Agreed. This is why you have trials so the facts can come out, and a judgement can be rendered.

It's like social media... it's not even real media outlets. Who cares what the people think? We're obviously changing our minds every time some new development unfolds. What's the point in judging the criminality of Zimmerman's actions when no one has any facts about the case. geez...

I can't believe that MSNBC would actually report that people think Zimmerman is not guilty. When and if they find him innocent, MSNBC should fire horses ass Mr. Ed. His broadcasts were way out of line. I believe he was the first to run the altered 911 tape. Then they supposedly fire some poor scapegoat.

I live in Florida and I hope I sit on the jury in this trial. I'd like to hear the real evidence not what the media puts out to sell advertising. It's a tragedy...no doubt...but the charges of racism are over the top and benefit only those that want to keep America a racially divided nation.

Hummmmmmmmmmmmm .... If the latest pictorial evidence is factual ( photos of blood dripping down the back of Zimmerman's head) ...... it seems that it corroborates a portion of Zimmerman's statements & calls in to question the state of mind of Trayvon Martians alleged statement to his girlfriend in his phone call.

I'd like to see the facts presented at trial, before making a judgement ............ lets be fair

Of course most people thinks he is guilty. The media already has convicted him.

Here's the new picture referred to at comment #1.6:

http://abcnews.go.com/images/US/ht_george_zimmerman_head_dm_120419_wmain.jpg

Fair warning-- ABC says the image is "graphic" and may upset some viewers.

This is exactly what I agrued about in one of my Criminal Justice classes. The media keeps the racial tension high in this country. This was never about race as much as it is about vigilante justice. No one cares about public opinion polls, man on the street interviews, etc. Zimmerman WILL receive a fair trial, however no matter the outcome there will br many that are going to play the "race card" to it's fullest. We ca thank the media in advance...

I apologize for the disconnected rant, but I'm trying to get my main thoughts out without typing a book.

Online polls are totally meaningless. You can vote over and over using different names and accounts/computers. If you don't own a computer or use it for such things, you are excluded. THis often leaves out the less wealthy, it leaves out people who ware very busy, just not a true cross section.

But still it warrants a story this long?

No scientific basis at all.

And that applies to all of them, not just this one. That is why Zogby is not as good, they use online polling (Though not open polling like this one was) But they still leave out significant portions of the populace. Truly balanced polls are almost impossible, but what is described here is meaningless in every way except to measure internet interest among those who participate in blogging and such polls.

The people who insist he's guilty have chosen to ignore all the evidence and believe what they want to believe.

ozmosis: Actually, this is a good sign of the times. You are right that the ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, and the other lib media have already convicted him. The fact that a majority don't think he's guilty is a sign that people are getting smarter and no longer trust the lib media. This is a good sign for the future of our country. Got a boot out of another article where Obama proudly proclaims that he was not born with a silver spoon in his mouth. He's got that right. He was born with a hammer and sickle in his mouth. But, hey, the good news is that we now know what the son Obama never had would look like! I guess that is as telling as whether Bill Clinton wears boxers or briefs.

I have a couple of questions. First, who is that black man in the first photo at the beginning of this article and what relevance does he have to this debate?

Second, where is all of the data breaking down support for guilt/innocence by race? This is an article by smnbc and they always break EVERYTHING down by race. Probably coming out in the next wave of articles in the hopes of keeping this case at the forefront of their news page.

WMG-21 - Come on. You can't put another news media's link on BSNBC site. It might undermine the credibility that this is a race based altercation by negating the Martin's assertions that their 12 y.o. son was shot for no reason.

This was never about race as much as it is about vigilante justice.

Self defense is not synonymous with vigilante justice.

RealAmerican - I think the people who insist either guilt or innocence have chosen to ignore all evidence (that we've seen thru the media). There are indications of both - Zimmerman did follow Trayvon, and it isn't clear if he identified himself as neighborhood watch. Trayvon might have thought some random guy was following him to rob him. Equally, Zimmerman might have identified himself and Trayvon might have decided to attack him anyway. I think Trayvon had just as much right to defend himself as Zimmerman did. Much of the testimony will have to come down to whether Zimmerman was within his "stand your ground" rights, since he didn't actually stand his ground, but followed the guy. I'm curious to see how this plays out and I hope that whatever the outcome, the verdict is accepted by all on both sides.

At least Zimmerman will finally have his day in court, which is all reasonable people wanted and expected.

The only good that will come of this if Zimmerman is found not guilty is that people will further scrutinize the ridiculous "stand your ground" law and perhaps alter the language of the law to eliminate the possibility of it protecting people who choose to pursue others and instigate confrontations only to shoot their way out of them when they're losing...

You are so right. The media stirs up more trouble just so they can justify there jobs. I wonder how much media coverage there would have been if the young man had been WHITE!!? Who would have been marching then, Think Jessie would would have weighed in? As for Zimmerman getting a fair trial I really doubt it as he has already been tried in the slanted media. He would have a better chance of getting a fair trial in China or Russia!

Well John you have a valid point, the media stir's the pot. So sad cause in todays world where everyone says they want equality, they will be so absorbed by what a few radicals are preaching, knowing good and well the "TRUTH" isn't what they are selling.

In this country, you are innocent till proven guilty by a jury of your peers. That doesn't mean "guilty, if a majority of internet users vote that way, without hearing the evidence presented at trial." What has happened to decency, maturity and wisdom?

I stopped having an opinion one way or the other in this case when I found out that the sweet, innocent childhood pictures of Trayvon Martin shown everywhere where years old. I don't care whether he was or was not a sweet, innocent child. I don't like to be manipulated. If you want my opinion on your side, don't try to manipulate me. Give me the truth.

I actually think that the amount of bail just indicates that the judge is willing to allow the prosecution to try to prove their case in court. I think if the judge was convinced that Zimmerman was dangerous, he wouldn't have been released - or bail would have been higher. I do not think that a jury is going to find him guilty of 2nd degree murder. It will be to the jury to offer a verdict on a lesser charge - like manslaughter. But, good luck with that. The Casey Anthony jury couldn't even do that and they had many more options to choose from. My guess? In order for Trayvon's parents to feel that they have gotten justice, they are going to have to file a wrongful death lawsuit in civil court where they will probably get a guilty verdict.

This story broke to strident calls for Zimmerman's immediate execution, then we found out there was a fight, then we found out Martin wasn't a kid, then we heard the 911 tapes, then we saw the pictures of Zimmerman's head, and so on. People began to realize there was more to the story and started saying things like "let justice take its course." It took a month for people to calm down enough to actually think.

Did we learn anything from this? No. Not a thing. The next incident comes along and people are just as quick to rush to judgement on one or two facts with no thought to the past month they spent doing exactly the same thing.

Look for both sides of the issue before coming to a conclusion. Remember, the media is manipulating you for advertising dollars. Don't fall for it.

The poll is a bit bogus in that it combines disparate groups --- a no-no in polling.

Group A believes that Zimmerman is not guilty because being Black, wearing a hoodie, etc are "threatening" in themselves and Zimmerman had a right to shoot anyone who was "threatening" making him not guilty.

But Group B believes that Florida passed a really bad law whilke pandering the to NRA and that Zimmerman will go free because of a lack of police forensics combined with a bad law. This does not mean that they actually believe that he is not guilty, just that he will be found "not guilty."

Combining these groups as though a majority of people think that he did not stalk and kill an unarmed teenager is simple misrepresentation and is intended to sell newspapers, air time, etc.

$150,000 bail, shows how much the judge thinks he's guilty/prosecutions case.

I have seen higher bonds for a DUI!

Zimmerman may or may not be guilty of murder and we won't know until there is a trial but one thing for sure is that he's an idiot. Why did this guy have to take vigilante justice out on a teenager doing nothing at all wrong? Everyone knows that Zimmerman wouldn't have followed a white man in a suit down the street and shoot him dead. It doesn't appear that Zimmerman was motivated out of racism but clearly his bias played a factor and resulted in the death of a kid.

The poll is meaningless but this story should be a good lesson to everyone concealing a weapon and playing cops and robbers. Let the professionals do police work.

I support George Zimmerman. It's called the presumption of innocence Coffin v. United States.

THey should have gone for voluntary manslaughter instead. They can more easily prove that Zimmerman was an equal participant in the escalation of the incident than they can for him initiating the fight, as in throwing the first punch.

My honest belief is that Trayvon just wanted the dude to back off of him and tried to act all tough. Zimmerman, being a cocky a-hole also wanted to act tough and they probably both started the fight. Both men are guilty of having too much pride!

The reason Zimmerman should be convicted of the lesser charge is because his life probably wasn't in danger and he most likely willingly engaged in the scuffle. George made the cowardly move of using deadly force rather than be the loser of the fight, which he probably would have walked away from with minor cuts and bruises (yes, I saw the photo of his head and the wounds look superficial. Drawing blood does not equal "life threatening"). Self defense cannot be claimed when your motivation is to be the alpha male.

Lolly: That's a little presumptuous. Finding yourself in a fight in the middle of the night with a stranger you don't think is supposed to be in your neighborhood, that you assumed was up to no good, could easily be considered life-threatening. In retrospect it probably wasn't, but Zimmerman had no way of knowing if this stranger was going to pull a knife on him or even just bash his head in. That Martin was shot before the fight escalated any further indicates nothing except the level of Zimmerman's fear.

I can't believe that MSNBC would actually report that people think Zimmerman is not guilty.

Why not. There are many out there who think he is. Are you angry because you think he's guilty? Maybe you should get over yourself.

When and if they find him innocent, MSNBC should fire horses ass Mr. Ed.

