READ about Piers Morgan's long career in journalism here.
Roughly three days since seeing the jury in the George Zimmerman trial return a "not guilty" verdict, on Tuesday evening "Piers Morgan Live" welcomed Mark O'Mara to the program.
Now, with the verdict having been reached, Morgan asked his guest to offer his thoughts of the prosecution's supposed star witness Rachel Jeantel. On Monday, the young woman joined the program for her first interview since taking the stand last month, and presented herself much differently, appearing strong in her convictions, and offering more about her late friend Trayvon Martin than she had been able to share on the stand.
The question facing O'Mara Tuesday, was whether or not this new side of Jeantel might have impacted the case had she reacted in court in the same manner that she did while on "Piers Morgan Live."
"I'm not sure how she would have presented herself but certainly last night she was more engaging, more straightforward, more amiable," described O'Mara. "I'm not sure why she started out with the attitude that she obviously did in the trial, but certainly some of what she could have said was lost on the jury through the attitude."
Morgan pushed O'Mara to explain how different Jeantel's description of Martin compared to the image that played out in the Sanford, Fla. courtroom:
"She painted a very different picture of Martin to the one that was repeatedly rammed home during the trial," noted Morgan. "She talked to somebody who was pretty quiet, a soft sort of character. She said he took a bit of weed twice a week but nothing that ever changed his personality from what she saw. Somebody that loved his mom and family and somebody from her understanding of the conversation on that fateful last night, was on his way home."
In the eyes of Tuesday's legal expert, the case remains full of questions:
"I'm not sure that we'll fully know," O'Mara admitted. "I know the four minutes after he said he was running, there was four minutes before the altercation took place and for whatever reason, misinterpreting George's signals, being worried or afraid or whatever or angry, he decided to reengage in a situation where George Zimmerman had the injuries and Trayvon Martin ended up dead, an event everybody would like to see changed but I have to suggest there is arguments on both sides as to who is really responsible for it."
Watch the rest of the clip of Morgan's exclusive interview with Mark O'Mara, and for the next edition of "Piers Morgan Live," watch CNN every night at 9.
» Follow "Piers Morgan Live" on Twitter
» Follow "Piers Morgan Live" on Instagram
Good job, you laid a good woop ass on those crackas. You are the best. Don't let us down Piers – keep up the fight for Travon. We know you with us man – dont care about that wierd accent of yours, you tell the truth. Peace out Piers.
Piers is interested in this case for one reason only that is to push his gun control agenda...
What is interesting to see is how Piers salivates at the idea that Zimmerman could get killed by some lunatic out there. Funny they accuse Zimmerman of being a vigilante yet that is exactly what they want to happen to Zimmerman. This case has been an eye opener it goes to show that the media has absolutely no respect for our justice system. Even though the media has not said it they might as well with the way they comment about the juror who spoke out they think she's a racist like the rest of the jurors because they are white and didn't vote the way they wanted them to vote. Seems like everybody who thinks Zimmerman had a right to defend himself from possibly being killed is a racist.
At least Zimmerman killed someone out of fear that he could die...seems the media always likes to gloss over the fact that Trayvon was 100 yards away and Zimmerman had no clue where he was after Trayvon ran off. Trayvon chose to come looking for Zimmerman and surprise attack him which is the reason why Trayvon had absolutely no fighting wounds not a scratch whatsoever but Piers what excuse do you have in salivating at the idea that Zimmerman could
be killed. You are no better then a street thug who wants to get people to take the law into their own hands...its shameful to see how you conduct yourself on television you have a social responsibility to not try to instigate violence and fuel the hate for your own personal agenda.
according to Forensic pathologist Vincent Di Maio's testimony Zimmerman head was hit against a hard surface at least 6 times and is more then likely due to extreme force.
Well put and sucinctly spoken. Yes....George is a Racist for defending his life against a Gangsta Wanna be. Everyone knows that Piers (and those like him) are only concerned with Ratings. Please....what a hypocrite.
Well said ... I will never look at Piers the same way. Piers opened my eyes on how one sided an educated individual on TV can be. ... If you're going to make so many assumptions, at least entertain the other side for a minute.
The prosecution of Zimmerman is mostly by those that are against guns, the black population and liberals.
Those that respect the law (gun and self defense) are not so quick to judge this case.
I stopped watching Piers. He interviews his guests and gets upset at those who don't side with his views. Not sure why CNN lets him do this. Anderson Cooper is more professional and objective and that's how it should be.
I find Piers Morgan to be a creepy ars cracka. This guy creeps me out. As of today I know who he is, and I am not impressed with his interview skills.
Piers Morgan has lied about the Zimmerman case more than anyone else on television and CNN lets him get away with it. I thought there was such a thing as journalistic integrity but either Morgan's quest for ratings amongst the low information types out there, his outright dishonesty, or his stupidity, has gotten the best of him. He seems to be the type who will stoop to whatever level of deceit and dishonesty it takes to get whatever it is he's looking for. Even so far as to support perjury by a witness in a murder trial. But shame on CNN for allowing it to continue. It's CNN's reputation he's trashing. He doesn't have one.
No, you got it wrong....
Justice should not be judged by color, race or religion.
Totally agree ... his show this week makes CNN look really bad. ... CNN was my source for news, but after watching several interviews by Piers Morgan, I think I need to find a new station.
Why continue to try this case on your show? Meaningless.
Rachel Jantel is a proven liar. Undoubtedly, she knows the real story but can't tell it for fear it would stain TM's memory.
This wasn't connected in the trial but there is very good evidence that Martin had made it to safety and decided to return and attack Mr. Zimmerman.
Rachel Jeantel testified that Martin was using his headset while they were talking. In fact, she mentioned that the headset came off when the altercation started. Martin's headset was found rolled up in his pocket.
Martin wore some kind of button with some guy's picture on it. It was said that it was something he treasured and the video from the 7-11 shows that he was wearing it then. The button was also found in his pocket.
This indicates that Martin had made it to safety (Rachel testified that he was at one time "by his father's house"). The fact that the button and headset were found in his pocket indicates that he stored those items in preparation for returning to attack Zimmerman and, in fact, planned the attack. One of the witnesses testified that she heard someone running in the direction of the T. The timeline indicates that what she heard was Martin returning to commit the assault. The fact that the headset was in his pocket further indicates that he was not on the phone with Rachel when the altercation started.
You hit the nail on the head. Trayvon was the attacker. Not surprising all this evidence didn't come out in the trial. The judge would have thrown out the case. Trayvon s text messages also showed him picking fights and trying to buy a gun. Proves he was not this innocent little child the media wants you to believe. I hope if a civil suit is brought up that all this evidence comes forward. Then Al and Jesse and Eric cand shut up.
Also, no offense to Jeantel, but I don't think she is smart enough to be that calculating and diabolical as people describe her as. She admitted to lying about her age, which she didnt have to do. So that's a confession right there! And she seemed very candid and open to me. Honestly too candid, so I don't understand why you say she's not credible. Of all people, I would lean on her credibility, because if started telling a train of lies, she might get her mind all tied up and not recall everything she said. So I like Jeantel, and it's not fair that people judge her because of her look and background. That should not be a determiner of ones credibility.
Ya, and you probably heard wet grass before too.
She was trained for months for her testimony, and still it was terrible. She tried to help TM, but she's not a very good liar ... thank goodness. ... Perjury is much worse when the witness is very credible.
Jeantel also lied about being in the hospital, and she lied to TM's parents about the racist epithets TM used to describe GZ. They had called the hospital and could not find any record of her being there. I wish people would stop trying to make Jeantel look like an innocent angel.
@ Cidney: You sound as ignorant and uneducated as Jantel. Please use your food stamp money and get an education. Read a book before it is too late and you become one dried up old 'ho. I know you can't read or write – so have someone who can read this to you.
Once again you Just prove that your 25 cent food stamp Education Failed to properly Educate you So Shut your 25 cent food stamp Education before we make a 24 cent food stamp Change out of you, Why don't you use your 24cent food stamp change and at least get a kindergarten Pre School Dick and Jane Reading Level skills. Hey Punk Ass STOP hiding behind fake Disguised Email address Just like George Zimmerman does everyday, Bigotry and Racism are not a Part Time spur of the Moment act. But thee Ass Whipping George gets will be just that There will be Plenty left over for all those whom also want and Do Defend This Racist BASTERD George Zimmerman.
Why is it that some people do not follow what the evidence in the trial says? Trayvon's death, though a tragedy, was not murder! Hate should never be injected into these situations! Just makes them harder for all! I really hope that Trayvon's family can move on from this terrible situation. I do believe that the jury got it right! So, get off these women who served so gallantly when it was obviously a very hard position to be put in!!!!
Good interview Piers but you should've pushed him more when he was talking about self-defense, said if you yell at him, he can yell back, if you punch him, he can punch you – you should've asked him than how could he justify using a gun against one punch from Trayvon? And would've mentioned the absurdity of "concrete" prop – the only thing as bad was johnnie cochran putting on oj's hat!
Are you genuinely as dumb as you come across here?
Those people who are familiar with the evidence in this case know that TM delivered multiple blows to GZ.
Piers: Here is the answer to your question of Mark O'Mara as to why the start of "cascading series of events" wasn't considered from an earlier point in the interaction. It is because people engage in rude, boorish, offensive, and insulting behaviour all the time. We have not and cannot make that behaviour illegal, because it takes an infinite variety of forms, sadly it is human nature, and it would be impossible to craft a rule regulating that type of behaviour (there are some exceptions – inciting a riot, fire in the crowded theatre, hate speech, etc.). But for the most part, the only bright-line rule we can craft is at the point of initiation physical violence, or a realistic threat thereof. Ii can call you just about anything I want to, and you can't touch me.
