Hopefully the impact will be Angela Corey getting disbarred.

I wasn't on the jury and didn't see all their evidence, but we the public did see some that they did not thanks to the judge. I don't see how they could have arrived at any other decision. You could argue that Zimmerman should not have exited his car from a common sense standpoint, but he had the right to get out of his car. Trayvon did NOT have the right to attack him. Zimmerman did have the right to defend himself from that attack.

The prosecutor and team are making me sick with the post interview comments. "the dead teenager Trayvon Martin". "We believe Zimmermand had a depraved intent"

I now look to the reactions of the public, various "leaders", and politicians, including the president, as a measure of how far our country has fallen into the sordid depths of race pandering and race hustling in this supposedly post-racial era.

Tuning in to the trial intermittently, I agree with the outcome. Even though I don't accept the defense's story of self-defense with 100% confidence, I think they created a theory that fit the facts and wasn't effectively rebuffed by the prosecution. The latter's theory of the crime was incoherent and, towards the end of the trial, seemed to shift radically. By the end, their position was little more that "Trayvon Martin is dead and that's tragic! Convict!!!" It is a tragedy, and I think Zimmerman plausibly did some things that were wrong, but I haven't been convinced that he did anything illegal.

TLDR: The prosecution came up way short.

Predictions: I'm seeing many people on twitter predict "open season on blacks" and "more Zimmermans"; I don't think this will materialize at all at a noticeable, statistical level. I also think Zimmerman will be put through the wringer in a wrongful death suit; probably appropriately.

Agreed.

While I would not follow anyone doing anything "suspicious" I'm really happy I live in a state with a make my day law. I own a gun. I don't keep it loaded in the nightstand, as a wise man who trains law enforcement once told me "you need to be awake and aware before you pull that thing out" but trust me, I can pop a mag in pretty quickly, even though the gun and the ammo are in adjoining rooms. I'm not so much worried about my home (I live on the top floor of a security building) but I AM worried about the to-from. I'm working on my CCL right now.

Also, for those of you who tote guns: the guy who trained me (trains the cops to shoot) told me NEVER say "I killed him". It's "I was threatened and I stopped the threat." Repeat as necessary.

And the Florida State Attorney's Office response?

They fired the whistleblower who provided the defense with evidence from Trayvon's cell phone that the prosecution withheld.

Like Snowden, another American hero.

Predictions: I'm seeing many people on twitter predict "open season on blacks" and "more Zimmermans"; I don't think this will materialize at all at a noticeable, statistical level. I also think Zimmerman will be put through the wringer in a wrongful death suit; probably appropriately.

Posted by: Kevin at July 13, 2013 7:30 PM

A wrongful death suit is a pretty tough hurdle to clear, after an aquital, and all those nasty character issues about Travon will be admissable in civil court.

You cant get blood out of a turnip.

I forsee the possibility of trumped up federal hate crime charges, but another trial in front of a federal jury will be a waste of time. This was not a racist incident except on the part of Travon Martin.

The mainstream media has actively promoted a racial agenda. This from Mark Steyn:

"... a Hispanic Obama voter can be instantly transformed into the poster boy for white racism ... most casual observers of the case, who've only seen young Trayvon in that beatific photo of him as a 12-year-old ... the ancient snapshot of a smiling middle-schooler that so beguiled American news editors, Trayvon Martin apparently being the only teenager in America to have gone entirely unphotographed in the second decade of the 21st century."

http://watchdogwire.com/florida/2013/07/04/black-racism-polar-bear-hunting-is-illegal-in-florida/
Over all it is much more dangerous for whites walking down the streets than black.

Exactly what the verdict should have been. He never should have been arrested in the first place.

I've said all along that second degree murder was a huge mistake...unless the prosecution felt that he had to appease the public by going through this charade and wanted to pursue a charge he was certain he couldn't win.

I think that we have to respect the verdict and I understand how reasonable people would reach just such s verdict.

I also blame Zimmerman for what happened. His actions led to the death of a teenager. He should have never followed Martin. If Martin has won the fight snd killed Zimmerman, he would have also had a good argument for self-defense. It would have been extremely frightening to be pursued by someone in a vehicle when you are on foot.