Now why should they do that. Because they printed an article that doesn't meet your agenda? That the lynch mob out there isn't so unified?

Puh-leease...

This is a story of two people whose actions, poor choices, ended a young life and has destroyed another. When this story first broke, i thought to myself that Trayvon was killed wrongfully and Zimmerman should have been jailed that night. He should have been arrested and charged, but not for second degree murder. This is an accident, Trayvon didn't know who Zimmerman was, and Zimmerman didn't know who Trayvon Martin was and both made bad judgements in their reactions to one another that ended with a 17 year old dead and a man fearing for his life based on racial ignorance of behalf political hate mongers. Even if Zimmerman gets a fair trial and some how found not guilty,he will have to hide and live in fear for the rest of his life. He might as well be in prison.

I think we are missing a couple of big points here. 1. Zimmerman confronted Trayvon so technically, Trayvon had the right to "Stand his Ground", not the other way around. 2. If Zimmerman gets acquited, then anyone can confront anyone with no witnesses, kill them, and claim they "Stood their ground". There is a big responsibility associated with carrying a gun and training similar to that which is required for cars, would be in order. If someone intentionally kills some one with a car because they were threatened by someone with no weapons, it would be manslaughter.

Not for the media, otherwise they could not make money out of it.

The vote seems to be down party lines. Most liberals believe he's guilty and the rest maintain he's innocent until proven guilty.

That sounds good CNJ, but as long as there is a lack of evidence....and its Zimms word against the ex-Martin's, it looks like Zimm is screwed.

As Everyone in here as posted, this trial isn't about law, its about race. And that doesn't say much for the Justice System at all.

The wrong verdict is rioting in the streets, another Rodney King. Race relations, set back 50 years, if that really matters.

Zimm deserves his day in court, which he wil get. Whether it will be a fair day, has yet to be seen.

CNJ Mom ~~ I'm with you. The trial will produce the evidence needed to sentence Zimmerman appropriately, according to his crime, and according to the law that is presently set, for such crimes.

Personally, I do not think this is about race. It's about an over zealous, trigger happy individual (Zimmerman), who should have been minding his own business, while allowing the police to do their business. Zimmerman did his job by calling the police, but acted in an aggressive manner, by continuing to follow the teen, even after being told by police "we don't need you to do that". This ridiculous law in Florida no doubt allows such ill conceived behavior to go unpunished. It's a law that is left up to interpretation. I'm sure it will be revised, as it should be.

By what I've recently seen, I do believe that Zimmerman is genuinely sorry for his actions. The sad part is that the teen is dead (which could have been easily avoided) because Zimmerman made the decision to get out of his vehicle and confront the teen. Zimmerman seemed to be intent on confronting Trayvon, but did not identify himself as a neighborhood watch commander, which may have totally changed the outcome. I really do not think Zimmermans intent was to actually to harm young Trayvon. But sadly, it only takes ONE ILL CONCEIVED decision to totally screw up someones life. Now TWO families will never be the same.

I feel for both families, and I do hope that Zimmerman is not made an 'example' of, simply due to public outcry, but rather on the actual merrits of the evidence produced, as well as what the law allows. Public outcry should be heard in connection to this OUTRAGOUS law of STAND YOUR GROUND. This law needs to be CHANGED. To me this law is totally unacceptable.

This case has everything to do with Florida state law, does it not? Just because public opinion is generally interested in the racial aspect of the case, doesn't mean the trial isn't about the laws regarding self-defense in Florida... It wouldn't even be a case if the laws were in disregard.

That's not correct 'dude...???', this is a story on race first, the law second. If the defendant were black, it would not be a national story! That's a fact! There have been several other shootings in Florida since this story broke, but because the 'defendant' was black in each of these cases, not a word of outrage... even though the victims were black as well. Who will speak up for those black kids? Not Sharpton or Jackson... no, this is a story about race!

You really think that we're ever going to determine that Zimmerman shot Martins because he was black? The racial issue is legally irrelevant. No one is going to take "race" to court unless it's the people whining outside the courthouse that things didn't go their way. I'm sure this case is way different, with race aside, from any of the other shootings you mentioned. Were any of these defendents Neighborhood watch members that stalked their victims to a private place and shot them.
... it's only race first because of public outcry, not the legallity of the issue or trial.

I hope the best for you Zimmerman,

Has anyone seen enough evidence to convict Zimmerman? I haven't, but my guess is that Zimmerman will be convicted of something, just to try to pacify the poverty pimps, Al and Jesse. That is a futile effort, as that is the only means for the pimps to make a living. There will be protest marches until the election in November, regardless of what happens in the case. It isn't about Trayvon, it is only about the election, Al and Jesse, don't give a d--- about Trayvon, except for a vehicle to further their financial future.