Piers, why did'nt you have Mark O'Mara, the attorney for George Zimmerman. on for the full hour tonight?? There are so many more questions that needed to be asked and answered, just as the interview started and was getting good, you ended the interview to bring on a morning radio host to talk about a scholarship...for Rachel Jeantel...
I was listening to your show and heard someone say that all the jurors cried in the process of deciding the verdict. That really puzzled my mind and wondered for who or for what and why they cried. Jurors are supposed to deliver the verdict that they feel is just and for having arrived at the verdict they should feel good about the decision. Why were they crying? Isn't it obvious that the reason they were crying was because in their heart they know Zimmerman was guilty but because of the law and technicality they have to render not guilty verdict? Who asked these jurors to be interpreters of the law? We have the lawyers to defend and prosecute based on the existing laws. The lawyers made it clear from two different points of view to make their case. All the jurors have to do is decide who they believe is telling the truth. But the fact that they all cried implies that all of them felt one way but compelled to give a different verdict based on the law. Is that their job? Why do we have the jury trial? If their job was to understand the law and apply the technicalities of the evidence and logically arrive at the right verdict why do we need the jury? It would be better just to use a computer and input the data and let the computer decide the verdict. The reason we have the jury to decide the verdict is so that justice can be attained incorporating the human factor, the individual sense of what is right and wrong, moral integrity, and justice. These jurors did nothing but try to be lawyers themselves and arrived at the verdict based on logic. The laws are made by human and when faced with conflicting judgement based on the law it is their job to override the law and come to the just verdict. That is why we have the jury trial. These jurors did nothing more than what could have been done better with six lawyers. Very sad.
WOW. Did you just say a jury is supposed to return a verdict they think is "just"
Obviously you didn't pay attention to the jury instructions or even understand the point of the jury... they are not supposed to decide what they THINK happened, they are only to ajudicate based on evidence. There was zero evidence of ill will and spite, so even if thye think Zimmerman murdered Trayvon, they have to return not guilty because there is no evidence of murder.
No wonder we have people breaking windows and committed crimes because they didn't like the verdict.
Do you think Supreme Court would have found Zimmerman not guilty? Not even man slaughter?
Let's say you drive into an alley when the police told you not to. Then you see an oncoming car and you collide with it. But because you are driving a Hummer you kill the other driver by head on collision. So you are not guilty because you thought you were going to die? Just tell me what was so sad about the verdict that ALL of the jurors had to cry.
So let me get this straight, you don't even understand the function of the supreme court but ypull assume your smart enough to see "what really happened". The jury came to the verdict having seen all of the evidence. The state failed to prove thier case. Probably because all of the evidence and testimony from the investigators and witnesses corroborated Zimmermans account of what happened. If someone was smashing your head against the ground I bet you would try to stop them any way you could. And if not, then you'd die fro. Severe head trama.
Lancia, you got it right. I do not understand why some people cannot understand this. The jury got it wrong. Juror B37 in her interview confessed to them not understanding the law surrounding manslaughter. She said the wanted to ask the judge if the could include the moment GZ started following TM as part of the evidence to decide manslaughter, but when they couldn't get an elaboration on definition of manslaughter and did not understand whether to consider the incidence leading to the confrontation in determining self-defense, the jury them decided not to consider what happened prior to the confrontation. Juror B37 said they all believe GZ was guilty of following him, but they did not factor that in, which is something a judge would have factored in if he/she was deciding the case. So the verdict is far from being just or fair.
If you look at the comments the jurors made after the trial, they thought GZ was guilty of using bad judgment for getting out of his car and following. But ultimately felt TM was the aggressor and was the cause for GZ's injuries. None of the jurors flat out called GZ a murderer. The prosecution was blessed with multiple scenarios with which the jury had to choose: 2nd degree murder, or manslaughter and they still couldn't get a conviction.
Many TM supporters have come out and said had GZ stayed in his car the whole incident would never have happened. The problem is, when you play the game of "What if?" you could apply that to any scenario. One could argue with equal effectiveness, that had TM not gotten suspended from High School a third time, the entire incident would never have happened.
If Trayvon Martin had just kept walking or if he had chosen to run away from George Zimmerman, he would still be alive today.
Hugo, but he did. GZ said it too. Trayvon walked and ran away from George Zimmerman. GZ should have stayed in his car and this wouldn't have happened. Can't you see that that is what is getting everybody upset at the verdict. Juror B37 said they wept at the verdict after delivering it it. Why? Because she said they knew GZ was guilty of coming out of his car and following him. And that was why they wanted to ask the judge if the could consider the fact that GZ started following TM first in their deliberation. GZ got away with this not because he is innocent, but because the jury did not understand the law very well. If a judge had decided the case GZ will be in prison right now. Jury process should be scrapped and judges should judge cases. Having jury decide a case on a law they never went to school for is like asking any person on a street who is not a surgeon and has never had any training in it to come and perform a surgery. This is what went wrong with this case.
