Quote:
Originally Posted by Makarov
Well, in my defence, we do know for a fact that Zimmerman shot and killed an unarmed teenager. We also know that, barring some intervening tragedy, if Zimmerman hadn't been out patrolling the perimeter of his gated community with a loaded firearm, Trayvon Martin would still be alive.
Again, I'm not saying that these facts alone mean that Zimmerman was guilty of murder (or indeed any criminal offence). However, they are enough for my sympathies in this tragic story to lie with Martin, the dead child. I'm surprised that, for other posters, despite these few known facts, their sympathies lie with Zimmerman.
|
What we know is that we don't really know what happened that night. Anyone arguing differently are clearly biased. I mean we can't help but form opinions, but I simply don't think it's fair to make assumptions about either Zimmerman or Martin. Of course people who have formed opinions are going "but he did...but he had..but...but" which is all just bull#### (in my opinion of course).
As I believe heavily in the concept of innocent until proven guilty, I don't see why I need to chose which side I feel sympathy for either. Why can't it be both? Zimmerman has to live with killing a 17 year old and half the nation hating him (some going so far as to put a bounty on his head) thinking he's a racist murderer where from all accounts he's not racist. While the Martin family has to deal with the death of their child.
If I need to hate someone or something about this trial, it's easily the media for me. Bunch of scumbags.