Zimmerman found not guilty

As far as I am aware Zimmerman was not a white supremacist, he was the local neighbourhood watch organiser.

Are you not yourself guilty of judging him to be a racist simply because he is white?

It is very difficult for us to form an opinion simply on the newspaper and news reports.

I do have some misgivings about the verdict.

It boiled down to a lack of evidence.A shame but it MUST be there.Wish they had figured out who was the one that screamed.

I wonder if he would have been acquitted if he had shot an unarmed white teenager?
I am afraid some of the British police are still not above some covert racism - black youths are seven times more likely to be stopped and searched than their white peers. The searches rarely result in any charges being brought but they serve to cause justified resentment among black people.

Not seen TV for several days. What has he been found 'not guilty' of?
Not guilty of murder I can just about understand given no witnesses (or none who came forward), but he does admit killing him so he must at least be guilty of manslaughter

MOGGSYS77 You are so filled with anger at everything and everybody, but surely your experiences in the Forces, Courts and Probation Service could be put to better use than firing off ill informed (no evidence that Zimmerman was a white supremacist) posts. You cannot simply change the facts because it suits your argument.

I think it is badly drafted legislation, but the jury followed the law. The people vote in the law-makers. The ballot box is the route to take to change that law.

A)I have followed the case with interest on CNN, the evidence in court clearly showed Zimmermans contempt for the black race.Southern State Law IS written by whites for whites, had the positions been reversed he would have been described as a vigilante and now be on death row. There is plenty of evidence for that, Not made up by me to suit my own arguments. I prefer to call them points of view. Sorry if my views upset because they dont fit in too a standard pattern but the vast majority of members have never met a rapist/murderer, have never seen the oppression imposed on human beings by their so called betters. The tax payer is quite happy to pay for others do do their dirty work but would prefer to have nasty elements brushed under the carpet. I have no beef at all at putting myself on the firing line, I signed on in both services in the full and informed knowledge of what the contracts entailed. now that I am free to campaign, in my own, obviously unpopular way to bring about change. At a time the rich and privileged are making sure they get richer and more privileged our teachers are, in far too many cases, feeding the children of working parents out of their own pockets the sick,disabled and poor don't choose that status, but too many people want to believe the blatant propaganda of two top class cars in the drive, designer clothes, always on foreign holiday. Go on to the government websites, look at the maximum rates and do your sums. The people, a tiny majority are and have to be getting the additional cash from elsewhere. There are a significant but tiny majority who work the system, that was my job to try to prevent such people succeeding, but now we are told that the bulk of legal aid we can no longer afford was spent on the rich and major institutions using the system to save paying insurance. A 20p tin of beans stolen from a Walmart, sorry Asda, cost the taxpayer many thousands in police, court, probation etc etc time. Because We Always Prosecute. The number of free graduate level security guards on " work experience " would escalate at a rate prosecution rates would fall if they were made to pay towards the prosecution. No I,m nor advocated legalized theft, how many desperate mums are going to go down that route when austerity for the poor working families really kick. in.
If even one person feels uncomfortable by my pointing out what I see as an urgent need for change press the report this post button. until then put forward arguments that stick, not truisms half baked misunderstandings and shock horror you must be wrong automatically, no not you as an individual If this is to be a comfy sewing circle or all lads together, so be it.
Peter

Peter, many share your views but you undermine them when you hurl insults. Cosy sewing circle this is not!

Or girls ??????

I don't feel uncomfortable at all. Your diatribes are the sort of psuedo-socialist ravings that bore me to tears, so I won't be reading any more of your posts. Bye

It is indeed a very worrying verdict. If the boy had killed Zimmerman, in self defense as he was being attacked for no more reason than being a young black man in a 'white' area- he would be on death row.

It would be interesting to hear Obama's reaction to this terrible verdict.

Excellent article from the Guardian:

Sunday 14 July 2013 09.28 EDT

Open season on black boys after a verdict like this

Calls for calm after George Zimmerman was acquitted of murdering Trayvon Martin are empty words for black families