GZ was walking back to his truck when TM came back and beat-up GZ. TM should have kept walking and not gone after GZ.
Maha, so how did TM's suspension placed GZ's life in danger? GZ coming out of the car and following TM directly placed TM's and GZ's lives in danger. That's what the 911 operator was trying to get across to GZ by saying we do not need you to following him.
Again, there is no evidence that GZ followed TM except from a distance and then only to see where he was going so he could tell the police TM's location. GZ's getting out of his car would have put no one in danger if TM had not attacked GZ. By putting GZ's life in danger, TM put his own life in danger.
So let me get this straight Piers!!!
It is NOT ok for the juror that did the interview with Anderson Cooper when she said about Rachel Jenel's "Cracka" comment that "That is just the way "THEY" talk, because that is "racist", according to all of Anderson Cooper's black guests on the show tonight. However! When the Joyner guy (the black guy who is a radio show host) you had on tonight, when discussing Rush Limbaugh's Niga comment, he said Rush should'nt criticize Rachel "that is just how THEY talk" That is how THEY communicate"?! Why not call Joyner out on it? While you and Anderson seem to be very nice guys, you are joining your guests in perpetuating reverse racism in this country. If you and all your guests want change i.e. Joyner the talk show host, then quit hyperventilating and making everything about race. The juror was no more racist than Joyner when both made the same comment....OR better yet, you and your guests Lead By Example and call everyone out!! Thanks for your time.
Finally,we can label Obama as the white african man that he is. Good Job CNN
Is anyone bothered by the fact that Jeantel so casually admitted that she & Travon smoked the "illegal" drug – marijuana – a few times a week?
Lancia, that is the most incoherent and internally contradictory piece I've read for a long, long time.
You can rationalize a verdict. But you cannot rationalize justice.
I was listening to juror B37,i almost throw up, she made up mind before she was selected as a juror. I can not believe why those prosecutors choose 6 white jurors in the trial. When I saw that i said to my friends that guy will be found not guilty. Whites jurors, non educated ones, juror B37 looks only for appearance not for evidence. I served twice in New Jersey, State and Federal heard how they talked about a case i was in. Federal is completely different than the State trial. jurors are more professionals, more educated, and they scrutinize more to the evidence in order to reach a verdict. Like juror B37 she already fall in love with George and look at 19 years old high school girl under microscope. that the way her mindset was throughout the trial. I am from Haiti, believe me, I know how it is when you speak an other language than English. I speak different languages, but I still have the french accent that can not diminish me like she to Rachel Jeantel without taking in consideration that she is an high school student. Race is the most important factor for those jurors through the trial, pretending differently that ashaime and sad.
For the same reason OJ had black jurors. Whey didnt you guys go to protest when he was found not guilty?
You misunderstood. TM was innocently walking home from alter boy practice and GZ shot him because the night was slow! That is what picture the state was trying to paint! Goes to prove when the wannabes are solo and unarmed they are nothing. Read the news, it is always gangs and guns against one person. Give me back the old days. Fists and may the best one win. Then you went on your way. Not now. The thug gets an butt whooping and guns and gangs show up. Can you say wuss? So sick of the aftermath of the trial. Let it go. No more tv interviews,, reports on biased CNN and it will go away. If TM had not been in that scene, it would have ended up the same way sooner or later. Best to GZ
The jurors decision was based on evidence not speculations and emotions. The prosecutions argument was based on speculation. Meanwhile the defense in essence took on the Prosecutions role and had evidence to back up their arguments. See the thing is the forensic evidence doesn't lie. I know people want to so badly believe Zimmerman is a racist or a crazy guy with a gun who shot Trayvon simply because he was black and walking. But the truth is Trayvon attacked Zimmerman there is no way in going around that little fact. The evidence fits to what Zimmerman said happened. I don't blame the prosecution for the failure of not getting what a group of people wanted the verdict to be. You can't change the evidence to suit your desires. The simple truth is that without evidence to back up your speculations you can't win. The prosecutors despite the fact the they continue to say that they had a case knew full well they didn't they only took it to trial to make the public happy of course they would never acknowledge it to the public. Frankly this case would never have even been looked at if not for the lies that were sent to the press by the Martins Attorney. Funny nobody in the media wants to acknowledge the elephant in the room:
Why did they release a photo of a 12 year old Martin, why did they insist this was all about a crazy white man who gunned down a child in cold blood. Why did NBC alter the 911 calls to make it appear as if Zimmerman made a racist comment when in fact he never mentioned race until the Dispatcher asked him is he white, black or hispanic.
