# State of Florida vs. George Zimmerman Trial Thread **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [June 20, 2013, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501 "2013-06-20T20:32:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 25
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/481 "2013-07-01T15:24:41Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > Us little people out in here in Internet Land have no influence on this trial’s outcome. So we can focus on whatever we want to. The State is the one putting on this case, and they are well-experienced at proving murders. I assume they know what they have to do to win. And you’re focusing on opinion without fact which is what Human Action was talking about. ---
**Author:** ![aceplace57](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aceplace57/32/3500_2.png) [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/482 "2013-07-01T15:29:59Z")
George’s interview with Officer Doris Singleton is playing. I bet he regrets not having an attorney present. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/483 "2013-07-01T15:33:37Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > Us little people out in here in Internet Land have no influence on this trial’s outcome. So we can focus on whatever we want to. The State is the one putting on this case, and they are well-experienced at proving murders. I assume they know what they have to do to win. You certainly can, but the persuasiveness of your arguments will suffer for it. Also: do you think Zimmerman’s guilt can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt? ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 3:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/484 "2013-07-01T15:44:20Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > You certainly can, but the persuasiveness of your arguments will suffer for it. > > Also: do you think Zimmerman’s guilt can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt? > [@](#): > > We operate under a jury system in this country, and as much as we complain about it, we have to admit that we know of no better system, except possibly flipping a coin. > Dave Barry You never know what a jury will do. ---
**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:** [July 1, 2013, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/485 "2013-07-01T15:47:13Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Also: do you think Zimmerman’s guilt can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt? The State clearly does, and since I’m not a lawyer, I’m gonna defer to the experts. Why do you care so much about my opinion if you’ve just said I lack persuasiveness? It would make more sense for you to continue to bask in the glow of your own views, then to elicit responses from me. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/486 "2013-07-01T15:50:05Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > You never know what a jury will do. True, but I didn’t ask whether the jury would convict him, but rather whether the state could prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. They aren’t the same thing, which is (part of) why there is an appeals process. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/487 "2013-07-01T16:03:47Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > The State clearly does, and since I’m not a lawyer, I’m gonna defer to the experts. I’ll take that as a “yes”, then. Your deference should be cautious, though, given the false convictions that have occured under our system, to say nothing of charges that have been brought and then dismissed. > [@you with the face](#): > > Why do you care so much about my opinion if you’ve just said I lack persuasiveness? Because if your position is “Zimmerman could be guilty”, I don’t differ with you. If it’s “Zimmerman’s probably guilty”, I can see how some evidence can be interpreted to show that. Thus, not that much to discuss. If it’s “Zimmerman is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt”, though, then I don’t see how it can be supported by the evidence. But, maybe you could enlighten me, _if_ it’s established that that is your view. I’ve had a hard time eliciting a complete theory of the crime, or how the evidence shows Zimmerman’s guilt without relying on unproveable speculation, from those here who believe Zimmerman to be guilty. > [@you with the face](#): > > It would make more sense for you to continue to bask in the glow of your own views, then to elicit responses from me. Are you always this hostile when people ask you your opinion in the “In My Humble Opinion” forum? I’m trying to arrive at a conclusion about this case that’s the closest to reality, and that means eliciting opinions from multiple viewpoints, not “bask[ing] in the glow of [my] own views”. ---
**Author:** ![aceplace57](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aceplace57/32/3500_2.png) [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/488 "2013-07-01T16:32:57Z")
Just a reminder that this thread is for discussing the trial. Theres been some critical testimony this morning. Yet another witness that had trouble reading cursive. I had no problems reading George’s handwriting. Several things in his statement confirmed what Good testified too. George remembered him saying he was calling 911. Good saw George move from the sidewalk to to the grass during the struggle. Thats also in the statement. ---
**Author:** ![hmarvin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/858c86/32.png) [@hmarvin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hmarvin)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/489 "2013-07-01T17:16:42Z")
> [@aceplace57](#): > > Just a reminder that this thread is for discussing the trial. Theres been some critical testimony this morning. > > Yet another witness that had trouble reading cursive. I had no problems reading George’s handwriting. > > Several things in his statement confirmed what Good testified too. George remembered him saying he was calling 911. Good saw George move from the sidewalk to to the grass during the struggle. Thats also in the statement. During the police interview, the back of George Z’s head was still bleeding, the blood on his nose was crusted, and he apparently hd problems remembering the exact date. Wonder if he suffered a “dinger” or mild concussion. Too bad he didn’t go to the hospital that evening. ---
**Author:** ![aceplace57](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aceplace57/32/3500_2.png) [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/490 "2013-07-01T17:25:04Z")
I realize the prosecution will focus heavily on the minor inconsistencies between George’s police statements and the video recreations. There are some of course and the defense will have to explain that. Thats one difference in cops and the rest of us. Cops are trained to report what they saw or did very carefully. We aren’t. There will be differences if I tell you a story and then tell someone else. Each time the story will change a little. I’m not a trained cop. They’ll also make a big deal that George called Trayvon “the suspect” in the police statement. What else was he supposed to call him? No one knew Trayvon’s name yet. What else could George say except “the suspect”? The “dead guy”? The hoodie guy? Suspect is the most appropriate word. Thats what the cops use too. ---
**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:** [July 1, 2013, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/491 "2013-07-01T17:47:30Z")
> [@aceplace57](#): > > They’ll also make a big deal that George called Trayvon “the suspect” in the police statement. What else was he supposed to call him? … Thats what the cops use too. The victim? That’s also what the cops use. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/492 "2013-07-01T17:52:05Z")
> [@aceplace57](#): > > They’ll also make a big deal that George called Trayvon “the suspect” in the police statement. What else was he supposed to call him? No one knew Trayvon’s name yet. What else could George say except “the suspect”? The “dead guy”? The hoodie guy? Suspect is the most appropriate word. Thats what the cops use too. The guy. You realize, don’t you, that you basically just said hey, He’s not a cop you can’t expect him to act like a cop! Followed by hey he acted just like a cop what’s wrong with that? ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/493 "2013-07-01T17:56:40Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > True, but I didn’t ask whether the jury would convict him, but rather whether the state could prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. They aren’t the same thing, which is (part of) why there is an appeals process. Not really. Unless the judge accepts a motion to throw out the case after the prosecutor rests. Which is very unlikely. The state proves its case beyond a reasonable doubt if the jury thinks it proved it beyond a reasonable doubt. And you never know what a jury will do. One of the reasons why they will usually try to plead out even a strong case. There are few grounds for appeal for the prosecutor due to double jeopardy. Neither side can appeal just because they don’t like the opinion of the jury. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/494 "2013-07-01T17:58:24Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > I’ll take that as a “yes”, then. > > Your deference should be cautious, though, given the false convictions that have occured under our system, to say nothing of charges that have been brought and then dismissed. > > . How about this: Zimmerman could only be a “false conviction” in the most rigidly technical sense-He is inarguably responsible for the death of Trayvon Martin. The question is simply Whether we are going to let him get away with it. For myself personally, even if everything he said were completely true, which isn’t possible, I would still have no problem with him being convicted Because I think he created the situation recklessly and irresponsibly and his reaction to what ever Martin may have done was grotesquely excessive. Hardly the same thing as someone being convicted of a murder they actually had nothing to do with. ---
**Author:** ![aceplace57](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aceplace57/32/3500_2.png) [@aceplace57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aceplace57)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/495 "2013-07-01T18:00:13Z")
George was more like a guy that watches tv. Every tv crime show uses words like suspect/victim. From George’s viewpoint he was reporting a possible burglary suspect. How bizarre would it be for George to say I shot the victim? From his viewpoint he defended himself. He didn’t victimize anyone (in his mind). > [@Stoid](#): > > The guy. > > You realize, don’t you, that you basically just said hey, He’s not a cop you can’t expect him to act like a cop! Followed by hey he acted just like a cop what’s wrong with that? ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 6:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/496 "2013-07-01T18:03:04Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > Not really. Unless the judge accepts a motion to throw out the case after the prosecutor rests. Which is very unlikely. The state proves its case beyond a reasonable doubt if the jury thinks it proved it beyond a reasonable doubt. And you never know what a jury will do. One of the reasons why they will usually try to plead out even a strong case. There are few grounds for appeal for the prosecutor due to double jeopardy. Neither side can appeal just because they don’t like the opinion of the jury. One of the many bases for an appeal is that the weight of the evidence does not support the verdict. That’s disliking the opinion of the jury, if that’s what you want to call it, and it reflects the difference between the state actually proving their case, and the jury convicting. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/497 "2013-07-01T18:12:09Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > How about this: Zimmerman could only be a “false conviction” in the most rigidly technical sense-He is inarguably responsible for the death of Trayvon Martin. A false conviction would be the conviction of someone who isn’t guilty of every element of the crime they were convicted of. That’s not a rigidly technical definition, it’s the only definition that’s legally meaningful. > [@Stoid](#): > > The question is simply Whether we are going to let him get away with it. For myself personally, even if everything he said were completely true, which isn’t possible, I would still have no problem with him being convicted Because I think he created the situation recklessly and irresponsibly and his reaction to what ever Martin may have done was grotesquely excessive. I hope no juror in any case thinks the same way. The question is and always is, “Is the accused guilty of the crime(s) they are charged with, beyond a reasonable doubt?” Admitting that you’d have no problem with Zimmerman being convicted, even if he’s not guilty (which would have to be the case if everything he said were completely true), as some sort of retribution for conduct that was _not illegal_ is appalling. I have a feeling you’d change your feelings in a hurry if you were on trial, and the jury decided to convict you because they disliked your conduct, rather than because you’d been proven guilty. > [@Stoid](#): > > Hardly the same thing as someone being convicted of a murder they actually had nothing to do with. Yes, it is. Either the crime was committed, or it wasn’t, there’s no halfway point. And the crime being committed depends upon **all** the elements of the crime being proven. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/498 "2013-07-01T18:14:28Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > One of the many bases for an appeal is that the weight of the evidence does not support the verdict. That’s disliking the opinion of the jury, if that’s what you want to call it, and it reflects the difference between the state actually proving their case, and the jury convicting. For some reason I was thinking you were talking about appealing a not guilty verdict not the other way around. Although I’m not sure I can remember a case in which a guilty verdict was overturned solely on the basis of the weight of evidence with no misconduct or misrepresentation. Unless it is egregious courts tend to side with a jury on interpretation of the evidence without procedural errors or misconduct. ---
**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 1, 2013, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/499 "2013-07-01T18:16:39Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > Hardly the same thing as someone being convicted of a murder they actually had nothing to do with. No, you’re asking for him to be convicted of a murder that may not actually have occurred. If Zimmerman killed Martin in self defence, there was no murder, no crime. That’s not a “technicality”, it’s absolutely fundamental to understanding what’s happening here. It’s not a case of letting him get away with killing Martin, as if he’s telling the truth there’s nothing to “get away” with. Killing someone is not a crime. Murder, manslaughter, reckless homicide, and so forth, are crimes, but killing someone is not. Someone should not be punished simply for killing someone. That’s the law, and that’s also the only workable moral solution, unless you like the idea of never ending blood feuds. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [July 1, 2013, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501/500 "2013-07-01T18:19:27Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > How about this: Zimmerman could only be a “false conviction” in the most rigidly technical sense-He is inarguably responsible for the death of Trayvon Martin. The question is simply Whether we are going to let him get away with it. For myself personally, even if everything he said were completely true, which isn’t possible, I would still have no problem with him being convicted Because I think he created the situation recklessly and irresponsibly and his reaction to what ever Martin may have done was grotesquely excessive. > > Hardly the same thing as someone being convicted of a murder they actually had nothing to do with. After all these posts and threads you still seem to have a problem with the fact that someone can cause a death and not be guilty of a crime. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501.md?page=24) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/state-of-florida-vs-george-zimmerman-trial-thread/661501.md?page=26)