# Pitting the Zimmerman trial circus **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 13, 2013, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419 "2013-07-13T19:53:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 14
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/261 "2013-07-14T20:27:04Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > This case was racial. The circus surrouding the case was racial, but the actual court case itself wasn’t. It’s standard procedure in ANY court case to try and portray the other side in some sort of negative way- it’s not surprising that the defense portrayed Martin as a super-thuggish angry young black guy who got attitude and beat down a well-meaning, if a bit thick neighborhood watch member. It’s also not surprising that the prosecution tried to portray Zimmerman as some kind of pathetic Walter Mitty-esque cop wannabe who took the law into his own hands and stalked Martin like some sort of prey, and slaughtered him in cold blood. Obviously the truth was probably somewhere in the middle. All that characterization is to try and establish motive, and/or influence the jury. It’s not what the trial’s about- in this case it was whether or not Zimmerman shot Martin in self-defense or for some other reason. All the hoopla about Martin being black, or wearing a hoodie, etc… are incidental to the actual murder verdict. It sounds to me like a lot of people want to make it about race because there was a black kid involved, but those same people would have been screaming as loudly in reverse had it been a black neighborhood watch guy who shot a Hispanic kid in the same exact situation. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/262 "2013-07-14T20:33:52Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > “Why did you shoot George Zimmerman, Travyon Martin?” > > “Because when he strolled up on me in the darkness and demanded to know what I was doing and I told him to fuck off, he called me a punk and came at me like animal. I started to run, but he grabbed my arm. I threw out a punch and he fell back, hit his head on something. That’s when I saw the gun in his pocket. He reached for it the moment I saw it. So I pulled out mine and pulled the trigger. I got him before he could get me, officer.” > > I await the chorus of people saying they would have defended Trayvon Martin if he had been the one presenting this testimony. I’d defend him under those circumstances and under FL law, if it was actually established that Zim had a gun in his hand at the time. Not sure if it would be so cut and dried if all Zim had done was “reach for it”, since you can’t really know if someone intends to grab their gun until they actually do so. Perhaps one of the residence lawyers can clarify how the law speaks tot that situation. > [@](#): > > But I won’t believe them. Believe what you wish. But if you’re going to throw up a hypothetical, demand people come in and address it, but say in advance you’re only going to believe one answer, then I think you need to be a bit more open minded about things. > [@](#): > > I believe Trayvon Martin would have been charged right away that night, and no one would even know his name. Not even the real Trayvon Martin sympathizers would be coming to his defense, if he had been the killer. The “real” sympathizers seem to be strongly anti-gun, so maybe they wouldn’t. If I understand who qualifies as a “real” sympathizer. ---
**Author:** ![camille](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/22d042/32.png) [@camille](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/camille)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/263 "2013-07-14T20:35:48Z")
> [@Belowjob2.0](#): > > If he had been carrying, legally of course, he could have shot Zim as soon as Zim attempted to illegally detain him. > [@Terr](#): > > He could have. Then he would have been charged with murder and convicted, since in order to claim self-defense when you kill someone, you have to show reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm. Someone putting a hand on you (even if that happened, and you have absolutely no evidence it did) does not qualify. By what evidence would Martin be convicted beyond a reasonable doubt? There were no witnesses to that part of the encounter, except Zimmerman, who would in this alternate scenario be dead. So Martin could say anything he wanted to show he was not the aggressor, and had reasonable fear, just the way Zimmerman did. Funny how you are so quick to see it as murder when the situation is reversed. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/264 "2013-07-14T20:43:03Z")
Who made the decision that initiated the chain of events? Martin, walking while black and recklessly eyeballing houses that weren’t his to look at? Or Z, who was specifically instructed by law enforcement not to to follow Martin? Who was armed? If Z had simply did as he was told, he would have been embarrassed by another bullshit call to the cops. And Martin would be alive. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/265 "2013-07-14T20:46:47Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Nope, we don’t take his word for it, we look at the evidence. Martin went out of his way to return to Zimmerman. Shortly after that, Zimmerman was on the ground with a broken nose, and Martin on top of him. There is, quite literally, no evidence that Zimmerman did anything to start a fight. > > If it pleases you to construct imaginary narratives that ignore the evidence but feed your fantasies of persecution, have fun with it, but don’t expect to be taken seriously. Of course you’re dodging the fact that you’ve specifically claimed, without any credible evidence that Trayvon attacked Zimmerman. Beyond that, it’s hilarious that someone who defends the verdict in the Emmitt Till case is accusing others of not being taken seriously. I don’t know whether you’re stupid, a racist, a troll, or some combination but you’re certainly not in any position to accuse others of having “fantasies of persecution”. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 8:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/266 "2013-07-14T20:48:38Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Not sure if it would be so cut and dried if all Zim had done was “reach for it”, since you can’t really know if someone intends to grab their gun until they actually do so. Perhaps one of the residence lawyers can clarify how the law speaks tot that situation. We don’t know that Martin said “You’re going to die now.” He could have really said, “You’re an asshole”, and Zimmerman simply misheard him. Or Martin could have said nothing at all, except “Why are you following me?” No one heard him say anything after that. We only have Zimmerman’s word for it. His wounds aren’t consistent with being punched and slammed 20-odd times. His own vitals didn’t indicate that he was in any fear, let alone mortal fear. But all of this was deemed irrelevant. As were all the other WTFs. Completely irrelevant. Makes me wonder just how anyone ever gets sent to prison. Imagine all the guys sitting in prison right now, regretting their decision to plead guilty instead of claiming SYG self-defense. People will be wiser now in the future. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/267 "2013-07-14T20:52:53Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > Even so, this is a glorious moment. A Florida jury has affirmed our right to use deadly force to defend ourselves from feral proto-humans, and, having twice been the victim of black street violence, I fervently hope there will be . . . . . . a third time. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 8:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/268 "2013-07-14T20:53:49Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > You mean, other than follow him when specifically instructed not to? He was never instructed not to follow him. > [@](#): > > Get out of his truck and confront him? You’ve got that backwards, Martin confronted Zimmerman, at least according to the two people who heard it. > [@](#): > > What did he say to Trayvon Martin? An exchange of pleasantries, perhaps, after describing him on the phone as an “asshole” and a “punk”? According to the witness who heard it, it was along the lines of “What are you doing here?” Her testimony is on record, if you want to check the exact words. > [@](#): > > Do you attach any significance to the fact that the was armed? Nope, he was entitled to be armed. It makes no difference to whether his actions were reasonable or reckless. > [@](#): > > He could have left the gun in the truck, no? But decided not to. Do you wonder why? Nothing to wonder about. He routinely carried a gun, and it’s fair to presume he did so in case he needed to defend himself. There was nothing unusual about his actions that would make it less likely that normal he would need to defend himself, so no reason to leave the gun. > [@](#): > > Mr. Zimmerman had been instructed in the technicalities of self defense law. What would have stopped him from breaking his own nose? Certainly would have bolstered his “self defense” claim, no? Which fact he knew. It could have happened like that. It could also have been space aliens that broke his nose. Both possibilities are equally supported by the evidence. > [@](#): > > Martin is on top, pinning Z to the ground while he wails away on him with his fists. Yet, miraculously, Z can reach the gun which is holstered behind his back, which he is lying upon with both his weight and Martin’s. The gun was not holstered behind his back. It was at his right hip. [quote] You think maybe Martin might have noticed that rather than using both hands to protect himself, he started reaching behind his back? [quote] Maybe. > [@](#): > > Didn’t Z say that Martin went for his gun, trying to grab it? Unsuccessfully, it appears, since there was no Martin DNA on the gun. Well then, it must have been the space aliens again, as there was none of Zimmerman’s DNA on the gun either. Stop watching bad TV shows for your legal and scientific education. > [@](#): > > He couldn’t get up and outrun a 9mm bullet, so he pretty much has to grab that gun but couldn’t manage even to _touch_ it? Reflexes slowed by Skittles, perhaps? How do you know he didn’t touch it? Why would you expect there to be touch DNA on a smooth surface? It can happen, but it’s by no means expected. > [@](#): > > Why not do as he was told, simply stay in his truck and wait for the cops? He was not told to do that, and indeed spoke to no-one with authority to tell him to do that. > [@](#): > > Because he was an officer of the law, and a crime was in progress? But he wasn’t, and it wasn’t. Wow, you are actually right about something. > [@](#): > > Martin didn’t follow Z. Martin did not initiate the chain of events, Z did. What’s that got to do with anything? Martin may not have followed Zimmerman, but if not it’s because Zimmerman stopped moving. Zimmerman stopped following, and we have a couple of minutes during which we don’t know his movements, if any. In those couple of minutes, Martin got home then, instead of going in, returned to Zimmerman. Then, for reasons unknown, punched him. > [@](#): > > Any of this sinking in? What has sunk in is that you didn’t follow the trial, haven’t actually looked at the evidence or the law, and are wrong about almost everything you claim as a fact in your post. Most importantly, you are wrong - utterly so - in your insinuation that Zimmerman did something wrong in following Martin, whether he was armed or not, and in your claim that he didn’t stop following when he was advised to. Advice he was give for his own safety, not because he should not have followed him. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/269 "2013-07-14T20:58:45Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > Of course you’re dodging the fact that you’ve specifically claimed, without any credible evidence that Trayvon attacked Zimmerman. Apart from the witness who saw him on top beating Zimmerman, you mean? Apart from the injuries to Zimmerman’s face and Martin’s fist? > [@](#): > > Beyond that, it’s hilarious that someone who defends the verdict in the Emmitt Till case is accusing others of not being taken seriously. Have you actually looked at that case? The prosecution didn’t even prove Till was dead. It was a horrible, racist judicial system that deliberately didn’t prove guilt - but no honest juror could have convicted on the evidence provided. So yes, I’ll defend the verdict there, but say that the trial could, and should, have been conducted in such a way that a fair jury would have convicted. I also don’t believe that the actual jury there would have convicted in a proper trial. > [@](#): > > I don’t know whether you’re stupid, a racist, a troll, or some combination but you’re certainly not in any position to accuse others of having “fantasies of persecution”. Ha ha keep having your little fantasies. When you have to attack me personally rather than show that I’m wrong, it means I’m correct. Even if I’m correct about some fucking unpleasant things, such as the Till case. ---