This didn't make national headlines because a non-black man shot a black man. It was because one person shot another, admitted he did it, claiming self defence and was let go with very little investigation, because of a law that many of us have a hard time understanding. Don't get me wrong, if someone is trying to break into your home, I 100% believe you have every right do use whatever force necessary to stop that person. Where it gets gray for me is that someone out driving around can spot someone who "looks suspicious" and determine that person is up to no good, confront that person and if he "feels threatened", becomes judge and jury and shoots that person. No "guilty until proven innocent" Just vigilante justice. There is just too much room for mistakes and lives needlessly lost with such a vague law.

What if my teenager gets home to find that he has lost his keys, and no one else is home. He tries to get in through a window, just as someone is driving by. That person, believing my teenager is trying to break in, gets out of his car to confront him. When my child turns around, he has something in his hand that he was using to try to unhook the screen. The person mistakes it for a gun and shoots my child. That distinct possibility really scares me. I'd rather the passer-by just called the police and if a burglar got in, hopefully he'd be caught by the police the person called, but if not, at least an innocent person wouldn't be dead. This is just one possible scenario of so many. Our justice system provides for a jury of peers, and innocent until proven guilty. It was set up this way because it is much preferable that a guilty person goes free than an innocent person is incarcerated. This law skips the incarcerating an innocent person and allows for killing that person, with no recourse and very little proof that he was actually threatened.

Sally how do you know what level of investigation was done? Oh you mean you just believe that, because you have no clue?

james-actually, YOU have no clue. zimmerman followed, i.e. stalked, the boy against the dispatcher's request that he not continue to follow the boy. That makes zimmerman the instigator/aggressor. That also makes zimmerman a vigilante with an attitude of empowerment due to the gun he was carrying.

The scenario that Sally Lu put forth is a very real possibility.

Regarding the investigation-the outrageous conclusion that the "stand your ground" law applied here is what started the outcry. Add to that the fact that the FBI came in to investigate shows the level of investigation that was carried out. Add to THAT the fact that zimmerman was declared innocent immediately after the murder shows the level of investigation. It's very simple to those with understanding.

Sally Lu

.....That person, believing my teenager is trying to break in, gets out of his car to confront him. When my child turns around, he has something in his hand that he was using to try to unhook the screen. The person mistakes it for a gun and shoots my child. That distinct possibility really scares me. I'd rather the passer-by just called the police and if a burglar got in, hopefully he'd be caught by the police the person called, but if not, at least an innocent person wouldn't be dead. This is just one possible scenario....

Here is yet another likely scenario:

The person calls the police and when officers arrive -

my child turns around, he has something in his hand that he was using to try to unhook the screen. The POLICE mistakes it for a gun and shoots my child.

There are no simple answers to any of this. I wish I had the answers and I think that most of society does. Until we reduce crime people will continue to protect themselves and mistakes will happen.

To many single parent families and lack of responsibility has led to a very criminal society.

James, maybe she read the articles where the preosecuter initially declined arresting Zimmerman with no pollice investigation. You appear to be the one that is clueless.

Silly lou.....

Yes, we know he was heading towards where Trayvon was at. If you listen to the tape, he stated he ran. So, how do you know he kept following him? Especially when he said he ran!

This is unfortunately turning into a circus because of networks like this. I hope you are in no way shape or form trying to defend MSNBC's handling of this? Now if you believe this is about the gun law, then why did democrats overwhelmingly support this law? You know the representative who stated Trayvon was hunted down like a rabid dog and was racially profilled, killed in the street......I forgot that crazy ladies name, but she voted for the Stand your ground law.

Below is a nice video in Arizona where a black man shot someone and claiming stand your ground. The person shot and kiled never even touched the shooter. Do you think Jesse and Sharpton are heading that way? I HIGHLY doubt that very much. I agree no one knows what happened, but based on watching the bond hearing this morning I didnt see anything concrete to make a murder 2nd degree stick. (did you?)

http: // www. youtube. com/ watch?v=VqeXWPNOHvY

From the beginning, it looked like there were two scared guys out there that night. Martin could be understandably be frightened to be followed by an unidentified stranger on a dark, rainy night. Had he been armed, he might well have shot and killed Zimmerman, claiming "self defense". Zimmerman claims to have been following Martin, to the point that he lost him. And, was later surprized by Martin, and attacked, and used his gun fo "self defense".

There you have Florida's "stand your ground" law, in its bare bones form. Someone is allowed to shoot and kill you (somehow it doesn't sound the same, when its you getting shot and killed, as when you are the killer, does it? You are not that lone sheriff, on the dusty main street at high noon, protecting yourself. You are the dead guy laying there, with people walking around talking about how you seemed to be threatening that guy. Well, were you actually threatening him? Doesn't matter!! He thought you wer. Now, you're dead. Does that make you feel safer?) for no other reason than that you scare them. You don't actually have to be threatening them. They just have to be afraid that you are.

