Trayvon Martin

[madbrian]

I absolutely love the pictures of Jeb Bush singing the praises of the Stand Your Ground law as he signed it, particularly the vision of the NRA lobbyist standing over his shoulder as he signed the bill into law.

[Kalimba]

Florida certainly is one f*cked up state. Makes me think twice about wanting to go there to spend my hard earned money that's for sure.

[TheatreDiva90016]

Next thing you know, Atlantis cruise line will be docking there...

[YouWantitWhen????]

The PD has released the security video - with some additional camera angels.
Gash and Broken Nose...

[Mister Matt]

This is really getting to be overkill. And making a trial more difficult for the prosecution as the defense will be SCREAMING about the amount of media coverage and bias.

[SNAFU]

This is what happens when the police blotch proceedures and a suspect isn't arrainged. I have to say I am beginning to feel that Zimmerman is actually being aided by the police force.

[YouWantitWhen????]

Who says there is going to be a trial?

All of this outrage was to at least get someone objective to look at the facts and evidence surrounding the incident. The outrage is that he has not been charged and with what appears to be a less than stellar investigation.

If there is a trial, then all of the facts should and must come out. If they show that Zimmerman was seriously threatened with death or great bodily harm, then I will be the first line saying that Zimmerman should not be convicted of a crime.

[TheatreDiva90016]

But, we all know that is not going to happen.

So, let's continue...

[SNAFU]

Wish my Daddy were a judge!

[thetinymagic2]

http://newyork.grubstreet.com/2012/03/trayvon-martin-candy-controversy-skittles-arizona-iced-tea.html

[PalJoey]

Aw c'mon. Leave Skittles out of it.

[madbrian]

"The outrage is that he has not been charged and with what appears to be a less than stellar investigation."

For me, the outrage is the difference between how this case is being handled and how we all know a case would be handled if a black man chased and shot down an unarmed white teen.

[TheatreDiva90016]

The people complaining that money is being made should STFU and donate something to their cause of choice.

[strummergirl]

The fact his parents trademarked his name is not unusual in these high-profile cases. If it was not the parents and some Joe Schmo who trademarked Trayvon's name, there would been a lot of outrage actually deserved.

[SNAFU]

Right Strummer, specially if there is a charity or college fund being set up in his name.
It would be the very first thing their lawyers would tell them if the had suggested one.
Also keeps scam artists from starting ones up on their own.

[broadwaydevil]

Two voice analysis experts who conducted independent studies were hired by the Orlando Sentinel to analyze the calls for help in the 911 call. This is important, neither were hired by the Martin family. Both concluded that the voice screaming for help was NOT Zimmermann. However, neither can conclude if it was Martin since they don't have a sample of his voice. These conclusions could prove vital to bringing this to trial (hopefully) and also as evidence.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/os-trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-911-20120331,0,250481.story

[Pauly3]

Not looking to start a crap storm here by reviving this thread, but at the risk of doing just that I am genuinely interested in thoughts from those who have both a legal background and became very familiar with the evidence in this case. I have read Lisa Bloom's book, "Suspicion Nation...", and I find it severely lacking in discussion of actual evidence and witness testimony.

I am very interested in what the entirety of the evidence shows, and I believe most people, including Lisa Bloom, are not. Most people, on both sides, look at only select few pieces of evidence and then refuse to listen to other pieces of real evidence. Most discussions turn into horrific name calling and completely illogical storytelling. I'm referring mostly to comments on videos or news stories.

One thing I find both fascinating and dumbfounding is there has been next to zero discussion looking at the time stamps plotted along what I believe to be a critical timeline. Examining these plot points - and what could have occurred between them answers questions and brings up new questions. Yet few people appear to be interested. In her book, Lisa Bloom offers nothing in this regard.

I have developed my own opinion as to what the most likely story was, but I don't insist it is the only likely story. I can't come up with a 2nd one though. If it's not apparent already, I think the not guilty verdict was absolutely the correct verdict. I came to that opinion long after the trial ended - and only after having viewed the entire trial on video and then subsequently sought to better understand the evidence presented during the trial.

I contend I know the evidence, however I don't know all the legal ramifications. Anyone also know the evidence but also knows the law - and is also still interested in this case?