Unfortunately, the cartoonist has won by generating this useless debate, by validating unsupportable conspiracy theories as to Zimmerman and his neighbors actions and motives, and by the very fact that someone has actually agreed to employ such a simpleton. In actuality, the cartoon itself portrays a horribly misguided, and an intentionally inflammatory and insulting premise and conclusion.
I wanted to make my views known and have said all I need to say in response to the editorial cartoon. Thank you all for your responses to my comments. I may quite likely post elsewhere, but not here again. The cartoon's author certainly does not deserve any more of my valuable time and effort..
"I'm not the least bit surprised by the jury's verdict, given the fact that the case pretty much boiled down to a matter of he said/he said. Oops. There was only one man left standing, wasn't there? So it was just a matter of... he said."
Actually, that is just simply wrong. There was in fact eyewitness testimony other than Zimmerman's. The physical evidence, Zimmerman's injuries, and expert testimony also corroborated his version of events over the State's fantasy scenario. That is really all the jury needed to render a not guilty verdict. Everything else is just prosecutorial smoke and mirrors
"It's a shame that you cannot see the probability that it was Trayvon who was standing his ground that night, because George Zimmerman was acting like a criminal himself from the get-go"
Oh, I actually did see the probability that Mr Martin was standing his ground, and that Mr. Zimmerman was the one engaging in criminal behavior, but I quickly realized it would be an agenda-driven fantasy to favor that probability over any other.
"The Jurist who has come forward has stated that they were ready to convict him of manslaughter, but the jury instructions and the letter of the law turned the tide"
So the actual Laws of the land, and our very justice system thwarted....errr...Justice! How convenient for her. It lets her off the hook...No overriding self-interest here....no way(eyeroll)
Even if what she said is true, that jurist did have another recourse. It's called "nullification". It's what some say the OJ jury engaged in. A perfectly acceptable tactic in my view. She and others could have voted guilty despite the law and the instructions, or at the very least made a hung jury so Zimmerman could have been retried. But they didn't.
"The above phrase has already come back to haunt so many. In essence, it clears the way for every criminal, every rapist, serial killer, child molester, kidnapper to follow their victims, then shoot and kill them if they resist"
So every criminal, every rapist and serial killer, child molester, and kidnapper is now free under the law to openly stalk and murder their victims? Really???
And you don't actually know if the "same" thing happened in a local neighborhood as happened in Zimmerman's neighborhood, you are just comparing them because it fits your particular narrative.
We can't throw away our natural right of self-defense just because the law is being partially exploited as written. Castle Doctrines and "stand your ground" are laws overwhelmingly favored by law abiding individual Americans who recognize they have a duty and an obligation to protect themselves and their loved ones, especially in light of the fact that police often cannot and legally will not take on that responsibility. Legislatures can go back and fix the loopholes, but once we willingly give up our rights in exchange for some perceived safety, we will not easily get them back, and to paraphrase Ben Franklin, nor would we deserve to.
I couldn't possibly hear everything the jury heard and neither could anyone else. But I suspect anyone who feels that a few inconsistencies uttered by a bruised and bloodied victim would have turned the tide in favor of the prosecution is living in a fantasy world. I do know that all the evidence presented was absolutely damning for the prosecution. Zimmerman's version was the one believed by the jury. He didn't have to take the stand. It's his right under the law. The prosecution knew he likely wouldn't and still plowed ahead with their malicious prosecution.
In any case, the police investigators did hear everything, including the "inconsistencies" and obviously decided that there was not nearly enough evidence to bring charges.
Bottom line, the prosecution laid an egg and could not overcome their handicap of trying to prove their case. Even their own witnesses, including the police investigators, ended up helping the defense. It would be a joke if it wasn't so tragic a story.
The perspective that the prosecution over-reached on this one due to political pressure is hardly ignorant, but speaks to the truth.
Apparantly many of us are miles apart on this one. That's ok. Justice was served in this case so far despite the fact that many won't or can't come to terms with that reality.
In the end, although Martin's death was a tragedy, and equally avoidable, it was caused directly and unmistakenly by his decision to violently assault Mr Zimmerman. The jury came to the same conclusion. Unbiased History won't equate the death of Trayvon Martin with that of Emmitt Till,(for good reason) even though many will try their very best to make it so.
If there were embellishments and inconsistencies that were never aired in court, that is the fault of the prosecution, who knew beforehand they had a high standard of "reasonable doubt" to overcome. They failed. The prosecution over-reached in a huge way because of political pressure and got owned. They should have listened to the experts at the Stanford Police Department and declared it a justifiable homicide. This was a case for the ages to show how malicious prosecution often backfires.
Following anyone you consider suspicious may be discouraged by many, but anyone is free to do so. His neighborhood had been the target of numerous break-ins, so perhaps we need to walk a mile in his shoes before criticizing him for choosing at that spur of the moment to be a more active participant than we might have been in the same situation..
All 50 states now legally recognize some form of personal concealed carry. Neither Zimmerman nor so-called right-wingers invented the concept of justifiable homicide. Zimmerman was not doing anything unethical or unadvisable by carrying a licensed gun in public for his own protection. In fact, it may have saved his life.
Zimmerman didn't make anything up. He waived his miranda rights and talked to police, then his story was corroborated by eyewitness testimony and the evidence. Case closed.
No, not everyone needs to fear the fallout from the verdict. The simple fact is, that the eyewitness testimony, and the evidence, including the injuries suffered by Mr. Zimmerman, all backed up his version of events. The myth that Zimmerman was racially profiling, and stalking Martin in order to instigate a confrontation, was destroyed by the truth. That is the only fallout from the case.
And no need to put "aggressive" in quotes. The injuries suffered by Zimmerman were real, and were caused by Martin attacking him first with his fists, causing him to fear for his personal well-being. The judge did not allow Martin's cell phone records,(revealed now by Zimmerman's attorneys) which would have shown that he texted others about "mounting" someone in a fight so they could not fight back, and about breaking their nose to win a fight. He was trying out his fight strategy that night, plain and simple. He should have went home instead of circling back and ambushing Zimmerman.
This was not a case of "gun violence" as the President so thoughtlessly asserted, and nor was it a case of irresponsible gun ownership. Only as a last resort did he use his firearm to possibly save his own life. That type of action is indeed what the law allows, and for good reason.
In general, I think Neighborhood Watches are a good thing, but if neighborhood watchers are now supposed to ignore any and all minorities(youths or adults) in their neighborhood late at night, for fear of being labeled "racist" or "bigoted", then that would essentially render most, if not all neighborhood watches useless.
Oh, and PS, the author of this cartoon should be ashamed of himself for posting such inflammatory rubbish.