Las Vegas Sun

May 3, 2015

Currently: 88° — Complete forecast | Log in | Create an account

letter to the editor:

Zimmerman will always be on trial

I thought the jury would find George Zimmerman guilty. After all, he was an adult male with a concealed weapon following a 17-year-old, unarmed male. At some point there was a confrontation and the 17-year-old was shot dead. How could Zimmerman not be guilty? Silly me. But there is some relief in the fact that Zimmerman will be looking over his shoulder for the rest of his life. He will not live a normal life. I guess we’ll have to settle for that.

Join the Discussion:

Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.

Full comments policy

Previous Discussion: 22 comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

  1. I wish I could say that Mr. Mundy's letter surprises me, but sadly, it doesn't. If you strip it down, in Mr. Mundy's opinion, if someone follows someone else and a confrontation ensues, and the person being followed is shot by the person doing the following, the person doing the following is guilty. No need to look any further. No need to investigate the circumstances. Doesn't matter who started the physical altercation. Doesn't matter that it isn't illegal to follow someone or to carry a weapon if you have a permit. Doesn't matter what the laws are.

    If this is how our society decides guilt, we can dispense with laws, evidence and trials.

    What if someones car is vandalized and items stolen and the owner sees someone near the car on his return? What if he follows that person, catches up to him and asks him questions related to the vandalism? What if the person takes exception to being followed and the questions asked and a physical confrontation ensues? What if the person being followed ends up dead at the hand of the other person? What if there are no witnesses?

    I'm afraid that in the world that Mr. Mundy and others live in, the guy that did the following would be presumed guilty based on the fact that he followed someone and that person is dead.

    I don't know if Zimmerman lied about the events and neither does anyone but Zimmerman, but we have all agreed to be governed by laws and to judge people in trials based on available evidence and guided by laws. That's what happened here. I do not want to throw all that out the window over a tragic situation because some people 'believe' Zimmerman profiled, stalked and murdered an unarmed black teenager. There is little evidence of that and there is some evidence to support the version Zimmerman told. Can we be sure the verdict was correct? Absolutely not. Should a man be convicted when there is reasonable doubt that he actually profiled, stalked and murdered an unarmed black teenager? I think not.


  2. Here is another supporter of a mugger. If Martin thought he was being followed he would have called 911 instead of attacking someone for being on the same sidewalk. Martin was clearly the attacker. By design of the concealed carry law he could not have known that Zimmerman could defend himself that way and so he apparently thought he could get away with a beat down.

  3. The legal system failed in the Zimmerman-Martin trial. Why? The purpose of the U.S. legal system is to provide the truth and justice. If not both, at least the truth. The Zimmerman-Martin trial provided neither.

    Carmine D

  4. When two people decide to "stand their ground" stuff can happen. When one has a gun, the outcome can be predicted. Two cases of poor judgment and bad decisions led to tragedy.

  5. Jim:

    But... one was 17 years old and the other 27. Who should have known better: The 17 or 27 year old?

    Carmine D

  6. Carmine,

    Both should have known better and both made poor choices. And most importantly, under our system, you cannot convict and punish someone for poor judgment, unless they also violated a law or laws and that can be proven 'beyond a reasonable doubt'.


  7. "Carmine,

    Both should have known better and both made poor choices"


    When I was 17, my father was the dumbest person in the world. After a few years in the Army and I came home, I was amazed how much smarter he had gotten.

    Carmine D

  8. Zimmerman was told to stay in his car by a police dispatcher, until the police arrived. He chose not to take the advice of the dispatcher,and took matters into his own hands. For this we have a young 17 year old who is dead (martin), and 27 year old (Zimmerman) who will forever by on the lookout for someone trying to get to him and cause bodily harm. Both have sad endings.

  9. CarmineD -- Age doesn't necessarily bring wisdom. You only have to look at Congressional leaders to see that!


  10. Sam: Another distortion, The dispatcher said "we don't need you to do that" as Zimmerman was walking. he said "OK" and turned back and was bushwhacked from behind by martin. get the story straight it would seem that Martin was looking for a victim to beat down. for all he knew Zimmerman was a person out for a walk.

  11. Carmine,

    The evidence wasn't there to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Zimmerman was guilty of the charges he faced. The decision was proper, even though some may disagree with it.


  12. Jim: Your last comment made me laugh.

    Michael: Count me in the latter category.

    Sam: I have to wonder, would Zimmerman have gotten out of his vehicle on the night of February 26, 2012, IF he didn't have a gun? We won't ever know!