In the Martin/Zimmerman case, both may have been afraid. One had a gun, one didn't. Martin had only his fists to defend himslf. What a fool! He took his fists to a gun fight!! How many young black guys are going hear about this, and draw logical conclusions? They would normally not arm themselves, but after Martin/Zimmerman its clear, if you have to defend yourself, its way better to do it with a gun. The law will back you up. If you are beating a guy with your fists, because that's all you have to defend yourself with, you can be shot and killed, and called the criminal for your actions. But, if you shoot first, the law will protect you.

Ed, did you see the blood on Zimmerman's head courtesy of ABC News? Obviously you didn't.

I do not have to see blood on his head or tape on his nose. The police report states he was bleeding from the nose and from the back of his head wich substantuated his claim. There was an investigation and the evidence pointed to him telling the truth. If they can do this to him they can do this to you.

Free Zimmerman

Not many have noticed or if they have, then they ignore that on Zimmermans 911 call, his words already state, he had something premeditated.
It is a fact that after he is told not to follow Martin, later he is also asked if he will meet with police by some mail boxes (cause police do have to take care of the situation) and Zimmerman says yes at first, BUT he changes his mind then says for police to call his cell after they have arrived, and he (Zimmerman) will tell the police where he will be.

After I heard the recording, I have the reason to believe that Zimmerman was the one who continued to follow Martin, and after he reached him, then Martins gf says what happened next, then we can hear from the 911 the teacher reported that she heard ppl talking outside, then it turned into a wrestling match, then yelling, and a shot.

. Now i can make my own conclusions about this cause those words on the 911 call are facts that tell more than what we are being told by Zimmerman himself, so his claim of self defense wouldn't make much sense if he was the one who most likely stalked Martin questioned him with the wrong tone of voice, which provoking an argument then a fight then murder or "self defense"

as far as we know, neighborhood watch is to report suspects and suspicious activity to police, so Zimmerman calling police was the right thing to do, Zimmerman following Martin after being told not to, was the mistake he made, now I would like to know his explanation of the motive he will claim to have for following Martin, cause beased on the 911 call, his motive was that he was an up to no good druged person, what made Zimmerman say Martin was up to no good? did Zimmerman know Martin? how does Zimmerman make those statements of Martin? what lead Zimmerman to believe that Martin was on drugs? DON'T YOU THINK IT WAS BECAUSE OF WHO MARTIN WAS...BLACK?

the sad thing now is that we don't have Martin here to defend himself, and did he have to die cause supposedly he was attacking Zimmerman...well it depends why Martin attacked Zimmerman, what triggered Martin to attack Zimmerman if that even happened, so far the "facts" that we will have will be Zimmermans, and Zimmerman will say anything to get out of a murder case. That is if people will ignore that Zimmerman had premeditated something and we know it when we hear him tell police to call his cell when they get there and he will tell police where he will be

From your mouth to God's ear.

The problem is... with so much media circus as it was at national level, where do you think that he can get an impartial jury?

Both cases come down to reasonable doubt. I agree that Casey Anthony was probably guilty, but the prosecution could not tell you how Caylee died. Without that, how can you say "murder"? You simply can't, which is why she got off. I think the jury got it right, legally speaking.

In this case, it will be even harder to prove based on what has been released since no one saw it go down. How can you say it was not self-defense?

It is also interesting that with these statistics, being close to a 50/50 split, it is important to note that the defense only needs one doubter in 12 jurors to at least hang the jury. That is going to be very hard to overcome unless the prosecution has some kind of smoking gun witness or video.

Not guilty.

@justiceforall: sure a jury of Amish people would not have television or newspapers involving the case

How would a fair trial even be possible after the President personally predjudiced the case on national TV? The defense attorney has an easy job this time.

In the Casey Anothony case the prosecution was not able to prove 1. how the girl died, 2. who was responsible.

Furthermore, when the prosecution brought in the ridiculous air samples from the car they lost a lot of credibility.

There was no phone call to 9-1-1, or phone call to a girlfriend, or claiming defense under a law that doesn't apply, like in the zimmerman case.

To get an acquittal, Zimmerman won't need an impartial jury. Based on this article, he's already in the Free Zone and Trayvon is just another kid who got what he deserved.

we are talking about florida here. the 4 smart people that live there are probably busy and wont be able to be jurors.

In regard to the impartial jury question: No where in Florida. Let's try Boseman, Montana.

The poor guy has already been tried and convicted by the media, where could he possible go to get a fair and impartial jury?

The poor guy has already been tried and convicted

So has Trayvon. The only difference is that Trayvon cannot say anything in his own defense. Your response is pathetic.

Garth Vader, we all understand Trayvon has also been "convicted" in the eyes of many but that doesn't negate that everyone is entitled to a fair trial.

I'd also hazard a guess that even if GZ is acquitted in a criminal trial, he'd lose big in a civil one. Very similar to OJ.

Garth Vader, Sam is asking for a fair trial... it seems you have already convicted the defendant before a trial. I submit your response is pathetic!

