Trayvon Martin's Family Calls For Arrest Of Man Who Confessed To Shooting [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Trayvon Martin's Family Calls For Arrest Of Man Who Confessed To Shooting


Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6

TBO
03-09-2012, 09:15
Trayvon Martin's Family Calls For Arrest Of Man Who Police Say Confessed To Shooting

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/08/family-of-trayvon-martin-_n_1332756.html

wjv
03-09-2012, 17:54
Even considering the source (HuffPo) it sounds like a questionable shooting. Unless the 17 year old went wack-a-doodle and started assaulting the "block captain" or what ever his title is. Gut feeling is that was not the case, but rather you had a young guy who wanted to play cop.

Like I said, just a gut feeling. Could be wrong. Too bad that there weren't any witnesses.

Problem with cases like these is that they both had an equal right to be walking on that block. But both seemed upset that the other one was there. :dunno:

This is a perfect example of MYOB. . Especially when carrying a gun.

ballr4lyf
03-09-2012, 18:22
I can't find any other news stories about this that says anything differently than what was posted. That being the case, it really sounds like a REALLY bad shoot. If it is determined to be so, lock the wanna-be Dirty Harry up!

blackjack
03-10-2012, 04:04
I can't find any other news stories about this that says anything differently than what was posted. That being the case, it really sounds like a REALLY bad shoot. If it is determined to be so, lock the wanna-be Dirty Harry up!

Left out of the Huff-n-Puff's account by the "writer":

The report said that Zimmerman’s back was wet and he was covered in grass as if he had been on the ground. He was bleeding from his nose and the back of the head, the report said.

From:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/family-wants-answers-in-teens-death-after-encounter-with-neighborhood-watch-leader/2012/03/08/gIQAPkJSzR_story.html

IMNSHO, referring to anything on the HuffPo as a "news story" is a significant stretch. The writer had an obvious point of view and was not impartial in any way, shape, or form.

Also discussed here:

http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1407217

FL Airedale
03-10-2012, 05:18
The report said that Zimmerman’s back was wet and he was covered in grass as if he had been on the ground. He was bleeding from his nose and the back of the head, the report said.


That's an extremely important part of this story.

The "captain" still made a bad decision by ignoring the dispatcher's advice. Just because one is armed is no reason to go looking for trouble.

He saw what he considered suspicious and did the right thing by calling police. It is their job to deal with these matters and they are trained to do it.

The only way he should have gotten further involved is if someone's life was in imminent danger.

Misty02
03-10-2012, 05:55
My prayers to the family. I can only imagine what it would be like to deal with the loss of one’s child. I too would want answers. I’m afraid the entire truth will never be learned by those involved though.

.

RussP
03-10-2012, 07:23
From:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/family-wants-answers-in-teens-death-after-encounter-with-neighborhood-watch-leader/2012/03/08/gIQAPkJSzR_story.htmlSanford Police Chief Bill Lee:
There is some physical evidence and some testimony that would corroborate some of that story


The 911 tapes haven’t been released because it has critical information and detectives don’t want it to influence the testimony of prospective witnesses


residents upset by the lack of an arrest so far should wait until the investigation is completed, as soon as next week.


The State Attorney’s Office will then decide whether to present it to a grand jury.


“I understand the emotions and the response from the community ... based on the limited information they have,” Lee said.


“We just hope they would allow us the time to conduct a thorough and fair investigation.”

Mr. Blandings
03-10-2012, 07:57
Here's another story -

http://abcnews.go.com/US/florida-family-seeks-justice-unarmed-teen-shot-neighborhood/story?id=15888961#.T1trSIEgd2B

RussP
03-10-2012, 08:13
This is from the subdivision's February 2012 Newsletter:Neighborhood Watch —
The Sanford PD has announced an increased patrol within our neighborhood. In addition to the extramarked patrols, Sanford PD has initiated random bike patrols of both the front and back yards of our community and random unmarked vehicle patrols with increased patrolling during peak crime hours.If you’ve been the victim of a crime within the community, after calling the police, please email us at:RTLNeighborhoodWatch@gmail.com, so we can be aware and help address the issue with other residents.

The Neighborhood Watch is looking for additional members to participate and become a block captains. We are open to all residents. Meetings are held the third Tuesday of each month at 6:30PM inthe clubhouse, 30 minutes prior to the scheduled HOA Board meetings. Please keep your eyes open.If you see something suspicious or out of place, report it! You can make an anonymous call to theSanford PD Non-emergency # 407-688-5199 or 911 and help keep our community safe. Email us at:RTLNeighborhoodWatch@gmail.com for more information.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/84398084/RTL-February-2012-Newsletter

steveksux
03-10-2012, 09:01
I would hate to be that guy, and plan on avoiding questionable situations, as well as escalating them. Pretty much the opposite of what this guys plan seemed to be.

So which is it, did the guy have a squeaky clean record, or was he arrested for resisting and battery on an officer? (the shooter) Charges were dropped, would like some background on that incident before passing judgement.

Did he confront an off duty cop in the same sub and start an altercation with him too?

Randy

steveksux
03-10-2012, 09:05
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1353307542&sk=infoLooks like you have the wrong Trayvon Martin. Must be a common name...

Why are they using slide shows of childhood pictures? Oh right, momma's sweet honor roll student.

How bout an up to date picture from Trayvon's own facebook page?

Quoted Image Deleted - Inappropriate Content

Randy

RussP
03-10-2012, 09:57
Folks, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, before posting, verify your information.

Yeah, I know, it takes time, it's a whole lot of trouble.

Just do it.

Thanks!! :thumbsup:

steveksux
03-10-2012, 10:25
Desire to be a hero can be a powerful motivator. Thing is, cops have better options, quite a few more non-lethal options to go to, they have backup, they have reinforcements, they have training and experience. They have much better legal and civil liability protections when mistakes are made, and when they are not.

Its all to easy to find yourself confronted with nails if all you have is a hammer. Avoidance is a lot less sexy, it doesn't soothe the ego. Smart things are often less sexy than stupid for some reason.

Observe and report. Stay out of it unless you have to. Really have to. Not "ooh this is my chance to play a cop" have to.

Randy

RussP
03-10-2012, 11:37
The term, "Gated Community" has been used many times in the stories. "Gated Community" implies secure, limited access, right? Well, maybe not...

The gates at Retreat at Twin Lakes control vehicular traffic. The walls along South Oregon Ave, the east boundary, and Oregon Ave, the north boundary and the route Martin probably used to get to and from the 7-11, do impede pedestrian traffic. HOWEVER, the Oregon Ave wall ends 390 feet west of the north access gate to the community. It is open pedestrian access at that point. (Use Google Earth, search for Retreat View Circle, Sandford, Fl.)

It's possible Martin used the northwest corner of the property to go to and from the 7-11. When he returned, Zimmerman might have witnessed him coming onto the property from between buildings.

Add in this element:http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/08/2684419_p2/shooting-mystery-miami-dade-teen.html

It was reported on March 9 that Police Chief Lee said the neighborhood watch, which works directly with police, started two months ago after the community was hit with several property crimes. Zimmerman was the leader.In the same article this is reported:
Martin lived with his mother in Miami


He was a junior at Dr. Michael M. Krop Senior High School.


He was in the middle of serving a one-week suspension from the school.


His father, Tracy Martin, didn't discuss his son’s suspension


He said he took Trayvon to Sandford “to disconnect and get his priorities straight.”

Bren
03-10-2012, 12:13
That's an extremely important part of this story.



Yeah...if you write for Huffington Post, that's the part it's important to leave out.

RussP
03-10-2012, 12:57
I would hate to be that guy, and plan on avoiding questionable situations, as well as escalating them. Pretty much the opposite of what this guys plan seemed to be.

So which is it, did the guy have a squeaky clean record, or was he arrested for resisting and battery on an officer? (the shooter) Charges were dropped, would like some background on that incident before passing judgement.

Did he confront an off duty cop in the same sub and start an altercation with him too?

RandyThat was back in 2005.

RussP
03-10-2012, 13:00
Tracy Martin said that when he asked police why Zimmerman hadn't been charged (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/09/george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin_n_1335984.html), officers told him "they respected [Zimmerman's] background, that he studied criminal justice for four years and that he was squeaky clean."

RussP
03-10-2012, 13:10
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/08/family-of-trayvon-martin-_n_1332756.html

Chief Lee:
By Zimmerman's account, he followed Martin to get an address to give police.


Zimmerman was trying to keep Martin in eyesight.


Zimmerman told the police that Martin noticed that he was being followed and asked, “what’s your problem?”


That's when a physical confrontation ensued.


Moments later, Martin was shot.
This occurred at night during halftime of the NBA All Star Game. Did Zimmerman have his headlights on or off while following Martin?

Misty02
03-10-2012, 13:15
The term, "Gated Community" has been used many times in the stories. "Gated Community" implies secure, limited access, right? Well, maybe not...

The gates at Retreat at Twin Lakes control vehicular traffic. The walls along South Oregon Ave, the east boundary, and Oregon Ave, the north boundary and the route Martin probably used to get to and from the 7-11, do impede pedestrian traffic. HOWEVER, the Oregon Ave wall ends 390 feet west of the north access gate to the community. It is open pedestrian access at that point. (Use Google Earth, search for Retreat View Circle, Sandford, Fl.)

It's possible Martin used the northwest corner of the property to go to and from the 7-11. When he returned, Zimmerman might have witnessed him coming onto the property from between buildings.

Add in this element:In the same article this is reported:

In addition to all that, kids do some unnecessary and stupid things at times, especially boys. One of mine got a pretty nasty gash on the back of his thigh (right underneath his buttocks) when he miscalculated the height of our chain linked fence (the top ends on metal open V). As his brother was explaining how he had to pull him off the fence and he heard the short tear right before all the blood started pouring out, the only question I had of them “why did you jump the fence? The gate door was open!” Their response? “Oh, we just wanted to see if we could jump it!” (or something to that effect)

They were 11 and 8 at the time; the little one was the one bleeding all over the place. For a second, I considered letting him bleed out for doing something so stupid. Yes, they still do stupid things ever so often in spite being in their 20’s. Like the night they decided to dress with all their gear to practice (their name, mine is play) exterior home defense and protection. My only comment being “if a neighbor calls the police because they believe something suspicious is going on, they come here and arrest you…. don’t expect me to open the door and say I know who you are and don’t waste your only phone call in calling me!” (just in case, they told the 3 or 4 closest neighbor what they were going to do).

At 17 you should have some sense (maybe), but a boy is still likely to think about jumping that fence, just to see if he can. Possible evidence to that effect is that at least one of the stories I’ve read mentioned he had the skittles and the ice tea in his pocket. Why would anyone put ice tea in their pocket unless they needed their hands free?

I have no clue what actually happened there, or who was the original aggressor, but I wouldn’t discount the possibility of a boy doing something really stupid that was completely misinterpreted by someone else observing.


.

ATW525
03-10-2012, 13:22
My initial reaction is that the shooter is a wannabe cop loser who went too far and ended up gunning down an innocent man. On further reflection, however, getting out of the car and "playing cop", while stupid, didn't automatically negate Zimmerman's right to self defense. So, depending on how things actually played out, I suppose it's entirely possible that the shooting was justified.

That said, even if he dodges criminal charges, I would not want to be in his shoes in civil court.

m2hmghb
03-10-2012, 15:18
My initial reaction is that the shooter is a wannabe cop loser who went too far and ended up gunning down an innocent man. On further reflection, however, getting out of the car and "playing cop", while stupid, didn't automatically negate Zimmerman's right to self defense. So, depending on how things actually played out, I suppose it's entirely possible that the shooting was justified.

That said, even if he dodges criminal charges, I would not want to be in his shoes in civil court.

If he dodges charges criminally he will be fine in civil court. If they determine there is no crime committed that automatically nullifies a civil case. Welcome to Florida.

jack76590
03-10-2012, 22:40
My initial reaction is that the shooter is a wannabe cop loser who went too far and ended up gunning down an innocent man. On further reflection, however, getting out of the car and "playing cop", while stupid, didn't automatically negate Zimmerman's right to self defense. So, depending on how things actually played out, I suppose it's entirely possible that the shooting was justified.

That said, even if he dodges criminal charges, I would not want to be in his shoes in civil court.

Well Zimmerman has a right to self defense, but so did Martin. Let us say Zimmerman laid hands on Martin, because he found Martin suspicious, but with no concrete evidence Martin was about to commit a crime, such as carrying a can of gasoline and threatening to set houses on fire.

If you were Martin in this situation would you feel you had a right to fight the person who laid hands on you? Now it seems Martin was a real tiger for his size. I have heard he was under 150 pounds. Now you have to ask yourself if Zimmerman who for sake of argument laid hands on Martin and is now to his surprise losing the fight has a right to shoot Martin.

I have also read Zimmerman was in a vehicle and could have just driven away and waited until police arrived. But Zimmerman chose to get out and play policeman, when at least by all accounts so far, Martin was posing no immediate threat or maybe no threat period. And again a real policeman was on the way.

I think we have to place ourselves in Martin' shoes. How would you feel if a NON police officer followed you in a vehicle, when you were not breaking the law. The person got out and a fight began, you were winning, so the aggressor who had been following you now decided to shoot you.

If Zimmerman is a struggling student, I doubt if he has assets that would justify a civil suit. As in his net worth is less than the cost of an attorney to bring suit. A civil suit should be well down Zimmermans list of concerns.

Bren
03-11-2012, 06:49
Reading the additional information in this thread - the Huffington articles still suck, but sounds like the shooter was the typical nut I expect to find on a neighborhood watch. I'd expect an arrest (although Florida sometimes surprises me, by letting shooters walk no matter how questionable the justification).

Pretty much anything that involves cooperation and organization of a suburban neighborhood is just a hobby for geeks and busybodies - for a "watch" multiply that by 10. I prefer to let everybody in my neighborhood take care of themselves - especially including me.

When I lived near there, Sanford was a country town best know for its awesome flea market. These days, I imagine it's been swallowed up by Orlando and middle-class suburbs.

steveksux
03-11-2012, 07:51
That was back in 2005.

Did you find some info on that incident? Was curious how Mr. Squeaky Clean got himself arrested... may not be relevant here, but may shed some light on his mindset.

Ultimately, I think the case is going to hinge on a lot of details known only to Zimmerman, Martin, and God. There are probably lots of scenarios, some of which end up with a crime being committed, and some of which end up with a justified shooting.

I'm thinking this is the sort of situation Mas refers to as when he advises you to "avoid the areas where the ice is thinnest"?

ETA: if you were going to list the additional info, why'd you hide it in a link???? :whistling: That's as useless as hiding useful information in books! :embarassed:

Randy

ATW525
03-11-2012, 08:09
Well Zimmerman has a right to self defense, but so did Martin. Let us say Zimmerman laid hands on Martin, because he found Martin suspicious, but with no concrete evidence Martin was about to commit a crime, such as carrying a can of gasoline and threatening to set houses on fire.

If you were Martin in this situation would you feel you had a right to fight the person who laid hands on you? Now it seems Martin was a real tiger for his size. I have heard he was under 150 pounds. Now you have to ask yourself if Zimmerman who for sake of argument laid hands on Martin and is now to his surprise losing the fight has a right to shoot Martin.

I have also read Zimmerman was in a vehicle and could have just driven away and waited until police arrived. But Zimmerman chose to get out and play policeman, when at least by all accounts so far, Martin was posing no immediate threat or maybe no threat period. And again a real policeman was on the way.

I think we have to place ourselves in Martin' shoes. How would you feel if a NON police officer followed you in a vehicle, when you were not breaking the law. The person got out and a fight began, you were winning, so the aggressor who had been following you now decided to shoot you.

If Zimmerman is a struggling student, I doubt if he has assets that would justify a civil suit. As in his net worth is less than the cost of an attorney to bring suit. A civil suit should be well down Zimmermans list of concerns.

I don't disagree at all. I think it really hinges on why Zimmerman got out of the car, who initiated the physical confrontation and whether Zimmerman was really in fear of his life. However, looking at Florida's Stand Your Ground law, it wouldn't surprise me if this never sees the inside of a courtroom.

steveksux
03-11-2012, 08:12
I don't disagree at all. I think it really hinges on why Zimmerman got out of the car, who initiated the physical confrontation and whether Zimmerman was really in fear of his life. However, looking at Florida's Stand Your Ground law, it wouldn't surprise me if this never sees the inside of a courtroom.The problem for me is, without knowing what happened, I can't tell if this never seeing the inside of the courtroom is a good thing, or a bad thing. It may turn out that the kid had a right to stand his ground also.

Randy

Bren
03-11-2012, 08:19
I don't disagree at all. I think it really hinges on why Zimmerman got out of the car, who initiated the physical confrontation and whether Zimmerman was really in fear of his life. However, looking at Florida's Stand Your Ground law, it wouldn't surprise me if this never sees the inside of a courtroom.

Even if you assume the dead kid attacked the shooter, Florida did not change the level of force you are allowed to use, so the shooter would still have to have reasonably believed he was in danger of "death or great bodily harm." Fla.St. §§ 776.012-.013.

Bren
03-11-2012, 08:26
The problem for me is, without knowing what happened, I can't tell if this never seeing the inside of the courtroom is a good thing, or a bad thing. It may turn out that the kid had a right to stand his ground also.

Randy

You are correct. Shotters tend to want to side with the guy with a CCW permit, but he may not have been the guy acting in self-defense, from what we've read so far. If the kid was acting in self-defense, it's not very likely (but possible) that there was a point when the shooter "became" justified in using deadly force.

RussP
03-11-2012, 09:17
Did you find some info on that incident? No, other than he was arrested and charges were dropped.ETA: if you were going to list the additional info, why'd you hide it in a link???? :whistling: That's as useless as hiding useful information in books! :embarassed:

RandyHuh?

ATW525
03-11-2012, 09:18
Even if you assume the dead kid attacked the shooter, Florida did not change the level of force you are allowed to use, so the shooter would still have to have reasonably believed he was in danger of "death or great bodily harm." Fla.St. §§ 776.012-.013.

Florida law allows him to claim immunity from prosecution. So, unless there's evidence that refutes Zimmerman's account of what happened, I suspect any legal action will go nowhere. Unfortunately, Martin can't give his side of the story.

steveksux
03-11-2012, 09:22
No, other than he was arrested and charges were dropped.Huh?just making fun of myself for not noticing the link you posted.

There was a movie, Lake Placid, very funny, very sarcastic lines. There was a smartmouth expert on alligators, someone questioned something he said, asked where he had heard that. His reply was something to the effect of "of course you didn't know, they carefully hide that sort of information..... in books..." probably had to see the movie to get the reference...

Randy

RussP
03-11-2012, 09:34
just making fun of myself for not noticing the link you posted.

There was a movie, Lake Placid, very funny, very sarcastic lines. There was a smartmouth expert on alligators, someone questioned something he said, asked where he had heard that. His reply was something to the effect of "of course you didn't know, they carefully hide that sort of information..... in books..." probably had to see the movie to get the reference...

RandyI loved Betty White in that...:rofl: Feeding her "pets"...

Don't remember the line, but I like it. :thumbsup:

steveksux
03-11-2012, 09:42
I loved Betty White in that...:rofl: Feeding her "pets"...

Don't remember the line, but I like it. :thumbsup:

Yeah, Betty has some choice lines in that one, make sure to see it on cable or dvd! :rofl: One of my all time favorite movies, everyone is such a sarcastic smartass in the movie...

"We captured the alligator... uhhh with the helicopter"

Randy

Louisville Glocker
03-11-2012, 09:51
I'm not a lawyer, but it seems like the only facts available here do not support the shooter.

He shot an unarmed man, after being advised by 911 not to pursue him.

By pursuing him, and getting out of his car, he escalated the incident. He provoked the confrontation (we do not know what occurred, but by getting out of his car he caused it to happen).

You can't go around shooting unarmed people. Carrying a gun means you have to be extra careful to avoid fights and confrontations. And if somebody takes a swing at you, that doesn't mean you are justified in shooting him (especially after you are the one initiating contact). I predict Zimmerman will do some serious jailtime. And then face a civil suit, probably directed at the whole community as well.

P.S. Although it hasn't been stated here, to me, this whole episode reeks of racism and stereotyping. Both the initiation of contact and the police not making an arrest. With national media attention, justice will hopefully be done. But we can't bring back a dead youth. Sad.

Misty02
03-11-2012, 10:52
Even if you assume the dead kid attacked the shooter, Florida did not change the level of force you are allowed to use, so the shooter would still have to have reasonably believed he was in danger of "death or great bodily harm." Fla.St. §§ 776.012-.013.


……or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony. 776.012 Use of force in defense of person (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0776/SEC012.HTM&Title=->2008->Ch0776->Section%20012#0776.012).