**Author:** ![Belowjob2.0](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Belowjob2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Belowjob2.0)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 8:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/270 "2013-07-14T20:58:59Z")
Steophan, you need to help Zim by sponsoring him for a visa. Let him become a permanent resident of your country. Win-win for everyone. Let him stay in your house, too. Especially if you’ve got kids. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/271 "2013-07-14T21:00:06Z")
People arguing with Steophan should remember that he believes that the Emmett Till jury did the correct thing when they took the advice of the defense lawyers to “do their anglo-saxon duty” and let off the men who beat him to death and then threw him in the river afterwards. If he’s going to agree with that jury it should come as no mistake that he supports another uppity negro getting murdered by yet another racist bigot. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/272 "2013-07-14T21:00:33Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > We don’t know that Martin said “You’re going to die now.” He could have really said, “You’re an asshole”, and Zimmerman simply misheard him. Or Martin could have said nothing at all, except “Why are you following me?” No one heard him say anything after that. We only have Zimmerman’s word for it. > > His wounds aren’t consistent with being punched and slammed 20-odd times. His own vitals didn’t indicate that he was in any fear, let alone mortal fear. > > But all of this was deemed irrelevant. As were all the other WTFs. Completely irrelevant. > > Makes me wonder just how anyone ever gets sent to prison. Imagine all the guys sitting in prison right now, regretting their decision to plead guilty instead of claiming SYG self-defense. People will be wiser now in the future. It _should_ be difficult, extremely difficult, to find someone guilty of a crime and deprive them of their liberty. If there’s _any_ reason to doubt their guilt, they should go free. In this case, there are many reasons for such doubt. ---
**Author:** ![Belowjob2.0](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Belowjob2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Belowjob2.0)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 9:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/273 "2013-07-14T21:03:35Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > People arguing with Steophan should remember that he believes that the Emmett Till jury did the correct thing when they took the advice of the defense lawyers to “do their anglo-saxon duty” and let off the men who beat him to death and then threw him in the river afterwards. > > If he’s going to agree with that jury it should come as no mistake that he supports another uppity negro getting murdered by yet another racist bigot. Ignorance fought on my end. Had I known, I never would have engaged klanboy. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/274 "2013-07-14T21:06:12Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > People arguing with Steophan should remember that he believes that the Emmett Till jury did the correct thing when they took the advice of the defense lawyers to “do their anglo-saxon duty” and let off the men who beat him to death and then threw him in the river afterwards. > > If he’s going to agree with that jury it should come as no mistake that he supports another uppity negro getting murdered by yet another racist bigot. No, I believe they did the correct thing by not convicted some people for the murder of someone who was not proved to be dead. Please, try to keep up, and please, look at the actual facts of the case. There was a shitload of racism, from the judge, jury, prosecution, defence, and defendants, and there was certainly a conspiracy to ensure that they could not be convicted. But it was not the jury at fault. As I said, I have no doubt that, had the case been solid, they would still not have convicted, and then it _would_ have been their responsibility. I will not, however, condemn any jury for finding not guilty when there is reason to doubt that a crime occurred. Bear in mind, the jury were only allowed to decide based on evidence presented in court, even if they knew from outside that the killers had admitted it they were bound not to use that knowledge. So why, when I clearly said that all parties were involved in a racist conspiracy, do you call me racist for noting that the jury were technically correct? ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/275 "2013-07-14T21:07:14Z")
> [@Belowjob2.0](#): > > Ignorance fought on my end. > > Had I known, I never would have engaged klanboy. Ha ha, try actually reading people’s posts rather than taking the word of one of this site’s more notable racists (that’s **Ibn** I’m on about, by the way). ---