Why did the media go along with the lies after they knew about it. Why did the prosecutors cave in to public pressures, why did they hide evidence from the defense. They did absolutely everything they could to win they had endless funds, support from the public, FBI was involved( probably due to NAACP) they believed the media's story about a 12 year old boy. They had everything to win but they forgot the most important thing: EVIDENCE...this is why they lost. Why do they want to continue to prosecute Zimmerman in the public arena now they want to prosecute the jury too by insinuating they are racist.
Political agenda, network support since Zimmerman may sue NBC for defamation something is very fishy
Piers did not want to talk to O.Mara for too long because he coudnt stir racial hate with him. But i see he did enjoy talking to a jeantel. I think they may have smoked a reefer together because none of them made any sence. They did made more people angry though
... all for the sake of ratings. Piers is the quintessential tabloid journalist (journalist is probably a bit too much of a compliment).
Facts that prosecutors missed:
1. GZ self-inflicted that wound to his nose using his own gun; evidence – sharp cut to the nose bridge, one side of the nose swollen (both sides of the nose will be swollen if the claim that TM rained blows on GZ while he was on the ground was true). This explained why GZ refused to let his doctor take an X-ray of the wound, which would have revealed that. Another evidence – he wiped his gun off of any blood stain, so when fingerprint and DNA tests were done on his gun, nothing was found: Not even his own fingerprint and DNA.
2. The injury to the back of his head is too high up on his head to be consistent with a head been banged on the floor (I don't know how they missed this).
3. The trajectory of the bullet – the entrance showed straight entry, which meant the gun was pointed at perfect 90 degrees to the body of TM. In a fight when you are beaten up and in the position he claimed he was, it would have been very impossible to get that angle: from shaken and tired hands to the fact that TM would have tried to deflect the shot by hitting GZ's hand if he was on top of GZ and hitting GZ as he claimed.
Alternative to the position, which would be consistent with defense's expert witness, Dr. Vincent J. M. Di Maio, is that GZ, while standing, pulled on TM clothes as he was trying to get away and fired the shot. If you look GZ's re-enactment tape when GZ described how he got his gun out to shot, look at how he positioned his knees and left hand (that moment said it all about his position during the shot). Please those of you that really want to know the truth should take a look at the tape again.
GZ was definitely guilty of manslaughter.
... says the jury of one!
ROFL.. so George Zimmerman kicked his own butt... good grief. Desperation is setting in...
Jeantal the Hut told a completely different story of the events that night.. she never heard the confrontation, she told Piers that Trayvon said he would call me back, he had to go teach this guy a lesson.
Sounds like Trayvon was looking for a fight, and found it... Act like a thug, wind up like a thug.
Why didn't other forensic scientist come up with the same conclusion as you? I think the prosecution would have presented that scenario.
I think because they were not asked. The prosecutors did not offer that as an alternative to how GZ got the wounds. When GZ's doctor said GZ refused to go take an X-ray during her testimony, I thought they would see the lopehole there. Because X-ray would have shown that the cut was from a harp object not from a blow to the face.
Fact.....Trayvon beat George up and then shot himself with George's gun. With his last few seconds he put the gun back in George's hand to make it look like George did it. He wanted to be a martyr.
Glad to see your a medical expert! Where did you get your degree?
What are your medical qualifications to make these statements? My 34 years of experience as a physician tells me that you are very much wrong.
I have 34 years of experience as a practicing physician and I suspect that you do not. Your theories do not pass the laugh test.
Wow just wow. Roflmbo! I am utterly speechless of how dumb & stupid your conspiracy theory is. I don't know where you got this dumb theory from but I will not be shock this came from the Martin's lawyers. Oh, I'm sorry, I meant social engineers. Lol. Stop eating the dung that these racist idiots are trying to feed the public. By eating this socially engineered conspiracy theories & making a comment about it in social media makes you look stupid in front of the whole world. You are trying to make a man a diabolical monster even though he just shot TM just to defend himself from potentially being killed. If you hear the 911 tapes it is clearly Zimmerman crying for help. There was a witness to this & I believe his story over your dumb conspiracy theory.
Why a respectable defense attorney would want to appear during Piers Morgan's tabloid hour is startling to me. Time to move over to MSNBC, Piers!
QUIT REGURGITATING LIES TO :
The police did not day "Do not follow him!!!!!"
"Stand your ground law" was not used or applied in this case.
What an uncomfortable interview with Rachel. I think Piers, the news networks, attorneys and these so called black activist are exploiting this silly girl. This " we've been best friends for only two weeks " needs be quiet. She's up there flapping her gums about Trayvon's weed smoking habits among the other gems is the kind of information I don't think Trayvon's parents want out there. The more I think about it, it's because of Trayvon's association with people like Rachel is reason why his mother shipped him off to his father. Rachel probably instigated for Trayvon to kick Zimmerman's ass. BTW if Trayvon was such an angel how come we haven't heard from his Miami Gardens neighbors, friends and school officials. I'm just saying.