776.08 Forcible Felony (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?mode=View%20Statutes&SubMenu=1&App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=forcible+felony&URL=CH0776/Sec08.HTM) - denition in the link attached to the statute number.

Then there is: 776.041 Use of force by aggressor (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0776/SEC041.HTM&Title=->2008->Ch0776->Section%20041#0776.041)


I’m not disagreeing with you, just expanding a tad.

Misty02
03-11-2012, 11:11
You are correct. Shotters tend to want to side with the guy with a CCW permit, but he may not have been the guy acting in self-defense, from what we've read so far. If the kid was acting in self-defense, it's not very likely (but possible) that there was a point when the shooter "became" justified in using deadly force.

Not all of us do. Before thinking the man with the license was in the right I would need a ton more information, which I’ll likely never have. What we’re likely to get is a story from the perspective of the one individual that survived the incident, which may or may not contain sufficient elements to be considered self-defense.

I can understand following and maintaining eye contact until the police arrived if he believed something was amiss. Why did he exit his vehicle and make physical contact?

From Trayvon’s side, I can understand why he would try to evade someone following. If that person exited their vehicle and attempted to lay hands on me, it would all escalate rather quickly as well.

My grandchildren have been taught to evade and escape anyone suspicious that attempts to follow them or make contact that is not an uniformed officer and in a marked vehicle. Anything short of that they are to evade, scream for help and have someone (or themselves, if they can) call 911.

.

Darkangel1846
03-11-2012, 11:13
Its a leftist press story hyped to give it a strong antigun focus...I'd wait to see what the investigation will show.

Bruce M
03-11-2012, 12:18
The term, "Gated Community" has been used many times in the stories. "Gated Community" implies secure, limited access, right? Well, maybe not...



:

From what I have seen, gated communities almost always do a better job of slowing down fire and police response than they do of keeping bad guys out.



When I lived near there, Sanford was a country town best know for its awesome flea market. These days, I imagine it's been swallowed up by Orlando and middle-class suburbs.


It has probably been a decade or so but I also remember it as being a remarkably large flea market, but if I remember it was only open one weekday, I think Monday, each week.

jack76590
03-11-2012, 15:25
I'm not a lawyer, but it seems like the only facts available here do not support the shooter.

He shot an unarmed man, after being advised by 911 not to pursue him.

By pursuing him, and getting out of his car, he escalated the incident. He provoked the confrontation (we do not know what occurred, but by getting out of his car he caused it to happen).

You can't go around shooting unarmed people. Carrying a gun means you have to be extra careful to avoid fights and confrontations. And if somebody takes a swing at you, that doesn't mean you are justified in shooting him (especially after you are the one initiating contact). I predict Zimmerman will do some serious jailtime. And then face a civil suit, probably directed at the whole community as well.

P.S. Although it hasn't been stated here, to me, this whole episode reeks of racism and stereotyping. Both the initiation of contact and the police not making an arrest. With national media attention, justice will hopefully be done. But we can't bring back a dead youth. Sad.

You raise an interesting point re civil suit and liability. As I mentioned earlier, I doubt if Zimmerman has enough resources to make cost of civil suit worthwhile. However, if the community has some liability for his actions then perhaps the community, which I assume has insurance, can be sued.

If the community is sued for the action of one of "their" neighborhood watch members then this would have chilling effect on the neighborhood watch program nationwide.

Of course the police department, which may enjoy some form of immunity, might also be sued if they sanctioned or cooperated with the neighborhood watch program.

All about finding someone with deep enough pockets to sue. Whether the protection afforded by Florida law against civil suit in a non criminal shooting would extend to the homeowner community and police who may have connections to the neightborhood watch problem is also an interesting question.

kensteele
03-11-2012, 16:08
P.S. Although it hasn't been stated here, to me, this whole episode reeks of racism and stereotyping. Both the initiation of contact and the police not making an arrest. With national media attention, justice will hopefully be done. But we can't bring back a dead youth. Sad.

I was waiting for someone to say this but apparently the topic is still too sensitive for us to address. Apparently we are all just waiting around in America for this to blow up in our faces....again. :faint:

If Martin had wrestled the gun away from Zimmeran and shot him with his own gun and claim Zimmeran stalked him and then attacked him, we would have a FL capital murder case on our hands with Martin sitting in jail for a few years until trial.

From what I have read, Zimmeran escalated this. If Zimmerman had stayed inside watching the half-time show, Martin would be back in school getting his classwork.

Misty02
03-11-2012, 16:13
You raise an interesting point re civil suit and liability. As I mentioned earlier, I doubt if Zimmerman has enough resources to make cost of civil suit worthwhile. However, if the community has some liability for his actions then perhaps the community, which I assume has insurance, can be sued.

If the community is sued for the action of one of "their" neighborhood watch members then this would have chilling effect on the neighborhood watch program nationwide.

Of course the police department, which may enjoy some form of immunity, might also be sued if they sanctioned or cooperated with the neighborhood watch program.

All about finding someone with deep enough pockets to sue. Whether the protection afforded by Florida law against civil suit in a non criminal shooting would extend to the homeowner community and police who may have connections to the neightborhood watch problem is also an interesting question.

If his actions are cleared as self-defense, he’s likely to be immune from prosecution in a civil suit against him. Not only that, the family would have to pay all reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action.

I believe the function of anyone that participates in a “crime watch” or “neighborhood watch’ program is to “watch” (observe), and report. I don’t know if the neighborhood watch had its own LLC, were acting as part of the association or was just a group of homeowners with no formal set up. If I was a member of the association I would argue that Zimmerman’s action were outside the scope of his duties. That once he went beyond the scope of the program he was no longer acting as a member of it and had taken the law into his own hand. No doubt there are some documents stating the purpose and the procedures to follow by those that participate in the program to present as evidence. It may still cost a pretty penny to deffend though.

Needless to say the personal liability assumed by any member of a neighborhood watch could be more than they bargained for. Not only can they possibly be held liable for taking certain actions, but also for failing to take them.

.

Misty02
03-11-2012, 16:29
From re-reading the article Russ posted in post #14 http://glocktalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=18692151&postcount=14 (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=18692151&postcount=14)

If the neighborhood watch works directly with the police department, would its members be considered “volunteers” and acting under the direction of the PD?

If it is considered that members of the neighborhood watch are working under the direction of the PD, which are their (PD’s) responsibilities as respect training and background checks of the members?

If the members are considered volunteers of the PD, does the PD share its sovereign immunity with the members?

If the above applies, it may explain the reluctance to release any information or make any arrests until the investigation is completed. It may also explain many things to follow in the near future.

I believe that even fully credentialed officers that act outside the scope of their duties may be held personally liable without immunity, is my assumption correct?
.

acpd442
03-11-2012, 17:11
Another thing to take into account is the physical size of the shooter and the victim. Disparity in size and strength should also play a role in the investigation. How much larger/smaller was Zimmerman that he needed a handgun to "defend" himself? If he had followed the dispatcher's instruction to stop following, this would be a non issue. Not following the advice of the dispatcher shows some kind of willful disregard for his own safety. He put himself in that situation. I kinda get the feeling that Zimmerman or his family may be "connected", but that's just my opinion.

jack76590
03-11-2012, 17:20
Link to article that says action being considered against homeowner's association.

http://www.thefloridanewsjournal.com/2012/03/09/head-sanfords-citizen-neighborhood-crime-watch-group-shoots-unarmed-teenager

RussP
03-11-2012, 19:22
From re-reading the article Russ posted in post #14 http://glocktalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=18692151&postcount=14 (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=18692151&postcount=14)

If the neighborhood watch works directly with the police department, would its members be considered “volunteers” and acting under the direction of the PD?

If it is considered that members of the neighborhood watch are working under the direction of the PD, which are their (PD’s) responsibilities as respect training and background checks of the members?

If the members are considered volunteers of the PD, does the PD share its sovereign immunity with the members?

If the above applies, it may explain the reluctance to release any information or make any arrests until the investigation is completed. It may also explain many things to follow in the near future.

I believe that even fully credentialed officers that act outside the scope of their duties may be held personally liable without immunity, is my assumption correct?
.Law enforcement provides guidelines for communities wanting a Neighborhood Watch. They do not direct the actions of the volunteers. They will and do talk to volunteers about what they can and cannot do.

Neighborhood Watch is: (http://www.sanfordfl.gov/police/flyers/neighborhood_watch.pdf)

Misty02
03-11-2012, 19:34
Law enforcement provides guidelines for communities wanting a Neighborhood Watch. They do not direct the actions of the volunteers. They will and do talk to volunteers about what they can and cannot do.

Neighborhood Watch is: (http://www.sanfordfl.gov/police/flyers/neighborhood_watch.pdf)

Thanks for the link, Russ. :)

Years ago there was talk of converting our area into a gated community and forming a neighborhood watch; not due to crime in the immediate area, but to keep it as it was. We had moved from Townhomes where there was an association, so… um… No!

.

RussP
03-11-2012, 20:39
Activists protest outside Sanford Police headquarters
The New Black Panther party along with other activists are putting pressure on police to charge the man who fatally shot a Miami teenager. (http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/os-black-panther-protest-trayvon-martin-20120310,0,1905865.story)

kensteele
03-11-2012, 22:37
read a few articles but haven't seen this up until now, maybe i missed it earlier:

"Sanford Police chief Bill Lee said there is evidence to corroborate Zimmerman's self-defense claims."

interesting, would like to see what that is.

ScottieG59
03-11-2012, 22:58
It is really easy for a situation like this to get out of hand. The neighborhood watch guy should have backed off one the police were notified. If the suspicious person were not found, so be it.

Years ago I faced a similar situation. On one evening, the police were staking out the roof of our office building because they felt they had credible information that the neighbor's jewelry story was going to be burglarized. The very next evening, I exited an exit back of the office, which involved going across the roof to the fire escape (it was easier than going out the front and around the block). I noticed someone hiding in one of the dark corners on the roof of our building. With my hand stealthily on my Ruger Speed-Six 357, I continued toward the fire escape and went down and called the police. The person descended the stairs shortly after I did and I decided to say hello to him. I was polite and non-confrontational and he was clearly a little nervous. It turns out he was the new boyfriend of one of our tenants and also heard of the police stakeout. He was hiding because he feared I might have been the burglar the police sought. I was never close to shooting or being confrontation with the suspicious person. I avoided escalating the situation and only I knew I was armed and prepared to use deadly force. To the young man, he just happened to meet someone he did not know.

I do not know the details of the shooting in Florida, but I understand the rules of engagement of a citizen on patrol are not the same as it would be with a police officer. Police have an affirmative duty to intervene; non-police have the right to protect themselves as well as innocent third parties. Following the teen after the citizen on patrol should have either broken contact right away or as soon as he was spotted.

I know people often see a black person and become more suspicious. I am not sure it really matters what the race of the observer is. It is a sad fact of life in the United States that we see what we expect to see. There is no doubt that many black people are very sensitive about being called out for things that are not questioned when it involves white people. If this were a police officer, he may have employed a non-lethal weapon first.


Out there in fly-over country...

CitizenOfDreams
03-12-2012, 00:36
Well, some interesting versions came up in this thread. According to them, Zimmerman has not been arrested and charged because:
- He is white and the kid was black;
- He is "connected";
- The police is trying to avoid responsibility for the neighborhood watch actions.

RussP
03-12-2012, 05:07
read a few articles but haven't seen this up until now, maybe i missed it earlier:

"Sanford Police chief Bill Lee said there is evidence to corroborate Zimmerman's self-defense claims."

interesting, would like to see what that is.There is another report about a 911 recording that captured the fight and the gunfire. Whether that is correct or not...

ATW525
03-12-2012, 06:41
P.S. Although it hasn't been stated here, to me, this whole episode reeks of racism and stereotyping. Both the initiation of contact and the police not making an arrest. With national media attention, justice will hopefully be done. But we can't bring back a dead youth. Sad.

What evidence is there for racism, other than the dead kid being black and the shooter presumably being white? Martin didn't live in the neighborhood, so Zimmerman being suspicious of an unfamiliar face walking through the gated community after dark doesn't seem unreasonable to me. Is he only allowed to be suspicious of unfamiliar white folks?

Misty02
03-12-2012, 07:05
Well, some interesting versions came up in this thread. According to them, Zimmerman has not been arrested and charged because:
- He is white and the kid was black;
- He is "connected";
- The police is trying to avoid responsibility for the neighborhood watch actions.

Mine, addressing the above was a question, not a statement not even an assumption, let alone a version.

.

Misty02
03-12-2012, 07:15
What evidence is there for racism, other than the dead kid being black and the shooter presumably being white? Martin didn't live in the neighborhood, so Zimmerman being suspicious of an unfamiliar face walking through the gated community after dark doesn't seem unreasonable to me. Is he only allowed to be suspicious of unfamiliar white folks?

I rarely make comments about race, because it is for the most part irrelevant. I’m more for the overall appearance regardless of color, clothing, the way a person walks and other mannerisms. Thugs come in colors and nationalities. However, I’ve noticed that is quickly assessed as a possibility (and at times a certainty) if the wrongdoer is a white American and the person victimized is of another race/nationality. Perhaps it is a factor in this case, I have as much details about that than about how the fight started and by whom.

.

fuzzy03cls
03-12-2012, 08:36
Its a leftist press story hyped to give it a strong antigun focus...I'd wait to see what the investigation will show.
Bingo

ATW525
03-12-2012, 12:57
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/os-trayvon-martin-shooting-case-20120312,0,3967780.story

Mayor and police are planning a news conference in about an hour. Perhaps some questions about what happened will finally be resolved?

RussP
03-12-2012, 14:40
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/os-trayvon-martin-shooting-case-20120312,0,3967780.story

Mayor and police are planning a news conference in about an hour. Perhaps some questions about what happened will finally be resolved?During the news conference, Lee said that Zimmerman's claim of self defense has not been proven or dis-proven. He also said that after the police department's investigation is complete, they will hand it over to the State Attorney's Office.

RussP
03-12-2012, 14:52
Police Hold News Conference About Teen's Death (http://www.wesh.com/news/30661664/detail.html)

Words are interesting. Here is another version of the description of Zimmerman's previous encounter with law enforcement.

We all know Zimmerman was arrested in 2005 for resisting an officer. He was charged with with violence and battery on a law enforcement officer. This version adds that the case was dismissed because no evidence could be found. Really new are these words: Zimmerman attended a pre-trial diversion program and a deal was made with his attorney to get the case dropped.

What's a pre-trial diversion? Basically, it's for first time offenders deemed unlikely to be a repeat offender. A person pleads guilty, but the judge will not enter an order adjudicating him guilty.

There's more to it... You can read that "more" here. What is Pretrial Diversion? (http://williamlpfeiferjr.suite101.com/what-is-pretrial-diversion-a59358)

RussP
03-12-2012, 18:52
Sanford chief: 'No winners, especially for...family' of slain teen, Trayvon Martin (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/os-trayvon-martin-shooting-case-20120312,0,3967780.story)

At the bottom of the linked story Chief Lee says that after calling police, Zimmerman lost sight of Martin but somehow found him again.

RussP
03-12-2012, 18:56
'Neighbourhood watch captain who shot dead unarmed teen' may not be charged as police claim there's nothing to dispute his self-defence claim (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2114152/Trayvon-Martin-shot-dead-Police-say-theres-evidence-dispute-claim-neighbourhood-watch-captain-George-Zimmerman-acted-self-defence.html)

Longer story with photo of Zimmerman.

kensteele
03-12-2012, 19:31
I understand how it work and I can see where the police chief is coming from, most of us know exactly what he is saying and how they are proceeding with this.

The problem is his own community doesn't understand it. The reason his community doesn't understand it is probably because the same "standards" don't often apply to them. When there are questions, sometimes a person sits in jail with murder charges and $million bond and arraignment in a matter of days prove yourself innocent if you want to go home and sometimes they sit at home for weeks and weeks with no signs of progress as we trying to figure out if you committed a crime or not.

Historically minorities find no justice in the American judicial system that unfairly and time and time again have not ruled in their favour in even the most obvious cases, you can't help but to think it is racial or economic in nature. When you say "the case is turned over to another office" that code for the police aren't going to make the call, let the judicial system capture him. Yet, when a black man shoots someone, the entire SWAT team is hunting him down and the police absolutely make the call and says let the judicial system free him.

You don't announce out loud the shooter confessed to shooting him but he had a good reason. Let his go to court and apply his self-defense theory to his peers. Isn't that the way everyone else is treated?

This is what the residents see and hear for years and years. It's a horrible pattern even Stevie Wonder can see this case has racial overtones. When an unarmed black man is spotted and stalked and shot and killed and it's STILL his own fault for his own death, don't you think that is pushing it a bit? How exactly do you expect the resident to react?

I think the Sanford PD has already blown this, they didn't handle this well. It looks like they are protecting the shooter, even though they maybe aren't. They look like they are biased even thought the shooter might have lawyered-up, you only hear one side of the story, dead man tell no tales, whatever.....which is all fine and good but considering you have black men on death row when there isn't even a dead body found sometimes....you have to wonder.

I hope they resolve this soon. Would suck if they went ahead and pressed charges under pressure because no jury will convict this man and that will make this worse when nobody can touch him after that but maybe Federal. People get tired of being saddled with hopelessness and despair. Read the comments in some of those articles, I know you can't always trust them but this is 2012 and that's downright scarey what some people (your peers) have to say.

If you CCW and you think you might be so lucky to not follow instructions, confront someone innocent, shoot and kill them half your size but two shades darker but you got your butt kicked being where you had no business being....don't count on it if you live in a state north of the Mason Dixon line. That kind of nonsense don't fly everywhere, know where you live before you shoot.

ATW525
03-12-2012, 20:12
Florida Statute 776.032 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.032.html) says "the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful." Chief Lee has said that the evidence he has does not support probable cause that the force was unlawful, so the hands of the Sanford Police are tied. They are prohibited by law from arresting Zimmerman.

ATW525
03-12-2012, 20:33
Anonymous homeowner says people had previously complained about Zimmerman's aggressive tactics, according to HuffPost. Anonymous member of homeowner association denies any knowledge of complaints.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/12/george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin_n_1340358.html?ref=mostpopular

G30Mike
03-12-2012, 20:52
Doesn't the family of the guy who was shot have any recent pictures? All I keep seeing is the kid when he was about 10 years old....irritating. The majority of teens today look nothing like when they were 10. Most of them are punk ass thug wannabes that don't like people even looking at them. Straight bs IMHO, but then we get a dirty mugshot pic of the shooter in jail orange. Stupid liberal media jerks!

RussP
03-12-2012, 21:22
Doesn't the family of the guy who was shot have any recent pictures? Go to his Facebook page...the link was posted earlier. Some of his family members have what appear to be recent photos on their pages, too.

LongGoneDays
03-12-2012, 21:29
I'm sorry, I don't read articles that start off as obvious racebaiting.

G30Mike
03-12-2012, 21:30
Go to his Facebook page...the link was posted earlier. Some of his family members have what appear to be recent photos on their pages, too.

Can only see one picture, could be because I dont have a facebook.
Looks young, but he isn't wearing his hat like an idiot. That's why I said "most" kids now portray the "thug" image. Maybe he wasn't one of them.

Misty02
03-13-2012, 05:17
Can only see one picture, could be because I dont have a facebook.
Looks young, but he isn't wearing his hat like an idiot. That's why I said "most" kids now portray the "thug" image. Maybe he wasn't one of them.

Like you, I only saw the main picture on the profile. He looks younger than 17. Not all kids develop the same. One of my son’s friends is 21 and looks like a 16 year old kid. I keep telling him that one day he’ll be thankful he looks younger than he is, he doesn’t share my opinion.

This story is rather complicated when you put yourself in both shoes. For that I would have to not take in consideration that I believe Zimmerman should have followed the instructions of the police and not approach, let alone pursue and attempt to apprehend the kid. Actually, it is extremely hard (if not nearly impossible) to not consider that part. If I were the kid and was followed by a strange man than then tried to approach me, I too would have fought back.

If it were a completely different case, I was the shooter and believed I had acted in self-defense; I wouldn’t want to sit in jail while they investigate. Still, I would fully understand if I were a family member of the person shot, I would want that person in jail.

.

Misty02
03-13-2012, 05:27
Florida Statute 776.032 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.032.html) says "the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful." Chief Lee has said that the evidence he has does not support probable cause that the force was unlawful, so the hands of the Sanford Police are tied. They are prohibited by law from arresting Zimmerman.

It’s that pesky “innocent until proven guilty” kind of thing. I’m having a real difficult time stomaching the fact that Zimmerman pursued in spite the police telling him not to. At the same time, I wasn’t there; I don’t know what else was going on. Even if it is proven that what he did was wrong, can they prove it was criminal?
.

TBO
03-13-2012, 06:56
This incident may help illustrate the vast difference between the criminal court system and the civil court system as things play out.