    Carmine D

  13. I believe he would. He was simply watching out for his neighborhood, by the way included Martins Father.
    He didn't act on his own he called the police instead as he was supposed to.

  14. Carmine,

    I can totally understand feeling sorry for Martin and his family and friends, and wondering just what really happened. I wasn't on the jury and I did not watch every minute of the trial, but from what I did see and know, I could not have voted to convict Zimmerman, although I will readily admit he might be guilty.

    Zimmerman said he did not do what he was accused of. He was accused in the media of being a racist but there was no evidence of that. His call with police was doctored by the media to make it look like he volunteered that Martin was black when he only provided that information when specifically asked by the dispatcher. His wounds were consistent with a fight where the other person was landing blows. Witnesses , although far away, said it appeared that Zimmerman was on the ground and under Martin. Friends of Zimmerman said the voice yelling for help was his, while Martin's father could not be sure whose voice it was.

    Add to all that what Rachel Jeantel said to Piers Morgan about Whoop Ass, homophobia and Zimmerman not understanding that Martin wasn't trying to kill him but just whoop ass on him, and I find it hard to understand people who think the jury should have convicted Zimmerman.


  15. Nez212 Clyde Perkins,

    "Sam, another distortion,the dispatcher said "we don't need you to do that" as Zimmerman was walking,he said "OK" and turned back and was bushwhacked from behind by Martin. Get the story straight it would seem that Martin was looking for a victim to beat down.For all we know Zimmerman was a person out for a walk."

    Talk about distortion where did you ever get that information that" Zimmerman turned back and was bushwhacked by Martin ? "

    I suggest that you get the story straight before you ,come up with a wild accusation like that.

  16. Yes Zimmerman will always be on trial. We don't know who took the first swing, we don't know who was screaming for help, we don't know if Martin was defending himself and got the upper hand. We don't know if Martin knew Zimmerman had a gun.

    Yes Zimmerman will be looking over his shoulder, because we heard only one version of a complex situation.

  17. But Vernos, should Zimmerman have been convicted based upon the evidence available? If the answer is 'no', that should be the end of it.

    The FBI has investigated the racist angle and determined that there is no evidence that this was racially motivated. Eric Holder and the Justice department should let it go.

    If Martin's parents and attorney want to file a wrongful death case in civil court, they should be allowed to do that. That's the extent of what should happen.


  18. nez212- "If Martin thought he was being followed he would have called 911"

    Not true. Young black men don't trust the police because they are treated differently. And you believe Martin attacked Zimmerman because you want to, not because of facts or truth. No one seems to remember Zimmerman had previous incidents of violence. You people pretend Martin was some sort of gangsta thug but don't realize Zimmerman had been involved in domestic abuse having a restraining order placed on him. He was also arrested and charged with resisting an officer and battery of law enforcement officer. All of which magically disappeared. Hmmm, do you think his father the judge had anything to do with it?

  19. Mr Sam: I have seen no evidence to show otherwise and much to the contrary.
    I listened to the same recordings and saw the same evidence that the Jury did and made my opinion based on that.

  20. wtplv - "But Vernos, should Zimmerman have been convicted based upon the evidence available? If the answer is 'no', that should be the end of it."

    No I don't, the system is what it is. But if a black woman or two had been jurists we may have had a different out come. Far too many people fail to realize that when it comes to law minorities are treated very different than whites in this country.

  21. Vernos,

    I think you said you don't think Zimmerman should have been convicted. Good. I hope that's what you said. And yes, unfortunately, I think you are right and he may have been convicted if there were black men or women on the jury.

    That's just the problem. We still have racism and some unequal treatment of minorities by police and the justice system, but it is soooooo much better that it was in the past and continues to improve. When minorities on juries do things like vote for acquittals or convictions when the evidence doesn't support it, all it does is give the bigots a reason to stay bigoted and brings questions into the minds of some who want all people treated equally.

    I know it's tough to swallow the unfairness, but when minorities retaliate through the justice system by supporting incorrect verdicts not justified by the facts of a case, it just sets back the goal they want to reach, which is equality for all.


  22. wtplv - "I think you said you don't think Zimmerman should have been convicted."

    In my heart he should have been convicted of manslaughter, according to law he should walk. Until the day Zimmerman dies we will never know what was the truth and what was not. We only have one side of a story and according to the system Zimmerman is not guilty. I wonder though, what if he was a black man? Would the outcome be the same?