We all need to calm the F down and work to make each other feel less threatened, not more threatened. We need to be conscious of the actions that might scare others. We trigger the fight or flight response which leads to these kinds of tragedies. Lets work to make each other feel safe and we won't have these problems.

If both men had lived, my sympathies would still go toward Martin.

I also blame Zimmerman for what happened. His actions led to the death of a teenager. He should have never followed Martin. If Martin has won the fight snd killed Zimmerman, he would have also had a good argument for self-defense. It would have been extremely frightening to be pursued by someone in a vehicle when you are on foot. -- Jen at July 13, 2013 9:31 PM

The problem is that Zimmerman had lost track of Martin. Zimmerman was walking back to his truck when the altercation with Martin started. If Martin had kept on walking in the direction he was going, it would never have happened. So calling Martin totally not at fault means that his doubling back was justified.

Regardless, there will probably be 20-30 black-on-black shootings in the Chicago area this weekend. But it isn't going to rise to the level of national news.

This was nothing but media driven bias.

You guys are a cool, refreshing drink of sanity.

"unless the prosecution felt that he had to appease the public by going through this charade and wanted to pursue a charge he was certain he couldn't win"

Perhaps prosecution thought they might get an easy victory on the back of public sentiment. This thing was textbook self-defense from the start - there was never a case.

"If both men had lived, my sympathies would still go toward Martin"

My sympathies do not go toward the party who holds down the other, breaks their nose, and smashes their head repeatedly against a pavement. My sympathies go to the innocent victim who was forced to endure an extremely stressful unnecessary trial and public pillorying just for exercising his right to self-defense against an aggressive attacker.

If both men had survived, my sympathies would go toward Zimmerman. Trayvon did not have justifiable cause to attack him. Period.

Lobster: This thing was textbook self-defense from the start - there was never a case.

True. Zimmerman never should have been arrested in the first place. And he wasn't. But because of media-driven public outcry, he was forced to go through this laughable charade. And he's going to spend the rest of his life as almost universally despised.

Isab: A wrongful death suit is a pretty tough hurdle to clear, after an aquital,

In a word, bullshit. It's a hell of a lot easier than Murder One or Two. Wrongful death has a much lower standard of proof than murder.

Perhaps you were in a coma during the O.J. Simpson trial. Guess who was acquitted of Murder One, but still was hit with wrongful death?

The campaign to convict Zimmermann in the media failed. I honestly did not expect this - congratulations to the jury.

I wish (but do not believe) that there would be a backlash against the racism that drove this case: the attempt to paint it as "white shoots black in cold blood", despite this obviously not being the case.

Local law enforcement got it right at the beginning: after an initial investigation, they knew it was self-defense. It was only the racist media frenzy and political pressure that forced them to file charges after all. The President making speeches and showing the picture of the innocent 12-year-old Trayvan, in an attempt to influence the outcome of the case. Genuinely despicable.

Let the race-baiting begin!

Er, I mean, continue.

"sordid depths of race pandering and race hustling in this supposedly post-racial era."

Uhh...why would pandering stop? To any group? As an atheist I see tons of Christian pandering. I see white, black, Hispanic, woman pandering.

What I see is some whites whining about how they are always painted bad, aggresors, racist by the media and blacks saying the exact same thing about their group.

Raise your hand if you belong to the most persecuted group!

DONTCHA LOVE humanity?

congratulations to the jury.

agree

Local law enforcement got it right at the beginning

right. the police chief got it right and was fired for doing so.

It was only the racist media frenzy and political pressure that forced them to file charges after all.

and fire their police chief

The President making speeches and showing the picture of the innocent 12-year-old Trayvan, in an attempt to influence the outcome of the case.

and where is our president now? Silent, when presidential leadership could promote much-needed healing.

Genuinely despicable

agree

Ppen, you left out gays.

Jim, the verdict just happened last night. Why don't you give it at least 24 hours before you complain about the President's supposed lack of leadership.

Not that I'm really expecting him to say anything. But it seems somewhat hysterical to foam and gnash in indignation about how silent the President is when the verdict was released around five hours ago last night!