RussP
03-13-2012, 08:05
This incident may help illustrate the vast difference between the criminal court system and the civil court system as things play out. I'll be so bold as to say this will be a classic comparison of the criminal court system and the "media court system."

ATW525
03-13-2012, 08:38
It’s that pesky “innocent until proven guilty” kind of thing. I’m having a real difficult time stomaching the fact that Zimmerman pursued in spite the police telling him not to. At the same time, I wasn’t there; I don’t know what else was going on. Even if it is proven that what he did was wrong, can they prove it was criminal?
.

I think in most other states, however, guilt or innocence would be determined by a court of law when there was doubt as to what happened. Florida law almost seems to go overboard with protecting someone claiming self defense. Of course, if I had to shoot somebody in self-defense in Florida, I would be relieved to have that kind of legal protection.

What I find interesting is that the family and their lawyers aren't talking about the law, but are instead focusing on racial issues. Surely the lawyers are familiar with the law, so I wonder what their motivations are.

RussP
03-13-2012, 09:09
What I find interesting is that the family and their lawyers aren't talking about the law, but are instead focusing on racial issues. Surely the lawyers are familiar with the law, so I wonder what their motivations are.Are you familiar with the history of the Sanford PD, the City of Sandford?

SGT HATRED
03-13-2012, 09:15
I'm always reading threads where people claim "if it was the other way around reverend so and so the NAACP Ect. would be all over it".
Here's the proof...

ATW525
03-13-2012, 09:26
Are you familiar with the history of the Sanford PD, the City of Sandford?

No, I'm afraid I'm not. A Google search mostly brings up the current incident, though I found a reference to the city not allowing a baseball team to field both black and white players at the same time in 1946.

RussP
03-13-2012, 09:26
Like you, I only saw the main picture on the profile. He looks younger than 17. Other photos on relatives' and friends' pages reflect the same youthfulness.

The comments about Martin on various Facebook pages are respectful. They lack the hate and calls for violence seen on your typical "thug" page.Not all kids develop the same. One of my son’s friends is 21 and looks like a 16 year old kid. I keep telling him that one day he’ll be thankful he looks younger than he is, he doesn’t share my opinion.He gets that from his Mom, huh...:cool:This story is rather complicated when you put yourself in both shoes. For that I would have to not take in consideration that I believe Zimmerman should have followed the instructions of the police and not approach, let alone pursue and attempt to apprehend the kid. Actually, it is extremely hard (if not nearly impossible) to not consider that part. If I were the kid and was followed by a strange man than then tried to approach me, I too would have fought back.Valid points.If it were a completely different case, I was the shooter and believed I had acted in self-defense; I wouldn’t want to sit in jail while they investigate. Still, I would fully understand if I were a family member of the person shot, I would want that person in jail.

.Yep...

Misty02
03-13-2012, 10:04
I think in most other states, however, guilt or innocence would be determined by a court of law when there was doubt as to what happened. Florida law almost seems to go overboard with protecting someone claiming self defense. Of course, if I had to shoot somebody in self-defense in Florida, I would be relieved to have that kind of legal protection.

What I find interesting is that the family and their lawyers aren't talking about the law, but are instead focusing on racial issues. Surely the lawyers are familiar with the law, so I wonder what their motivations are.


Think about it, it makes perfect sense that neither the family nor the attorney is talking about the law. They want the man that shot their son behind bars. They are appealing to the court of public opinion to create pressure and force the PD to arrest Zimmerman, whether they have sufficient evidence that he is guilty of a crime or not.

Immediate goal for the family = Zimmerman in jail

Why would they bring up the fact that a person can’t (or shouldn’t) be arrested until there is evidence that a crime was committed? Later on, if Zimmerman is arrested and set free is when you bring up the law that permitted him to walk away.

I don’t believe that Florida law goes overboard. If there is evidence that it was murder and not self-defense, you get arrested, charged and (hopefully) convicted. Why should a person that acted in self-defense have to sit in jail during the investigation?

.

Misty02
03-13-2012, 10:15
Sanford chief: 'No winners, especially for...family' of slain teen, Trayvon Martin (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/os-trayvon-martin-shooting-case-20120312,0,3967780.story)

At the bottom of the linked story Chief Lee says that after calling police, Zimmerman lost sight of Martin but somehow found him again.

Charges for what? If they have no evidence that the shooting was murder or another crime was committed, there won’t be any charges and definitely no convictions.

Zimmerman admitted he shot the kid, he said he did so in self-defense. He doesn’t have to prove he acted in self-defense; the law is the one faced with the burden to prove his actions were criminal. It could be as wrong and as devastating as people want to see it, if it’s not criminal there is nothing that can be done.


ETA: Oops, sorry Russ, I was reacting to the article, not your comment.
.

IndyGunFreak
03-13-2012, 11:10
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/os-trayvon-martin-shooting-case-20120312,0,3967780.story

This link is very telling to me (assuming it is accurate). The article points out the shooter had a bloody nose, had blood on the back of his head, and grass on his back.

Bruce M
03-13-2012, 11:12
But in a lot of jusridictions there would be sufficient evidence to charge Mr. Zimmerman. If he ends up not being charged, it will be interesting to see what, if any, fallout there is regarding the (relatively) new law in Florida. Sometimes, prosecutors prefer to make decisions themselves as to what cases to take to court rather than have that forced on them by legislation.

RussP
03-13-2012, 11:25
Charges for what? If they have no evidence that the shooting was murder or another crime was committed, there won’t be any charges and definitely no convictions.

Zimmerman admitted he shot the kid, he said he did so in self-defense. He doesn’t have to prove he acted in self-defense; the law is the one faced with the burden to prove his actions were criminal. It could be as wrong and as devastating as people want to see it, if it’s not criminal there is nothing that can be done.

.:crying::crying::crying::crying:ETA: Oops, sorry Russ, I was reacting to the article, not your comment.
.Oh, OKAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :supergrin:

Bruce M
03-13-2012, 11:32
Police Hold News Conference About Teen's Death (http://www.wesh.com/news/30661664/detail.html)

Words are interesting. Here is another version of the description of Zimmerman's previous encounter with law enforcement.

We all know Zimmerman was arrested in 2005 for resisting an officer. He was charged with with violence and battery on a law enforcement officer. This version adds that the case was dismissed because no evidence could be found. Really new are these words: Zimmerman attended a pre-trial diversion program and a deal was made with his attorney to get the case dropped.

What's a pre-trial diversion? Basically, it's for first time offenders deemed unlikely to be a repeat offender. A person pleads guilty, but the judge will not enter an order adjudicating him guilty.

There's more to it... You can read that "more" here. What is Pretrial Diversion? (http://williamlpfeiferjr.suite101.com/what-is-pretrial-diversion-a59358)


It would be a true shame if it ever comes to light that Mr. Zimmerman would not have gone after the seventeen year old if he (Zimmerman) did not have a gun and the seventeen year old would still be alive. And perhaps if it were not for pretrial diversion, or phrased another way, if the crime had occured in a different, possibly more rural location with a smaller court docket, Zimmerman might have had a felony conviction which in turn might have caused him to be denied the permit.

Misty02
03-13-2012, 11:51
:crying::crying::crying::crying:Oh, OKAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :supergrin:


:rofl:I went back and added the comment because I knew no one (other than me) would have a clue what I was reacting to.

.

eaglefrq
03-13-2012, 11:58
I believe this was mentioned in an earlier post, but I don't recall seeing the responses.

SPECULATION WARNING:

Zimmerman attempted to stop Martin because he was afraid he would get away before the police arrived. Martin doesn't comply because Zimmerman has no authority to stop him, so Zimmerman put his hands on Martin. Zimmerman has now escalated the situation and Martin feels he is being attacked and defends himself. Martin punches Zimmerman in the nose, knocking him down, so Zimmerman "fears for his life" and shoots Martin.

Wouldn't Zimmerman be guilty because he escalated the situation? If he had not escalated the situation, there have been no fight and no reason to use his gun.

I understand this situation is screwed up, and unless something on the 911 tapes reveals something different, then Zimmerman will not be charged since they only have his account of the incident.

Misty02
03-13-2012, 13:29
I believe this was mentioned in an earlier post, but I don't recall seeing the responses.

SPECULATION WARNING:

Zimmerman attempted to stop Martin because he was afraid he would get away before the police arrived. Martin doesn't comply because Zimmerman has no authority to stop him, so Zimmerman put his hands on Martin. Zimmerman has now escalated the situation and Martin feels he is being attacked and defends himself. Martin punches Zimmerman in the nose, knocking him down, so Zimmerman "fears for his life" and shoots Martin.

Wouldn't Zimmerman be guilty because he escalated the situation? If he had not escalated the situation, there have been no fight and no reason to use his gun.

I understand this situation is screwed up, and unless something on the 911 tapes reveals something different, then Zimmerman will not be charged since they only have his account of the incident.

Have any of the articles indicated who laid hands on whom first? I still believe Zimmerman shouldn’t have followed Martin; however, I’ve read nothing so far that would indicate he wasn’t acting in self-defense. Depending on what was going on, either one could have been acting in self-defense, either one could have been the aggressor and both could have taken turn at being either. Then there is the fact that he too was injured. Of course, we don’t know at what point of the exchange he sustained them.

Doing something stupid and escalating the conflict may not be sufficient to find Zimmerman guilty. He could be guilty of following the kid, he could be guilty of getting out of the vehicle and asking what he’s doing there (even if he did it with an attitude) he could be guilty of many things; however, if Martin was ticked off he was being followed and questioned for no reason (I can understand anyone being upset up that point) and if it was Martin who attacked Zimmerman, then he would have had every right to defend himself (even if the whole thing started because he was stupid).

.

ATW525
03-13-2012, 15:54
Florida's self defense laws are starting to be brought up by the media:

http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/13/cnn-legal-contributor-on-fl-shooting-of-trayvon-martin-stand-your-ground-law-moves-castle-doctrine-to-the-street/

RussP
03-13-2012, 16:23
Petition: Prosecute the killer of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin (http://www.change.org/petitions/prosecute-the-killer-of-17-year-old-trayvon-martin)

Misty02
03-13-2012, 17:01
http://abcnews.go.com/US/neighborhood-watch-shooting-trayvon-martin-probe-reveals-questionable/story?id=15907136 (http://abcnews.go.com/US/neighborhood-watch-shooting-trayvon-martin-probe-reveals-questionable/story?id=15907136)

Referring to the claim of self-defense:

"Until we can establish probable cause to dispute that, we don't have the grounds to arrest him," Lee said.
.

Rupert
03-13-2012, 17:17
Wannabe cop starts fight with unarmed minority teen, then shoots him to death when said teen defends himself. This guy is scum and should be put away. And leave this kid's facebook page alone you losers. Show some respect for the deceased and his family. A couple of these comments make me ashamed to be a member of this forum.

Bren
03-13-2012, 17:19
Florida's self defense laws are starting to be brought up by the media:

http://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/13/cnn-legal-contributor-on-fl-shooting-of-trayvon-martin-stand-your-ground-law-moves-castle-doctrine-to-the-street/

Not significantly different than other states and stricter than some. I make the point in teaching "use of force" law, that when Kentucky adopted Florida's "castle doctrone/stand your ground" statutes in 2006, we actually increased the duty to retreat and possibly decreased our right to use deadly force. We used to have NO duty to retreat, ever, anywhere,, to use any force. No, we have no duty to retreat if we are "in a place we have a right to be, etc.," which at least implies there is some duty to retreat otherwise. We also have the right to kill a burglar, no matter the danger to us or how minor the crime he is entering out house to commit and we can kill a person who slaps a school volunteer or bus driver or an escaping purse snatcher. I doubt Florida's goes that far.

G30Mike
03-13-2012, 17:42
Wannabe cop starts fight with unarmed minority teen, then shoots him to death when said teen defends himself. This guy is scum and should be put away. And leave this kid's facebook page alone you losers. Show some respect for the deceased and his family. A couple of these comments make me ashamed to be a member of this forum.

There must be new evidence to back up your post?

kensteele
03-13-2012, 18:24
another story, another interesting perspective: http://abcnews.go.com/US/neighborhood-watch-shooting-trayvon-martin-probe-reveals-questionable/story?id=15907136#.T1_gQFF9n-o

no wonder everyone is working overtime to make sure this case doesn't go to trial. sounds like it would be nightmare for more than one person and locally, it will definitely come out as a race trial. sounds like we'll never know the truth or the true facts which is why a court needs to decide this, not the government.

honestly it doesn't matter if the state acts or not, the federal govt will take action like they have in the past when the state will not "do the right thing." ianal but i've seen this before, this case is clearly a federal civil rights violation case. from what i read, zimmerman's actions were a clear violation of the martin's civil rights (who cares about florida laws). still, we'll have to wait awhile longer for more information to "leak", we all could be surprised, what's on the 911 tape, more witness statements, findings from the states atty.

if the police chief and the department want to go this route to protect a scumbag like zimmerman, fine have at it because this isn't going to be pretty for anyone unfortunately. from what i can tell, zimmerman lied to the police about his record, he's probably assaulted the police in the past, he ignore their instructions...why the police haven't dropped him like a hot potato i don't even know.

c'mon sanford, when there is a dispute like this, let a jury decide. oh i forget, florida juries have no business ajudicating (ala casey anthony).

ATW525
03-13-2012, 18:48
honestly it doesn't matter if the state acts or not, the federal govt will take action like they have in the past when the state will not "do the right thing." ianal but i've seen this before, this case is clearly a federal civil rights violation case. from what i read, zimmerman's actions were a clear violation of the martin's civil rights (who cares about florida laws). still, we'll have to wait awhile longer for more information to "leak", we all could be surprised, what's on the 911 tape, more witness statements, findings from the states atty.

IANAL, but I believe Zimmerman would have had to be acting under color of state law in order to bring a Federal civil rights claim against him. Does being in the neighborhood watch count? I have no idea. It would likely depend on whether he had any special authority or powers granted to him by the state.

RussP
03-13-2012, 18:57
Wannabe cop starts fight with unarmed minority teen, then shoots him to death when said teen defends himself. This guy is scum and should be put away. And leave this kid's facebook page alone you losers. Show some respect for the deceased and his family. A couple of these comments make me ashamed to be a member of this forum.What are you talking about? Where did you see any GT members' posts on his FB page?

Misty02
03-13-2012, 18:59
another story, another interesting perspective: http://abcnews.go.com/US/neighborhood-watch-shooting-trayvon-martin-probe-reveals-questionable/story?id=15907136#.T1_gQFF9n-o

no wonder everyone is working overtime to make sure this case doesn't go to trial. sounds like it would be nightmare for more than one person and locally, it will definitely come out as a race trial. sounds like we'll never know the truth or the true facts which is why a court needs to decide this, not the government.

honestly it doesn't matter if the state acts or not, the federal govt will take action like they have in the past when the state will not "do the right thing." ianal but i've seen this before, this case is clearly a federal civil rights violation case. from what i read, zimmerman's actions were a clear violation of the martin's civil rights (who cares about florida laws). still, we'll have to wait awhile longer for more information to "leak", we all could be surprised, what's on the 911 tape, more witness statements, findings from the states atty.

if the police chief and the department want to go this route to protect a scumbag like zimmerman, fine have at it because this isn't going to be pretty for anyone unfortunately. from what i can tell, zimmerman lied to the police about his record, he's probably assaulted the police in the past, he ignore their instructions...why the police haven't dropped him like a hot potato i don't even know.

c'mon sanford, when there is a dispute like this, let a jury decide. oh i forget, florida juries have no business ajudicating (ala casey anthony).


How do you know he lied? He could have said “Never in my life have I been convicted of a crime” or even “My record is clean, I’ve never been convicted of a crime”

There is sufficient evidence to prove Zimmerman acted inappropriately and shouldn’t have followed the kid when he was told to not do so. The information reported by the media (at least the ones I’ve read) have yet to print anything that would prove to me he didn’t act in self-defense as he stated. If that turns out to be the truth, I would say that he pretty much created the conditions that led to that result, but still may not be enough to prove his actions were criminal.

.

ATW525
03-13-2012, 19:26
From HuffPost(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/13/trayvon-martin-sanford-state-attorney_n_1343223.html?ref=mostpopular):

Crump filed a public records lawsuit to get the 911 recordings for the night of the shooting. Crump said people who have heard the tapes said Zimmerman, who is white, made a comment about Martin’s race during the call and that he had no intention of letting the youth get away because, “they always get away.” Others outlets have reported the use of an expletive. Martin is black.

If true, this looks very bad for Zimmerman.

kensteele
03-13-2012, 19:29
IANAL, but I believe Zimmerman would have had to be acting under color of state law in order to bring a Federal civil rights claim against him. Does being in the neighborhood watch count? I have no idea. It would likely depend on whether he had any special authority or powers granted to him by the state.

Understood, neither am I. My thinking the angle is hate crime or race-related. Or against the actions of the state/local government. People smarter than I will figure it out. YMMV

kensteele
03-13-2012, 19:56
How do you know he lied? He could have said “Never in my life have I been convicted of a crime” or even “My record is clean, I’ve never been convicted of a crime”


.

I don't know for sure if he lied. They won't release anything. Guess we'll have to wait for the results of the official investigation. Only going off the various reports which are all over the place at this point. My instinct tells me he is serious liar but I have been known to be wrong on numerous ocassions.

Misty02
03-13-2012, 20:07
I don't know for sure if he lied. They won't release anything. Guess we'll have to wait for the results of the official investigation. Only going off the various reports which are all over the place at this point. My instinct tells me he is serious liar but I have been known to be wrong on numerous ocassions.

We’ll have to wait and see. I too don’t like it and believe Zimmerman is guilty, I just don’t know if he’s guilty enough to make it criminal.
.

jack76590
03-13-2012, 22:02
Yes, we don't have all the facts and probably never will. But the question will be asked why did Zimmerman step out of the car? I believe most people will feel Zimmerman got out of the car to play police officer and detain Martin. Now maybe Zimmerman or his lawyers can come up with another reason Zimmerman got out of his car.

But if the jurors believe Zimmerman got out of his car to play policeman and detain Martin, then I think Zimmerman is toast.

And I don't want any precedents being set that justifies a non police officer attempting to detain me, unless there is a clear and immediate danger I am about to do harm to people, not harm to property, but harm to people.

I can not support the position a person has a right to say to another, hey you stop, attempt to detain him because of vague suspicion of some undefined crime the person thinks he might commit. And then when the person resists being detained by non police officer give non police officer the right to use deadly force because he is losing a fight, that he started without justification.

BrewerGeorge
03-13-2012, 22:28
Serious question here. From reading the FL statutes about self defense, could either of the men be allowed to shoot the other? Can the guy losing ANY fistfight in Florida just shoot the other one - no matter who "started" it? I would think, actually, that Martin would have a better case for self defense because his attacker was armed, while Zimmerman's attacker was not. It also seems like Zimmerman was the one who started the fight, does it not?

jack76590
03-13-2012, 22:55
Serious question here. From reading the FL statutes about self defense, could either of the men be allowed to shoot the other? Can the guy losing ANY fistfight in Florida just shoot the other one - no matter who "started" it? I would think, actually, that Martin would have a better case for self defense because his attacker was armed, while Zimmerman's attacker was not. It also seems like Zimmerman was the one who started the fight, does it not?

Unless Zimmerman or his defense team can come up with another reason Zimmerman stepped out of his car, I believe most people/jurors will believe it was to play police officer.

I agree with you a key point will be who was aggressor. And I believe Zimmerman getting out of his car will tend strongly to support that Zimmerman was the aggressor.

I also don't think Zimmerman sustained any serious injuries. I don't think he was admitted to a hospital. Don't even know if he was treated on the scene. Really hard to justify you were in fear for your life, if you only had a cut lip and bruised cheek.

Misty02
03-14-2012, 05:45
Serious question here. From reading the FL statutes about self defense, could either of the men be allowed to shoot the other? Can the guy losing ANY fistfight in Florida just shoot the other one - no matter who "started" it? I would think, actually, that Martin would have a better case for self defense because his attacker was armed, while Zimmerman's attacker was not. It also seems like Zimmerman was the one who started the fight, does it not?

Not only was Zimmerman armed, but he outweighed Martin by nearly 100lbs, so the articles say.

As far as what the statute allows or is not available to the aggressor, the Florida Statute reads:



776.041 Use of force by aggressor (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0776/SEC041.HTM&Title=->2008->Ch0776->Section%20041#0776.041).--The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or (b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

.

ATW525
03-14-2012, 06:25
Serious question here. From reading the FL statutes about self defense, could either of the men be allowed to shoot the other? Can the guy losing ANY fistfight in Florida just shoot the other one - no matter who "started" it? I would think, actually, that Martin would have a better case for self defense because his attacker was armed, while Zimmerman's attacker was not. It also seems like Zimmerman was the one who started the fight, does it not?

