<p>I am watching the interview. I had no strong opinion either way. I still am open to the facts of the event leading to a not guilty verdict, but it is clear how he came to be in that situation based on his personality . He really is a horse’s butt.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>yes, and his state of mind based on those statements is that he thinks Martin is another person trying to break into someone’s home. That state of mind is not depraved or improper. I think a lot of people would be angry if crime occurred in their neighborhood and it continued. I heard a talking head say there were 7 attempted break ins in the neighborhood over 11 months. That’s a lot of crime for a small neighborhood.</p>
<p>razorsharp, I agree–I’d be annoyed/scared too if my presumably “safe” community was being targeted by burglars. The thing is, it comes across as profiling to ONLY follow TM because he fit the description of the previous burglars. There was nothing TM was doing that should have aroused suspicion, other than “walking while black.” And I do think GZ’s state of mind was not “depraved,” but angry and motivated to do something about the “f-ing punks.” The fact that he felt they “always got away” fits with the idea of taking matters into his own hands.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Coming from the poster with the most emotional reaction to everything in this discussion…</p>
<p>I’m sorry but your narrative seems to be completely driven by your passionate views on gun rights and your suspicion of the “liberal” media and the “agendas” of everyone other than yourself.</p>
<p>P.S. the quoting code takes almost no time and really makes it easier to decipher your thoughts from quoted text.</p>
<p>Razorsharp - Calling the police about a random person walking through your neighborhood is indicative of a state of mind concerned about recent break-ins. Using the kind of loaded language GZ used, and, in particular, using it after you already know you’ve killed an unarmed teen, is indicative of aggression and anger, which seems to me relevant in judging the plausibility of Zimmerman’s account of the fight.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Do you know what “empathetic” means? EVEN IF someone was trying to kill me, I would be despondent over the idea of taking someone’s life. I don’t think I would EVER get over it and I certainly wouldn’t be able to dispassionately discuss it on national television.</p>
<p>
That belief is not a defense to murder or to manslaughter.
“Depraved” has a specific legal meaning – it is used to mean that he had a callous disregard to the risk of harm to others. Martin was not iln fact a burglar. That Zimmerman assumed him to be a burglar, without specific evidence to support it, and followed Martin while carrying a loaded firearm, is what supplies the intent. </p>
<p>In other words, the prosecution is arguing that Zimmerman dehumanized Martin – rather than seeing Martin as fellow human being entitled to courtesy and respect, Zimmerman categorized him as a criminal to be pursued. That he harbored an attitude that it was o.k. to shoot first and ask questions later when dealing with Martin, can be considered a “depraved mind” under the law.</p>
<p>Nice to see the camps haven’t budged while I was away. 
I’ll continue with my futile efforts to move folks toward the open-minded middle ground. Gets kinda lonely here sometimes. :)</p>
<p>I’m curious to know if everyone who’s currently posting about GZ’s history/comments being indicative of his state of mind that night, are you willing to concede that the same could be applied to TM?</p>
<p>If you make assumptions about GZ’s state of mind and use those assumptions to come up with one version of the sequence of events, will you also concede that TM’s state of mind might support a different version of events?</p>
<p>For example, if “f<em>*in’ punk" is supposedly indicative of GZ “spoiling for a fight”, would you not concede that "creepy-a</em> cracker” is just as inflammatory and thus be just as indicative that TM could have started the physical altercation?</p>
<p>thanks Calmom–would GZ’s standing on top of TM after shooting him in the heart be another instance of depraved disregard to risk of harm?</p>
<p>I’ll answer, Wolverine. </p>
<p>No. Describing someone following me as a “creepy-ass cracker” (to someone else, not the person stalking me through a neighborhood with no stated purpose) is a natural REACTION to being provoked.</p>
<p>Ask my kids what I say when I am driving and someone cuts me off on the expressway. I try to keep it clean but it is not always easy. I occasionally slip with some colorful expressions. But again, it is always a REACTION to provocation.</p>
<p>Quote:
“Considering Martin was apparently trying to kill him, I thought he was quite empathetic.