Perhaps you were in a coma during the O.J. Simpson trial. Guess who was acquitted of Murder One, but still was hit with wrongful death?

Posted by: Patrick at July 13, 2013 11:58 PM

I was in law school during the Simpson trial.

There was plenty of proof that OJ had murdered Nicole, and a preponderance of evidence was an easy standard to meet.

OJ also had substantial assets to go after.

Zimmerman was aquitted of charges that should have never been brought in the first place.

He is also indigent. Hasn't had a job in a year. As I said before, no blood from a turnip.

Wrongful death, civil action is about seizing assets or getting to insurance policies. Martins bad behavior and school suspensions would be admissable in civil court.

It is a non starter as a winable case, and not worth pursuing financially.

I'd wager that this will be spun & twisted by individuals & the media to be about "justice" not being served. I think we'll be hearing about how the system "failed" because somebody died and the "murderer" went free. All this will disregard the fact that our justice system relies upon the presumption of innocence and the fundamental right of individuals to protect themselves from harm.

It may very well be that Zimmerman was NOT acting in self defense, but the prosecution could not convince the jury that he WAS - and the burden of proof is on the prosecution. This will be entirely forgotten and people will call for "reform."

I also predict that somebody is likely to try to "do justice" in a vigilante manor and if successful, there will be a serious lack of interest in then "doing justice" for Zimmerman and/or his family.

I also have to wonder about all these laws that are based upon something as impossible to prove as one's frame of mind. Not, say, premeditation, but things like, "depraved state of mind," or "due to racial prejudice." If you could truly prove the former, you could likely get an incompetency defense. As for the later, unless somebody is on YouTube going, "I hate all people wearing unicorns on their shirts and am going to kill them all!" it's pretty hard to prove what somebody is thinking feeling. That is an awful legal standard.

Isab: A wrongful death suit is a pretty tough hurdle to clear, after an aquital,

Patrick: In a word, bullshit. It's a hell of a lot easier than Murder One or Two. Wrongful death has a much lower standard of proof than murder. Perhaps you were in a coma during the O.J. Simpson trial. Guess who was acquitted of Murder One, but still was hit with wrongful death?"

This is telling. Somehow, you set up the hurdle as an obstacle to the prosecution, rather than the citizen.

If Martin has won the fight snd killed Zimmerman, he would have also had a good argument for self-defense.

Ummm, no. You're allowed to use as much violence as needed to end the confrontation. But not more.

'Waste: This is telling. Somehow, you set up the hurdle as an obstacle to the prosecution, rather than the citizen.

'Waste, I mean this with all sincerity, but you are getting stupider every day.

Of course, I'm setting the hurdle as an obstacle to the prosecution! That's the way the law is supposed to work in this country, you idiot!

The burden is on the side making the accusation, not the person who defends.

Good grief! That any American adult needs this explained to them is absolutely disgusting. A grade school social studies course should have taught you that much.

Patrick... tsk. That's not where Isab was coming from.

Lately, you, the citizen have the hurdles installed for you by regulations and decrees. Be searched because you want to fly on an airplane. Go through classes to defend yourself with an effective weapon. Get DOMA repealed to get your partnership reconized across the land.

Really. When was the last time you heard of a prosecutor referring to satisfying a legal requirement as passing a "hurdle"?

You really think differently from other people. That's what got you into the habit of thinking others had to bend to understand you.

There's an aspect of this I see understated.

If an opponent is within about 20 feet and advances on you, you MUST take defensive action immediately.

Or, get your ass beat or killed. If you are carrying a gun, you must assume it will be used against you if you do not use or immobilize it. You then have the choice to shoot or be shot.

This is NOT dependent on this particular case. It is true of ALL cases where hand/hand combat may ensue and one or both participants are armed with a gun.

Best outcome would have been a manslaughter conviction. Might have appeased the angry mob, who'd forget him while he was locked up, and maybe feel he'd served his time and justice was done. Now the dude has to fear for his life.

Best outcome would have been a manslaughter conviction. Might have appeased the angry mob, who'd forget him while he was locked up, and maybe feel he'd served his time and justice was done. Now the dude has to fear for his life.