In the comment section of several of the news articles, I have seen a post attributed to someone name Blake claiming to know Zimmerman that said that Martin found Zimmerman's gun during the struggle and was trying to take it from him. I have no idea how reliable that information is, since the poster could have been anybody. Even if the poster was who he claimed to be, it only means that that's the way Zimmerman said it happened.

This is this comment I'm referring to:

"This is not the real story. George called 911 to report a suspicious person. As he got off the phone the kid attacked him and started beating the crap out of him and slamming his head against the walkway. All the while saying "you're gunna die tonight motherxxxxxx" George was screaming help when someone in a nearby apartment called 911 again. George's shirt came up while the kid was beating him, revealing the gun that he is licensed to carry. The kid went for the gun and they struggled for it, George ended up shooting the kid and saving his own life. All these people on yahoo saying that he should be in jail when they don't even know what happened. George is the brother-in-law of one of our good family friends, works with my parents, and is one of the nicest most gentle people you will ever meet. He's completely devastated that this happened and has barely been functional from the guilt. No one shoots someone for no reason, and especially not George. And they need to stop pulling the race card, George is hispanic, not white."

ATW525
03-14-2012, 07:23
Yes, we don't have all the facts and probably never will. But the question will be asked why did Zimmerman step out of the car? I believe most people will feel Zimmerman got out of the car to play police officer and detain Martin. Now maybe Zimmerman or his lawyers can come up with another reason Zimmerman got out of his car.

I've wondered why Zimmerman got out of the car myself. I've read that was trying to keep eyes on Martin and get an address for the police, but I wasn't entirely sure why he had to get out of the car to do that. Well, that was until I found this map:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/breakingnews/os-gfx-trayvon-martin-sanford-shooting-20120313,0,5710580.graphic

If the dot where Martin was shot is accurate, then according to Google maps he was killed on a walkway that runs between two rows of buildings. When he went behind the buildings, Zimmerman would have lost sight of him, unless he got out of his car. So, it's entirely possible that the motivation for getting out of the car wasn't to confront Martin, but to simply see where he was heading so he could pass that information on to the police when they arrived.

ATW525
03-14-2012, 09:06
My speculation on how this might have gone down:

George Zimmerman spies Trayvon Martin walking back from the 7-11 store, and something makes him suspicious. Maybe it's the color of his skin, or maybe it's just an unfamiliar person walking through the neighborhood wearing a hood. Whatever the reason, he dials the non-emergency number for the police department, and reports what he sees. He his told that an officer is on the way, and to take no action (exact wording is unknown until transcripts are released).

Trayvon Martin leaves the street and starts down a walkway that will take behind the buildings. George Zimmerman decides to leave his vehicle to see where Martin is going. It's possible Zimmerman doesn't even regard this as taking action because he only intends to peek around the buildings and see which one is Martin's destination.

Unknown to George Zimmerman is the fact that Trayvon Martin has realized that someone is following him. Not knowing the intentions of this person, Martin decides to confront him when he rounds the corner of the building. He angrily shouts something along the lines of, "Do you have a problem?"

A surprised George Zimmerman responds, "No."

Unhappy with this answer, since he knows George Zimmerman was following him, Trayvon Martin decides the best defense is a good offense. "Well, now you do," he exclaims as he attacks Zimmerman and a struggle ensues. The fight quickly ends up on the ground.

At some point Trayvon Martin realizes that George Zimmerman has a gun. He still doesn't know who Zimmerman is, or why he was following him and now he's probably worried that he might get shot. He decides that he needs to get the gun before Zimmerman can use it on him.

George Zimmerman realizes that Trayvon Martin is trying to get his gun, and panics as this is now a life and death struggle. He doesn't know who Trayvon is or what his intentions are, but probably thinks that he will be killed if Martin gets his gun.

Somebody screams for help in the moments of frantic struggle over the gun. Moments later George Zimmerman gains control of the weapon and shoots Trayvon Martin in the chest. The fight is over, and Martin will soon be dead.

Of course this is just speculation on how it might have gone, from what I've been able to piece together from information on the web.

RussP
03-14-2012, 09:56
Didn't a few stories say that Zimmerman was carrying his pistol in his waistband? I don't remember reading about a holster. Maybe I just missed it.

BrewerGeorge
03-14-2012, 11:22
Didn't a few stories say that Zimmerman was carrying his pistol in his waistband? I don't remember reading about a holster. Maybe I just missed it.
Knowing typical media ignorance of guns, I'd just assumed IWB holster.

TBO
03-15-2012, 11:03
Trayvon Martin Shooting: Another Neighborhood Watch leader's view

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-14/news/os-trayvon-martin-shooting-another-neighborhood-watch-leaders-view-beth-kassab-20120314_1_neighborhood-watch-police-officer-weapons

RussP
03-15-2012, 11:27
Trayvon Martin Shooting: Another Neighborhood Watch leader's view

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-14/news/os-trayvon-martin-shooting-another-neighborhood-watch-leaders-view-beth-kassab-20120314_1_neighborhood-watch-police-officer-weaponsGood piece.

jack76590
03-15-2012, 13:02
Trayvon Martin Shooting: Another Neighborhood Watch leader's view

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-14/news/os-trayvon-martin-shooting-another-neighborhood-watch-leaders-view-beth-kassab-20120314_1_neighborhood-watch-police-officer-weapons

Quote from article

"...Frink has a concealed weapons permit and owns a firearm. But when he's walking his neighborhood he doesn't carry a gun..."

It appears Frink came to the conclusion that he would participate in the Neighborhood Watch in unarmed capacity.

That is not the conclusion I would come to. I would conclude not to participate in the Neighborhood Watch period.

Article seem to be written by a liberal who thinks guns are bad, but you should still put yourself in harms way and god will protect you.

The Zimmerman case does point out that you can be attack on Neighborhood Watch. It was Zimmerman's action, more than fact he was carrying a gun that got him in trouble.

kensteele
03-15-2012, 13:31
^Good article yet I want to point out one thing just in case it is missed.

Standing by and doing nothing but observing a criminal breaking into a car in progress is much different than standing by and doing nothing but observing a black man peacefully walking thru the neighborhood minding his own business. My guess is it will be a $multi-million difference.

I know profiling is n/a to private citizens but just like unlawful profiling with police, unlawful forms of profiling are just plain bad and never end up doing any good, period.

RussP
03-15-2012, 13:42
Quote from article

"...Frink has a concealed weapons permit and owns a firearm. But when he's walking his neighborhood he doesn't carry a gun..."

It appears Frink came to the conclusion that he would participate in the Neighborhood Watch in unarmed capacity.

That is not the conclusion I would come to. I would conclude not to participate in the Neighborhood Watch period.

Article seem to be written by a liberal who thinks guns are bad, but you should still put yourself in harms way and god will protect you.

The Zimmerman case does point out that you can be attack on Neighborhood Watch. It was Zimmerman's action, more than fact he was carrying a gun that got him in trouble.That part in bold, where did you read that in the article?

jack76590
03-15-2012, 13:47
^Good article yet I want to point out one thing just in case it is missed.

Standing by and doing nothing but observing a criminal breaking into a car in progress is much different than standing by and doing nothing but observing a black man peacefully walking thru the neighborhood minding his own business. My guess is it will be a $multi-million difference.

I know profiling is n/a to private citizens but just like unlawful profiling with police, unlawful forms of profiling are just plain bad and never end up doing any good, period.

Will be a multi-million dollar difference only if there are people or organizations with assets or insurance coverage in multi millions.

I doubt if Zimmerman has asset or insurance coverage beyond maybe 10-20 thousand. The homeowners association might be sued, however. If homeowners association sued successfully I doubt if many other homeowners associations will want to sponsor neighborhood watches.

I am always surprised with people talking about multi million dollar suits not giving consideration to what people or organizations may be liable and the assets or insurance coverage they have.

kensteele
03-15-2012, 17:23
Will be a multi-million dollar difference only if there are people or organizations with assets or insurance coverage in multi millions.

I doubt if Zimmerman has asset or insurance coverage beyond maybe 10-20 thousand. The homeowners association might be sued, however. If homeowners association sued successfully I doubt if many other homeowners associations will want to sponsor neighborhood watches.

I am always surprised with people talking about multi million dollar suits not giving consideration to what people or organizations may be liable and the assets or insurance coverage they have.

actually i was thinking about the government. but you're right, i don't know the terms of even the government's liability. still, judgments don't mean you can actually collect. let's just wait and see shortly when the government comes out and says no charges will be filed.

jack76590
03-15-2012, 18:13
That part in bold, where did you read that in the article?

I thought when I started sentence "Article seems to be written..." that it would be clear I was expressing my personal opinion, which was the case.

The beginning and ending quote marks indicate where I was quoting the article vs making comments.

jack76590
03-15-2012, 18:20
actually i was thinking about the government. but you're right, i don't know the terms of even the government's liability. still, judgments don't mean you can actually collect. let's just wait and see shortly when the government comes out and says no charges will be filed.

The only government entity involved in the case, that I can see is the local police. Given the circumstances as outlined I can't envision how they are liable.

Unless you can make a case the police did not instruct or supervise the neighborhood watch correctly.But it seems the local police instructed the neighborhood watch to well watch and report. And in this particular case the dispatcher told Zimmerman to back off.

Further I don't think I have every heard of a situation where the government at any level was sued because they did not bring criminal charges.

Rupert
03-15-2012, 18:22
What are you talking about? Where did you see any GT members' posts on his FB page?

And where did you see anything about posting on his facebook page? There was no mention of posts, and no, you don't have to post to be a loser. Visiting and prowling is enough. I'm sorry you have to be told that.

ATW525
03-15-2012, 18:30
The Sanford Police are disputing Mary Cutcher's statements to the media. It's not terribly surprising, and I suspect the inconsistencies make her virtually worthless as a witness except in the court of public opinion.

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/seminole/os-trayvon-martin-witness-tv-report-20120315,0,559932.story

kensteele
03-15-2012, 18:37
The only government entity involved in the case, that I can see is the local police. Given the circumstances as outlined I can't envision how they are liable.

Unless you can make a case the police did not instruct or supervise the neighborhood watch correctly.But it seems the local police instructed the neighborhood watch to well watch and report. And in this particular case the dispatcher told Zimmerman to back off.

Further I don't think I have every heard of a situation where the government at any level was sued because they did not bring criminal charges.

perhaps you are correct. let's see the report from the state and it's might reveal a bit more on how extensive this cover-up goes or not.

jack76590
03-15-2012, 19:12
perhaps you are correct. let's see the report from the state and it's might reveal a bit more on how extensive this cover-up goes or not.

Ok, if you are talking about active cover up or conspiracy, that would be different story. I would guess if that were the case criminal charges would be involved probably brought by Fl attorney general or the US attorney general.

High Altitude
03-15-2012, 19:20
If this is the story and the police have no real evidence to the contrary, the guy is not going to be charged.




"This is not the real story. George called 911 to report a suspicious person. As he got off the phone the kid attacked him and started beating the crap out of him and slamming his head against the walkway. All the while saying "you're gunna die tonight motherxxxxxx" George was screaming help when someone in a nearby apartment called 911 again. George's shirt came up while the kid was beating him, revealing the gun that he is licensed to carry. The kid went for the gun and they struggled for it, George ended up shooting the kid and saving his own life. All these people on yahoo saying that he should be in jail when they don't even know what happened. George is the brother-in-law of one of our good family friends, works with my parents, and is one of the nicest most gentle people you will ever meet. He's completely devastated that this happened and has barely been functional from the guilt. No one shoots someone for no reason, and especially not George. And they need to stop pulling the race card, George is hispanic, not white."

jack76590
03-15-2012, 19:33
In the comment section of several of the news articles, I have seen a post attributed to someone name Blake claiming to know Zimmerman that said that Martin found Zimmerman's gun during the struggle and was trying to take it from him. I have no idea how reliable that information is, since the poster could have been anybody. Even if the poster was who he claimed to be, it only means that that's the way Zimmerman said it happened.

This is this comment I'm referring to:

"This is not the real story. George called 911 to report a suspicious person. As he got off the phone the kid attacked him and started beating the crap out of him and slamming his head against the walkway. All the while saying "you're gunna die tonight motherxxxxxx" George was screaming help when someone in a nearby apartment called 911 again. George's shirt came up while the kid was beating him, revealing the gun that he is licensed to carry. The kid went for the gun and they struggled for it, George ended up shooting the kid and saving his own life. All these people on yahoo saying that he should be in jail when they don't even know what happened. George is the brother-in-law of one of our good family friends, works with my parents, and is one of the nicest most gentle people you will ever meet. He's completely devastated that this happened and has barely been functional from the guilt. No one shoots someone for no reason, and especially not George. And they need to stop pulling the race card, George is hispanic, not white."

I don't know how much race or ethnicity play in this, if anything. But if Whites can be biased so can Hispanics and so can Blacks.

In fact in some places I think there is more hostility between Blacks and either Asian or Hispanics, then there is hostility between Blacks and Whites.

And I have known a couple of very White Hispanics, as well as Black Hispanics.

I guess bottom line here is Al Sharpton can play race card as long as Zimmerman (not a very Hispanic name, by the way) is not Black in appearance.

So in some sense I agree with you. Just that I don't automatically assume any "non white" is unbiased and bias must therefore not even be entertained, because Zimmerman is Hispanic. But at the end of the day, I agree race card will be played justified or not.

ATW525
03-15-2012, 19:53
I don't know how much race or ethnicity play in this, if anything. But if Whites can be biased so can Hispanics and so can Blacks.

In fact in some places I think there is more hostility between Blacks and either Asian or Hispanics, then there is hostility between Blacks and Whites.

And I have known a couple of very White Hispanics, as well as Black Hispanics.

I guess bottom line here is Al Sharpton can play race card as long as Zimmerman (not a very Hispanic name, by the way) is not Black in appearance.

So in some sense I agree with you. Just that I don't automatically assume any "non white" is unbiased and bias must therefore not even be entertained, because Zimmerman is Hispanic. But at the end of the day, I agree race card will be played justified or not.

The comments you're replying to aren't my own, but are comments that somebody left on one of the news articles. I have no idea if Zimmerman is Hispanic or not.

jack76590
03-15-2012, 20:10
The comments you're replying to aren't my own, but are comments that somebody left on one of the news articles. I have no idea if Zimmerman is Hispanic or not.

Sorry to have attributed comments to you.

RussP
03-15-2012, 20:39
Quote from article

"...Frink has a concealed weapons permit and owns a firearm. But when he's walking his neighborhood he doesn't carry a gun..."

It appears Frink came to the conclusion that he would participate in the Neighborhood Watch in unarmed capacity.

That is not the conclusion I would come to. I would conclude not to participate in the Neighborhood Watch period.

Article seem to be written by a liberal who thinks guns are bad, but you should still put yourself in harms way and god will protect you.

The Zimmerman case does point out that you can be attack on Neighborhood Watch. It was Zimmerman's action, more than fact he was carrying a gun that got him in trouble.That part in bold, where did you read that in the article?I thought when I started sentence "Article seems to be written..." that it would be clear I was expressing my personal opinion, which was the case.

The beginning and ending quote marks indicate where I was quoting the article vs making comments.Perhaps then my question should be, "What in the article you quoted led you to form the personal opinion highlighted in bold.

I've read the article several times, but can't reach the same opinion. What did I miss in the article?

RussP
03-15-2012, 20:57
Wannabe cop starts fight with unarmed minority teen, then shoots him to death when said teen defends himself. This guy is scum and should be put away. And leave this kid's facebook page alone you losers. Show some respect for the deceased and his family. A couple of these comments make me ashamed to be a member of this forum.What are you talking about? Where did you see any GT members' posts on his FB page? And where did you see anything about posting on his facebook page? There was no mention of posts, and no, you don't have to post to be a loser. Visiting and prowling is enough. I'm sorry you have to be told that.You missed my post here, didn't you?Other photos on relatives' and friends' pages reflect the same youthfulness.

The comments about Martin on various Facebook pages are respectful. They lack the hate and calls for violence seen on your typical "thug" page.Rupert, sorry that you find research into the background of one of the parties offensive. Nothing I posted about Mr. Martin is disrespectful. Nothing on his Facebook page, nor on his relatives pages contain anything disrespectful to him. Quite contrarily, everything reflects very, very positively on his character. I thought what I posted countered some of the negative comments about Martin that were posted earlier. That was my intention.

Are you also offended by my information about Mr. Zimmerman?

Which comments in the thread make you ashamed to be a member of this forum?

jack76590
03-15-2012, 22:23
Perhaps then my question should be, "What in the article you quoted led you to form the personal opinion highlighted in bold.

I've read the article several times, but can't reach the same opinion. What did I miss in the article?

The part with quote led me to make comment. And what I take as praise from the author for his position. I don't think you missed anything, you simply have different opinion. And granted my opinion or comment really, may be reading too much in short passage from article.

Basically I took the author's praise to be saying, see what problems guns can get you into. Rather than saying see what problems you can get into when you assume the role of police officer.

A liberal blaming the gun, not ill advised action. And after the Zimmerman-Martin incident I think it is ill advised to join a neighborhood watch group. Become a reserve police officer if possible should you want to patrol the streets in your free time.

RussP
03-16-2012, 04:40
The part with quote led me to make comment. And what I take as praise from the author for his position. I don't think you missed anything, you simply have different opinion. And granted my opinion or comment really, may be reading too much in short passage from article.

Basically I took the author's praise to be saying, see what problems guns can get you into. Rather than saying see what problems you can get into when you assume the role of police officer.

A liberal blaming the gun, not ill advised action. And after the Zimmerman-Martin incident I think it is ill advised to join a neighborhood watch group. Become a reserve police officer if possible should you want to patrol the streets in your free time.Now I see.

What you quoted is a lead-in, a transition into the next part of the story. The first part was about Frink's restraint when he observed someone breaking into his car. Even though armed, he waited for the police - Zimmerman didn't.

The next sentence following your quote is Frink's justification for not carrying - it isn't prudent, armed patrolling belongs to the police, and his comment, "Most people don't have that kind of training," which leads into the next segment interviewing a firearms instructor about the importance of proper training.

The author sets the scene for all this in the beginning by asking two questions: "The shooting death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin by a Neighborhood Watch volunteer got me thinking: Is this what Neighborhood Watch is about these days? Pack heat, forget waiting on the cops and shoot?"

She answers in the next word, the first in her second paragraph, "No."

She wrote another piece, too. Trayvon Martin would be alive if Neighborhood Watch rules followed (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/columnists/os-trayvon-martin-beth-kassab-031512-20120314,0,4335449.column).

I do not see her two articles as anti-gun as much as anti-cop-wannabe, anti-ill-advised behavior.

Thanks for your explanation.

ATW525
03-16-2012, 06:12
A few more tidbits of info in the Miami Herald:

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/15/2696446_p2/trayvon-martin-case.html

“If someone asks you, ‘Hey do you live here?’ is it OK for you to jump on them and beat the crap out of somebody?” Lee said. “It’s not.”

A possible hint at what Zimmerman said happened?

On Thursday, Zimmerman’s father hand-delivered a letter to the Orlando Sentinel, disputing widely repeated version of events, saying his Spanish-speaking son is not a racist.

“The media reports of the events are imaginary at best. At no time did George follow or confront Mr. Martin,” Robert Zimmerman wrote. “When the true details of the event become public, and I hope that will be soon, everyone should be outraged by the treatment of George Zimmerman in the media.”

The account I posted earlier from a person that claims to know George Zimmerman said Martin was trying to take Zimmerman's gun and also claimed that Zimmerman was Hispanic. The father characterizing his son as Spanish speaking might possibly be adding some credibility to that story?

ATW525
03-16-2012, 09:20
Black militia group plans to make citizen's arrest of Zimmerman:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57398739-504083/militia-group-to-attempt-citizens-arrest-in-fla-shooting-of-trayvon-martin/

Ironic, that with all the blasting of Zimmerman for supposedly taking the law into his own hands, that now this group intends to do just that. I don't expect that this group will actually find him, but if they do I suspect things will go south in short order.

Misty02
03-16-2012, 17:08
Black militia group plans to make citizen's arrest of Zimmerman:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57398739-504083/militia-group-to-attempt-citizens-arrest-in-fla-shooting-of-trayvon-martin/

Ironic, that with all the blasting of Zimmerman for supposedly taking the law into his own hands, that now this group intends to do just that. I don't expect that this group will actually find him, but if they do I suspect things will go south in short order.

Saying that it would be chaos would be an understatement. At this rate the police might have to find a way to protect Zimmerman or he’ll be met somewhere by a lynch mob.
.

