The State of Florida vs George Zimmerman: The Trial

Zimmerman's Parents in Hiding from 'Enormous Amount of Death Threats': ABC News Exclusive
July 15, 2013
By LAUREN EFFRON
LAUREN EFFRON More From Lauren »

George Zimmerman immediately went back into hiding after being acquitted of murder in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, his parents told Barbara Walters in an exclusive interview with ABC News, adding that they haven't seen him since he left the courthouse.

The Zimmermans said that because of "an enormous amount of death threats," they, too, have remained in hiding and still don't feel safe enough to return to their home in Orlando, Fla.

Two days after a Florida jury found their 29-year-old son not guilty of second-degree murder and manslaughter charges in the death of Martin, 17, Zimmerman's parents, Robert Zimmerman Sr. and Gladys Zimmerman, sat down for their first television interview. They opened up about how their son's murder trial has affected their family and how he and they are struggling to cope with the aftermath.

"Under the circumstances, we have not been able to talk to him," Gladys Zimmerman told Walters. "To tell you the truth, we don't trust anything, not even the phones."

"We have had an enormous amount of death threats. George's legal counsel has had death threats, the police chief of Sanford, many people have had death threats," Robert Zimmerman said."'Everyone with Georgie's DNA should be killed' -- just every kind of horrible thing you can imagine."

Zimmerman juror says she’s lost her job and received death threats against her kids
The Daily Mail Online ^ | November 1, 2013 | Alex Grieg
Posted on 11/1/2013 12:08:34 PM by Uncle Chip

A juror in the George Zimmerman trial claims the case ruined her life and says she's had death threats made against her children, lost friends, her job and will soon lose her home as a result of it.

The juror, a 36-year-old mother of eight who only identified herself as Maddy during an interview on Inside Edition Thursday, was the only juror who showed her face when she appeared on Good Morning America in July.

Since then, Maddy says, she's lost her job as an aide at a nursing home and she and her husband have had to sell most of their possessions.

Twitter explodes with death threats against George Zimmerman, white people Comment142 Share
See alsoGovernment Topics George Zimmerman Conservative Opinion Congressional Black Caucus Death Threats Racism
Twitter explodes with death threats against George Zimmerman, white people
Gary W. Green/Getty Images

Joe NewbySpokane Conservative Examiner
Subscribe Follow:
Twitter explodes with death threats against George Zimmerman, white people
Zoom in
June 28, 2013
On Thursday, Twitchy reported that the social media site Twitter has exploded with death threats against George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch volunteer on trial for the shooting death of Trayvon Martin. Twitchy said that several also threatened to kill random white people if Zimmerman is not found guilty.

Most of the tweets captured by Twitchy were racist and profane in nature.

"I'll kill him," tweeted "Lindsey Franco."

"Watching the Zimmerman Trial. If he don't get life ill kill him myself (sic)," said the ironically named "Love." The tweet was deleted, but not before Twitchy captured it.

"Trayvon Martin need justice ! Gimme me tha pistol ill kill Zimmerman myself," declared another Twitter user.

One person offered to kill Zimmerman for $20, and several said they would murder random white people.

"If they don't kill Zimmerman Ima kill me a cracka (sic)," said one person, using a racial term for white people that Mediaite's Tommy Christopher said is a "proud nod to the region’s history, and one’s own ancestry."

"If George Zimmerman win I'm gonna kill a fat white boy dat look lik George Zimmerman I swear lol (sic)," tweeted "Creeplife."

Last year, Martin supporters flocked to Twitter, using the site to express their desire to see Zimmerman killed.

The volume of threats was so high that a member of the family wrote the Seminole County NAACP, saying blood would be on their hands if Zimmerman was harmed.

The unidentified family member said "the rest of the racists that have rushed" to judge Zimmerman will also have blood on their hands if he is hurt.

"You need to call off the dogs. Period. Publicly and swiftly,” the letter added.

The New Black Panther Party put out a $10,000 bounty on Zimmerman's head with a "Wanted Dead or Alive" poster and issued calls to murder white people.

"Kill these racist honkeys, these crackers, these pigs, these pink people, It has been long overdue!" the group said in a tweet that has since been deleted.

