Scarecrow had a nice idea about starting a debate thread about this topic.

I personally believe Zimmerman is in fact at fault here. Why follow the kid in the first place, knowing you should contact authorities? I mean, if some guy in his thirties was following me, I'd feel provoked too. And, who knows who really started the fight? For all we know, Zimmerman could have started it. Plus, either way, he killed a young kid with his whole life ahead of him, which makes me disgusted that he's found not guilty..

What are you guys' thoughts?

Just going to throw this out there: Someone can follow you all they want to and say what they want, but unless you actually feel like your life is being threatened you cannot physically take action. Self defense is using the minimum amount of force to defend yourself, not knocking someone to the ground and beating the shit out of their face.

Just thought you should know.

oh yeah, I don't know about Florida, but bloodshed in VA is a felony, so the kid automatically had issues :/

I do agree that if he was alive he'd likely be charged with assault. But, if self defense is what you said, then it's also not murdering someone. Although alotta people would likely do that if they had a gun in his position, seeing as he likely had a license he should have been trained to keep calm and shoot non fatally

Ill reiterate that it is probably hard as shit to "remain calm" when you get jumped, knocked on your back, get your head slammed into the concrete, and are having your face beat in.

Guilty of what?

Quote from Arch-Angel

Just going to throw this out there: Someone can follow you all they want to and say what they want, but unless you actually feel like your life is being threatened you cannot physically take action. Self defense is using the minimum amount of force to defend yourself, not knocking someone to the ground and beating the shit out of their face.

Just thought you should know.

oh yeah, I don't know about Florida, but bloodshed in VA is a felony, so the kid automatically had issues :/

If I remember correctly, Zimmerman had made the first move by following

Legally, the mere threat of physical harm is assault. The actual physical harm is battery. Because Zimmerman was following and knew he might use physical force, he committed assault. Any reasonable person would feel compelled to defend himself if he was being followed at night. I tend to think that if Zimmerman was close enough to get jumped when the kid noticed, he was following too close. If Zimmerman was on the ground when he pulled the trigger, then that's manslaughter. If he was standing, which means he can aim, he has used lethal force improperly, and that is likely to be murder. Whether or not the kill was premeditated would decide the charges. Zimmerman might not have intended to kill, but it's pretty hard to aim when you hit the ground and get your head slammed. At the very least, he would face manslaughter charges and lose the license to carry concealed weapons.

I actually followed the trial a bit, since my mother and stepfather were seriously into it. Apparently, Travis (the kid) was leaving a store with some skittles and some Arizona Iced Tea. Zimmerman, seeing Travis, called the police from within his car and was told to remain in the vehicle, as authorities were on their way. Instead, Zimmerman left his vehicle and followed Travis. Now, personally, if I were a young African-American male (which I am) being followed by an adult Caucasian male who just left his vehicle, I'd feel threatened as well. What happened next is pretty much speculation, but it ended up with Travis being shot to death, and Zimmerman somewhat injured.

Even though I think the case was overhyped to death, I do think that Zimmerman was guilty. Clearly, he held some racist thoughts, even if not deeply. He killed a child, an African-American one at that, even when using a gun was not explicitly needed. Unless he is unhealthy as hell, he should have been able to handle a child of Travis' age through sheer physical force. Aside from that, the entire thing would have been avoided, had he remained in his vehicle. Because he chose to get out and follow someone, he put himself in a situation that was not in his favor. Long story short, I don't think Travis was exactly innocent, but I'm sure Zimmerman was, and still is, guilty.

Quote from Azure Kite

Even though I think the case was overhyped to death, I do think that Zimmerman was guilty. Clearly, he held some racist thoughts, even if not deeply. He killed a child, an African-American one at that, even when using a gun was not explicitly needed. Unless he is unhealthy as hell, he should have been able to handle a child of Travis' age through sheer physical force. Aside from that, the entire thing would have been avoided, had he remained in his vehicle. Because he chose to get out and follow someone, he put himself in a situation that was not in his favor. Long story short, I don't think Travis was exactly innocent, but I'm sure Zimmerman was, and still is, guilty.

I agree with practically everything you said, and race is definitely an issue considering it was a case of racial profiling. Although I disagree with this statement.

"Unless he is unhealthy as hell, he should have been able to handle a child of Travis' age through sheer physical force."

Travis was a seventeen year old in his prime. Most adults couldn't just use physical force to handle that situation.

Quote from GrimmtheReaper

If Zimmerman was on the ground when he pulled the trigger, then that's manslaughter.