I really like your newscast Mr. Morgan. I can't say I thought much about your comments during the time you hosted American Idol or one of those shows...but I have to say your demeanor, calmness, concentration on the issue, ad your respect of people of all colors has given me hope that there can be an unbiased investigation to the facts that allows for the truth to come out. Thank you and I hope that Jehovah is a part of your life as well.
Can someone help me?
Why does Piers have an audience built around Rachel Jeantel....when he interviews her, but no audience for O[Mara and Robert Zimmerman???
also so glad this witness didnt want to be a part of this whole trial.. sofar 2 interviews on TV and not even a week after the verdict was in?
Mark O'Mara was one of the most sensitive, intelligent and sensible defense attorneys that i have seen..Piers, an hour with Mr.O'Mara would have been more educational and informative then 5 minutes with RJ but you were after the shock factor and not the facts of the case!
What about her gay bashing?
Having viewed Rachel Jeantel's courtroom testimony and her interview with Piers Morgan, I wonder how well she really knew Trayvon Martin or how honest she was in either setting. Martin had reportedly been suspended from school 3 times during the school year during which he was killed. He was on suspension at the time he died. At least one suspension was for fighting. Review of the contents of his cell phone records and text messages revealed that he boasted about fighting. His cell phone photos included those of jewelry, marijuana plants, a black hand (possibly his) holding a pistol, and pictures of nude, underage girls. His mother had reportedly kicked him out of her house because of his fighting. That is why he was being sent to live with his father. Martin reported enjoyed the Mixed Martial Arts type of fighting.
I believe that an unbiased, dispassionate look at ALL of the evidence in this case can lead only to the conclusion that race played no part in it, that Trayvon Martin was the aggressor in the altercation with George Zimmerman, that George Zimmerman was the person shouting for help on the phone recording, that George Zimmerman had good reason to fear for his life, and that George Zimmerman truly killed Trayvon Martin in self defense. The verdict of Not Guilty was the only fair verdict. No other set of conclusions is logical.
She met him when they were little kids in elementary. She admitted that they only reconnected weeks prior to him getting killed. So how the hell would she know anything about him considering the gulf of time had passed since they lost contact?
There you have it America
The verdict is in
And it is not guilty
Not because he is truly innocent
But because the law of the land
The law which was authored by the people
For the people
Makes this person innocent
Now you can go to Florida
With a gun in your back pocket
Provoke someone to hit you
And take some hits to your face
And shoot that person dead
The jury has spoken
And they were so heartbroken
To deliver the verdict
That they all cried
Oh how sad it must have been
To let the person who gunned down the boy
To go free
When it was their job to get it right
Not play lawyer
But just deliver the verdict
Based on facts that are indisputable
Dissected and put the facts under microscope
To find one reason not to convict
And they succeeded
Oh how sad it must have been
And they thought Trayvon said
It says H.E.L.F.
Please provide evidence that George Zimmerman provoked Trayvon Martin to hit him. You seem to be conceding that Martin struck the first blow.
A grown man following a boy at dusk. TM had all the right to fight back and defend his life. From TM's point of view his life was in danger. Since he is dead he cannot testify to that fact. GZ is a psycho-lunatic who played cop. GZ's life was in danger? It could very well be that he banged his head after he shot the boy. Self inflicted wounds. Reasonable doubt? Sure. Reasonable doubt should have been applied to GZ's testimony. Prosecution laid it out clearly and jurors just didn't believe it. Don't try to rationalize or justify the verdict. The more you do the more you are admitting you have guilty conscience for feeling the way you do.
1) I cannot believe that anyone is so stupid as to believe that George Zimmerman inflicted significant facial and head injuries on himself to make people think that his life was in danger if it were not. Actually, I take that back. Since you and several others on this forum have made that claim, that proves that there ARE people so stupid as to believe that.
2) The facts are clear: Trayvon Martin attacked George Zimmerman first, throwing the first punch (which broke Zimmerman's nose) when Zimmerman looked down to pull out his cell phone to call 911.
3) Zimmerman was not "playing cop." If so, why had he called the police in the first place? He was walking back to his vehicle when Martin attacked him. If he were "playing cop," why did he reach for his cell phone rather than his pistol when confronted by Martin?
4) Martin put his own life in danger when he first put Zimmerman's life in danger.
5) The prosecution had a weak case and they knew it. That is why they tried to change the charges just before the jury got the case. Most of the prosecution witnesses actually helped George Zimmerman's defense.
6) I don't have a guilty conscience. There is nothing to feel guilty about. Justice was served by the jury's verdict. The injustice that is being done now is being done to George Zimmerman by people such as yourself to seem to be unable to understand the facts and logic of the case. That includes Attorney General Holder and President Obama.
