Jump to content

Trayvon Martin. Thread 2.


bugatti

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 318
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

40% Now Say Trayvon Martin Shot in Self-Defense; 24% Say It Was Murder - Rasmussen Reports™

 

As evidence continues to emerge from the shooting death of Florida teenager Trayvon Martin, Americans are becoming more convinced that his killer acted in self-defense and that the legal system will come to that conclusion.

 

A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 24% of American Adults still believe the man who shot Martin should be found guilty of murder. But that’s down from 33% in late March when the case first began to draw national headlines and 30% in early April.

 

Forty percent (40%) now think George Zimmerman, who has been charged with second degree murder in the Martin shooting, acted in self-defense. That’s up 25 points from 15% in March and up 16 points from 24% last month. Thirty-six percent (36%) remain undecided, compared to 55% two months ago. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Alexander poll in 1994 said that 78% thought OJ was guilty and 22% said he was framed. How did that turn out?

 

Polls are for interest only. The people being polled have no clue as to the letter of the law. They do not know the SYG wording vs the self-defense wording. Just gut reactions by them and probably the decrease in "murder" voters is due to the recent pictures of Zimmerman's bloody head. However, that picture tells us nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Alexander poll in 1994 said that 78% thought OJ was guilty and 22% said he was framed. How did that turn out?

 

Having read the evidence of OJ Simpson, that was a case of the LA PD losing the case more than OJ not being guilty. Read the book and see how much evidence was not admissible. The LA PD REAALLLY screwed that one up...and OJ's lawyers were unbelievable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one on here knows what happened or has access to all the inforation in this case. I find it funny that so many feel with such conviction on both sides of this that they are right, when they don't have the information needed to hold such convictions. I will say the same thing about this that I did about OJ. Let the courts do their jobs.

 

The media has gone out of their way to manipulate public opinion on this one as much as it is possible to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've wondered all along if the prosecutor reached too high. If she's good I think she can make a manslaughter charge stick. Murder 2 I wonder about. I base this just on what's been reported, the great unknown is what we haven't seen from her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've wondered all along if the prosecutor reached too high. If she's good I think she can make a manslaughter charge stick. Murder 2 I wonder about. I base this just on what's been reported, the great unknown is what we haven't seen from her.

 

Does Florida allow a jury to go with a lesser charge? Can the jury say no to Murder but settle on Manslaughter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since an investigation has been done and he's been charged I plan to ride it out until the trial. Then again, something could always draw me back into the fray, but I hardly kept up with recent discussion in the other thread. I am anxious to see the evidence presented if there is no plea deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Polls and propaganda. Based on the evidence that has been presented, the man murdered a boy. The confrontation was avoidable. Very tough statement to mitigate against. Girlfriend on phone, very tough to argue against. Dead boy at your hands, very tough to argue against. Little scrapes on his head, are we sure those aren't ruptured razor bumps or something? Pictures don't show a man being beaten an inch within his life. Show a guy who knows he is in deep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Polls and propaganda. Based on the evidence that has been presented, the man murdered a boy. The confrontation was avoidable. Very tough statement to mitigate against. Girlfriend on phone, very tough to argue against. Dead boy at your hands, very tough to argue against. Little scrapes on his head, are we sure those aren't ruptured razor bumps or something? Pictures don't show a man being beaten an inch within his life. Show a guy who knows he is in deep.
Every person knows a life was lost and avoidable... As are 99% of confrontations. I know you are wanting to convict Zimmerman now. And that is fine. But in your heart of hearts, do you really feel with everything people have been shown up until this point - and I realize a lot more is set to come out in the courtroom - that the prosecution has anything less than an uphill battle, or are you just going with wishful thinking that a heap of evidence that no person has been privy to will come out against Zimmerman?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "avoidable" part is interesting.

 

It came avoidable as soon as Zimmerman got out of his car. So that in and of itself doesn't seem like enough. I'm far from a legal expert but I don't think the fact he didn't listen AND the fact he confronted Trayvon is enough. The jury will need to have facts presented to them that show Trayvon was physically confronted before he did anything. I'm not sure if "feeling threatened" is enough as it's too vague. Some people feel threatened when they see a black kid walking down the sidewalk or a skinhead.

 

You add in the "beyond reasonable doubt" part and what we've heard so far doesn't seem to meet that threshold. As I said in the other thread I hope the prosecutor has more we haven't heard. You can't convict a guy for simply being a bad guy who hates blacks and is a police wannabe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "avoidable" part is interesting.

 

It came avoidable as soon as Zimmerman got out of his car. So that in and of itself doesn't seem like enough. I'm far from a legal expert but I don't think the fact he didn't listen AND the fact he confronted Trayvon is enough. The jury will need to have facts presented to them that show Trayvon was physically confronted before he did anything. I'm not sure if "feeling threatened" is enough as it's too vague. Some people feel threatened when they see a black kid walking down the sidewalk or a skinhead.

 

You add in the "beyond reasonable doubt" part and what we've heard so far doesn't seem to meet that threshold. As I said in the other thread I hope the prosecutor has more we haven't heard. You can't convict a guy for simply being a bad guy who hates blacks and is a police wannabe.

Has there been evidence released that Zimmerman actually confronted Martin? Aside from the girl friends statement? Could have been and I just missed it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using the site you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Policies.