From the beginning, the Zimmerman case has brought out the worst in many people, including some in Congress who prejudged Zimmerman to be racist without knowing all the facts.

Civil rights activists like Jesse Jackson and MSNBC's Al Sharpton used the shooting to whip up racial strife in the country.

The FBI, however, said in a report that racism was not a factor in the shooting death of Trayvon Martin.

Related:

New Black Panther le

http://www.examiner.com/article/judicial-watch-zimmerman-prosecution-may-have-been-forced-by-obama-doj

Last year, the Zimmerman family wrote the Justice Department asking why members of the New Black Panther Party were not arrested for actions they said fall into the category of hate crimes.

The letter also suggested that race was the reason for the inaction.

“The Zimmerman family is in hiding because of the threats that have been made against us, yet the DOJ has maintained an eerie silence on this matter. These threats are very public. If you haven’t been paying attention just do a Google search and you will find plenty. Since when can a group of people in the United States put a bounty on someone’s head, circulate Wanted posters publicly, and still be walking the streets?” the family asked last April.

At the time the letter was written, DOJ employees were busy providing technical assistance during demonstrations in Sanford, according to documents obtained by Judicial Watch.

Related:

I've said this before, but if you have to defend yourself, and if circumstances allow, it is likely better to just make sure that your assailants are dead and then slip away, letting the police chalk it all up to "gang activity".

This is likely true even if you have a solid case that it was legitimate self defense.

Quote:

Many people have been attacked without suffering any marks of any kind. It happens. Inept people do attack...and some people being attack are street smart and can easily thwart an attack.

So this poor innocent child can outfight a man who is ten years older then he happen to be and to the degree that there was not a mark on his body.

Seems you are going away from a poor harmless teenager in order to be able to explain how Zimmerman could be the attacker and yet not be able to leave any marks of any kind on Trayvon.

OmSigDAVID wrote:

OmSigDAVID wrote:

BillRM wrote:

Zimmerman stalked Martin.

What an emotional loaded word to used for the act of legally following Trayvon
in order to get the police to check him out!!!!!!!!!!

Yes he killed Trayvon and a jury found he did so in legal self defense.

Frank Apisa wrote:

Zimmmerman STALKED Martin...whether the word is emotionally loaded or not.

Frank, u write that as if there were anything rong
with stalking someone. If we ever meet, u will be welcome to STALK me.
I will not mind, and I faithfully promise NOT to beat your head on the street.
I remember a childrens' game called: "Follow the Leader."
When the stalking is complete, we can go somewhere good for dinner.
I wish that u 'd stop implying that there is anything rong
with following anyone, unless u show how it is un-lawful or immoral, or fattening.

If u DO allege that it is un-lawful,
then will u please cite to the applicable statute
and quote its operative language???

David

Frank Apisa wrote:

I did not say it was unlawful, did I, David?

Yes, u did not (so far as I know),
but u appeared to be so intensely offended by it
that I was un-sure on that point; (better just to ask).

Frank Apisa wrote:

And thank you for agreeing that it was stalking.

OK; the truth is that I dont know the difference
between stalking and following; however, I did not mean that
in the sense of animalistic depredations.
I believe that Zimmy was trying to identify martin's location for the police.

Frank Apisa wrote:

Under any circumstances...none of us know for sure who attacked whom first. Except for what Zimmerman says, we have no hard facts about what occurred when the two first said words to each other...and there is no reason to put great credence in what Zimmerman says.

I suspect that u already know
that in America, the defendant always gets the benefit of the doubt,
which is to say that the burden of proof is on the affirmative side.
David

Just one thing here I want to comment on here, David

DAVID wrote:

the defendant always gets the benefit of the doubt,
which is to say that the burden of proof is on the affirmative side.

Frank Apisa wrote:

Let's grant that for the trial that is so.

But the thing I was talking with Bill about was who attacked whom first.

We do not know. The jury does not know.

The jury is instructed the way you say.

We have no such instructions, because we are not a jury judging Zimmerman.

Bill repeatedly has said that Martin attacked Zimmerman.

WE DO NOT KNOW THAT!

That was what I said.

OmSigDAVID wrote:

R u suggesting that Zimmy was executing a citizen's arrest ??

Frank Apisa wrote:

No, I am not. I am suggesting quite strongly I thought,
that we do not know who instigated the physical confrontation
that began with Zimmerman stalking Martin.