Zimmeran is screwed either way, and three ways to Sunday. If he is acquitted in the criminal trial, he will be charged with a civil rights violation by the federal government. Our panderer in chief can not let this go without losing votes. He will also be sued as someone has already pointed out in wrongful death suit.

And before you criticize me of bringing politics into this, Obama has already done it. He opened the door. He should have stayed out of it.

Zimmerman face it, you're screwed no matter what.

Jury selection is going to take 5 years.

To those noting he will be sued in a civil action. THAT will need to wait for the completion of the trial. If in fact he is acquitted and the reason is the SYG law, he CAN'T be sued. The SYG law exempts people from civil action.

Dan then riddle me this? Why would a Republican governor appoint a republican district attorney (she who has all the facts) charge him with the highest charge she could levy against him? Why not try him for manslaughter or a lesser crime? She, unlike any of us, has all of the facts. Do you think she is swayed by pressure. This is a red state why would they care during an election year what the bleeding heart liberal care? This is about justice more than anything else. You like everyone else is basing you facts of tidbits of information where she has the entire case file in the front of her. Think on that and see if your argument holds water.

None of this would have happened if zimmerman hadn't followed/stalked Trayvon against the dispatcher's request. zimmerman was the instigator/aggressor. If Trayvon DID turn around and attack what he perceived as a threat, and we know that per Trayvon's call to his girlfriend, Trayvon was well within his rights to defend himself. All I can say is, too bad Trayvon didn't have a gun to defend himself. The the playing field might have been leveled.

The "stand your ground" law doesn't apply to vigilantes stalking people in the dark far from the vigilante's (zimmerman's) apartment/home/abode.

You are actually wrong in your reasoning, the stand your ground law still applies, following or not never enters into the law.

G-man.... The prosecutor used tactics to get a conviction, which is what a prosecutor wants. They really don't care, contrary to what people believe, in the truth. Be that as it may, a prosecutor wants a conviction........ period.

A possible motive for the 2nd Degree charge is if she felt she would have trouble getting a conviction on a manslaughter charge, she would go high hoping that if the jury had "issues" they might convict on a lesser charge as a compromise. It all comes down to what the Judge instructs the jury to consider. If he/she permits the jury to consider a lesser charge, it might come out as a "win" for the prosecution even though 2nd Degree will be problematic. At least with the information available to the public, which is spurious at best.

The coward is guilty.

The coward is guilty.

Do you have a crystal ball? The trial hasn't even begun yet.

Innocent until proven guilty.

Coming from a banker, that comment is worthless.

Where's YOUR crystal ball banker?

Z admitted to chasing Martin down. Z had a gun Martin did not. Who was defending himself against whom?

Get lost Garth

Zimmerman didnt say he was chasing anybody, he was keeping an eye on what he considered to be a suspicious person, and from seeing recent pictures of Martin, Zimmerman was right, the kid looks like a thug.

Why did you come here then? Does that make you a worthless journalism reader? Do you go to gay clubs only to bash gays? Do you go to Klan rallies only to say you are not racist? Do you attend AAA to pick on recovering addicts? In a nutshell do you go somewhere just to start @!$%# and leave?

Esprit De Corps

Where does one go to find unbiased reporting? You tell me and I will check it out but until then I have to try to decipher the truth through their slanted hack jobs.

Bankers are such trustworthy sources of propaganda.

Ummmmm ok what does that supposed to mean?

NO BAMA 12 if you know this then why come to the sight that totally opposes your views to rail? Why not stick to the news sites that cater to your needs and be happy with it? If you only come here to complain about the news coverage and how it is written (not what is written) why come? I come to hear the arguments from both sides, I enjoy that. If you are open and honest something someone says that opposes you will strike a chord and make you think and recalculate. If you are not and you only come to argue the use of a pic, how the article is written or the headline why bother? You are wasting your time because that gets us nowhere as far as a discussion goes. I like to argue the merit of the content not frivolous side issues.

If you noticed any of my other posts you would understand that this is not my only point of veiw regarding this case. However, how can you NOT acknowledge the medias handling of these events ?? Such biased reporting and nearly constant exposure has fed this new story into the bloated monster it is and in my opinion, has become part of the story itself. The media treatment of this case IS IN FACT PART OF THIS DISCUSSION ROOM. Just Incase you havent noticed all the other posts here regarding just that.

Remember Sambos? They had to close.

I miss "Sambos", my mum and I used to take coffee and breakfast at 2 - 3 in the morning once a week. I still have a couple of their "wooden nickels" somewhere that guarantee a nickel cup of coffee. Their coffee was great! Stupid NAACP!

As for the issue in this article, thought it was one of the better efforts put forth by MSNBC. I still, as I have from the very beginning, respect the laws and Constitution of the United States and will consider Zimmerman innocent until proven guilty by a court of law.

crack-er-bar-rel

[krak-er-bar-uhl]
adjective
of or suggesting the simple rustic informality and directness thought to be characteristic of life in and around a country store: homespun, cracker-barrel philosophy.