And how is it so? Floridian law says that a person who isn't engaged in an illegal activity or isn't in a place they are legally allowed to be is justified in using deadly force if they are attacked and feel that they might receive severe bodily harm. Zimmerman already had lacerations on the back of his head before he shot Trayvon Martin, and he was lying on his back according to some witness testimony. That seems like a situation where someone could reasonably expect to receive severe bodily harm.

Also, 'Manslaughter' isn't a blanket term that means the same thing throughout the country, and it's meaningless outside of local legal context.

Well, i dont defend anyone on this case.

Think about it.
Some guy follows you around, after being told not to follow you. They follow you because they're suspicious of you. Being afraid he probably attacked as defense, his life felt threatened by being watched and followed. Doesn't matter how badly he beats him. If he would have killed him, the trial would either call it self defense because Zimmerman was armed and following him, or found as murder because he beat him to death. But Zimmerman had no right to kill the boy and neither did Trayvon.


Trayvon - I'm a black boy, hooded walking in a neighborhood that recently had a crime
Zimmer - That boy, he looks suspicious cause he's wearing his hood, kinda looks like a thug... I should call the police on him with no evidence, but his thugish look is suspicious
Cop - Don't follow him, it's not your job.
Zimmer - I'm going to follow him anyways
Trayvon - Why Is he after me?! What did I do?! Imma book it!
Zimmer - He's running, that means he did something better chase him!
Trayvon - He's chasing me what do i do... I have to defend myself
>>> Trayvom attacks Zimmer in an attempt to stop this stalker, most likely to knock him out.
Zimmer - He's trying to kill me or rob me! I better shoot him and kill him.

And another note, it's easy to say anything, when the other part of the situation is dead. Zimmer COULD have shot Trayvon right after he got off the phone, and then made up a story and told his neighbors to lie. Very unlikely, but possible, because only the neighbors are witnesses because the kid is dead and cant say anything. We're all following a story by other people, but the person dead may be the only honest one.

And last, in my house, and most of my family, if we're in trouble, we're taught to beat the person until they are unconscious and then call for help. For your safety. Especially when armed.

Quote from Azure Kite

Zimmerman, seeing Travis, called the police from within his car and was told to remain in the vehicle, as authorities were on their way. Instead, Zimmerman left his vehicle and followed Travis.

police dispatchers are trained specifically to avoid giving direct orders to callers. they can make suggestions, but for liability purposes they don't tell people what to do.

you're making it sound like he disobeyed a command from an authority figure, that's not the case at all. a dispatcher saying "oh, you don't have to follow him" isn't the same as being commanded to remain in his vehicle from a police officer.

Quote from Pin

And last, in my house, and most of my family, if we're in trouble, we're taught to beat the person until they are unconscious and then call for help. For your safety. Especially when armed.

Whaaaaaaaaaaaat?!!?!? XD That's such horrible advice.

Quote from Cobalt

Whaaaaaaaaaaaat?!!?!? XD That's such horrible advice.

Well I guess its just in my house, most of my friends of african descent even agree. Its a black thing. Lol jk xD
"If your in danger, knock that nigga out."
"Don't go out like a little bitch."

Quote from Exilement

police dispatchers are trained specifically to avoid giving direct orders to callers. they can make suggestions, but for liability purposes they don't tell people what to do.

you're making it sound like he disobeyed a command from an authority figure, that's not the case at all. a dispatcher saying "oh, you don't have to follow him" isn't the same as being commanded to remain in his vehicle from a police officer.

During the trial, it was actually stated that the officer "Asked him to remain in his car, as police were on their way to the location." While not a direct order, it does seem strange that he took it on himself to get out of his car with his gun, then follow this teen who left a store and was carrying skittles and tea. Perhaps I have bias towards this case, despite trying to avoid such. Still, it seems peculiar. And even bringing the gun out seems entirely too rash. He had no defensive wounds. That meant that the first thought that went through his mind was "I have to shoot this kid."

It was also stated that he called his wife, who did agree to this, and stated "There was a shooting." It was brought up that this isn't typically something in his situation would say, seeing as a "normal" reaction would be to assure the person you were calling that you were alright, before actually talking about the event, at least in an event such as this.

Quote from Exilement

police dispatchers are trained specifically to avoid giving direct orders to callers. they can make suggestions, but for liability purposes they don't tell people what to do.

you're making it sound like he disobeyed a command from an authority figure, that's not the case at all. a dispatcher saying "oh, you don't have to follow him" isn't the same as being commanded to remain in his vehicle from a police officer.

I heard what I believe to be a recording of that call, although I only turned on the tv part way through and I don't know if it was a reconstruction or anything so correct me if I'm wrong. "'Are you following him?' 'Yeah' 'Ok, we don't need you to do that'". It's not a command, but it was a suggestion made as forcefully as someone who isn't allowed to give commands can do so.