Since you seem to have trouble understanding the concept here is a scenario to help you:
A boy (TM) stands on the edge of the cliff looking over the horizon enjoying the sunset. A man on the look out for the suicide watch (GZ) sees this young boy and thinks TM is about to jump to commit suicide. GZ trying to prevent such tragedy goes to TM. TM sees this creepy guy coming and tells him to back off. GZ insists on helping TM and does not back off. They both stand on the edge of the cliff and engages in physical altercation. Only God knows who grabbed who first but now they are both in physical altercation. Now GZ thinks he is in danger of falling off the cliff so he pushes TM off the cliff to his death so he can survive. GZ is not guilty for TM's death? What kind of sick twisted mind can think GZ is not guilty?
Instead of pontificating, why are you, (Piers), not helping this woman sentenced to 20 years.
finally the truth came out, RJ slipped and said..."when Trayvon attacked George Zimmerman......" when Piers asked about it she tried to cover it up by saying something about "well if your kid doesn't attack they will be in the news as a missing child" i wish the transcript of her interview was on line then the world could see her lies.
The jury got it right!!!
I would like you to address the real issue regarding young black males in America-that they commit a huge number of violent crimes and live in a self created culture of glorifying violence. Most black leadership avoids this issue and deflects the discussion to racism
that is a minor problem compared to the self inflicted damage done to many in the black community by themselves. We need some leadership to act like adults. The George Zimmetman trial is a smoke screen. Do something worthwhile not feed this distraction from the real issue
I totally agree with you. An interesting recent article appeared on PJ Media on this subject:
"What Do You Do When The Oppressed Are Their Own Worst Oppressors?"
Piers Morgan does not interview people. He is there to promote his own agenda and is not interested in any views that do not match his own. I was squirming during his interview with Ms Jeantel. I had a high opinion of Trayvon until I saw the type of woman he mixed with..She might not be able to help her underbite but nobody need eat as much as she obviously did to look that repulsive. The girl has no energy or charm.
Let me help those of you that do not understand the unintended implication of the GZ verdict:
If you have a child (girl or boy) and a child molester, rapist, or kidnapper follows your child on his/her way home wanting to harm your child, and your child luckily is able to overpower the person and beat the crap out of the molester, kidnapper or rapist. If the person now pick up his/her gun at that point and shoots your child, the verdict is saying it is okay. Because at that point the molester, rapist or kidnapper would claim to be in fear of his/her life.
GZ never announced who he was, so it was natural for TM to run and when confronted, fight for his life. This is not black and white case, it is a case of broken law. If you do not believe it, just pray it happens to your child, maybe then you will be able to understand and have a taste of what TM parents are going through now.
You obviously did not objectively review all of the evidence in the case. George Zimmerman did not follow Trayvon Martin except to see which street he walked down. If Trayvon Martin had just kept walking, he woulld have reached his destination (his father's girlfriend's house) easily and safely. There is no evidence that Trayvon Martin ran away from George Zimmerman (if he had run away from George Zimmerman, Zimmerman would not have been able to catch him). George Zimmerman did not stalk him. Zimmerman never went more than 100 feet from his vehicle. Trayvon Martin attacked George Zimmerman in such a way that Zimmerman had legitimate reason to fear for his life. In the unlikely scenario that you have put forward, a jury would still have to decide whether it was reasonable for the "molester, kidnapper, or rapist" to be in genuine fear for his life. It should not be automatically assumed that the person who fired the shot would get off on a self defense claim.
Hugo, you see how biased you are. You said GZ did not follow, even though GZ said with his own mouth when he was talking to the 991 operator that he, GZ was following TM. It show you cannot be objective in analyzing the case. In the re-enacting GZ gave did you see where he parked his car and how far it was from where TM's body was found? Another fact that shows you did not really follow the case.
As I made clear, GZ "followed" TM only to see which street he went down. It is undeniably true that if TM had just kept walking that he would have made it safely to his destination, which was his father's girlfriend's house. GZ only ventured ~100 feet from his truck. It was a much longer distance than that to TM's destination. There is a website with an aerial map of the neighborhood, which helps one get a better picture of how things happened. You might wish to look at it. GZ was attacked by TM as GZ was walking back to his truck, which was not near TM's destination. You need to be aware that the statements of GZ regarding his actions that night were recorded during an interview on Sean Hannity's show in 2012. The PROSECUTION entered that interview with GZ's statements as to his movements and as to TM attacking him into the court proceedings as evidence. In other words, the prosecution by doing so acknowledged GZ's version of events. They then tried to discredit GZ's statements made in the interview, but were not able to do so. The conclusions are clear: TM attacked GZ, and GZ shot and killed TM in self defense. It is a tragedy, but one that TM could have easily avoided if he had just kept walking toward his destination. GZ was not "stalking" him. He had no reason to attack TM since he had already called the police and was waiting for them to arrive.