ATW525
03-16-2012, 20:30
Trayvon Martin's family have heard the 911 recordings. Two shots fired, with somebody screaming in between the shots. The family's lawyers are saying the screaming is coming from Martin. I wonder if forensic speaker recognition will be able to verify this.

No references to race in Zimmerman's call, but he did say, "These <expletive> always get away."

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-16/news/os-trayvon-martin-shooting-911-call-20120316_1_warning-shot-tapes-dispatchers

Not sure if the media will be getting a copy of the recordings so that we can form our own opinions.

ATW525
03-16-2012, 21:54
911 call with screams and shots in background:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/videogallery/68870555/News/911-call-Yelling-gunshot-heard-in-background

Zimmerman's call:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/videogallery/68871920/News/George-Zimmerman-911-call-reporting-Trayvon-Martin

Another call... heard gunshot, saw two people struggling:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/videogallery/68870733/News/911-call-Pretty-sure-guy-is-dead

jack76590
03-16-2012, 22:31
911 call with screams and shots in background:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/videogallery/68870555/News/911-call-Yelling-gunshot-heard-in-background

Zimmerman's call:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/videogallery/68871920/News/George-Zimmerman-911-call-reporting-Trayvon-Martin

Another call... heard gunshot, saw two people struggling:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/videogallery/68870733/News/911-call-Pretty-sure-guy-is-dead

Wonder if others understood last video linked same as I did, that is the two White women and maybe one White guy in video were witnesses of some kind to the shooting and they were supporting Zimmerman's guilt by appearing with Martin's parents. The speaker seemed to be saying this was the case.

ATW525
03-16-2012, 22:38
An interesting exchange on Zimmerman's call:

Dispatcher: "Are you following him?"
Zimmerman: "Yup."
Dispatcher: "Okay, we don't need you to do that."
Zimmerman: "Okay."

It sounds like he's still on the move for a short time after that, but then the dispatcher asks him his name, he replies and then says, "He ran." Based on his voice and the background noise in the conversation that follows, I just don't get the impression that he's running after him.

6forsure
03-16-2012, 22:48
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/videogallery/68870683/News/911-call-Guy-on-top-wearing-white

who was wearing white? the grown man stalking the minor child? or the minor child who had to defend himself from the grown man?

Misty02
03-17-2012, 08:22
911 call with screams and shots in background:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/videogallery/68870555/News/911-call-Yelling-gunshot-heard-in-background

Zimmerman's call:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/videogallery/68871920/News/George-Zimmerman-911-call-reporting-Trayvon-Martin

Another call... heard gunshot, saw two people struggling:

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/videogallery/68870733/News/911-call-Pretty-sure-guy-is-dead

He was already on foot when he called 911. The suggestion/order to not follow was also not what I had assumed it would be.

I still believe he shouldn’t have followed; however, he does articulate other concerns during the call and some observations. It also seems as Trayvon got a look at him while he was making the call, that also could have triggered another response. Zimmerman may not be as guilty as I originally suspected he was.

I still believe he was wrong and am having great difficulties separating his original actions (following) from the final outcome.

I can also see how a person that has accepted the duties of being in charge of a neighborhood watch may feel some obligation to not lose a stranger and keep him in sight until the police is there to apprehend them. If it had been a BG, he had lost sight of him and something had happened to someone in the community, they would have been all up in arms that their neighborhood watchman didn’t stick around to “watch” until the police arrived.

I have a feeling that there might be more than a few neighborhood watch members that dropped their membership in the past week and more to follow as this unravels

.

ATW525
03-17-2012, 08:57
He was already on foot when he called 911.


I got the impression that he left his vehicle during the call. I can hear a beeping sound like he opened the door with the keys still in the ignition. After this it sounds like Zimmerman is on the move until he reports, "He ran."

Misty02
03-17-2012, 09:17
I got the impression that he left his vehicle during the call. I can hear a beeping sound like he opened the door with the keys still in the ignition. After this it sounds like Zimmerman is on the move until he reports, "He ran."

I believe you may be correct. It does appear; however, he was on foot and on the move when the suggestion to not follow was given.

There is a sound at around 1:02, could be a car door. At 1:08 I hear movement, but not sure if the type from walking or just moving inside the vehicle. There is a peculiar sound at around 1:41, not like any beeping sound from an opened door I’ve heard before but I guess it could be. It did sound as if he was walking before that though.

.

ATW525
03-17-2012, 09:47
To me, the sound at 1:41 sounds similar to this:

http://sep800.mine.nu/files/sounds/cardoording2.wav

Of course, it could be something else.

kensteele
03-17-2012, 10:09
Dispatch asked Zman to meet police at a specific location.

Zman agreed.

Then Zman changed his mind and asked dispatch to have police call him to determine his current location since he won't be at the specific location.

I'm assuming Zman intended to resume the chase and had no intention of following instructions to break it off. Zman already had the state of mind to catch Martin regardless, which is the basis for his aggresive behaviour.

Misty02
03-17-2012, 10:11
To me, the sound at 1:41 sounds similar to this:

http://sep800.mine.nu/files/sounds/cardoording2.wav

Of course, it could be something else.

Yes, I can hear the similarities.

So now, who made the first aggressive move?

I’ll be honest; I can see how either could have believed the other was the aggressor, depending on what took place.

Someone following me is going to send a scary message and it’s unlikely I stop to interrogate the person to find out why they are following me. If I attempt to run and hide and they continue following and find me, it’s not likely to be pretty.

Zimmerman mentioned on the 911 call and I saw a video of another neighbor indicating there have been break-ins in the neighborhood. He shouldn’t have followed, but he did. Whether it was from a sense of obligation to the community since he was the captain of the neighborhood watch or for other reasons, we’ll likely never know. However, if I had been stupid enough to follow in spite sensing possible danger, if the person came at me and made an aggressive physical move I believe I may have been justified in defending myself.

I still can’t part with the fact that if he had not followed (whether it was legal for him to do or not) all this could have been avoided. It’s also very easy to Saturday quarterback from the comfort and safety of my home.

.

ATW525
03-17-2012, 11:21
Dispatch asked Zman to meet police at a specific location.

Zman agreed.

Then Zman changed his mind and asked dispatch to have police call him to determine his current location since he won't be at the specific location.

I'm assuming Zman intended to resume the chase and had no intention of following instructions to break it off. Zman already had the state of mind to catch Martin regardless, which is the basis for his aggresive behaviour.

It's possible.

However, Zimmerman says, "He Ran," at 2:10, and the recording continues until 2:32. That's a good a 30 second head start, and Trayvon is reportedly an athlete. Looking at Google maps... the clubhouse looks maybe a little over 200 yards from where Martin's dad lived.

How is it possible that they were able to meet and have a confrontation unless Martin turned back to confront Zimmerman?

Misty02
03-17-2012, 11:34
It's possible.

However, Zimmerman says, "He Ran," at 2:10, and the recording continues until 2:32. That's a good a 30 second head start, and Trayvon is reportedly an athlete. Looking at Google maps... the clubhouse looks maybe a little over 200 yards from where Martin's dad lived.

How is it possible that they were able to meet and have a confrontation unless Martin turned back to confront Zimmerman?

Interesting observation!

At the same time, it could be, not a matter of turning back but that he stopped running to ask why he continued to follow him.

.

TBO
03-17-2012, 13:08
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/16/2697604/trayvon-martins-parents-criss.html

kensteele
03-17-2012, 13:11
It's possible.

However, Zimmerman says, "He Ran," at 2:10, and the recording continues until 2:32. That's a good a 30 second head start, and Trayvon is reportedly an athlete. Looking at Google maps... the clubhouse looks maybe a little over 200 yards from where Martin's dad lived.

How is it possible that they were able to meet and have a confrontation unless Martin turned back to confront Zimmerman?

I dunno. Why can't the police allow Zman to present that theory to a courtroom jury?

ATW525
03-17-2012, 13:28
I dunno. Why can't the police allow Zman to present that theory to a courtroom jury?

I don't disagree with the sentiment, but I don't know what other evidence there might be that hasn't been made public yet.

Misty02
03-17-2012, 14:15
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/16/2697604/trayvon-martins-parents-criss.html


One call, so close that the cryies for help could be heard, contains two sounds, first a muted bang that family attorneys believe was a warning shot, then the louder crack of close-range gunfire. Sanford police said Sunday that a check of the weapon showed only one shot was fired.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/16/2697604/trayvon-martins-parents-criss.html#storylink=cpy



Does a warning shot any different than an aimed shot? Or are people just making up stuff as they go now?

.

ATW525
03-17-2012, 14:33
Does a warning shot any different than an aimed shot? Or are people just making up stuff as they go now?

.

I'm pretty sure there's a lot of "making up stuff up as they go" in the case, whether intentional or not.

kensteele
03-17-2012, 14:35
I don't disagree with the sentiment, but I don't know what other evidence there might be that hasn't been made public yet.

Same with the shots. People may have claimed what they heard but that doesn't change the facts. I only heard one shot on the tape I listened to but what was that other sound? And for a semi-auto handgun, how do you tell for sure it only fired once?

Sadly, we'll have to wait a little longer for the official release and in the meantime, tension builds and rumors circulate and fiction becomes fact as this news spreads across America, thru the liberal media of course.

To you and I, a warning shot is bad news for zman. For the community, a warning shot is akin to trying to make an arrest or stop someone from fleeing. Right or wrong, the state making the final call and the final interpretation will ultimately leave half satisfied and half unsatisfied. the only people contributing to the evidence is the police and zman. when does the dead man get to speak?

Kaonashi
03-17-2012, 14:39
Apologies if this has already been posted but here's Roland Martin's opinion piece on the shooting.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/17/opinion/martin-sanford-killing


This is Roland Martin so even his opinion should be taken with a large grain of salt and maybe three or four shots of tequilla. That being said it's telling that a little over halfway down he questions why Zimmerman was armed. I don't know the law in the state of Florida but if it was legal for him to be armed then why wouldn't he be and that seems like a bit of a cheap attack on the right to carry. Again, not surprising considering who wrote the piece.

Misty02
03-17-2012, 15:06
Apologies if this has already been posted but here's Roland Martin's opinion piece on the shooting.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/17/opinion/martin-sanford-killing


This is Roland Martin so even his opinion should be taken with a large grain of salt and maybe three or four shots of tequilla. That being said it's telling that a little over halfway down he questions why Zimmerman was armed. I don't know the law in the state of Florida but if it was legal for him to be armed then why wouldn't he be and that seems like a bit of a cheap attack on the right to carry. Again, not surprising considering who wrote the piece.

News articles have stated he had a license to carry. That being the case, he had the right to carry once he stepped out of his vehicle. While inside his vehicle he had the right to be armed, whether he had a license to do so or not (as long as he is not a forbidden person).

It seems Roland Martin has made some mistakes of his own as well: http://news.yahoo.com/cnn-lifts-roland-martins-suspension-225031346.html

.

kensteele
03-17-2012, 15:18
Apologies if this has already been posted but here's Roland Martin's opinion piece on the shooting.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/17/opinion/martin-sanford-killing


This is Roland Martin so even his opinion should be taken with a large grain of salt and maybe three or four shots of tequilla. That being said it's telling that a little over halfway down he questions why Zimmerman was armed. I don't know the law in the state of Florida but if it was legal for him to be armed then why wouldn't he be and that seems like a bit of a cheap attack on the right to carry. Again, not surprising considering who wrote the piece.

From our perspective, sure. We carry our firearms all the time, every day, everywhere we can. But look at it from the viewpoint of the average citizen. If you are the neighbourhood watch person, why do you need a gun to perform your duties? It would only make sense that you need a gun if you plan to do more than your duties.

All indications so far show that Zman shirked his duties, ignored the police, and actually planned to carry out his actions beforehand (confront, apprehend, detain). Even Stevie Wonder can see that was his state of mind.

Couple that with the fact that lots of strangers pass thru that complex and don't get ambushed and shot. Saying we've had break ins during the past is code for looks like I surprised a potential burglar casing the place.

When Roland said the police bought his story, he is basically saying the police will not take into account the totality of the circumstances when they do so often in the past. Why not now?

jack76590
03-17-2012, 15:48
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/16/2697604/trayvon-martins-parents-criss.html


Article indicates witnesses thought Zimmerman was aggressor or at least had upper hand. This could be very telling with jury. Quote,


"....She said calls from other witnesses who heard or saw the incident from their window appeared to back up their claim that it was Zimmerman who had the upperhand throughout the altercation..."

steveksux
03-17-2012, 15:48
I dunno. Why can't the police allow Zman to present that theory to a courtroom jury?

I think Fl law the prosecution has burden of proof to show it was a bad shoot to bring charges from the sound of it. Cant just bring charges and let the jury sort it out. FL legislators wanted to give the advantage to a citizen in a self defense shooting.

Randy

jack76590
03-17-2012, 15:54
As to question of Zimmerman only firing one round. If Zimmerman started with FULLY loaded mag and one in the chamber, if condition of his gun was one in the chamber and one less than full capacity in the mag, then he fired one round. Barring he replaced mag with spare or took existing mag out and added a loose round he was carrying. All pretty unlikely given circumstances.

kensteele
03-17-2012, 16:46
As to question of Zimmerman only firing one round. If Zimmerman started with FULLY loaded mag and one in the chamber, if condition of his gun was one in the chamber and one less than full capacity in the mag, then he fired one round. Barring he replaced mag with spare or took existing mag out and added a loose round he was carrying. All pretty unlikely given circumstances.

LOL Unlikely? So the shooter gets the unlikely on the facts and the dead man gets nothing? How about it is unlikely that a teenager would brutally attack an armed adult posing as the law weighing more than 100 lbs as him and go for his gun? What does that count for?

You honestly think this young black man doing nothing but being innocent and walking decided to attack what he thought might have been the police and try to get his gun? That's sounds more like a hardcore ex-con on drugs to me. I'm sorry but that raises red flags for me.

Personally I think it is more likely he fired one shot the more live rounds you find in his gun.

Misty02
03-17-2012, 16:49
Article indicates witnesses thought Zimmerman was aggressor or at least had upper hand. This could be very telling with jury. Quote,


"....She said calls from other witnesses who heard or saw the incident from their window appeared to back up their claim that it was Zimmerman who had the upperhand throughout the altercation..."

Guilt or innocence cannot be assessed to the survivor without reviewing how it all started, by whom, how it progressed and what was reasonable based on the circumstances.

If having the upper hand at any point branded a person as the guilty party, what would be the purpose of laws that allow for the use of lethal force in a self-defense case? Obviously, if the person succeeded in self-defense at some point (arguably it could have been the last second) they had the upper hand.


.

jack76590
03-17-2012, 17:13
Guilt or innocence cannot be assessed to the survivor without reviewing how it all started, by whom, how it progressed and what was reasonable based on the circumstances.

If having the upper hand at any point branded a person as the guilty party, what would be the purpose of laws that allow for the use of lethal force in a self-defense case? Obviously, if the person succeeded in self-defense at some point (arguably it could have been the last second) they had the upper hand.


.

I agree with what you say in terms of how the world SHOULD BE.

But in terms of influence on most juries, I think the fact that witnesses believe Zimmerman to be guilty will have great influence on the jury's decision. Certainly not necessarily right in terms of how often witnesses incorrectly judge a situation. But Zimmerman's freedom will most likely depend on perception more than fact.

Or to roughly quote Machiavelli from memory, "the perception of virtue is more important than virtue."

If anyone ever needed a good lawyer with fully backup, it is Mr. Zimmerman. I hope he has significant resources.

Misty02
03-17-2012, 17:37
I agree with what you say in terms of how the world SHOULD BE.

But in terms of influence on most juries, I think the fact that witnesses believe Zimmerman to be guilty will have great influence on the jury's decision. Certainly not necessarily right in terms of how often witnesses incorrectly judge a situation. But Zimmerman's freedom will most likely depend on perception more than fact.

Or to roughly quote Machiavelli from memory, "the perception of virtue is more important than virtue."

If anyone ever needed a good lawyer with fully backup, it is Mr. Zimmerman. I hope he has significant resources.

I don’t disagree with you. Nonetheless, in a court of law, I believe, what the witnesses actually observed will have more weight than what they felt at the time. Granted, cases have been won by prosecutors with circumstantial evidence. So far it doesn’t appear there is a witness that has provided testimony on how the physical confrontation started.

I still believe that Zimmerman shouldn’t have followed Martin. Had he not followed, whatever took place after would have never happened and Martin would be alive today. If that is all there is for the prosecutor to work with, it may not be enough to determine criminal culpability. It is also possible that there is not enough to determine criminal culpability, because there was none.

Assuming that Zimmerman is not an evil/bad person, just someone whose actions were inappropriate and didn’t take the best course of action; he’s going to need more than a good lawyer. Living with the thought that you possibly killed an innocent kid is something I never wish to be able to relate to, it will take a huge toll in a person's mind.
.

jack76590
03-17-2012, 18:09
I don’t disagree with you. Nonetheless, in a court of law, I believe, what the witnesses actually observed will have more weight than what they felt at the time. Granted, cases have been won by prosecutors with circumstantial evidence. So far it doesn’t appear there is a witness that has provided testimony on how the physical confrontation started.

I still believe that Zimmerman shouldn’t have followed Martin. Had he not followed, whatever took place after would have never happened and Martin would be alive today. If that is all there is for the prosecutor to work with, it may not be enough to determine criminal culpability. It is also possible that there is not enough to determine criminal culpability, because there was none.

Assuming that Zimmerman is not an evil/bad person, just someone whose actions were inappropriate and didn’t take the best course of action; he’s going to need more than a good lawyer. Living with the thought that you possibly killed an innocent kid is something I never wish to be able to relate to, it will take a huge toll in a person's mind.
.

I don't believe it so much of a problem of what the witnesses said they saw at the time being different, from what they will later say or as you put it they "actually observed." Yes, eye witnesses testimony can change, but they will probably stick to their original stories. However, the big problem is many witness never at any point knew what they "actually observed." Eye witnesses testimony especially in stress situation is often inaccurate from first telling to many retellings.

So I don't really see the witnesses changing their testimony so much as, perhaps the defense attorney breaking down their testimony or casing doubts. For this Zimmerman needs a really good attorney and experts on witnesses testimony, lighting, etc, etc. Zimmerman may get a break in that witnesses testimony is conflicting.

On one video clip what I took to be Martin's attorney was speaking with the family present and two White woman standing in the background. I took the attorney to say the White women were witnesses who came forward to support Martin as victim. Need I say that White witnesses supporting Martin, as victim would be especially telling with a jury.

It is going to be an interesting case and verdict I suspect will hang on some very thin strands of evidence or more likely perceptions.

Misty02
03-17-2012, 18:43
It will be an interesting case to follow, of that there is no doubt.

I don’t know if either of them actually committed a crime once they were in close proximity to one another.

My prayer for Trayvon’s family and loved ones as well as Zimmerman and his loved ones. No parent should have to outlive their children. From reading his facebook page before it was erased or locked, from the company he kept, I got the impression that he was a good kid.

.

TBO
03-17-2012, 21:27
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-17/news/os-trayvon-martin-shooting-tension-20120317_1_shooting-death-english-teacher-uncle?pagewanted=all

ATW525
03-17-2012, 21:53
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/17/v-fullstory/2700249/shooter-of-trayvon-martin-a-habitual.html

An interesting article with neighbors who know George Zimmerman. Previous articles had made it sound like he was a loose cannon who ran around harassing his neighbors. This article actually paints a different picture of the man who shot Trayvon Martin.

6forsure
03-17-2012, 21:56
the road rage and taking the law into in his own hands part of the artcle sure doesn't paint a pretty picture of zimmerman.

a minor child is acosted by an armed violent adult who is stalking him. minor child gets the upperhand on violent stalker? violent stalker shoots minor child.

jack76590
03-17-2012, 22:14
http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/17/v-fullstory/2700249/shooter-of-trayvon-martin-a-habitual.html

An interesting article with neighbors who know George Zimmerman. Previous articles had made it sound like he was a loose cannon who ran around harassing his neighbors. This article actually paints a different picture of the man who shot Trayvon Martin.

This quote from article was interesting. That is average of just over one police call every day. And a 260 unit townhouse complex is pretty average sized. Lot of crime going on there.

"....In all, police had been called to the 260-unit complex 402 times from Jan. 1, 2011 to Feb. 26, 2012..."

Phaze5ive
03-17-2012, 22:20
If there's a race-riot in the imminent future, I hope they don't exclude angry Caucasians/Asians/Hispanics/Jews from partaking. The guy is scum.

Misty02
03-18-2012, 07:59
There is still much to be learned from this case as the entire process of the aftermath has merely begun. Nonetheless, there are many things on the table from which to learn already. It includes, but is not limited to, how a possible act of self defense that was just between two people at a point in time can affect not just the lives of those involved, their family and their loved ones, but an entire community and even the world.