Sorry, Tommy. Not what you thought. I get what you were trying to do, though.

Vegas_Tommy, that is actually a good point. The difference is us "crackers" arent looking for a reason to cry racism and make a big deal out of nothing. I remember Sambos too. It was a good coffee shop. The NAACP made a big stink but Sambos wasnt even referencing black. Sambo was an East Indian reference. Remember the little boy wearing the turbin! Just an excuse and nothing more.

That will never happen because ,Do I really need to explaim why ?

Hey Vegas Tommy.......Remember son, it's not what you are called, it's what you answer to.......Just saying.

Jesse and company got this thing blown way out of proportion. I hope he has discredited himself in the eyes of many of his followers.

This is not a Jesse, an Al or really a race thing. It is more of "Do the right thing" type thing. Let the courts decide his innocence or guilt. Not the keystone cops or the DA who is friends with his dad. Let a jury of his peers say there is nothing to this and world would be a better place. Let the prosecution prove his guilt or the defense prove his innocence. I don't think it would have escalated to this had everything been done right in the beginning. The a many faults on both sides of this thing and it should not have had to play out in the media. This is 2012 and we should be past this.

Esprit De Corps.

@G-man

It is up to the prosecutor to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman is guilty. Zimmerman is innocent UNTIL proven guilty, not the other way around.

@ Tea I couldn't agree with you more. If i were his lawyer i would seriously not put him on the stand and make the DA prove their case beyond a reasonable doubt. The burden of proof falls on them and right now from what little I know it is going to be hard. It is another O.J. and Casey Anthony waiting to happen if you ask me.

Really? You think if a hispanic shot a white guy, he would not have been arrested immediately?

Where do you live, in Mexico?

If there were no physically different characteristics to distinguish us, we would find other ways to hate each other.

tex if Martin had been white, he wouldn't have been murdered in the first place.

IM thinking that if the roles were reversed, verbatum, this would not be a story, it would not have garnered the media attention that it has. It wouldn't have brought out Jackson or Sharpton, it wouldn't have rated a comment from our pnaderer in chief. And I am sure, the shooter wouldn't have been convicted in the public forum.

Racism and bigotry runs both ways.

no it doesn't. It only runs one nowadays? Against all white people.

You just contradicted yourself, sport. You know no more details than I or your mother do, yet you already believe he stalked the man, which has more sinister implications that if he simply followed him.

Case of both these guys thinking the other was up to no good. Trayvon I'm sure thought Zimmerman was stalking him. Which one of us wouldn't think that? It's also why I feel that Trayvon got in his face about it and roughed him up.

Unfortunately, it is a one sided story. Any child can make up a reason that they did something bad. It's not rocket science.

Zimmerman knew or at least thought the police were coming. Either way in his mind the cops were coming. Why would he purposely kill Martin?

friggin c00ns!

Yeah, you're not biased...much.

GV..... even the authorities investigating have said that that purported 'statement' was not made.

You're buying into what someone thinks they heard.

You whine about racial hatred while calling a kid a thug for no reason apart from his race. Z admitted to being suspicious of Martin because of his race and chased him with a gun. If Trayvon did attack Z, it was because HE was the one defending himself, not Z.

If he bashed in his skull i didn't see any injuries on the back of his head. You are saying we are crazy to listen to the news outlet yet this is where you got your information. How is a kid walking in the rain with a hood on a thug oh that's right he is Black all of us are thugs. I am sure you have the perfect kids who do not disagree with you, do nothing wrong in school, and are such good boy or girl scouts. the rest of us in the real world who have been kids and have kids know different. we understand that we rebel because we think we know it all and times are different than our parents time.

If he bashed in his skull i didn't see any injuries on the back of his head.

Maybe you should look in to that, there are several pictures available.

Newest evidence clearly now shows the "f**cking coons" is "f**cking punks"

Know anyone that is going to be using racial slurs while on the phone with the cops? Yourself I'm sure, but anyone else?

G-Man, I commend you on most of your posts, but there are pictures now circulating on Zimmermans head injuries.There is a post above with a link- I can't verify if they are Zimmerman or not but you can check it out if you like.

post # 1.8 above.

The world is watching this case obviously. Do you really think that the jury may not be comprised of enough African Americans through disqualification? Such an obvious impropriety would never be allowed in such a high profile case. He will be judged be a jury of his peers and African Americans will be represented in that jury.

You ask about righteous indignation, then you spout off some self-righteous BS. You probably believe in mythical beings in the sky, too. Tell me, oh wise one, isn't there a saying that goes something like, "there but for the grace of god go I"? You insult your grace with willful ignorance. As such, that grace is undeserved.