IIf a child molester were following my child I would hope that he would simply walk home. Not walk home then turn around and go back to "whoop his ass" as is the case here.
Rob, you would hope your child walk home, even though your child knows you are not at home at that time to protect him/her?
I agree with Rob Webb. A child old enough to walk home alone is old enough to lock all of the doors once inside the house and call 911.
Dele's statement makes no sense whatsoever: "Rob, you would hope your child walk home, even though your child knows you are not at home at that time to protect him/her?"
If the child needs someone at home to protect him/her, the child does not have the ability to "whoop" anyone.
Piers Morgan does have his own agenda and it is divisive; exploiting others and creating division. Don't be fooled into thinking he really cares about the issues at hand, he as an agenda regarding "gun control." He's not a citizen of the US so what does he have to lose! Shame on CNN for letting him bully people who don't follow his distorted thinking.
I I firmly believe that Piers Morgan must not watch his own shows. She came across as a ghetto queen in the trial!. In her interview with Piers she still came across as a ghetto queen.
My respect for both Piers Morgan and Anderson Cooper has elevated in the last week because of their intelligent and compassionate interviews with many of the people involved in this whole terrible incident. It does appear that having an all white jury may have altered the outcome which is very unfortunate. Also, that juror that spoke out first should not have been allowed on the jury. They are not supposed to have pre-trial assumptions about the situation and she obviously did. She is married to a lawyer so you can't tell me she didn't talk about it with him at some time in the eighteen months before the trial. Do they live in a vacuum? Also, she had a book deal ready to sign the second the trial was over. Is that why she wanted to be on the jury? She has really discredited herself. Perhaps if the jury had not been sequestered they would not have been so insulated, naive and ignorant of all of the facts. There should definitely have been at least one or two African Americans on the jury to provide balance and perspective. What is wrong with the state of Florida? They allow a mother who lets her little daughter's body decay in the trunk of her car, then bury her in a swamp area and lie for months about it off and an adult with a gun who stalks an unarmed teenager and then shoots him to death walk also. This is crazy considering that another mother is serving 20 years for shooting at her horrible abusive husband and he wasn't injured at all. Something is really wrong here. Casey Anthony and George Zimmerman might actually have been better of being convicted of manslaughter and then serving up to five years and then when they were released they would have paid their debt to justice, served their time and perhaps could have started over to some extent. This way they are fugitives for the rest of their lives. Zimmerman will now know the fear that Trayvon Martin felt when he was being followed by a stranger and did not know what was happening. Karma.
Joan, I totally agree with you.
It racist to say that the jury could not be fair and impartial just because they were white. This case has proved beyond any doubt that Blacks can be racist because so many convicted GZ in their hearts before hearing all the facts. CNN has reported that the prosecution dismissed a black prospective juror because he reported that he watched FOX news! It has also been reported that a black alternate juror agreed with the jury's verdict.
Please help me here. Those of you that are so happy about the jury's verdict: What do you think that TM did wrong that he had to die that night?
" What do you think that TM did wrong that he had to die that night?"
He attacked George Zimmerman for no reason at all. Martin was long gone while Zimmerman continued talking to the dispatcher. Martin then turned back to attack Zimmerman simply because he was mad at him. Rachel Jeantel knows the entire story but she isn't talking.
Trayvon should NOT have come back and confronted Zimmerman, he should have just kept running all the way home. That's the point keeps being ignored.
He attacked GZ and could very possibly killed him with his bare hands. GZ used the only weapon in his possession. No attack on GZ and TM would still be alive.
The GZ verdict is wrong. Here is why: The jury got it wrong. Juror B37 in her interview confessed to them not understanding the law surrounding manslaughter. She said they wanted to ask the judge if they could include the moment GZ started following TM as part of the evidence to decide manslaughter, but when they couldn't get an elaboration on definition of manslaughter and did not understand whether to consider the incidence leading to the confrontation in determining self-defense, the jury then decided not to consider what happened prior to the confrontation. Juror B37 said they all believe GZ was guilty of following him, but they did not factor that in, which is something a judge would have factored in if he/she was deciding the case. So the verdict is far from being just or fair.
This is nonsense squared. The jury got the verdict right despite not fully understanding all of the evidence exonerating GZ. Even the Black alternate juror says the jury got it right.
Why not let OJ Simpson out of jail so that he can join all the black protesters. While he's at it he may be able to find the real killers
Moishe, nemesis always catch up with evil doers no matter how long it takes. OJ got his and GZ will too. Remember that.
Mark O'Mara That's cause she was angry during the trial. She fell into the BS that was being preached during the trial and took that
angry into the court room. It ended up hurting her. Now that she had time to calm down and relax she has more people listening to
This story case was so sad! Don't worry Zimmerman will end up in jail or dead before you know it. He is his own worse enemy.
Notify me of new comments via email.