Trayvon Martin: 'Shoot first' law under scrutiny

[Sabda]

Here’s what I’m trying to figure out: what possible conversations could they have had?

Reportedly Martin was saying on the phone that he was being followed and was trying to get away. Meanwhile, Zimmerman is out of his truck and following Martin despite the 911 dispatcher’s comments.

(It’s really a shame Martin didn’t call 911. With any luck, they could’ve said “Hold it, guys, you’re both talking to us, and everything’s cool”).

So: Zimmerman follows Martin. If he started the conversation, was it “Halt! Who goes there?” or more of an “Excuse me, can I help you?” Or maybe just “Hi! I’m with the neighborhood watch. Are you lost?”

Assuming good faith on Zimmerman’s part, I’m hard-pressed to think of anything reasonable Zimmerman would say that would provoke a response other than “Oh, thank God, I thought you were a mugger!” Obviously there are outrageous things he could’ve said that he should’ve known would provoke an attack – fighting words, etc. – that would lay the blame on him; but, assuming good faith, I can’t think of anything coming out of Zimmerman’s mouth that would’ve resulted in Martin dying.

On the other hand, if Martin started the conversation, it doesn’t matter what he said; Zimmerman could just respond by saying “Neighborhood Watch.” End of fear on both sides. Again, assuming good faith, I don’t see how Martin dies.

That leaves two possibilities: no conversation at all (one of them just up and attacks the other, in which case the one who started it is probably responsible), or one of them was acting in bad faith.

And all we have so far is Zimmerman poking his head in where it didn’t belong – a self-appointed “neighborhood watch guy” who clearly doesn’t like black people, carrying a weapon while “on patrol” and pursuing someone after being asked not to.

Yes, the police found blood on his head (which explains and probably justifies the lack of arrest at the time); but the injuries don’t sound like the kind you would get from a 17-year-old sitting on top of his prone body beating him with his fists; they’re too light.

Here’s where CSI comes in: if Zimmerman’s story is true, then the evidence should back up a point-blank shot from below, with serious injuries to Zimmerman from the “scared for his life” beating he was taking. If Zimmerman’s story is false, then the evidence should point to something else – e.g., a shot from further away, a more level bullet trajectory, and so on.

And for that, we’ll have to wait for the grand jury’s report.

From one of the news reports I read a friend of Martin’s called him and Martin told her that he was being followed. She heard him ask Zimmerman “why are you following me?”. She couldn’t understand Zimmerman’s response. Five minutes later the police showed up and Martin is dead. We’ve got reports that Zimmerman was being beaten and we have other reports of Martin being beaten. My guess is they where both beating up on each other. That being the case they are both going to have injuries. Why have we not heard about Martin’s injuries? Another thing is Zimmerman has a recorded history of aggressive behavior. I haven’t heard to much about Martin’s history.

Regardless of who started the fight, Zimmerman is in the wrong for choosing to pursue Martin instead of waiting for the police and letting them handle it. If Zimmerman had simply done that Martin would still be alive today.

 

[mlund]

Another thing is Zimmerman has a recorded history of aggressive behavior. I haven’t heard to much about Martin’s history.

He was a minor for a few more days yet. I’m not sure how much of his history can be made public without the consent of his parents. I did find out that at the time of his death he was a high school football player serving a 5-day suspension from school.

Regardless of who started the fight, Zimmerman is in the wrong for choosing to pursue Martin instead of waiting for the police and letting them handle it. If Zimmerman had simply done that Martin would still be alive today.

I agree. None of that, however, proves Zimmerman to be a racist, a murderer, or even having committed a felony or a hate-crime - despite the fact that the media has already convicted him.

If Trayvon actually took the first swing in that fight and Zimmerman had legitimate reason to fear he was going to be killed before he pulled his gun then Zimmerman may not even be legally guilty of manslaughter.

It’s tragic that this senseless death could’ve been easily avoided. That doesn’t automatically make it a murder.

• Marty Lund

 

[L_piperatus]

Folks, there’s an audio recording of the two fighting and one of them screaming for help. That should answer some questions. Not sure how that audio recording came about (maybe through Zimmerman’s cell phone, the 911 call??) but it exists for sure - the other day they played part of it on TV. The police even played back the recording to Martin’s father, who said that the person screaming for help wasn’t Trayvon Martin (it turned out it was George Zimmerman).

orlandosentinel.com/videogallery/68870555/News/911-call:-yelling-&-gunshot-heard-in-background

 

[Calgar]

I really want this case to go forward and Zimmerman to face justice.

What’s your definition of justice? You are mad so he’s guilty?

This is why we have “trials” where you must produce “evidence”.

 

[mlund]

This situation demands a full investigation to gather evidence and then decide what criminal charges (if any) have sufficient evidence to warrant an arrest and a criminal trial.

I’m not sure if they had grounds initially to formally charge Zimmerman with anything like murder, assault with a deadly weapon, or anything like that, though.

An investigation just requires an incident. Criminal charges and arrests require probable cause. “You shot him,” on its own isn’t probable cause if self-defense invoked. You need more evidence than that.

“Hasn’t been charged yet,” is not the same thing as “we aren’t conducting an investigation,” or “he’s not going to be charged with anything.” That said, it seems like a kind of important situation and its been 3 over weeks now. I can see how people might get the impression that the police weren’t taking the matter seriously.

• Marty Lund

 

[ringil]

What’s your definition of justice? You are mad so he’s guilty?

This is why we have “trials” where you must produce “evidence”.

Justice would mean a thorough investigation and it’s consequence. Justice was not being served in the police’s initial handling of the situation.

Some would say justice delayed is justice denied. Thankfully now that the Justice Department is involved, justice may be realized.

 

[mlund]

Justice would mean a thorough investigation and it’s consequence. Justice was not being served in the police’s initial handling of the situation.

Actually, that’s quite arguable. No one has produced any evidence that the Police department has been negligent in this case.

Hint: You can’t arrest or charge someone who claims self-defense with murder or manslaughter unless you gather sufficient evidence that there is probable cause that the case was not self-defense. That means compiling witness testimony, forensic evidence, and recordings and making a judgment.

Some would say justice delayed is justice denied.

Yes, some people foolishly prefer show trials and kangaroo courts in the name of expediency. Thankfully, that demented form of injustice is not how our legal system is designed to work.

Thankfully now that the Justice Department is involved, justice may be realized.

Taking a local and state law-enforcement case that’s not even a month old and turning it into a Federal case - brilliant. The shooting did not cross state lines, didn’t involve federal employees, and didn’t occur on federal property. No charges of corruption of due process have been leveled or investigated.

The fact that D.O.J. intervention here basically bypasses any criteria of due process and federalism for the sake of sensationalism and race-based politicking should clue everyone into the fact that involving the Obama Justice Department in this case makes the likelihood of justice being served drop like a rock.

It works like this:
Local → State → Federal

Not like this:
Local → Media → White House

• Marty Lund

 

[qui_est_ce]

Actually, that’s quite arguable. No one has produced any evidence that the Police department has been negligent in this case.

Hint: You can’t arrest or charge someone who claims self-defense with murder or manslaughter unless you gather sufficient evidence that there is probably cause that the case was not self-defense. That means compiling witness testimony, forensic evidence, and recordings and making a judgment.

Yes, some people foolishly prefer show trials and kangaroo courts in the name of expediency. