Go solve a beheading, Columbo.

A 3rd class citizen? Well, was it a legal gun. And the bullet had to come down somewhere and could have hurt someone.

First, I wonder if Zimmerman ever called in any non-blacks as he supposely talked to the cops alot, which would show if he was biased. And in this case, he said the guy looked supicious and was looking into houses.

I will wait for you to point out where this becomes legal, as that is crazy stupid. Unless it has already been put on the books in Florida?

The gun was in the holster, so what was Martin defending himself from? Questions & Words.

Why doesn't Stand Your Ground apply there? Why doesn't she have a right to defend herself from an abusive husband? It's RACISM. Pure and simple. If you don't see this then you are racist scum yourself.

A legal gun that was holster. Not an issue. A racial slur. Words Big Deal. Possible, but not enough to show beyong a reasonable doubt here. How black people get treated. Like the ones violently rioting after after the verdict. Do any other groups riot as much as blacks?

hahaha, so I am a racist scum. Please post the article so I can comment better, with facts.

In ending, I agree with the jury lady who spoke, they both could have walked away. And since all we know if Zimmerman followed him and then Zimmerman shot him while they were fighting, they is not enough to prove reasonable doubt of anything. As who knows what Martin and Zimmerman did, right prior to the fight. That is the important question, that unfortunately can't be answered, beyond a reasonable doubt.

The jury was made up of women from their 30s to 50s, and one was Hispanic. They didn't understand that it was racial profiling, because the judge ruled that the state had no evidence to claim it was racial profiling and had to limit their charge to profiling. The rest is just your uninformed opinion based on a flawed understanding of the facts of the case.

She went outside the home to get her gun in her car and came back into the house. She fired the shot into a room where her children were staying. You can't leave a situation, get your gun, and come back. Removing yourself from the situation kind of defeats the whole "stand your ground". She also supposedly was a bad shot according to the prosecution, and only fired a warning shot, because she missed. It is a lousy case (more complex than the media is willing to report) charged by the same woman, Angela Corey, that charged the Zimmerman case. Angela Corey is the problem that no one is talking about as they scream racism and try to prove their diversity bona fides.

Could you be so kind as to provide proof of this racial slur, because it was never presented as evidence in the trial.

As well, he called in numerous calls on a variety of individuals. Of the five calls the state cherry picked to make him look like a profiler, two were in relation to the individual Olivia Beltran identified as one of her home invaders. The second call led to a fingerprint that identified an individual that OB identified as the intruder. He got sentenced to five years for that crime and another burglary.

Was he thrown out as a safety threat for this case or a previous case? Can your provide a link?

No no no no..

Following a person is not a crime if Martin attacked Zimmerman and beat him quite badly then Martin made a big mistake as well.

Its like I am Drunk and Drive and then I get hit by a person who runs a red. Should I as the Drunk Driver be responsible for anything that could transpire for driving drunk? No, I made a poor choice and bad choice like Zimmerman but does not mean I am responsible for everything that happens after that.

You need to realize what Zimmerman did was manslaughter and not murder.

That so called rock hard evidence you say exists was pretty much ripped to shreds by the defense in the case.

The mistake in this sad charade is the media and the black community wants to Lynch Zimmerman and went for Murder and got burned by the rule of law.

The thing everyone loves to ignore: Martin was 15 seconds from his home after he 'lost' Zimmerman. He was never afraid of Zimmerman, he made a conscious choice not to remove himself from the situation and go home, to the contrary, he opted to escalate the situation.

Zimmerman supporters always come off in the wrong light, it's hard not to when defending a guy responsible for the needless death of another person. Yet Martin supporters ignore fact, and refuse to acknowledge or partake in basic reason.

I hate guns. I'm not a fan of broad self defense laws. I think the vigilantism displayed by Zimmerman is something to be ashamed of, not proud of. I could go on, but that's not the point. The point is that the facts of this case did not warrant Murder 2, Murder 3, or Manslaughter. Did Zimmerman help create this situation? Yes, but that doesn't make him guilty.

In addition, Zimmerman may have stereotyped Martin, but I don't believe the man to be racist. Martin supporters will have their day soon enough, just wait for Martin's family to file the civil suit. They'll win every penny Zimmerman has to his name, no one wins here, two lives were destroyed, just in very different ways.

I have a question was Zimmerman's lawyers founded by other people or groups because he got some great lawyers.

There is a good chance there will be no civil case. GZ has a SYG hearing coming up where he will invoke SYG. If granted he is immune from any civil case due to an acquittal in the criminal case. I don't know where the "experts" on TV get the idea there is definitely going to be a civil case.

Mark Najame the analyst on CNN was asked originally, but he turned the offer down. Najame had just had three difficult case over the previous 18 mos. He gave GZ a list of three lawyers and Mark O'Mara was on the list. O'Mara recruited Don West or Don West volunteered, I am not sure but he was not on the list Najame provided.

What is a SYG hearing? Is this new, as OJ got acquitted in criminal trial and then lost the civil case.

SYG Stand Your Ground

http://ideas.time.com/2013/07/16/a-civi ... -backfire/

Stand Your Ground. GZ did not invoke it in the criminal trial. California where OJ was charged does not have a SYG law.

Forgive me if I ask dumb questions but I didnt follow the case that much.

Am I right that the only "witness" was the operator on the phone? No one actually saw Martin attacking Zimmerman and Zimmerman opening fire?

OK, so do you think it is clear cut that, the SYG defense will be approved?

Most experts I've heard believe there's no chance of a civil trial. My reading of the law either differs from them greatly, or is incorrect. When Zimmerman elects to argue pretrial under "Stand Your Ground," it will be vastly different from the trial we just witnessed. The most important difference is that ZIMMERMAN will have the burden of proof, and the same lack of evidence which haunted prosecutors at trial may come back to haunt him.

He will be up against the legal term preponderance, which basically means he has to prove his story is more likely. Not that it was possible within a reasonable doubt, but that it was the more likely scenario.

He has a much higher hill to climb. He may still get there, but if the Martin's lawyer up with an A lister, I think they'll get to trial.

The operator was one ear witness, the other was Rachel Jeantel. John Good was the only eyewitness. He saw someone he thought was TM reigning down blows toward someone he thought was GZ. He thought GZ was the one yelling.

I think Eagle is right, but I have not seen a very many SYG requests denied after a criminal acquittal. Much depends on the judge assigned to the hearing, some are very easy to get immunity and others are much more skeptical. There might be pressure to have a civil case and the immunity might be denied on more political grounds (never admitted) than legal grounds, much like the criminal case was fast-tracked without a grand jury.