Zimmerman verdict: Not Guilty.

[Creed of Heresy]

@Dionysus: THAT...is VERY interesting. I hadn't actually considered the possibility of it being *pukes* sizzurp components. Also, seriously, sizzurp? Ugh. WHY? WHY would anyone think that mixture is good? It even SOUNDS vile. "Sizzurp." Sounds like the sound you make when you sneeze and puke at the same time...

Although, I thought that the mixture used hard candies, not skittles, and that it required a carbonated beverage, and that arizona iced tea isn't carbonated. Then again I dunno shit about it other than what goes into it [and I only know that from hearing it before from that terrible "G6" song anyway].

I have to ask though. Why did he keep the drink and candy on his person if he'd dropped it off in the house? Rather strange choice.

Still. I managed to find the article on wikipedia. found the full transcript.

More and more I'm starting to doubt my original stance. This is starting to sound less and less like Trayvon was as innocent as the media portrays.

---

This is just my opinion here, but honestly, if the police dispatcher tells you to NOT FOLLOW the person you're calling them about...then don't fucking follow them. Let the fucking cops handle it.

Again, the police dispatcher didn't tell Zimmerman not to follow Martin. The police dispatcher asked whether he was following him, and when Zimmerman confirmed that he was, the police dispatcher said "Ok, we don't need you to do that". That is very different.

Again, I must ask, if he thought he was confronting a person who was robbing peoples' homes, what the fuck did he expect was going to happen when he confronted the guy?? He CLAIMS the kid was looking into peoples' homes. He also said the kid was coming towards him, then turned and ran away after investigating him sitting in his car staring at him. And then he gives chase. He's not a fucking cop. He had no business pursuing the kid. You have to admit that much.

We can only go by pieced together versions of events, based mostly on phone calls.

According to Zimmerman, he stopped pursuing Treyvon after the police dispatcher said they didn't need him to, and was trying to find a place to meet police at when Treyvon attacked him. According to Rachel Jeantel, who was on the phone with Treyvon before he was shot, Treyvon asked Zimmerman why he was following him, and then Zimmerman attacked Treyvon. It should be noted that Rachel Jeantel's testimony was called into question by the defense, who pointed out that parts of it differed from her official deposition.

The fact is, with so little actual evidence of what happened, we can't conclude beyond reasonable doubt that Zimmerman is guilty of murder or manslaughter. We may not like that fact, but the justice system is supposed to work on the principle of innocent until proven guilty, and in this case, there was little to no evidence that Zimmerman was guilty of a crime.

I'm not saying you support the outcome in other cases, Tib, I'm saying that the ruling in this regard is bullshit because it's similar circumstances except the defendant was a woman who was being beaten by her husband, she DIDN'T shoot him to death, and yet somehow gets 20 years when this guy gets off scot-free. I'm just comparing what a level of bullshit this is between these two cases, and what the underlying problem is; we've got a weird set of double-standards at play. Some guy goes off and oversteps his bounds in his role in a community watch program, pursues a guy, starts getting the shit kicked out of him and somehow is justified for pulling the trigger when he started the situation to begin with, and then there's the thing with the woman. That's what I'm more pissed about than anything else; if this other woman was guilty, then THIS guy should DEFINITELY be guilty.

I disagree with that logic. We both agree that the woman should not have been convicted, so I'm confused as to why you would think that two miscarriages of justice would be better than one? A better conclusion to events should be:

This guy was found not guilty, so the woman should have been found not guilty too, and possibly should have her case re-tried.

I'm pissed about the justice system itself...or the lack of justice, anyway. This is ass-backwards as all fuck. THAT is why I am so pissed off, THAT is why these posts are so emotionally charged.

Good, be pissed off at the justice system all you want, but when we are talking about actual human beings, who have actual lives, getting emotionally charged is not a good idea. It leads you to make utterly appalling statements like:

"I'm a humanist and I want this guy to get shot."

"Beat him to death and string his body up underneath the ol' rebel flag. I wouldn't shed a single tear for him."

These aren't helping anyone. If you think the justice system is broken, help fix it. Don't make a mockery of it by resorting to mob rule.

Yeah, I'm starting to come to the conclusion that I seriously need to redact my original statement. My initial information was inaccurate, and the later bits of information I got were watered down with pandering from the media and I bought into it.

I'm a big enough man to admit when I'm wrong. This was certainly one instance where I was very, very wrong.