FindArena > Find Arena > Attorney

Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 ()
songfeng607 : Which is better? Also what will the price of the iPhone 4 be when the iPhone 5 comes out?

  Reply With Quote
  #2 ()
stoffCitsmord : In the discussions about this case online, all the legal people as well as the armchair lawyers (like myself) have made their arguments and such, but I have come to several thoughts about this situation that bother me.

(1) Based on the comments in the media, the people angry about this are mad because a kid is dead and the guy who killed him is not in prison. The law does not seem to matter and it is a problem because the victim is black and the guy with the gun is not.

(2) You can use deadly force in a situation based on the law. The law says you cannot be arrested. The court says you are not guilty. So, the President and Attorney General have set up an e-mail address so people can send in tips to support a civil rights federal charge. I guess the courts are no longer the ones who decide guilt.

(3) Messages of hate are rampant from people who blame their opponents for being all about hate.

I am saddened by this event. You cannot be glad this happened and be a decent human being. The decision of Not Guilty was based on the law, evidence, and witness testimony.

This decision does NOT say that Trayvon Martin was guilty of any crime. It does NOT say that killing him was right. It does NOT say that you can wantonly stalk and kill black people.

It says that though a man killed a 17 year old, his actions were legal based on the circumstances of the situation created and exacerbated by BOTH individuals.

It shows that BOTH men are held responsible and accountable for their actions and decisions of that night. Putting Zimmerman in jail for following the law would be wrong. Making him pay further is wrong. As a nation, we have to be better than this.

If a law is wrong, campaign to change it--don't riot and destroy property.
If a situation makes you uncomfortable, discuss it with others respectfully--who knows what you both may learn?

What say you? Should both people involved be responsible for their decisions? Or is it just one is dead, so he is innocent?
@mommanuke...I was asked that question earlier, which made me consider that as well. I truly do not know what I would do...I would probably ignore and get away if I could. Keep in mind, by the evidence and testimony, Trayvon initiated the confrontation aspect--not Zimmerman. At least that is what I have seen. If confronted, I would answer with respect as I would to anyone. That is how I was raised.

@Professor...I did my best to be objective and reasonable with my question. There is no hate in my heart towards blacks...was just at a game with a black friend two weeks ago--great man. Is there bias? Sure, that's not easy to remove and is part of the rationale for asking the question, to see if what I am seeing is what is right. I am well able to admit my own short comings, but seek to be a better person every day. Can you say the same? You seem to have a pr3etty negative opinion yourself and never bothered to actually answer the main question.
  Reply With Quote
  #3 ()
xxldoctttibr : Agree. That's the beauty of America.
  Reply With Quote
  #4 ()
RicyKcn 571 : Well said!
  Reply With Quote
  #5 ()
zegreeDradaXT : I'm wondering what decision you would make if you were walking home at night, in the rain, and someone first trails you in his car and then gets out and follows you and confronts you, asking what you are doing there, and while he's asking, you see a gun on his waist. I don't care how old you are, and the fact that you are black does affect your decision. So would you simply have turned and run, knowing the person could shoot you in the back or would you have simply accepted your lower class status than the follower and answered him politely?
  Reply With Quote
  #6 ()
Normagree : If "being rational" was a wide spread there wouldn't be a politics section on YA. This case was not to seek justice but to affect a desired outcome. And when that outcome was not achieved, they desire still more desired outcome called "justice". I suggest charging him with discharging a firearm in a residential area. Or perhaps he has an over due library book he hasn't turned in as an excuse for the DEA to drive another APC through another door or a baby their sniper teams can shoot. (I refer to both Waco and Ruby Ridge). Perhaps with a pound of anybody white's flesh, they will have their "justice" at last! They have become the racist mobs of yesterday... they are the killers of Emmit Till and Medgar Evers who probably all thought they acted under the name of "justice".
  Reply With Quote
  #7 ()
doristop : I would love to just once see an honest, intelligent question that is not laced with the asker's own personal political opinion.
Do you really think this question was unbiased? You people really have no clue as to how much you really hate black people.
  Reply With Quote
  #8 ()
Loasiarog : I don't have time to read the whole thing so will just answer the first part. Freep no! This case should at least match the OJ Simpson deal and may even rival the Kennedy assassination.
  Reply With Quote
  #9 ()
mapesmootte : OMG! I need to report you and hopefully have you banned for life from YA! You have violated a basic rule here, you are taking a complex and emotional situation and discussing it in a fact based, intelligent, and logical manner. Don't you know that only emotional rants and ad hominem attacks and name calling are allowed?

Seriously I agree pretty much with everything you said. Both men exercised poor judgment that contributed to this tragedy, and if EITHER had made better decisions it would never have happened. I think that manslaughter, with the severe sentence it would have carried, is not appropriate to this case. Something that resulted in a year or two would have been appropriate, but not sure if that exists in Florida law. Some states have varying degrees of manslaughter, again, not sure about Florida. If that is the case, then the prosecution is at fault for overcharging.

I have NO idea exactly what all those protesting really want. Should he have been convicted even though under the law that would have been a miscarriage of justice? If it is a change in a law, which one? And were these same people out protesting when a clearly guilty suspect got off scott free after brutally slaughtering two innocent people? OOPS! I forgot, OJ was black and the people he killed were white, never mind!
  Reply With Quote
  #10 ()
Broumenn : I think Martin was innocent because he was. It is a known fact that Martin was engaged in lawful activity, carrying neither a weapon nor burglary tools.

it is true that the decision doesn't actually say that Martin did anything wrong. However, you wouldn't know that from several of the commenters on this site who routinely state as a fact that Martin assaulted Zimmerman, and even claim that he was probably casing the neighborhood for future burglaries, without the slightest factual basis.

But the real problem is that you can talk about the law, and it is probably true that the verdict was justified under Florida law. But the truth is that this case was always about race, not law. The stand your ground law may say in principal that anybody who feels threatened can use deadly force, but in the real world it says that whites can, especially against blacks. In cases where one person is shot by someone unknown to them, a white killing a black is 3 times more likely to be ruled justified than a white person killing another white person - and over 10 times more likely than a black person who shoots a white victim.
  Reply With Quote