This all started with a young man and a boy. Today Black Militia groups are involved. Rep. Corinne Brown wants to extend this case to include racial tensions that date back to 1911 http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2012/0317/Trayvon-Martin-911-tapes-Who-screamed-for-help-before-shot-rang-out/(page)/2 (http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2012/0317/Trayvon-Martin-911-tapes-Who-screamed-for-help-before-shot-rang-out/(page)/2) (near the end of the article). Reverend Al Sharpton and others are organizing a rally for the 26th but will be in the area starting on the 23rd http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/16/2697604_p3/trayvon-martins-parents-criss.html (http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/16/2697604_p3/trayvon-martins-parents-criss.html) There are several other things being scheduled in the community http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/os-trayvon-martin-rally-al-sharpton-20120317,0,7122870.story (http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/os-trayvon-martin-rally-al-sharpton-20120317,0,7122870.story)

One wrong decision can echo in the whole world, a notoriety that I’m almost sure Zimmerman never expected and wished didn’t exist.

I’m often accused of over-thinking things and insisting of looking at things from all angles, when it is often obvious to others that there is but one angle to consider. This, an actual case, has actually gone beyond my “over-thinking” of the past as what the possible ramifications could actually be. Based on the facts I've read to date, I still believe either party (or even both) could have been acting in self-defense. Both probably made some unwise decisions, but it is quite possible that in spite being unwise none of it might be illegal. None of it changes the fact that a kid who appears to have done nothing illegal is now dead. A person who thought he was doing the right thing (in hindsight, he may think differently now) felt he reached a point where he had to take a life (that alone could be devastating) is now in hiding, has received death threats, has reports of a Black Militia attempting to find him and bring him to be arrested, would feel he is the reason for an uprising in his community, has representatives making press statements his actions represent racial tensions that date back to 1911. Even if he is never charged or convicted, he’ll never have peace in his life again.

Neither stupidity nor arrogance is against the law, but they can certainly trigger other events that could be. Even if nothing illegal takes place, the ramifications of words and actions can be well beyond anything we could even begin to imagine. Many of us are likely guilty of crossing that sensible line at one point in our life or another, we were just lucky and didn’t suffer the full consequence of “what could have happened”. Let’s do our best to ensure never do and avoid situations that can take us there.


.

6forsure
03-18-2012, 08:39
i wonder if the police had arrested zimmerman and let him be processed through the legal system, would this whole situation not have spiraled so out of control?

was zimmerman's race (and that of the victim) and his 'relationship' with the police reasons for not for not being arrested? it sure seems that way.

steveksux
03-18-2012, 08:57
i wonder if the police had arrested zimmerman and let him be processed through the legal system, would this whole situation not have spiraled so out of control?

was zimmerman's race (and that of the victim) and his 'relationship' with the police reasons for not for not being arrested? it sure seems that way.Thing is, do you let the facts determine how you proceed with a case, or do you base your decisions on what it may seem like to people who don't have the information about the circumstances that you have at your disposal?

I don't disagree with your opinion of what it seems like, but how to correct the situation outside of following the law, even when it may not "seem" right to everyone.

Generally there are people on both sides that don't think it seems right, but some want the shooter hung out to dry, and others are equally sure the one shot is the one guilty.

Not so much in this case as the kid doesn't seem to have much in the way of a shady past.

Seems the only fair way to handle it is to analyze the evidence, follow the law, and let the chips fall where they may. That's what's purportedly going on in this case.

Randy

Misty02
03-18-2012, 09:02
i wonder if the police had arrested zimmerman and let him be processed through the legal system, would this whole situation not have spiraled so out of control?

was zimmerman's race (and that of the victim) and his 'relationship' with the police reasons for not for not being arrested? it sure seems that way.

By virtue of being here I’m assuming you possibly carry a defensive weapon or at least own one.

If you believe you acted in self-defense and the police stated they have no evidence to dispute that fact, do you think you should be arrested for the sake of appeasing the community or do you think you should be arrested only if there are facts that dispute your claim?

I believe it would be wrong to arrest for the sole purpose of appeasing others. If there are facts that dispute his claims of self-defense, then it would be wrong to not arrest him regardless of the reasons.

.

ATW525
03-18-2012, 09:27
I think this case is scary because it shows what can happen when there's not enough evidence to conclusively prove what happened one way or another. I've read about vocalizing to "make good witnesses", but it seems in this case there's dispute over who was screaming for help and it's not inconceivable to imagine how somebody's own vocalizations could be used against them. It also shows the power of the media and the court of public opinion... just look at the people who have already declared the guy as "scum" without even knowing all the facts (he could very well be scum, of course).

Misty02
03-18-2012, 09:38
I would like to share a comment posted by a gentleman whose opinion I respect:


"we have a saying out on the water that is functional in this case..."the ocean floor is littered with vessels whose captains knew they had the right of way"....just because the actions you are taking are legal doesnt mean there wont be disastrous results for you or someone else...there is a very thick line between legal and right...my other thread was meant to make people think about that and it is specifically why i mentioned the penchant for some here to quote statutes like they are requirements for actions...

if nothing else...regardless of the outcome of this investigation...it should be a large lesson in thinking before you take action that could have a negative result in yours or someone elses life just because what you are doing is legal...

for all practical purposes...and its hard to deny at this point...a kids life ended for no real good reason and 2 families along with many friends are going to suffer a great deal for a long time because of it...i dont care what color they are, what they were wearing or why they were there...this is about as tragic as a situation can get...and there were some real bad decisions that lead up to it... "

eta...there is also a rule of the road on the water that states regardless of right of way every party involved is required to make every effort to avoid conflict on the water...rules to live by....


.

Misty02
03-18-2012, 10:01
I think this case is scary because it shows what can happen when there's not enough evidence to conclusively prove what happened one way or another. I've read about vocalizing to "make good witnesses", but it seems in this case there's dispute over who was screaming for help and it's not inconceivable to imagine how somebody's own vocalizations could be used against them. It also shows the power of the media and the court of public opinion... just look at the people who have already declared the guy as "scum" without even knowing all the facts (he could very well be scum, of course).

If a month or two ago someone would have stated what is currently taking place as the possible consequences of a self-defense shooting, several would have laughed at that person and stated they were either overdramatizing or at the very least exaggerating. It should be noted that I don't know whether or not this is truly a case of self-defense, only Zimmerman knows that beyond all doubt.

The fact is that even a clearer case of self-defense with some witnesses can still yield similar results. That is among the reasons we should exercise extreme care out there, what we say, what we do, and how others can perceive us can unchain events that will destroy many lives.

There are so many “what if’s” that can unravel from mundane actions/words that if we took a second or two to think, we may do some things differently. This includes actions/words others may perceive as a provocation, even if we know none was intended.

.

TBO
03-18-2012, 10:09
One wrong decision can echo in the whole world, a notoriety that I’m almost sure Zimmerman never expected and wished didn’t exist.

Misty,

Hope you don't mind me slightly modifying your post.
I believe this is something that goes to the essence of carrying weapons for self-defense.

Sincerely,

TBO

Misty02
03-18-2012, 10:27
Misty,

Hope you don't mind me slightly modifying your post.
I believe this is something that goes to the essence of carrying weapons for self-defense.

Sincerely,

TBO


I think you know well I don’t mind at all! :wavey:

And you are correct, with the information available at the time of the event it would have been impossible (without the benefit of hindsight) to know if following was a bad or good decision. People are upset (and rightfully so) because it involved a kid with no original intent of harming anyone. I doubt anyone would have been upset if the person Zimmerman followed, later turned out to be a convicted sex offender whose possible intent was to rape someone in that community.

It is way too easy to play Sunday morning couch-quarterback when we have information the other person didn’t have at the time. :embarassed:


.
.

6forsure
03-18-2012, 10:38
By virtue of being here I’m assuming you possibly carry a defensive weapon or at least own one.

If you believe you acted in self-defense and the police stated they have no evidence to dispute that fact, do you think you should be arrested for the sake of appeasing the community or do you think you should be arrested only if there are facts that dispute your claim?

I believe it would be wrong to arrest for the sole purpose of appeasing others. If there are facts that dispute his claims of self-defense, then it would be wrong to not arrest him regardless of the reasons.

.

as a 240lb grown man, if i sought out a confrontation with a smaller minor teenager and then shot him after he legitimately was beating my ***, then i would be arrested. a bond would be set, and the case would go to a grand jury.

Misty02
03-18-2012, 12:03
as a 240lb grown man, if i sought out a confrontation with a smaller minor teenager and then shot him after he legitimately was beating my ***, then i would be arrested. a bond would be set, and the case would go to a grand jury.

You call it “sought out a confrontation” someone else may call it keeping an eye on someone until police arrives. Laws in Texas may also not be the same as laws in Florida. If Zimmerman claims self-defense and the authorities don’t have sufficient evidence to the contrary, what would be the charge?

In Texas, does everyone that ends the life of another in self-defense gets arrested, has to post bond and go before the grand jury? Or does that happen when there is some evidence pointing to possible criminal action on the part of the shooter? Are any of those three outcomes (arrest, bond, grand jury) ever absent in self-defense cases?

Btw, how tall is Zimmerman? Is he a strong man or just a heavy man that may have difficulty outrunning a younger fit counterpart? Martin was 6’3” and an athlete. I’m not implying that either could have physically overpowered the other. Just that I’m not so sure how the physical disparities come to play here. The age probably should as a 28 year old man should be wiser than a 17 year old kid.

The benefit of having some information but not having ALL the information I would need to reach a conclusion allows me to explore each side, ask questions and retain doubts (and I still believe he should have never followed the kid).

.

steveksux
03-18-2012, 12:25
It should be noted that I don't know whether or not this is truly a case of self-defense, only Zimmerman knows that beyond all doubt.That's just it, I don't think Zimmerman knows even now, but certainly at the time he was not aware of all the pertinent facts. Often nobody really is in a fluid fast moving situation.

Does Zimmerman really know the laws regarding self defense use of force? Witnesses tell very different tales of what happened in a given situation. Which is accurate? Are any even accurate?

Zimmerman can't be sure of anything except his impression of the events, not what actually happened, and he's not aware of the intricacies of the laws of lethal force.

Add to the confusion, it doesn't matter what happened. Its what the prosecutor thinks happened, and whether he can sell that version of the incident to a jury.

Good reason to avoid confrontations whenever possible, deescalate when they are unavoidable, and only employ deadly force as a last resort, not the first choice at the first moment you think it's legal.

Randy

Bruce M
03-18-2012, 12:40
I wonder if Zimmerman has an attorney? If so I wonder how much that has cost so far? What would the cost be if the incident goes to trial?

ATW525
03-18-2012, 12:57
I wonder if Zimmerman has an attorney? If so I wonder how much that has cost so far? What would the cost be if the incident goes to trial?

I've kind of wondered the same thing. Other than his father's letter, his side of the story really isn't getting told. The Martin family has basically had free reign to try this case in the court of public opinion.

At this point, I think no matter what happens and what the evidence shows, a large part of community will always believe that George Zimmerman is a cold blooded racist murderer. That's what the media and the Martin family has portrayed him as. Any evidence that contradicts that will just be written off as part of the conspiracy by "the man" to cover this up.

Misty02
03-18-2012, 13:26
I've kind of wondered the same thing. Other than his father's letter, his side of the story really isn't getting told. The Martin family has basically had free reign to try this case in the court of public opinion.

At this point, I think no matter what happens and what the evidence shows, a large part of community will always believe that George Zimmerman is a cold blooded racist murderer. That's what the media and the Martin family has portrayed him as. Any evidence that contradicts that will just be written off as part of the conspiracy by "the man" to cover this up.

And it would be unwise for him to provide any information to anyone, especially the press! Anything he says can be damaging to his case, whether guilty or innocent.

.

Misty02
03-18-2012, 13:30
I wonder if Zimmerman has an attorney? If so I wonder how much that has cost so far? What would the cost be if the incident goes to trial?

He would need the best attorney available for a case of this magnitude. He appears to have given a full statement to the police and was never arrested. One doesn’t have a right to a court appointed attorney unless one is charged, right?

.

kensteele
03-18-2012, 13:35
One question and it will be my final question until the state releases the official findings of the investigation:

If it can be determined that the screams for help came from Martin and the screaming stopped right after the shot is fired, will that possibly change your mind and help you conclude that Zman should be tried for this crime?

saxconnection
03-18-2012, 13:46
I tried to use the links earlier in the thread to listen to the tapes. In the third one down, you can distinctly hear what sounds like a "warrior type", or "instinctual" (not sure how to describe it) howl, and another voice yelling "help". From that, it seems like Zman is telling the truth about asking for help. (Unless of course Zman is the "howler")

My $.02

Here is another source for audio: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/16/trayvon-martin-911-audio-_n_1354909.html

Adam

ATW525
03-18-2012, 13:56
And it would be unwise for him to provide any information to anyone, especially the press! Anything he says can be damaging to his case, whether guilty or innocent.

.

Oh... I agree 100% that Zimmerman shouldn't personally be saying a word to the press. That said, I would think his lawyer could release carefully chosen statements on behalf of his client. Of course, IANAL, and there might very good reason why Zimmern's attorney (if Zimmerman even has one) hasn't released any public statements yet.

Misty02
03-18-2012, 14:39
One question and it will be my final question until the state releases the official findings of the investigation:

If it can be determined that the screams for help came from Martin and the screaming stopped right after the shot is fired, will that possibly change your mind and help you conclude that Zman should be tried for this crime?

It is possible that both were acting in self-defense. Either could have yelled for help and wanted the fight stopped. It doesn’t automatically brand the other a criminal.

I would have to make certain assumptions not in evidence where both (simultaneously) were acting in self-defense and neither would reach the status of criminal in my mind. But it appears people want someone charged with a crime in a case where a person lost his life. I can’t even say I blame them; I too would want justice if it was a loved one, even if I wasn’t completely sure what justice in that particular case was.

A long time ago our family was involved in a case where I’m certain beyond doubt justice wasn’t served. It was a clear case of guilty that didn’t stick. I believe the police did what they could to make it happen, but the person got off on a technicality. I still cannot let my own bias of the system, as whole, influence individual opinions I form about a specific occurrence.

Now, when I’m called for jury duty I will honestly state that due to past experience I’m unable to believe that all relevant evidence, testimony and information has been presented. Based on that, I don’t believe I can reach a fair and impartial conclusion. At that point, whether they take me or not, is up to them. No defense attorney has made that leap of faith yet.

.

cgjane
03-18-2012, 15:44
Zimmerman is guilty of at least manslaughter. He escalated the situation to a confrontation. He disobeyed the dispatcher, followed and got out of the car, and initiated contact.

Zimmerman is the kind of neighbor I would be worried about having next door. A guy with a gun who was itching to pull the trigger...

jack76590
03-18-2012, 16:27
Again, I would really be interested in what if any injuries Zimmerman suffered. If the general standard for justifying use of deadly force is - in grave and immediate danger of loss of life or serious bodily injury, then it would really be to Zimmermans benefit to have some very visible injuries.

Yes, he could have sustained nothing other than a bloody nose and make case of grave danger, but it will be harder. I wonder if in the end Zimmerman will claim it was a fight over the gun and gun went off in the struggle.

kensteele
03-18-2012, 17:34
Yes, he could have sustained nothing other than a bloody nose and make case of grave danger, but it will be harder. I wonder if in the end Zimmerman will claim it was a fight over the gun and gun went off in the struggle.

I would think it would easy to prove if a gun went off a close range and the angle of the gunshot. There have been plenty of legitimate struggles where the gun have gone off, this would come back with the analysis and the investigation and the examination if that is what occured. We'll see. Looks like the FBI might be getting involved. I'm concerned there will be a lot of "inconclusive" results which is code for "I'm not going to call it...[fill in anything that would tend to make the shooter look guilty]."

kensteele
03-18-2012, 19:41
This story posted today and you should be warned don't read it if you don't care for theories and speculation and only want to know the facts when they are released. Lots of talk in this article: http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin-family-seeks-fbi-investigation-killing/story?id=15949879#.T2aMyXh9n-o

Misty02
03-19-2012, 03:56
This story posted today and you should be warned don't read it if you don't care for theories and speculation and only want to know the facts when they are released. Lots of talk in this article: http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin-family-seeks-fbi-investigation-killing/story?id=15949879#.T2aMyXh9n-o (http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin-family-seeks-fbi-investigation-killing/story?id=15949879#.T2aMyXh9n-o)
Looks similar to other articles I’ve read, then again, I’ve read more than a few that weren’t posted here and probably why I don’t see that much of a difference. Well, other than mention of the “stepmother” who in previous articles was the girlfriend and then the fiancé. Either the reporters keep changing her status or the dad moves fast. :)

For those that continue to say he disobeyed the 911 operator and got off the vehicle. I’ll start by restating that I personally don’t believe he should have gotten out of the vehicle either. However, doing so is not against the law. Second, the operator said “we don’t need you doing that” hardly an order. Third, if you believe that 911 operator instructions/suggestions carry the weight of law, remember that next time you hear them tell the caller (as the intruder is breaking into their home) “Ma’am put the weapon down!” The police are on their way.”

In spite all we think we know, we really know little to nothing. In spite what little we know, we still know a lot more than what Zimmerman knew at that point and time. I’m not defending him or his actions; I just haven’t read any information that would help me form a personal opinion on whether or not he may have taken that shot in self-defense. Conversely from the information that has been presented so far, I have formed the personal opinion that Martin was doing nothing wrong or illegal, at least until he came face to face with Zimmerman. Even if I were to learn that Martin pushed Zimmerman (a stranger that was following him) and it was then that Zimmerman sustained the injury to the back of his head from which he was bleeding, I would be able to label that action as self-defense, from Martin’s perspective.

At the end of the day, my opinion on something like this isn’t worth even the usual $.02 and just because I think it makes sense (or doesn’t) it doesn’t make it legal or illegal.


.

IndyGunFreak
03-19-2012, 04:48
Zimmerman is guilty of at least manslaughter. He escalated the situation to a confrontation. He disobeyed the dispatcher, followed and got out of the car, and initiated contact.

Zimmerman is the kind of neighbor I would be worried about having next door. A guy with a gun who was itching to pull the trigger...

Just curious where you've gotten the information he initiated the contact, escalated the situation, etc..? I've not read anything about that. Yes, he followed the guy.. but disobeying a dispatcher is not a crime.

IGF

Misty02
03-19-2012, 04:54
Something else to keep in mind; make sure kids always have some ID on them!


When he didn’t return back to the townhouse, it would be another 12 hours before Tracy Martin found out his son was dead.

“I started making calls to see if he was arrested,” he said.

Calls to 911 led him to missing persons, where he left a description of his son. Soon a marked patrol car followed by detectives arrived at Green’s rented townhouse

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/16/2697604_p3/trayvon-martins-parents-criss.html#storylink=cpy

.

RussP
03-19-2012, 05:20
In spite all we think we know, we really know little to nothing. In spite what little we know, we still know a lot more than what Zimmerman knew at that point and time.Very important...

ratchetjaw
03-19-2012, 06:30
Yes, we don't have all the facts and probably never will. But the question will be asked why did Zimmerman step out of the car? I believe most people will feel Zimmerman got out of the car to play police officer and detain Martin. Now maybe Zimmerman or his lawyers can come up with another reason Zimmerman got out of his car.

But if the jurors believe Zimmerman got out of his car to play policeman and detain Martin, then I think Zimmerman is toast.

And I don't want any precedents being set that justifies a non police officer attempting to detain me, unless there is a clear and immediate danger I am about to do harm to people, not harm to property, but harm to people.

I can not support the position a person has a right to say to another, hey you stop, attempt to detain him because of vague suspicion of some undefined crime the person thinks he might commit. And then when the person resists being detained by non police officer give non police officer the right to use deadly force because he is losing a fight, that he started without justification.

I agree totally. He shouldn't have got out of the car. End of story. By doing so its no longer self defense

cgjane
03-19-2012, 06:40
Just curious where you've gotten the information he initiated the contact, escalated the situation, etc..? I've not read anything about that. Yes, he followed the guy.. but disobeying a dispatcher is not a crime.

IGF

Known facts:

The kid is walking.
Zimmerman follows in the car.
Zimmerman shots kid outside the car.

Zimmerman escalated the situation, every single time he could.

He got what he wanted though, he got to shoot somebody. In his mall ninja mind, he thought he would be hailed as a hero for this.

Lost in all this is, a KID got shot, never to fulfill his life, his GOD given right.

A neighborhood watch idiot was the judge, jury and executioner.

kensteele
03-19-2012, 06:45
Following Martin is not a crime. When politely asked by dispatch, Zman said OK. Then he did the opposite. It shows a pattern of misleading the authorities of his true intentions which he did many times from mischaracterising the target Martin as a drug user to looking suspicious to having something in his waistband to having something in his hand to coming over to check him out. It's a classic setup (including the call to a non-911 number) and the state bought it. It is the totality of circumstances that don't add up to everything going wrong....from Zman chased him to Martin did nothing suspicious to Martin had nothing suspicious in his hand or waistband, even to Martin being the one who screamed for help. Everything is slightly off. Look at the big picture instead of the minute details.