Do you know what “empathetic” means? EVEN IF someone was trying to kill me, I would be despondent over the idea of taking someone’s life. I don’t think I would EVER get over it and I certainly wouldn’t be able to dispassionately discuss it on national television.”</p>
<p>Sally, you can drop the condescension, thank you.</p>
<p>Let’s suppose that what was Zimmerman said what happened, happened.</p>
<p>Have you even been in a situation where someone was on top of you saying they were going to kill you while punching you in the face, banging your head on the ground, and covering your mouth while you couldn’t breath through your broken nose?</p>
<p>I suspect not.</p>
<p>If you were, do you now how you feel towards that individual?</p>
<p>Regardless, it appeared to me that Zimmerman was genuinely sorry that Martin died and was sympathetic to his family.</p>
<p>“thanks Calmom–would GZ’s standing on top of TM after shooting him in the heart be another instance of depraved disregard to risk of harm?”</p>
<p>And why do you think this happened? Wow, this is just getting to weird for me. I think it’s time to bow out.</p>
<p>DNA is a big deal in many Florida criminal cases. Too, many convicted wrongfully years ago in Florida trials or railroaded in sloppy trials for things like rape and murder have been sprung from Florida prisons after being locked up for 20 years or more after modern DNA testing proved they couldn’t have committed crimes they went to prison for decades ago. </p>
<p>It is not uncommon for evidence to be mishandled. It was raised in court today, when DNA expert for state testified, that evidence hadn’t been handled entirely properly and ability to test for DNA reliably had maybe been compromised. GZ’s attorneys will likely have a DNA expert of their own say in court state’s DNA testing is flawed enough to be not reliable. Was evidence compromised enough that the DNA tests done by state will not be allowed to be used in this case?</p>
<p>sally305…Ok, but could someone not use the same logic and think that GZ’s words and actions (following TM) that people are saying are so telling were a natural reaction to the “provocation” of fearing another burglar in the neighborhood?</p>
<p>Had TM told his friend that “some guy” was following him it wouldn’t strike me as anywhere near the level that “creepy-a** cracker” does. One could argue that TM had made up his mind already about who was following him and why, which might indicate a pre-disposition towards how he’d react if they got close to each other.</p>
<p>Remember…open-minded is the goal here. :)</p>
<p>You don’t even see it as possible?</p>
<p>Well, you call it “provocation,” I call it “profiling.” Walking with Skittles and an iced tea? How is that behavior provocative? My son prefers Gatorade and Doritos, but he also likes hoodies. Should I worry that he is behaving provocatively the next time he walks home from the convenience store with his hood up because it is raining?</p>
<p>Being open-minded…I think that means understanding the language of teenagers. I sometimes overhear their conversations, and they are full of questionable language and bravado and amusing descriptions. This is just how they talk. Some of it comes from the music they listen to and some comes from their imaginations. A lot of it is designed to elicit a reaction from the listener on the other end of the line.</p>
<p>Does it bother you that GZ might have been using an overheard conversation that wasn’t aimed at him as incentive to escalate things with TM?</p>
<p>Are you open-minded here, Wolverine? :)</p>
<p>[creepy-**s cracker is just as inflammatory]</p>
<p>When you think someone is creepy you want to get away from such a person. </p>
<p>When you think those punks always get away you want to prevent another punk from getting away.</p>
<p>When the teen’s crass judgment turns out to be about right and the adult’s crass judgment turns out to be fatally wrong . . .</p>
<p>lizard, that may be–I am not surprised that a small-town police department might mishandle evidence. I have been wondering what the defense team would ask the DNA witness or how they would respond.</p>
<p>This case is interesting because the DNA seems to (hopefully) offer a way to clarify what happened that night, but it isn’t the main thing (since we know who did the killing). It’s hard to predict how it will turn out.</p>
<p>[The</a> State of the USA | New Statistical Approach to Burglary, Related Violence](<a href=“http://www.stateoftheusa.org/content/new-approach-to-burglary.php]The”>The State of the USA | New Statistical Approach to Burglary, Related Violence)</p>
<p>most burglaries occur during the day. why would a kid who was intent on doing something ‘wrong’ be peering in windows at night on a SUNDAY (when most folks are at home getting ready for work)?</p>
<p>I’m absolutely open-minded sally. I do believe that GZ was irrationally concerned about a hoodie-wearing teenager walking through his neighborhood…and I also think it’s quite possible that TM reacted physically to a situation that didn’t necessitate a physical confrontation.</p>
<p>To an unbiased observer, there hasn’t been any evidence presented yet that is absolutely conclusive to ANY version of events. That’s been my point all along, and it’s why I can’t realistically see a Murder 2 conviction happening. </p>
<p>I think it’s quite probable that GZ and TM BOTH overreacted on that night. I’ve had unknown individuals walking through my neighborhood at night before, and I didn’t automatically assume they were up to no good and follow them…but I was curious. I’ve also been followed by individuals before when I’ve been in various situations and I’ve been curious as to their intentions…but I didn’t assume the worst of them either.</p>
<p>Have you ever been followed at night, Wolverine?</p>
<p>It’s really scary. The guy had been following Trayvon for quite some time. He was scared enough about it to tell someone he was being followed.</p>
<p>He was scared enough to try to get away from the guy who was stalking him and then the guy got out of the car and followed him on foot.</p>
<p>I wish Trayvon had called 911. I would have called 911.</p>
<p>Zimmerman was carrying a gun and waiting for the police.</p>
<p>As far as I can see, one person was trying to get away from one person who was following him. Only one person has SYG rights here, and that is Trayvon.</p>
<p>With the DNA evidence, and ME testimony, the only rational conclusion in my opinion, is that Zimmerman was NOT in fear for his life. He just happened to have a gun and decided to use it.</p>
<p>I hope he gets at least manslaughter.</p>
<p>There is only one person responsible for this death. He was fully in control of letting Trayvon go and all Trayvon wanted to do was to be let alone. We can see this by his action to get away.</p>