Here are the results of our House Immigration Zimmerman Verdict Poll. Politics Polls are not scientific, because those who respond are not balances according to demographic categories, and therefore, we do not demographically reflect the US population. Nevertheless, our polls are often accurate.
And here are your comments:
Posted by Phil P July 24, 2013 at 7:34 pm.
The defense put Trayvon on trial from the beginning and the prosecution never countered or presented Trayvon as a typical 17 yr old black kid nor alternative scenarios of the shooting that the jury could consider as Manslaughter.
Posted by Patty July 20, 2013 at 5:36 am.
It was a bit of everything. I knew it wouldn’t happen but I wished with all my heart that Zimmerman would have taken the stand. The jurors would have seen his hatred on display then.
Posted by Barbara K in reply to Patty July 21, 2013 at 2:08 pm.
Am I the only one who noticed how they wouldn’t let Zimmerman speak so the the jury could not hear his higher pitched voice?
Posted by Patty in reply to Barbara K July 22, 2013 at 4:10 am.
Barbara K, I had heard that mentioned on some news show at one time during speculation of the trial. I think it was before they even picked the jurors. One of their "expert lawyers" said something to the effect that they shouldn’t let him testify because of his high pitched voice. I thought that was the last of their worries.
Posted by Rixar13 July 19, 2013 at 3:49 pm.
AG Eric Holder said it best. The stand your ground law was for a problem that did not exist…
Posted by John Dasef July 17, 2013 at 10:12 am.
Instructions to the jury were heavily slanted in Zimmerman’s favor.
Posted by Fred Lemon July 17, 2013 at 6:05 am.
I also think it was a bit of all the things mentioned except nothing. I just ask what made it Zimmerman’s ground to stand on rather than Martin’s?
Posted by Angelica in reply to Fred Lemon
That was my question, too. Why did the prosecution ignore that? They should have raised hell and they didn’t.
Posted by Archie July 16, 2013 at 9:09 pm.
So when Mr Zimmerman moseys on down the street with shopping bag,is followed in the dark by someone who hollers"Hey you stop there!" You are of middle Eastern appearance, you are a terrorist! I,ll have to shoot you! Would the good folks of this jury say right ON!?
Posted by dave c July 16, 2013 at 12:54 pm.
a little bit of each?!
Posted by SoINeedAName in reply to dave c July 16, 2013 at 3:04 pm.
Most definitely, a little bit of each.
Posted by Angelica July 16, 2013 at 6:33 am.
I heard juror @37B on TV last night. The woman has an IQ about 4 points higher than a head of iceberg lettuce. She "liked what was in Zimmerman’s heart." I almost fell out of my chair. It was clear that she never saw the victim as human. I say she’s beyond ignorant because she thought the most compelling testimony OF THE WHOLE TRIAL was the doctor who talked about death screams in Nam.
Posted by Vanessa Dawne in reply to Angelica July 19, 2013 at 11:10 pm.
You’ve hit the nail on the head, Angelica! 37B was 1 of 6 making the decision & she was also part of the group who changed the minds of 2 or more of the 6 who were leaning towards ‘guilty’ — an ignorant bully. Is that really representative of a jury of Trayvon’s peers?
Was there any intelligence in that room?
Posted by Angelica in reply to Vanessa Dawne July 20, 2013 at 1:24 pm. From 70.127.233.x
After listening to her make outrageous claims that she "knew what was in Z’s heart," I can only conclude that she was part of the same dumber than dirt group that supports "Stand Your Ground" and all the racial inequality that goes with it.
Posted by Lynn Squance July 16, 2013 at 1:11 am.
I think it was no one thing. A jury made up of 5 white women and one Hispanic woman in my view is not racially balanced. For that matter, where is the token male? As I understand, the judged ruled that there could be no mention of race, yet in some of Zimmerman’s comments prior to the trial, racial profiling was done.
I hope the DOJ carries forth with an investigation and hate crime charges.
Posted by Angelica in reply to Lynn Squance July 20, 2013 at 1:31 pm.
Clearly, there was racial profiling. Those 40-something phone calls of his to the police prove it.
![clip_image004[1]](https://www.7thstep.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/clip_image0041.gif "clip_image004[1]"){kind=small}
![clip_image003[1]](https://www.7thstep.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/clip_image0031.gif "clip_image003[1]"){kind=small}
I voted for all of the top four choices. There was clearly bigotry on the jury. 37B proved that beyond a reasonable doubt. The prosecution was weak. They missed many opportunities to demonstrate premeditated malice. The defense was skillful. All those Republican donations bought great lawyers. The only choice I made, about which I have doubts is that the judge was biased. I thought that he should have instructed the jury that Martin had more right to stand his ground than Zimmerman, as he was the one being pursued. I figured the judge thought that stand your ground only applies to the white in a mixed race confrontation. On the other hand, since the Republicans are the Party of Death, it may be that stand your ground only applies to the armed survivor. I should have included another choice for Florida Law.
8 Responses to “Poll Results–8/1/2013”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Isn't there an Appeals procedure? (Recently here a protest was made when a guilty man was given a light sentence – it went to Appeals and was doubled). It all seems so wrong that Zimmerman should go free.
Pat, in the Bill og Rights, we can not be retried on the same charge once acquitted. I understand it was common practice for the powerful to have criminal charges brought against innocent individuals over and over again as a form of harassment.
He probably thinks he has a license to kill now. When he was stopped by a cop on Sunday for speeding he told him he had a gun and opened the glove compartment to show him. The cop let him go with a warning not to speed again and told him not to "play with his gun" after he realized who he was. It's probably a good thing the cop was white.
You know it, Patty. See Lynn's comment.
I sure hope that there is a civil trial as outlined in Greg Palast's open letter to Tracy Martin. Not a "revenge" suit, but a suit that will call into question 'stand your ground' laws and hopefully prevent another Trayvon Martin situation. For those that have not seen the letter, here's the link
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/17752-open-letter-to-trayvons-father-sue-zimmerman
I said it, before, and I say again, aman!
I was saddened by the outcome of this trial, and truthfully, did not watch all the testimony on TV. If I had been Trayvon Martin, I would have fought back, too. He was standing his ground. Zimmerman is a racist and a bully, can't believe he is still allowed to carry a gun. I voted for weak prosecurion because the little that I saw and read showed a very poor case presented by the state.
Actually, when the feds took his gun as evidense in the federal investigation, Ohio Baggers chipped in and bought him a new one.