Because Zman didn't know all the details, he had no right to take the action he did. He gambled.

Misty02
03-19-2012, 07:44
I agree totally. He shouldn't have got out of the car. End of story. By doing so its no longer self defense

Not certain I understand exactly what you mean (as respect legalities and self-defense) correctly. Could you please let me know if the following is correct so I can more clearly understand?

We all know it is not wise to be out alone at 2:00 AM in a shady areas of town.. We are told this constantly by the media, by friends, by the authorities. Following that train of thought, if you’re out and about at 2:00 AM in a shady area of town you likely instigated the problems by virtue of being there (where you are legally allowed to be) thus any problems you encounter or if you have to act in self-defense, won’t be viewed as such.


.

Misty02
03-19-2012, 07:54
Following Martin is not a crime. When politely asked by dispatch, Zman said OK. Then he did the opposite. It shows a pattern of misleading the authorities of his true intentions which he did many times from mischaracterising the target Martin as a drug user to looking suspicious to having something in his waistband to having something in his hand to coming over to check him out. It's a classic setup (including the call to a non-911 number) and the state bought it. It is the totality of circumstances that don't add up to everything going wrong....from Zman chased him to Martin did nothing suspicious to Martin had nothing suspicious in his hand or waistband, even to Martin being the one who screamed for help. Everything is slightly off. Look at the big picture instead of the minute details.

Because Zman didn't know all the details, he had no right to take the action he did. He gambled.

Do we know for a fact that there were no drugs or alcohol in the system of either?

I don’t know what actually happened here but it seems that the state lacks sufficient evidence to disprove self-defense. I too believe that Zimmerman likely followed Martin, chased I’m not so sure, he was breathing heavily at times from just getting out of the car and walking.

Which are the actions Zimmerman had no right to take that we know he did?

.

ATW525
03-19-2012, 08:09
Something else to keep in mind; make sure kids always have some ID on them!


When he didn’t return back to the townhouse, it would be another 12 hours before Tracy Martin found out his son was dead.

“I started making calls to see if he was arrested,” he said.

Calls to 911 led him to missing persons, where he left a description of his son. Soon a marked patrol car followed by detectives arrived at Green’s rented townhouse

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/16/2697604_p3/trayvon-martins-parents-criss.html#storylink=cpy

.

Thanks, I remember reading this but couldn't find it again to post here. As a parent this baffles me. I mean, Trayvon went to get snacks at the 7-11 which is 15 minutes away, doesn't come back and in the meantime someone is murdered 70 feet from the dad's house. Why would it take twelve more hours to become concerned?

RussP
03-19-2012, 08:27
It is the totality of circumstances that don't add up...Look at the big picture instead of the minute details.You do not have the totality of circumstances to add up.Because Zman didn't know all the details, he had no right to take the action he did. He gambled.Yet you feel comfortable condemning Zimmerman when you do not know all the details...

RussP
03-19-2012, 08:28
Do we know for a fact that there were no drugs or alcohol in the system of either?It is reported that Zimmerman was not tested for drugs or alcohol.

Misty02
03-19-2012, 08:50
Thanks, I remember reading this but couldn't find it again to post here. As a parent this baffles me. I mean, Trayvon went to get snacks at the 7-11 which is 15 minutes away, doesn't come back and in the meantime someone is murdered 70 feet from the dad's house. Why would it take twelve more hours to become concerned?

It mentions it took 12 hours for the father to find out his son was dead. It appears they were looking for him and calling 911 long before that.

Without ID, and possibly not even a cell phone, it would have taken the police some time to figure out who the kid was; more so if the neighbors couldn’t point them in the right direction.
.

Misty02
03-19-2012, 08:59
It is reported that Zimmerman was not tested for drugs or alcohol.

I read that too. It is likely that information is within Martin’s autopsy and the reason no one has mentioned it is because the results were negative, but that is an assumption on my part. All the reports we’re reading is what the family has been able to get police to disclose, what the police so far has disclosed, and what some witnesses said. Other than Zimmerman’s dad letter and the 911 call, no information is flowing from that side. I’m also assuming that what has been printed is what those sources actually said (one heck of a leap on my part).

.

cgjane
03-19-2012, 09:19
You do not have the totality of circumstances to add up.Yet you feel comfortable condemning Zimmerman when you do not know all the details...

Because the total arc of the relevant information suggests Zimmerman was the instigator.

Mall ninja Zman could have prevented the shooting and let the "professionals" handle it at least 3 times:

- listened to Dispatch and stayed at home

-not get out of the vehicle and just observe

-avoid any contact

Everything is pointing to zMan looking for contact to draw.

RussP
03-19-2012, 10:30
Because the total arc of the relevant information suggests...And you believe all relevant, factual information has been made public?

Or is it all the information you need has been made public?

I believe Zimmerman has culpability, and that he could have and should have handled it differently.

Is it a good self defense homicide or a negligent homicide? The DA will let us know based on all the facts.

ATW525
03-19-2012, 10:37
HuffPost: Shooting of Florida Teen Shows Danger of Maryland Judge's Renegade Ruling:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-a-henigan/shooting-of-florida-teen_b_1363409.html

pizzaaguy
03-19-2012, 10:47
I don't have anything to add, other than I live in Sanford
and can see this situation spiraling out of control. Let's
hope that the new Black Panthers, Jesse Jackson and Al
Sharpton don't turn this into MORE of a media circus when
they get here at the end of the week.

At least I can hope not...right??

RussP
03-19-2012, 11:01
HuffPost: Shooting of Florida Teen Shows Danger of Maryland Judge's Renegade Ruling:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-a-henigan/shooting-of-florida-teen_b_1363409.htmlFirst paragraph is all I could get through...

CitizenOfDreams
03-19-2012, 11:33
As a parent this baffles me. I mean, Trayvon went to get snacks at the 7-11 which is 15 minutes away, doesn't come back and in the meantime someone is murdered 70 feet from the dad's house. Why would it take twelve more hours to become concerned?

They were probably busy getting married (the "girlfriend" - "fiancee" - "stepmother" transformation in the media reports).

xmanhockey7
03-19-2012, 11:57
They talked about this on CNN last night. I want to know the full story and see how it really plays out. Granted it sounds like the guy should not have confronted the kid at all. Hard to say since I wasn't there.

SGT HATRED
03-19-2012, 11:59
Just saw it on fox. Nothing new that wasn't discussed here... However they did say the DOJ will be sending personal sometime this week to oversee the investigation.

jack76590
03-19-2012, 12:47
I believe we all agree Zimmerman getting out of his car was, at the least, a very unwise move. Was it illegal? I can not see how it was illegal as a stand alone issue.

However, if the case comes to trial and I believe it will, the exit of his vehicle will come up again and again. The prosecution will attempt to demonize Zimmerman as a racist, cop wannabe.

Unless there are creditable witnesses that observed Martin turning, moving toward Zimmerman and attacking him, I think Zimmerman will end up serving some time. You can talk all you want about beyond a reasonable doubt, but again barring witnesses supporting an attack on Zimmerman, I envision the jury finding Zimmerman guilty. Not saying whether if would or would not be a fair verdict, just saying I believe it will happen.

Being guilty of nothing but stupid, combined with bad luck can get you sent to prison. Unfair, yes, but also true.

LongGoneDays
03-19-2012, 14:29
A friend posted a link on Facebook that supposedly has the 911 calls but I can't get it to play. It is a page I'd been to before and they've updated it.

Mentioning of the White House, FBI, and groups of blacks chanting "Do I look suspicious".


Yeah, this is going to end well.

ICARRY2
03-19-2012, 15:06
They played the 911 tapes on fox news this morning. The man said to the operator the boy was walking toward him while he was sitting in his car and the boy had his hand tucked into his waistband like he had a gun.

The man may have gotten out of his car so he wouldnt be a sitting duck if this boy open fire on him.

slimgoodman
03-19-2012, 16:05
After Zimmerman's REFUSAL to follow police instructions and WAIT until REAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS arrived how can anything Zimmerman said or claims to have happened be TRUSTED AS ACCURATE due to his documented REFUSAL to follow official police orders/instructions. Why the refusal!!!! UNLESS---Police TOLD him or led him (Zimmerman) to believe it's OK to engage in such a potentially dangerous activity----a complete investigation is desparately needed --maybe not by the Sanford PD since what they told Zimmerman to do or not do will be in question. The list of "what if" or "maybe" is endless.

ATW525
03-19-2012, 16:23
After Zimmerman's REFUSAL to follow police instructions and WAIT until REAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS arrived how can anything Zimmerman said or claims to have happened be TRUSTED AS ACCURATE due to his documented REFUSAL to follow official police orders/instructions. Why the refusal!!!! UNLESS---Police TOLD him or led him (Zimmerman) to believe it's OK to engage in such a potentially dangerous activity----a complete investigation is desparately needed --maybe not by the Sanford PD since what they told Zimmerman to do or not do will be in question. The list of "what if" or "maybe" is endless.

What police orders/instructions? A call taker (not a police officer) simply said "We don't need you to do that," in regards to Zimmerman following Martin.

Misty02
03-19-2012, 16:30
After Zimmerman's REFUSAL to follow police instructions and WAIT until REAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS arrived how can anything Zimmerman said or claims to have happened be TRUSTED AS ACCURATE due to his documented REFUSAL to follow official police orders/instructions. Why the refusal!!!! UNLESS---Police TOLD him or led him (Zimmerman) to believe it's OK to engage in such a potentially dangerous activity----a complete investigation is desparately needed --maybe not by the Sanford PD since what they told Zimmerman to do or not do will be in question. The list of "what if" or "maybe" is endless.

A 911 Operator is not the police. Even if they provided an order (which they didn’t) you aren’t required by law to follow it.

Our doctors have more authority over us than a 911 operator, and we still don't always follow their orders/suggestions.
.

G30Mike
03-19-2012, 16:39
After Zimmerman's REFUSAL to follow police instructions and WAIT until REAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS arrived how can anything Zimmerman said or claims to have happened be TRUSTED AS ACCURATE due to his documented REFUSAL to follow official police orders/instructions. Why the refusal!!!! UNLESS---Police TOLD him or led him (Zimmerman) to believe it's OK to engage in such a potentially dangerous activity----a complete investigation is desparately needed --maybe not by the Sanford PD since what they told Zimmerman to do or not do will be in question. The list of "what if" or "maybe" is endless.

I didn't hear the dispatcher give him any "orders", he basically advised Zman that "We don't need you to do that"(follow him). Zman just said "Okay".
I'm not saying he was right in following the kid, I sure as hell wouldn't have, but he wasn't "ordered" to stop.
I'm sure because of the public outcry, there will be a more in depth investigation, as there should be IMO. None of us knows exactly what happened, but if he was stupid enough to play wannabe cop, then he's stupid enough to lie and fabricate a story to try and save his own ass.
If it was in fact a physical altercation that led to an attempted gun grab, then it sounds pretty justified to me. Someone attempts to grab my gun, it may have the exact outcome that this case had. But I know I don't want to play hero and follow someone I think may be up to no good and put myself in that situation to begin with.
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.....

kensteele
03-19-2012, 16:57
Do we know for a fact that there were no drugs or alcohol in the system of either?

I don’t know what actually happened here but it seems that the state lacks sufficient evidence to disprove self-defense. I too believe that Zimmerman likely followed Martin, chased I’m not so sure, he was breathing heavily at times from just getting out of the car and walking.

Which are the actions Zimmerman had no right to take that we know he did?

.

At this point, we do not know if Zman had drugs or alcohol in his body. Rumor has it the police didn't bother to collect it. It's likely that Zman declined. Either way, it's critical to know if he was under the influence. But it is possible we may never ever know and [experts] are saying Zman sounds under the influence; if this goes to trial, that portion will be weakened by only listening to the tapes and trying to explain his actions rather than reviewing the test results. Martin will submit to a blood test and his results will be available.

Chased is the word I use. I'm going easy on him. Expect to hear words like stalked and hunted.

kensteele
03-19-2012, 17:03
Yet you feel comfortable condemning Zimmerman when you do not know all the details...

I don't condemn him, I want him to stand trial. I want to know all the evidence and the facts, I want to know what is currently being hidden from me. but you know like i know that standing trial amounts to a guilty verdict so i guess in a way you are correct. Noboby on the planet will overlook this travesty or buy his lame story so i guess the government needs to do whatever they can to keep this out of court.

kensteele
03-19-2012, 17:10
I believe we all agree Zimmerman getting out of his car was, at the least, a very unwise move. Was it illegal? I can not see how it was illegal as a stand alone issue.

However, if the case comes to trial and I believe it will, the exit of his vehicle will come up again and again. The prosecution will attempt to demonize Zimmerman as a racist, cop wannabe.

Unless there are creditable witnesses that observed Martin turning, moving toward Zimmerman and attacking him, I think Zimmerman will end up serving some time. You can talk all you want about beyond a reasonable doubt, but again barring witnesses supporting an attack on Zimmerman, I envision the jury finding Zimmerman guilty. Not saying whether if would or would not be a fair verdict, just saying I believe it will happen.

Being guilty of nothing but stupid, combined with bad luck can get you sent to prison. Unfair, yes, but also true.

That's fine, a bunch of folks in this forum actually support prison sentences for stupidity. Been posted several times, no joke.

ATW525
03-19-2012, 17:22
I don't condemn him, I want him to stand trial. I want to know all the evidence and the facts, I want to know what is currently being hidden from me. but you know like i know that standing trial amounts to a guilty verdict so i guess in a way you are correct. Noboby on the planet will overlook this travesty or buy his lame story so i guess the government needs to do whatever they can to keep this out of court.

Unless I missed something Zimmerman's story isn't public knowledge yet. It seems a bit premature to be calling it lame.

kensteele
03-19-2012, 17:40
After Zimmerman's REFUSAL to follow police instructions and WAIT until REAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS arrived how can anything Zimmerman said or claims to have happened be TRUSTED AS ACCURATE due to his documented REFUSAL to follow official police orders/instructions. Why the refusal!!!! UNLESS---Police TOLD him or led him (Zimmerman) to believe it's OK to engage in such a potentially dangerous activity----a complete investigation is desparately needed --maybe not by the Sanford PD since what they told Zimmerman to do or not do will be in question. The list of "what if" or "maybe" is endless.

What police orders/instructions? A call taker (not a police officer) simply said "We don't need you to do that," in regards to Zimmerman following Martin.

A 911 Operator is not the police. Even if they provided an order (which they didn’t) you aren’t required by law to follow it.

Our doctors have more authority over us than a 911 operator, and we still don't always follow their orders/suggestions.
.

I didn't hear the dispatcher give him any "orders", he basically advised Zman that "We don't need you to do that"(follow him). Zman just said "Okay".
I'm not saying he was right in following the kid, I sure as hell wouldn't have, but he wasn't "ordered" to stop.
I'm sure because of the public outcry, there will be a more in depth investigation, as there should be IMO. None of us knows exactly what happened, but if he was stupid enough to play wannabe cop, then he's stupid enough to lie and fabricate a story to try and save his own ass.
If it was in fact a physical altercation that led to an attempted gun grab, then it sounds pretty justified to me. Someone attempts to grab my gun, it may have the exact outcome that this case had. But I know I don't want to play hero and follow someone I think may be up to no good and put myself in that situation to begin with.
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.....

We don't know if the dispatch is a sworn officer or not. Apparently Zman dialed a non-911 number so we don't know who is on the other end of the call. Personally (IANAL), I don't believe it matters if dispatch has a badge or not because Zman would not know if the dispatcher is a sworn officer or not. Still, perhaps someone can quote the law. I do know dispatchers will testify and they certainly won't convey their discussion as "requests." It could be argued that Zman called the police, assumed he was talking to the police, and therefore was subject to police instructions. He didn't call the bank or he didn't call the neighborhood watch team, he didn't call the convenient store, he called the police and instructions were given and he ignored them, FWIW. Again, not unlawful but it's part of the pattern.

I don't think it amounts to unlawful, disobeying police orders but what is telling is two things: Zman said Ok and then he followed anyway. That's show a pattern of deception. When he said OK, he had no intention of not following. When he said OK at that exact point he intented to follow. The reason why he said OK was to alter the conversation on record and cloud some people's interpretation (not me, I'm not fooled, I see this clearly) as to what exactly happened and fool the police for some odd reason; confirm that with his attempt to fix that part of the conversation with an [odd] request later....he's scheming and planning at this point. Second, it is reported that he has called 911 on dozens and dozens of past occassions. Why the call to a non-911 number this time, is that what happened? What was his intent? Again, I know what I would do to question him on this....believe me, so does the lawyer.

Zman better hope he doesn't has to explain this in open court. Otherwise, he's toast. Normally I would say it's unfair because folks s/b innocent until proven guilty but when the state is blocking this from going to court, that's like interfering with the justice system; that's like asking for problems. If you CHEAT, you have to expect the other side to CHEAT even harder to get justice. In this case, my definition of cheating is refusing to allow the evidence to be heard and judged in open court (not letting this go to trial or even a grand jury). and then cheating would be liberal [social] media, public demonstrations, outlandish articles, race card, and maybe calling the FBI. Nothing unlawful.

Again, I realise what the proper steps are and the timing but even a blind man can see where this is going. Nobody is interested in waiting around until a full investigation announces exhonoration. Seen that rodeo before. Not pretty. Fool me one, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

ATW525
03-19-2012, 17:40
Another article about the Trayvon Martin case as it relates to gun laws. This time from Slate:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2012/03/why_george_zimmerman_trayvon_martin_s_killer_hasn_t_been_prosecuted_.html

kensteele
03-19-2012, 17:45
Unless I missed something Zimmerman's story isn't public knowledge yet. It seems a bit premature to be calling it lame.

Sorry, I meant his claim to self-defense. Zman claiming he shot Martin to save his own life, to save himself from certain death is bogus.

His story is allegedly; Zman says: "if I had not fired my weapon and shot Martin in the chest, I would be dead for sure." :faint:

Who would believe that?

IMO

kensteele
03-19-2012, 17:52
Another article about the Trayvon Martin case as it relates to gun laws. This time from Slate:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2012/03/why_george_zimmerman_trayvon_martin_s_killer_hasn_t_been_prosecuted_.html

“A true man, who is without fault, is not obliged to fly from an assailant, who by violence or surprise, maliciously seeks to take his life or do him enormous bodily harm.”

yeah, that's what happened here. :upeyes:

Zman was minding his own business being in a place where he had every right to be and Martin came out of nowhere, unprovoked, using his hands only, with a deadly attack trying to kill poor Zman who had no choice but draw his licensed weapon and fire on Martin and kill him, that was the only way for him to survive that horrible night that Zman wanted no parts of and Martin insisted on.

Otherwise, the article is a good article, explains a lot.

NMGlocker
03-19-2012, 17:53
Again, not unlawful

I don't think it amounts to unlawful,

Nothing unlawful.

Yet you keep inferring that his lawful actions should place him in legal jeopardy.

cgjane
03-19-2012, 17:55
And for those who believe in our right to bear arms, idiots like ZMan are the most significant threats to those rights.

jack76590
03-19-2012, 18:01
I am beginning to wonder if there is not a video tape of the incident in police hands. If so the police may be waiting for all the stories to come out before releasing video tape.

kensteele
03-19-2012, 18:03
Yet you keep inferring that his lawful actions should place him in legal jeopardy.

When I saw unlawful, I meant there are no criminal charges expected to be brought for those specific actions. Those actions establish a pattern which points to: Zman was the aggressor and his hands are not clean (he's not an innocent party) and he doesn't deserve the protection of "self-defense."

Sorry I used the word "unlawful" so many times it thru you off. I should have only used it once. However, I just wanted to be clear that those things people are pointing out doesn't make him the criminal (not following instruction for example), it's the other things (firing his weapon; depriving Martin of his civil rights).

kensteele
03-19-2012, 18:11
I am beginning to wonder if there is not a video tape of the incident in police hands. If so the police may be waiting for all the stories to come out before releasing video tape.

Somehow I don't think that is the proper process. Producing a video tape at the last minute would seem quite disingenous and unfortunately would probably cause even more of a ruckus.

If they had one, they should have said they had one and it is under review, maybe not release it. If one appears now, the community will suggest it is manufactured (depending on what it shows). After all, the police did "indicate" that they didn't have much evidence and was depending on the shooter's statement. The video tape can't tell the whole story.