Minater, first there is moral outrage about the texas shooting. But to compare the two cases is ignorant. The cops acted promptly and made an arrest within 6 hours instead of letting the shooter go until there was a national outcry. The Zimmerman case is as much about police not doing their job as it is about racial discrimination.

The first DA didnt think he had enough evidence to charge Z, and he was probably right.

I'm also sure he'll get 2nd.

It was a tactic by the prosecutor. Knowing it would be hard to prove murder of any sort going in, go high and settle low. If you're unsure of getting a manslaughter conviction, go for the higher charge hoping that the jury will 'compromise' on the lesser charge of manslaughter if given the option by the judge.

Every move and every word both the prosecution and defense make will be tactically weighed for maximum impact and potential affect on a future outcome.

I agree. I think the best they can hope for is a manslaughter conviction. Then again, I don't have *all* of the evidence.

You don't have any of the evidence other then one man is dead and another man did it. If you say otherwise your full of sh*t. Nobody here on these boards has anything. Not a thing.

We intelligentsia can always tell the core of a person's being just by looking ta them, can't we?

I dont think that was what Mike was getting at. You must be a member of the new intelligentsia to decipher Mikes post so accurately.

Who cares what he looked like? I don't care if he was wearing gang colors and carrying stolen goods, GZ was wrong, wrong, wrong in following him in the first place. GZ should never have left his vehicle. The minute he did, he was in the wrong. Neighborhood Watch is not designed to be a mini-police force. It's designed to keep a few extra sets of eyes on the neighborhood and to REPORT anything that looks suspicious. If I was Trayvon and found myself being followed by a man with a gun and an attitude, I'd do whatever I was capable of in fending him off. It's just too bad he wasn't successful in beating some sense into his attacker.

I agree, so how are they going to get a 2nd degree murder conviction? Just going for the higher charge I guess but l see him convicted of the lesser, manslaughter.

Knobson..... debatable. If Z did in fact turn around and proceed back to his car, as some have surmised and have claimed is apparent if one listens to the 911 tape indicating the "binging" from the vehicles open door was getting louder, any "threat" to TM was negated. If TM at that point came up behind and/or struck Z, it's a new game as the rules changed if and/or when Z turned his back which effectively eliminated the threat to TM.

Good point but the fact that Z got out of his car, with a loaded handgun, points to him initiating whatever confrontation ensued.

If he hadn't gotten out of his car with a handgun, the homocide would likely not have happened.

It is debateable, I'm waiting to see if he testifies in his own defense.

I still go back to my first statement:

...Mr. Zimmerman had a clear choice and opportunity to stay away, and just report the young man to the police....

What happened from this point, I can only hope the evidence illustrates, however, it looks like the Police really didn't collect any. No pictures of Mr. Zimmerman's injuries, no clothing and blood evidence collected, etc. It's clear to me, the Police could have ended all discussion about the incident if they had simply done their job correctly.

If there was evidence that could help Mr. Zimmerman, it may be gone, because it was never collected.

Instead, we're left with hearsay, grainy videos, wild media speculation, and discussions on website forums.

:)

I don't believe the police have released ANY photos relative to this case for or against Martin OR Zimmerman.

However, and again I will note this:

If Zimmerman did in fact turn around and proceed to his vehicle, any threat, real or imagined, to Martin was negated. Once Zimmerman turned his back (assuming he did)to Martin, Zimmerman was effectively guiltless in any confrontation, especially if Martin then approached Zimmerman from the rear. Then Martin became the aggressor and Zimmerman the victim.

Sorry if this offends people, but that's the way the law works. Once the "threat" is eliminated, any action against the "previous threat" becomes the threatening behavior.

What doctored tape? What has Fox News been making up now? Ask yourself was Trayvon killed by the car, or was he killed 700 feet from his condo which was closer to his house than where he was and farther away from Zimmermans car than he was during the 911 call by Zimmerman. So now Trayvon dragged him there. The tape said he was following him. And Trayvon was running away which probably meant he was walking fast. Will he say he was making that up on the 911 call to? REmember they always get away and today I am not going to let them. And what cracks me up today was Zimmerman said he was sorry. Sorry to defend himself. Sorry because he thought Trayvon was older, about his age, and had a gun. He didn't know he was that he was that young? So he is sorry because he didn't shoot an older guy with a gun. What? They have tried to outsmart the court but may have outsmarted themselves. I don't care if the man was white and 90 and had a cane that he thought was a shotgun. You are not sorry unless you know you did something wrong and you don't admit you profiled incorrectly. He just helped the prosecution. I think there will be a plea deal anyway orchestrated by his stick his nose in where it doesn't belong judge father. And I don't think that Zimmerman himself likes it. Fires his lawyers, starts his own website and speaks when he should keep his mouth shut. That doesn't add up for good. And what did the judge think when his son was arrested prior. That the cops just made it up? If it looks like a duck and sounds like a duck it is a duck. No matter who you squirm and try to influence the media.