Posted by: NicoleK at July 14, 2013 11:38 AM

Best outcome? You think thirty years in prison for defending yourself is a good outcome?

Wait, the punishment is thirty years in prison... for -manslaughter-?

I just learned from a friend of mine who is a lawyer, that the Martin family cannot file a civil suit against Z for wrongful death.

The laws of Florida immunizes a defendant who was found not guilty due to self-defense from all civil suits arising from the same event.

I think Zimmerman should sue ABC and NBC for the edited tape. He'd win, easily.

I thought Zimmerman sued them last year?

Wait, the punishment is thirty years in prison... for -manslaughter-?

Posted by: NicoleK at July 14, 2013 12:14 PM

Yes. And the judge gets to determine it. You don't think Obama's pocket judge wouldn't max him out?

NicoleK: Best outcome would have been a manslaughter conviction. Might have appeased the angry mob, who'd forget him while he was locked up, and maybe feel he'd served his time and justice was done.

Since when are we supposed to punish people for the sole purpose of appeasing those who might be upset with the verdict?

You could argue that it was done in the Rodney King case, but that's not how justice is supposed to work. If George Zimmerman is not guilty, then he's not guilty. We don't make him guilty just because certain people might riot if we don't.

No defendant should be found guilty merely to be the sop for an oppressed minority. George Zimmerman was rightly found not guilty. And if certain people riot because they don't like the verdict, then the authorities should deal with it in accordance with the law.

Missed this:

"I wasn't on the jury and didn't see all their evidence, but we the public did see some that they did not thanks to the judge."

You and I were not on the jury, so actually, we saw NO evidence. Not one bit. Evidence consists of that set of facts, explanations and objects presented to the jury, and nothing else.

This distinction is necessary to prevent trying the case in the popularity contest that the public constantly engages in.

Prosecutors in the Zimmerman trial never proved Zimmerman's culpability "beyond a reasonable doubt" so he was acquitted. Some folks are upset by that outcome.

I like that "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard ... and so should you. The burden of proof is on the prosecution. If you're ever charged with a crime you didn't commit and there are no witnesses to exonerate you, the prosecution must prove you did it, you don't have to prove you didn't.

Sadly, in the Zimmerman-Martin contretemps, two young men made stupid decisions that cost one of them his life and forever changed the other one's life.

Zimmerman didn't have to bring a gun. He didn't have to follow Martin. He broke no laws, but even legal decisions can have tragic consequences.

Martin could have chosen non-violence. He didn't have to attack Zimmerman. He could have just gone home, called the police, gone to a well-lit public place, or called out to ask Zimmerman why he was following him. Instead, he attacked him.

One young man desperate to be a hero, the other enamored of violence, met one dark night and the aftermath has affected all of us. We as a country can chose to follow their path into violence or we can choose to learn something from this. It's up to us.

Conan,, What makes you so sure that Mr. Zimmerman is "enamored of violence"?
He was done "following" Mr. Martin.
He was, in fact returning to his own truck.
He was attacked, most likely from behind, by a larger, stronger man. Within seconds, he went from returning to his vehicle, to having the back of his favorite head, repeatedly slammed into a concrete sidewalk. Any wonder he resorted to his weapon, before he blacked out, perhaps for good?
This was a pretty clear cut case despite efforts to muddy it up.

What makes you so sure that Mr. Zimmerman is "enamored of violence"? ~ thomas

Martin was the one "enamored of violence."

He was infatuated with MMA fighting. He reported worked on his moves.

He got into several fights at school even tweeting his girlfriend after one that he regretted that he didn't make the other guy bleed enough.

"Zimmerman didn't have to bring a gun"

Sure he didn't, but he'd probably be dead now if he hadn't, his head bashed to pieces against the pavement.

You could say the same of an armed woman who defends herself against a rapist, but somehow it wouldn't make sense.

Sure he didn't, but he'd probably be dead now if he hadn't, his head bashed to pieces against the pavement.

Or ... he'd have behaved differently without the confidence having a firearm gave him. Difficult to say with any certainty.

And, no, this case is not the same as a woman who arms herself against a potential rapist ... unless she first follows the rapist through the neighborhood.