidence that you yourself have not specified or proved the relevance of? Are you convinced you have pertinent evidence or legal arguments that the Prosecution ignored/mishandled? Oh look - needlethreading. You handwaved away things as “irrelevant” that were entirely relevant, and did so because they were inconvenient for your argument. > [@](#): > > No, that is the only relevant fact. If no evidence exists that Martin was justified in his use of force then the automatic presumption is that he was committing a crime. Speculation without evidence is meaningless in terms of logic and the law when we have a rebuttable presumption with no legitimate rebuttal. More disingenuous needlethreading. You’re using “absence of evidence is evidence of absence” as a rhetorical argument and then using your “I’m just a caveman lawyer” schtick to get away with it. > [@](#): > > So what? None of that is criminal or justifies Martin responding with force. And none of that would justify Martin “standing his ground” either. Because for the Nth time, simply following someone at night and even confronting them and asking questions WITH A GUN > [@](#): > > does not come even close to justifying a legal claim of self-defense. “Stand your ground” or otherwise. You are simply wrong. Funny how you left the gun out of the equation. Because it’s inconvenient to your argument. > [@](#): > > And do you somehow think Martin was aware of Zimmerman’s background or could use it for justification after the fact in your little hypothetical? Because, in that case, your analysis went from “bad” to “completely off the rails.” Please point out where I said Martin was aware of Zimmerman’s background. > [@](#): > > Then why did you bring it up when talking directly to me? Because it was relevant to my post. I apologise if I overestimated your cognitive skills. > [@](#): > > I don’t need to thread any needles. I have the basic law and a verdict on my side. And yet you’ve misrepresented both the actual evidence and what I’ve said in this thread. > [@](#): > > And yes, one of the limitations of our legal system is it can only examine evidence it possesses. Do you have some solution to that? And what possible double standard are you referring to? We are all completely fooled by your feigned innocence. Seriously though, this **Bricker** Jr thing really isn’t working for you. ---
**Author:** ![orcenio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/orcenio/32/1036_2.png) [@orcenio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/orcenio)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2020, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/1508 "2020-02-26T17:44:53Z")
> [@DirkHardly](#): > > And see, that’s the difference between you and me. My personal feelings for Zimmerman or Martin, my emotional reaction to a teenager dying, or the actions of either party not relevant to the case, don’t ever enter into it. It’s called objectivity. You and some of the others here should look into it. Martin correctly identified Zimmerman as a dangerous threat, ran away from him and hid. You ignore this, but we haven’t forgot about that. Bathing yourself as objective while lecturing us on Zimmerman’s righteousness is simply a display of your lack of awareness about your own abilities. You are not persuasive nor as rhetorically skilled as you declare yourself to be. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2020, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480/1509 "2020-02-26T18:58:40Z")
> [@DirkHardly](#): > > Do you think Zimmerman would have shot Martin if he simply punched Zimmerman? [/QUOTE] Why wouldn’t he? People are killed everyday by short-tempered maniacs. Zimmerman took himself out the car and pursued a kid in the dark, _in the rain_, carrying an armed weapon. With judgement With actions this irresponsible and hostile, it’s easier to believe Zimmerman shot Martin for the crime of refusing to submit to him than it is to believe the kid was the aggressor in the situation. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/george-zimmerman-in-the-news-again/694480.md?page=75)