Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Zimmerman Trial Is Over

The Zimmerman trial is already over

By John Lott
Published July 05, 2013
FoxNews.com

Prosecutors in the George Zimmerman second degree murder trial have pushed hard on two points as they seek to make their case against him: that the injuries to Zimmerman on the night Trayvon Martin died were �insignificant� and that he had studied Florida�s �Stand Your Ground� law in a college class in 2010.

To win conviction on second-degree murder, the prosecution has to show that the death was caused by a criminal act �demonstrating a depraved mind without regard for human life.�

That�s why the prosecutor keeps pushing the claim that Zimmerman profiled Martin because he was black. Meanwhile, the lesser charge of manslaughter generally is a crime that's been committed in the heat of passion, where there is no premeditation. The jury would have to believe Zimmerman lost his temper in shooting Martin.

This is a case that prosecutors should never have brought but they let politics influence their decision.

People can use force to protect themselves when they reasonably believe it is �necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to themselves.� On this score, the testimony of the Jacksonville medical examiner, Valerie Rao, that Zimmerman injuries were �insignificant� is largely irrelevant.

A broken nose, a head being slammed into cement, and punches to the face may not have left Zimmerman incapacitated. The important question is whether such an attack with a man on top of him would leave Zimmerman to �reasonably believe� that there was a threat of �imminent death or great bodily harm to himself.�

Much was also made of the class Zimmerman took class at Seminole State College taught by Professor Alexis Carter. The key supposedly was that Zimmerman really did understand Florida�s �Stand Your Ground� law. Prosecutor Richard Mantei told the court that Zimmerman's legal studies would help jurors understand his "state of mind" and "ambitions and frustrations" before the shooting.

Some pundits, such as Fox News� Bob Beckel, bought the claim: �I think that the prosecution got back in the case today for a very simple reason: this professor made it very clear that Zimmerman knew everything about the �Stand Your Ground� law and in that �Stand Your Ground,� according to the professor, there are reasons that you could use your gun if necessary but this was not an extreme enough case to do that. I think that the prosecution is back in it, back in it strong.�

One can debate about whether Zimmerman remembered the part of that lecture from the class. Nevertheless, but it is really beside the point because whether Zimmerman�s actions were legal has nothing to do with the �Stand Your Ground� law.

Prior to �Stand Your Ground,� citizens who wanted to defend themselves from a criminal had to retreat as far as possible and then announce to the criminal that they were going to shoot. The �Stand Your Ground� law simply says replaced the original requirement to retreat to a �reasonable person�s� standard, instead stating that lethal force is justified when a reasonable person would believe that a criminal intends to inflict serious bodily harm or death.

But Zimmerman�s defense has never raised the �Stand Your Ground� law for one simple reason: with Zimmerman on his back and Trayvon Martin holding him down, he had no option to retreat.

None of the testimony ever explained why the �Stand Your Ground� law was even relevant to Zimmerman�s actions. How Beckel comes away with the notion all this means that Zimmerman didn�t have �an extreme enough case� to defend himself is hardly obvious.

Prosecutors� problem is that they have to do more than eventually convince people that their version of events is �likely,� and they haven�t come close to doing that. Instead, they have to show that they are true beyond a �reasonable doubt.� To put it differently, to say something is �likely� just means that there is over a 50 percent chance it is true. To say something is beyond a reasonable doubt means that it is much closer to 100 percent.

The tragic thing about the case is how many people jumped to conclusions before they knew the facts. Many conservative commentators claimed early on that Zimmerman had acted improperly (Mona Charen, Rich Lowry, Heather Mac Donald, Robert VerBruggen, and Gregory Kane).

Comments by President Obama, Al Sharpton, and others surely stirred up the racial aspects of the case and appear to have generated many case across the country where blacks attacked whites to avenge Trayvon Martin (e.g.,Gainesville, Florida; Oak Park, Illinois; Mobile, Alabama; Toledo, Ohio; Grand Rapids, Michigan; and Norfolk, Virginia).