Trayvon Martin, who was shot dead in February last year. Photograph: Reuters
Gary Younge in Chicago
Let it be noted that on this day, Saturday 13 July 2013, it was still deemed legal in the US to chase and then shoot dead an unarmed young black man on his way home from the store because you didn't like the look of him.
The killing of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin last year was tragic. But in the age of Obama the acquittal of George Zimmerman offers at least that clarity. For the salient facts in this case were not in dispute. On 26 February 2012 Martin was on his way home, minding his own business armed only with a can of iced tea and a bag of Skittles. Zimmerman pursued him, armed with a 9mm handgun, believing him to be a criminal. Martin resisted. They fought. Zimmerman shot him dead.
Who screamed. Who was stronger. Who called whom what and when and why are all details to warm the heart of a cable news producer with 24 hours to fill. Strip them all away and the truth remains that Martin's heart would still be beating if Zimmerman had not chased him down and shot him.
There is no doubt about who the aggressor was here. It appears that the only reason the two interacted at all, physically or otherwise, is that Zimmerman believed it was his civic duty to apprehend an innocent teenager who caused suspicion by his existence alone.
Appeals for calm in the wake of such a verdict raise the question of what calm there can possibly be in a place where such a verdict is possible. Parents of black boys are not likely to feel calm. Partners of black men are not likely to feel calm. Children with black fathers are not likely to feel calm. Those who now fear violent social disorder must ask themselves whose interests are served by a violent social order in which young black men can be thus slain and discarded.
But while the acquittal was shameful it was not a shock. It took more than six weeks after Martin's death for Zimmerman to be arrested and only then after massive pressure both nationally and locally. Those who dismissed this as a political trial (a peculiar accusation in the summer of Bradley Manning and Edward Snowden) should bear in mind that it was politics that made this case controversial.
Charging Zimmerman should have been a no-brainer. He was not initially charged because Florida has a "stand your ground" law whereby deadly force is permitted if the person "reasonably believes" it is necessary to protect their own life, the life of another or to prevent a forcible felony.
Since it was Zimmerman who stalked Martin, the question remains: what ground is a young black man entitled to and on what grounds may he defend himself? What version of events is there for that night in which Martin gets away with his life? Or is it open season on black boys after dark?
Zimmerman's not guilty verdict will be contested for years to come. But he passed judgement on Trayvon that night summarily.
"Fucking punks," Zimmerman told the police dispatcher that night. "These assholes. They always get away."
So true it's painful. And so predictable it hurts.

After this verdict , I do hope things remain calm.

MOGGSY77, there is no such thing as Southern state law.

Enviousamerican
Tell that to black Americans living in former slave states. It is a relatively few years since George Wallace defied the law by refusing to allow American citizens who happened to have a skin pigment imported from Africa for the benefit of white, mainly, but not exclusively English aristocrats to ensure their fabulous lifestyle. Most died of sicknesses and cruelty on their way to a life of slavery and abject misery. Noodles, how dare you refer to my honest lifetime belief in socialist beliefs as pseudo socialism, feel free not to read my posts, its a pity cos you might just, one day realize this is an unjust world populated by the have and have nots. It so happened with my salary i was an have, does that make me wrong to continue to fight for the basic human rights of the have nots???
Live long and enjoy your complacency
Peter

I think this is a terrible miscarriage of justice.

Granjura - thanks for posting the guardian article, I always enjoy Gary Younge's articles and this one was excellent. America really is a foreign country isn't it. Shackling pregnant shop lifters, or drug users for example. I am not complacent about the justice system in this country, and share the concern about the fact young black men are much more likely to be subject to stop and search etc. However, the USA's ridiculous approach to gun law, and continued racism towards the ancestors of slaves is something I find truly shocking.

Noodles, instead of insults, would you mind telling us how you feel (if you do) that this Zimmerman verdict was fair?

I don't know if it was fair (just) or not. I don't have all the facts the jury had. Neither, I suppose, does anyone else. We only have what the media has told us, which is not quite the same as what would stand up in a court of law.

As portrayed by the mainstream media, the case does look bad, but I don't feel I am in a position to judge it or the acquittal.

granjura honestly, you thought that was an insult?

As I said in an earlier post, the jury followed the law. The law needs to be changed. The way to change the law is through the ballot box.

This is a very good walk through:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23310953

Thanks for that link, noodles. Here it is blued: www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-23310953.

What the Harvard law bod says about the differences between a legal right and a moral right (right as opposed to wrong) are particularly interesting.

Thanks Bags

Was the 'victim' carrying a weapon of any kind? [apologies if it has been mentioned but just rushing in and out and can't read whole thread...]

I was in the US last year when this case was receiving saturation coverage on national TV news so I learned a lot from the many programmes that discussed in great detail all aspects. The US doesn't have our rigid sub-judice laws and anything can be discussed openly prior to charging or trial .... or so it seems to me.

There was a lot of incompetence/racism from the outset - Zimmerman claimed this 'standing ground' defence and that was it, dead boy - no charges or investigation, until the Black community protested and then it all became political and the authorities were forced to take action.

Perhaps a charge of manslaughter would have been more successful - who knows.