**Author:** ![Belowjob2.0](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Belowjob2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Belowjob2.0)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/276 "2013-07-14T21:13:56Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > because you are a disgusting, pathetic excuse for a human being, who can’t accept that you are a fool, and that others know better than you. [QUOTE=Steophan] When you have to attack me personally rather than show that I’m wrong, it means I’m correct. [/QUOTE] Too funny! ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/277 "2013-07-14T21:14:33Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > No, I believe they did the correct thing by not convicted some people for the murder of someone who was not proved to be dead. [Wait, what?](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmett_Till) > [@](#): > > **Emmett Louis Till** (July 25, 1941 – August 28, 1955) was an African-American boy who was murdered in Mississippi at the age of 14 after reportedly flirting with a white woman. Till was from Chicago, Illinois, visiting his relatives in Money, Mississippi, in the Mississippi Delta region, when he spoke to 21-year-old Carolyn Bryant, the married proprietor of a small grocery store there. Several nights later, Bryant’s husband Roy and his half-brother J. W. Milam arrived at Till’s great-uncle’s house where they took Till, transported him to a barn, beat him and gouged out one of his eyes, before shooting him through the head and disposing of his body in the Tallahatchie River, weighting it with a 70-pound (32 kg) cotton gin fan tied around his neck with barbed wire. His body was discovered and retrieved from the river three days later. > > Till was returned to Chicago and his mother, who had raised him mostly by herself, insisted on a public funeral service with an open casket to show the world the brutality of the killing. Sounds pretty dead to me. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/278 "2013-07-14T21:16:03Z")
> [@camille](#): > > By what evidence would Martin be convicted beyond a reasonable doubt? There were no witnesses to that part of the encounter, except Zimmerman, who would in this alternate scenario be dead. So Martin could say anything he wanted to show he was not the aggressor, and had reasonable fear, just the way Zimmerman did. > > Funny how you are so quick to see it as murder when the situation is reversed. Belowjob put out a scenario. Under that scenario yes, Martin would be convicted. Of course, if he lied and lied convincingly, there would be another scenario and he might not be convicted. Is that what you’re implying? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/279 "2013-07-14T21:20:42Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > He could have. Then he would have been charged with murder and convicted, since in order to claim self-defense when you kill someone, you have to show reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm. Someone putting a hand on you (even if that happened, and you have absolutely no evidence it did) does not qualify. Being followed by an armed man in a state where it’s essentially legal for him to kill you at a whim is a “reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm”. Something clearly demonstrated by the fact that he’s dead. He would have been charged and convicted anyway of course, or outright killed at the scene by the cops; wrong skin color. > [@monstro](#): > > Makes me wonder just how anyone ever gets sent to prison. Imagine all the guys sitting in prison right now, regretting their decision to plead guilty instead of claiming SYG self-defense. People will be wiser now in the future. [Probably](http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/florida-stand-your-ground-law-yields-some-shocking-outcomes-depending-on/1233133). > [@](#): > > [ul] > [li]Those who invoke “stand your ground” to avoid prosecution have been extremely successful. Nearly 70 percent have gone free.[/li][li]Defendants claiming “stand your ground” are more likely to prevail if the victim is black. Seventy-three percent of those who killed a black person faced no penalty compared to 59 percent of those who killed a white.[/li][li] The number of cases is increasing, largely because defense attorneys are using “stand your ground” in ways state legislators never envisioned. The defense has been invoked in dozens of cases with minor or no injuries. It has also been used by a self-described “vampire” in Pinellas County, a Miami man arrested with a single marijuana cigarette, a Fort Myers homeowner who shot a bear and a West Palm Beach jogger who beat a Jack Russell terrier.[/li][li]People often go free under “stand your ground” in cases that seem to make a mockery of what lawmakers intended. One man killed two unarmed people and walked out of jail. Another shot a man as he lay on the ground. Others went free after shooting their victims in the back. In nearly a third of the cases the Times analyzed, defendants initiated the fight, shot an unarmed person or pursued their victim — and still went free.[/li][/ul] As long as you kill someone with the right skin color, it’s nearly a get-away-with-murder law. > [@Steophan](#): > > It _should_ be difficult, extremely difficult, to find someone guilty of a crime and deprive them of their liberty. But apparently it should be very easy to simply kill them. As long as they’re black, of course. ---
**Author:** ![colonial](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/34f0e0/32.png) [@colonial](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/colonial)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2013, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419/280 "2013-07-14T21:20:45Z")
This verdict really sends a terrible message to the following demographic: The cross-eyed, drooling, inbred white trash douchebags, such as Zimmerman (he got meds to correct those problems while he was in court), who have been itching all their lives for an excuse to plug someone, 99.9999% of whom now vote Republican. Look for more of the same, since the Republican have taken gerrymandering to a truly obscene level today, and are going to make it hard to roll back even their most insane and degraded legislation, such as the FL so called “Stand Your Ground Law”, which allowed an innocent, unarmed man to be gunned down in cold blood by the scum who was stalking him. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419.md?page=13) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-the-zimmerman-trial-circus/663419.md?page=15)