It is a case that prosecutors should never have brought, but they let politics influence their decision.

Next, it will be the defense�s turn to present their case. But, for all practical purposes, the Zimmerman trial is already over.



John R. Lott, Jr. is a FoxNews.com contributor. An economist and former chief economist at the United States Sentencing Commission, he is also a leading expert on guns. He is the author of several books, including "More Guns, Less Crime."

I certainly hope all this rings true and the jury upholds the law not their feelings.

Get ready for riots all over the country and for blacks to be attacking whites over this...

it will happen regardless of the outcome of the trial... it will only be worse if Zimmerman is acquitted...

blacks and liberals have already made up their minds before this trial ever even started.... Martin was black and Zimmerman wasn't...

so the entire thing is based on skin color.. by those who would call those others, racist for not agreeing with their predetermined opinions...

if Zimmerman is acquitted, if he is not thrown into witness protection or just leave the country, I give him a 90 day chance before he is killed by some black or liberal ghetto person...

look how full the internet is of people claiming they will kill him... yet nothing is done at all about it..

Its a sham trial. Whitey owned slaves at one time so we need to drag the entire country in to the gutter and make it more like detroit. Sounds fair to me.

IIRC Bob, the local DA investigated this at the time it happened & said no charges would be brought...It wasn't until the race baiters got involved, TV doctored the 911 recordings (along with input from the POTUS) & Eric Holder sending a team to "investigate civil rights violations", that the state caved in & pushed for the prosecution of a person who did what any other armed citizen (black or white) would have done in similar circumstances... If Trayvon would have been white or Zimmerman black, none of this would be happening...It's a damn shame this country is allowing the liberals to get away with this schitt!!!

Before this trial, I had never, ever heard the term "white Hispanic". Does that mean Obama is a "white Black"?

Pretty much.

Grouseman, the Spanish Colonized South and Central America. Some of them even brought Spanish wives across the pond. As a result there are people south of the boarder whom speak Spanish, but ancestors are white.

Technically Obama is Mulatto and not black.

Bob, I'm still unfortunately betting on the manslaughter conviction... This continues to be a politically motivated witch hunt and with the president's weight behind it, not to mention the media, those women will vote with their hormones...

thanks Bob, I am waiting with crossed fingers for a directed motion for acquittal.

No way that will be granted Sam.

That's what the analysts say, but I don't understand why??? Seems like the prosecution has not even come close to meeting its burden of proof. Is it just because of the political environment?

if the assertions are correct, in the blog article, the Prosecution has committed a huge number of highly questionable actions, particularly with regards to the initial charge of 2nd Degree Murder.
Are none of these egregious violations of Zimmerman's rights actionable?

My opinion is,..this case was tried by the media as soon as it happened.

He wouldn't even be on trial if a person's rights were still recognized in America.

You and Denton are spot on with your concerns but this Judge doesn't have what it takes to grant it. I'll be ecstatic if she does and she sure has a basis for doing so but, I don't think the politics will enable to buck the state. Her actions thus far seem to corroborate such.

Anyways, if she does grant the motion, she will have done the right thing.

According to the facts and police opinions he should never have been brought to trial, point is facts are being trumped by emotion to even bring him to trial.

With an all woman jury, they will have a hard time (especially the moms) getting past the notion that the adult brought a gun to a fight with a boy and shot the boy.

From the link you provided it seems the PA has some serious ethical issues in this case regarding discovery, and that the Judge is holding off any action on them pending the outcome of this trial.Like if GZ is found not guilty, "No harm, no foul" is the ruling.

Sounds like the PA's future in that regard is linked to Zimmerman's future. If GZ walks, so does the PA.

Won't be granted because IMO the judge, who has been completely biased to the point where there's about 80 million things available for overturn on appeal, has been promised something "if this goes the right way".

Judge was practically objecting FOR the State at points during this thing.