Don't you think a video tape is supposed to be shown in court on behalf of your defense? How else can Martin impeach that video tape's "story" if you don't let it go to trial as evidence?

jack76590
03-19-2012, 18:34
Somehow I don't think that is the proper process. Producing a video tape at the last minute would seem quite disingenous and unfortunately would probably cause even more of a ruckus.

If they had one, they should have said they had one and it is under review, maybe not release it. If one appears now, the community will suggest it is manufactured (depending on what it shows). After all, the police did "indicate" that they didn't have much evidence and was depending on the shooter's statement. The video tape can't tell the whole story.

Don't you think a video tape is supposed to be shown in court on behalf of your defense? How else can Martin impeach that video tape's "story" if you don't let it go to trial as evidence?

If and very big If, a video tape was in police hands they would use it at some point and it would certainly come out at any trial.

However, if you release a video immediately, people who may wish to make up false stories or testimony then would not make stories up that could be refuted by the video. They would instead make up false stories that took video in account. By holding video back the police may be able to refute some false claims and stories at a later date.

Not saying a video is out there, but with all the cell phone cameras on the street you never know.

kensteele
03-19-2012, 19:08
If and very big If, a video tape was in police hands they would use it at some point and it would certainly come out at any trial.

However, if you release a video immediately, people who may wish to make up false stories or testimony then would not make stories up that could be refuted by the video. They would instead make up false stories that took video in account. By holding video back the police may be able to refute some false claims and stories at a later date.

Not saying a video is out there, but with all the cell phone cameras on the street you never know.

understood. as i said, the police could just say they have a video tape of the incident and not show the actual video to the police. that is acceptable if it is warranted. I believe the shooting took place several weeks ago.

Bruce M
03-19-2012, 19:34
We don't know if the dispatch is a sworn officer or not. Apparently Zman dialed a non-911 number so we don't know who is on the other end of the call.

.... Why the call to a non-911 number this time, is that what happened? What was his intent? .. .


Initial appearances suggest that Seminole County handles Sanford's 911 calls. My guess is that he wanted to talk directly to Sanford PD - some think that it is faster to talk directly with the department that services their area. (However a non-911 call can present problems of no ALI, no ANI, and potential difficulty if the call is inadvertently disconnected or dropped.)

kensteele
03-19-2012, 19:36
Same with the shots. People may have claimed what they heard but that doesn't change the facts. I only heard one shot on the tape I listened to but what was that other sound? And for a semi-auto handgun, how do you tell for sure it only fired once?

Sadly, we'll have to wait a little longer for the official release and in the meantime, tension builds and rumors circulate and fiction becomes fact as this news spreads across America, thru the liberal media of course.

To you and I, a warning shot is bad news for zman. For the community, a warning shot is akin to trying to make an arrest or stop someone from fleeing. Right or wrong, the state making the final call and the final interpretation will ultimately leave half satisfied and half unsatisfied. the only people contributing to the evidence is the police and zman. when does the dead man get to speak?

^couple of days ago i said this, now this story breaks:

"Police found a single shell casing at the scene, and when they seized George Zimmerman's handgun, a Kel Tel 9 mm, its magazine was full, according to a source close to the investigation. The only bullet missing was the one in the chamber, the source said." article (http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-19/news/os-trayvon-martin-shooting-students-20120319_1_warning-shot-college-students-florida-a-m-university-student)

Bad reporting, who can see the problem(s) with this statement? All kinds of issues with understanding what this means exactly.* We'll still have to wait to see the actual evidence but as I said earlier, I don't think one shot or two shots is important; he's still in trouble even with just the one shot.

*How do you have a full magazine when you fire one round in a semi-auto handgun*What is a full magazine, when loaded to marked capacity or physically loaded with as many as can be jammed in*Of course the round originally in the chamber is always missing, did the next round not chamber*Did the gun jam*How many shell casings were not found by police*Did Zman operate his weapon before police seized it and after he shot it*Find any rounds in his pockets or in his car*Does Zman carry with a round in the chamber*

NMGlocker
03-19-2012, 19:51
If it was a contact shot or done while wrestling the gun could have fired yet not completed the entire function cycle.
If the magazine release was pressed during the struggle that could cause a round to eject yet not pick up a round from the magazine.
That could also be evidence that the two men were fighting over the pistol.

ATW525
03-19-2012, 19:55
Less edited version of Zimmerman's call:

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/GRAPHIC-Trayvon-Martin-911-calls-released/-/1637132/9450044/-/6m827cz/-/index.html

Sizable parts of the conversation were edited out of the ones i posted earlier. Why did he want the officer to call him when he got there? Because he didn't know the address where he was. He mentions being in a "passthrough"... is it possible he's already in the location between the houses where the fatal confrontation occurs? He also mentions not wanting to give out his address because he's afraid Martin is nearby... is it possible he ran into Martin while walking back out to the road to get the address?

Presumably the other 911 calls are in the same video (it's over 34 minutes in length). I don't have time to listen all the way through right now, though.

kensteele
03-19-2012, 21:55
Less edited version of Zimmerman's call:

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/GRAPHIC-Trayvon-Martin-911-calls-released/-/1637132/9450044/-/6m827cz/-/index.html

Sizable parts of the conversation were edited out of the ones i posted earlier. Why did he want the officer to call him when he got there? Because he didn't know the address where he was. He mentions being in a "passthrough"... is it possible he's already in the location between the houses where the fatal confrontation occurs? He also mentions not wanting to give out his address because he's afraid Martin is nearby... is it possible he ran into Martin while walking back out to the road to get the address?

Presumably the other 911 calls are in the same video (it's over 34 minutes in length). I don't have time to listen all the way through right now, though.

that's not what i got from the audio starting around 02:50. the dispatcher said meet the officers by the mailboxes and zman said yes that's fine. he's not really focused and during part of the conversation he said "....i don't know where this kid is" meaning (to me) he is still actively searching for the kid. then he said "acutally could you have them [police] call me and i'll tell them where i'm at" which means to me, he doesn't know where he'll be when the police arrive. the piece of the conversation about the passthru and not knowning his current location (address) i don't see how that is relevant. again, the way i understand the conversation, zman does not want to rendevous with the police at the mailbox as he agreed to (he knows exactly where the mailboxes are located) but instead he would rather police arrive, call, and ask "where are you?" because zman doesn't know exactly where the chase will take him. meeting at the mailbox will cause him to break off the chase and zman will not break it off because "they always get away." zman forced this confrontation, he made sure it happened. you follow someone forever and then they finally turn to make contact with you, can't see how you claim you were attacked.

....and then to yell and scream help! help! help! and then the moaning and then YOU fire the fatal gunshot?

At 21:19 one of the callers says "...I just heard people saying Help Me ! Help Me! and this person shot him...." something like that. But she said it was dark and she says she doesn't want to be a witness, so the police probably dismissed it. She also said "Why would this man shoot him?" 10 feet outside her window. She didn't say "This man shot his attacker." She also said they were "talking" just prior to the wrestling and the shot, wonder what was said. She's very emotional. Seems to me she is implying the victim was asking for help. She also said there were other people that were 3 feet away from the scene. But of course, we don't know what they told the police.

Finally another witness around 32:50 listen to the description and see if you can make out who was screaming. He said he "saw a man laying on the ground screaming for help." He also said he heard a loud bang and then the screaming stopped. Something tells me (and I don't know this for sure), two men were not on top of each other rolling around when a shot went off. Same witness said he did not see the person who had to gun (sort of because it was a two part question). According to the witness the man he saw on the ground screaming did not have a gun. Go figure. Sorry, I listened to it quickly, it's late, the investigations will listen to this over and over so they get it right.

High Altitude
03-19-2012, 23:23
Do we know conclusively who was screaming for help?

Tiro Fijo
03-19-2012, 23:33
The people who really know the probable answer aren't being heard as they know what type of person the deceased was. You & I don't. Was he a thug wannabe? Hot headed? Was he an honors student?

I say this as I lived in a city where an incident similar to this happened and I knew the deceased. He was a total POS but from the TV interviews and the newspaper after the incident you would have thought he rescued babies from burning buildings. :upeyes:

We don't have all the facts. :wavey:

Misty02
03-20-2012, 04:09
I didn't hear the dispatcher give him any "orders", he basically advised Zman that "We don't need you to do that"(follow him). Zman just said "Okay".
I'm not saying he was right in following the kid, I sure as hell wouldn't have, but he wasn't "ordered" to stop.
I'm sure because of the public outcry, there will be a more in depth investigation, as there should be IMO. None of us knows exactly what happened, but if he was stupid enough to play wannabe cop, then he's stupid enough to lie and fabricate a story to try and save his own ass.
If it was in fact a physical altercation that led to an attempted gun grab, then it sounds pretty justified to me. Someone attempts to grab my gun, it may have the exact outcome that this case had. But I know I don't want to play hero and follow someone I think may be up to no good and put myself in that situation to begin with.
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.....

Again, playing both sides because I don’t have enough information, until I do, I make certain assumptions to see how a reasonable person could have reacted. Even if we’re talking about a gun-grab by Martin, what would you do if you were a 17 year old kid being followed by an adult male unknown to you and at some point you become aware he is armed? Martin can’t read Zimmerman’s mind, he doesn’t know why he is following him, he doesn’t know what his intentions are.

.

Misty02
03-20-2012, 04:17
At this point, we do not know if Zman had drugs or alcohol in his body. Rumor has it the police didn't bother to collect it. It's likely that Zman declined. Either way, it's critical to know if he was under the influence. But it is possible we may never ever know and [experts] are saying Zman sounds under the influence; if this goes to trial, that portion will be weakened by only listening to the tapes and trying to explain his actions rather than reviewing the test results. Martin will submit to a blood test and his results will be available.

Chased is the word I use. I'm going easy on him. Expect to hear words like stalked and hunted.

Is it really critical to know that when the law clearly states that it is not? If it is proven he was acting in self-defense his level of intoxication would be irrelevant.


790.151 Using firearm while under the influence of alcoholic beverages, chemical substances, or controlled substances; penalties


1) As used in ss. 790.151 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0790/Sections/0790.151.html)-790.157 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0790/Sections/0790.157.html), to “use a firearm” means to discharge a firearm or to have a firearm readily accessible for immediate discharge.


(2) For the purposes of this section, “readily accessible for immediate discharge” means loaded and in a person’s hand.


(3) It is unlawful and punishable as provided in subsection (4) for any person who is under the influence of alcoholic beverages, any chemical substance set forth in s. 877.111 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0800-0899/0877/Sections/0877.111.html), or any substance controlled under chapter 893, when affected to the extent that his or her normal faculties are impaired, to use a firearm in this state.


(4) Any person who violates subsection (3) commits a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0775/Sections/0775.082.html) or s. 775.083 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0775/Sections/0775.083.html).

(5) This section does not apply to persons exercising lawful self-defense or defense of one’s property.



.

Misty02
03-20-2012, 05:27
I don't condemn him, I want him to stand trial. I want to know all the evidence and the facts, I want to know what is currently being hidden from me. but you know like i know that standing trial amounts to a guilty verdict so i guess in a way you are correct. Noboby on the planet will overlook this travesty or buy his lame story so i guess the government needs to do whatever they can to keep this out of court.


In order to stand trial a person must be charged with a crime. The police have stated there is no evidence to prove Zimmerman was not acting in self-defense. Is what “we want” so important that we would demand a person be charged and have to stand trial even when there is no evidence a crime was committed?


Sorry, I meant his claim to self-defense. Zman claiming he shot Martin to save his own life, to save himself from certain death is bogus.

His story is allegedly; Zman says: "if I had not fired my weapon and shot Martin in the chest, I would be dead for sure."

Who would believe that?

IMO


I believe I posted the statute earlier, just in case: 776.012 Use of force in defense of person (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0776/SEC012.HTM&Title=->2008->Ch0776->Section%20012#0776.012)

A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or

(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013. (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0776/Sec013.HTM)

What was going on at the time? Was the injury to the back of his head serious? Could a person in that situation believed he was preventing imminent great bodily harm? After a blow to the head, could a person believe they are in danger of great bodily harm or even death? If you know you are armed does the thought of that firearm being used against you come to play in the equation?

When I saw unlawful, I meant there are no criminal charges expected to be brought for those specific actions. Those actions establish a pattern which points to: Zman was the aggressor and his hands are not clean (he's not an innocent party) and he doesn't deserve the protection of "self-defense."

Sorry I used the word "unlawful" so many times it thru you off. I should have only used it once. However, I just wanted to be clear that those things people are pointing out doesn't make him the criminal (not following instruction for example), it's the other things (firing his weapon; depriving Martin of his civil rights).

That could very well be the case here. Still the state needs evidence he didn’t act in self-defense in order to charge, arrest and have him stand trial. Although, their hand may be forced to do so even in spite lacking such evidence in order to appease everyone. Think of the precedence that would set for other self-defense cases with stand your ground type laws.


The people who really know the probable answer aren't being heard as they know what type of person the deceased was. You & I don't. Was he a thug wannabe? Hot headed? Was he an honors student?

I say this as I lived in a city where an incident similar to this happened and I knew the deceased. He was a total POS but from the TV interviews and the newspaper after the incident you would have thought he rescued babies from burning buildings. :upeyes:

We don't have all the facts. :wavey:

I don’t know any of the characters in this story. From what has been printed Martin had a clean record and described by one of his teachers as an A and B student. From what I read in Facebook page while it was up (not very familiar with it so unable to tell if it was locked, deleted, made private, etc) the people he associated with were not vengeful people looking for revenge or anything of the sort, quite the contrary, the posts I read were remembering the good times they shared, how he now was in a better place along with comments about spending time with God now. If we are to judge people by the company they keep, I would venture and guess that Martin was not a bad kid.

He may; however, have reacted negatively to a stranger following him. While acting in self-defense he may have acted in a way Zimmerman viewed as an attack.

It is really not that difficult to place ourselves in each of their places and see how one (or both) believed, at the time of the struggle/ fight/ physical confrontation, they were acting in self-defense while the other believed they were being attacked.

I still believe Zimmerman should have not gotten out of his vehicle and followed. Absent that part, none of this would have taken place. I also cannot say that leaving his vehicle or even following was an illegal act, just one I am willing to bet Zimmerman wishes he could do over, with a different decision.


.

kensteele
03-20-2012, 06:46
Is it really critical to know that when the law clearly states that it is not? If it is proven he was acting in self-defense his level of intoxication would be irrelevant.


790.151 Using firearm while under the influence of alcoholic beverages, chemical substances, or controlled substances; penalties


1) As used in ss. 790.151 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0790/Sections/0790.151.html)-790.157 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0790/Sections/0790.157.html), to “use a firearm” means to discharge a firearm or to have a firearm readily accessible for immediate discharge.


(2) For the purposes of this section, “readily accessible for immediate discharge” means loaded and in a person’s hand.


(3) It is unlawful and punishable as provided in subsection (4) for any person who is under the influence of alcoholic beverages, any chemical substance set forth in s. 877.111 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0800-0899/0877/Sections/0877.111.html), or any substance controlled under chapter 893, when affected to the extent that his or her normal faculties are impaired, to use a firearm in this state.


(4) Any person who violates subsection (3) commits a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0775/Sections/0775.082.html) or s. 775.083 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0775/Sections/0775.083.html).

(5) This section does not apply to persons exercising lawful self-defense or defense of one’s property.



.

didn't know that, it appears at first glance this section allow the intoxicated person to not lose their self-defense privileges just because they are under the influence.

whether or not zman was under the influence would help to better understand his state of mind or properly characterise his intentions, guage his reactions, clarify his [lack of] judgment. not sure about this but i heard the pd failed to obtain the blood test even though it is required procedure but again, i don't think their procedure override a person's refusal. if the police didn't collect, we'll probably never know. and despite this statute, i think a jury should be able to consider that evidence in detemining if his claim of self-defense is indeed valid.

ianal so i can't say this for sure but this section appears to suggest there is no crime in committed "using a gun while intoxicated" if you qualify for self-defense. iow, if someone is found ng by reason of self-defense, don't punish them with using a gun while intoxicated charges because the law says they are exempt from that. i'm not sure your claims the shooting was self-defense (which almost all shooter will do) will exempt you from tests or make them unnecessary.

if this is proven in court to self-defense, the tests will not help the prosecution. however, the test results could have possibly helped the prosecution prove this was not a self-defense shooting. big if, but if the police let him go without getting everything, could make it difficult to build a case. luckily the jury is not stupid and will make the right decision.

kensteele
03-20-2012, 07:03
In order to stand trial a person must be charged with a crime. The police have stated there is no evidence to prove Zimmerman was not acting in self-defense. Is what “we want” so important that we would demand a person be charged and have to stand trial even when there is no evidence a crime was committed?



I believe I posted the statute earlier, just in case: 776.012 Use of force in defense of person (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0776/SEC012.HTM&Title=->2008->Ch0776->Section%20012#0776.012)

A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or

(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013. (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0776/Sec013.HTM)

What was going on at the time? Was the injury to the back of his head serious? Could a person in that situation believed he was preventing imminent great bodily harm? After a blow to the head, could a person believe they are in danger of great bodily harm or even death? If you know you are armed does the thought of that firearm being used against you come to play in the equation?



That could very well be the case here. Still the state needs evidence he didn’t act in self-defense in order to charge, arrest and have him stand trial. Although, their hand may be forced to do so even in spite lacking such evidence in order to appease everyone. Think of the precedence that would set for other self-defense cases with stand your ground type laws.


I don’t know any of the characters in this story. From what has been printed Martin had a clean record and described by one of his teachers as an A and B student. From what I read in Facebook page while it was up (not very familiar with it so unable to tell if it was locked, deleted, made private, etc) the people he associated with were not vengeful people looking for revenge or anything of the sort, quite the contrary, the posts I read were remembering the good times they shared, how he now was in a better place along with comments about spending time with God now. If we are to judge people by the company they keep, I would venture and guess that Martin was not a bad kid.

He may; however, have reacted negatively to a stranger following him. While acting in self-defense he may have acted in a way Zimmerman viewed as an attack.

It is really not that difficult to place ourselves in each of their places and see how one (or both) believed, at the time of the struggle/ fight/ physical confrontation, they were acting in self-defense while the other believed they were being attacked.

I still believe Zimmerman should have not gotten out of his vehicle and followed. Absent that part, none of this would have taken place. I also cannot say that leaving his vehicle or even following was an illegal act, just one I am willing to bet Zimmerman wishes he could do over, with a different decision.


.


I don't think the police said there is no evidence.

I think the police said they don't have enough evidence.

The community would like the police to develop and work this case and pull together the pieces to results in charges. Can they do that please?

Instead of "taking his word for it", study and analyse the clues, pull together your thoeries based on years of experience, come to your own conclusions, go ahead and present what ithe facts. if it were cloudy to the community, i can see it maybe being cloudy to the police. But to millions, it's all too clear. It's baffling why the police can't see it. Perhaps the police have evidence we don't know about. None of their statements seem to suggest they do but it might be a good idea of make sure it is solid (and not simply "we can't figure this one out" or "we got nothing") because it will need to be rock solid and airtight and uber-conclusive if you expect the country to buy it. A finding of we don't see any evidence of a crime so we won't be going forward is going to be toxic. the benefit of the doubt goes to the person who took the bullet. zman can get his benefit of the doubt in court.

Gallium
03-20-2012, 07:07
If it is proven he was acting in self-defense his level of intoxication would be irrelevant.
...

I assume you mean "level of impairment" or if there was any alcohol in his blood - which is very different from what you have written (quoted above).

Initial news reports that outlined the breaking story indicate that Mr. Zimmerman was the driver of his SUV while he was following the deceased. Has this changed?

Consequently, yes, it would be very irrelevant to discuss his "level of intoxication", since it is already illegal to operate a motor vehicle in Florida on public roadways if intoxicated.


-G

noway
03-20-2012, 07:16
Consequently, yes, it would be very irrelevant to discuss his "level of intoxication", since it is already illegal to operate a motor vehicle in Florida on public roadways if intoxicated.


-G

oh really , what the law on that? care to explain ? I think DUI cases typically have some limits and just having alcohol in your system is against the law.


back on the shooting,

We will find out more as the police release more information in the case. The investigation is still active, but with the media, locals, and non-locals outrage. I think some charges will be presented and the state will prosecute.

Even if zimmerman wins, it will cost him a lot.

When I operated on a neighborhood watch ( Boca Raton ), our local police, instructed us NOT to do the job or try to do the job of the police, unless some one life was in immediate danger.

So unless Martin was robbing a resident, shooting an AK47 or breaking down some one door, Zimmerman had no authority to engage.

In this case Zimmerman would have been wise to follow that direction/suggestion that my local PD gave us. A watch means just that, watching and reporting .

Btw he ( Zimmerman ) had no authority to detain, follow, request ID , stop the teen, investigate or any of the other silly item brought up in the course of the 10pages of this thread.

One bad decision, has create havoc in the town of Sanford.