In YOUR scenario,
if Zimmy were NOT endeavoring to arrest martin
(as no one has ever alleged that he did), what possible motivation
did Zimmy have for laying hands on martin?? Do u allege that he
wanted to beat up ALL blacks and that he just went after the nearest one ????

BillRM wrote:

Frank Apisa wrote:

Zimmmerman STALKED Martin...wh

LOl we both know that you are using the word stalked to imply that Zimmerman was planning on attacking Trayvon and that the only reason you are in love with that word instead of the more correct word follow. that does not imply Zimmerman had any plans to attack Trayvon.

It should always be remembered that every single thing that Frank Apisa ever says is without exception always an outright lie.

To do so they needed to turn a mixed race Latin man
without any known racial hate, into a gun nut racist white man and Trayvon
from a hoodlum want to be into a poor defenseless black child.

In this case, Zimmerman ended up with a few minor scratches...and Martin ended up with a bullet into his chest.

Are you honestly saying that you could not come up with that...or with any of several other possible scenarios where Zimmerman could have initiated a physical confrontation????

His "motivation" may have been that he was in a funk
because his wife left him...and he was looking for someone upon whom
to take his anger and frustration.



Are you honestly saying that you could not come up with that...or with
any of several other possible scenarios where Zimmerman could have
initiated a physical confrontation????

Quote:

In this case, Zimmerman ended up with a few minor scratches...and Martin ended up with a bullet into his chest.

Sorry but a broken nose and wounds on the back of his head are not a few minor scratches and not a damn mark of any kind on Trayvon but one bullet wound tell the story of an attacked by Trayvon on Zimmerman that Zimmerman ended with one gun shot.

All Zimmerman wounds and the complete lack of any marks at all on Trayvon completely support Zimmerman version of the events of that night.

Quote:

Are you honestly saying that you could not come up with that...or with any of several other possible scenarios where Zimmerman could have initiated a physical confrontation????

Occam razor leave little question of who the attacker was that night and it is not the man who was on the phone trying to get the police on the scene and it was the man who was known to bragged of what a great fighter he happen to be.

Are you honestly saying that you could not come up with that...or with any of several other possible scenarios where Zimmerman could have initiated a physical confrontation????

Occam razor leave little question of who the attacker was that night and it is not the man who was on the phone trying to get the police on the scene and it was the man who was known to bragged of what a great fighter he happen to be.

Frank Apisa wrote:

His "motivation" may have been that he was in a funk
because his wife left him...and he was looking for someone upon whom
to take his anger and frustration.



Are you honestly saying that you could not come up with that...or with
any of several other possible scenarios where Zimmerman could have
initiated a physical confrontation????

Yes. I cud think of no reason for a random fist fight attack.
To my mind, the "funk" theory is not plausible. When I have felt "blue"
it has never occurred to me to start a fist fight with someone; alien idea.
I don t know anyone who acts like that; I never heard of anyone who acts like that.
To me, the idea of a random attack on martin just does not make sense,
not even if Zimmy had been drinking, which no one alleges to be the case.

David

Frank Apisa wrote:

His "motivation" may have been that he was in a funk
because his wife left him...and he was looking for someone upon whom
to take his anger and frustration.



Are you honestly saying that you could not come up with that...or with
any of several other possible scenarios where Zimmerman could have
initiated a physical confrontation????

Yes. I cud think of no reason for a random fist fight attack.
To my mind, the "funk" theory is not plausible. When I have felt "blue"
it has never occurred to me to start a fist fight with someone; alien idea.
I don t know anyone who acts like that; I never heard of anyone who acts like that.
To me, the idea of a random attack on martin just does not make sense,
not even if Zimmy had been drinking, which no one alleges to be the case.

David

David, because you wouldn't do something
is hardly a reason to suppose others also wouldn't.

C'mon.

This guy acts out often...and that MAY be what happened that night.

Do you disagree with my comment:

We do not know who instigated the physical confrontation that night.

Occam's Razor is one of the weakest philosophical gambits ever...and by no means does it clear up the question of who the attacker was that night.

We do not know who initiated the physical confrontation.

we do not know WITH PHILOSOPHICAL CERTAINTY who started the fight.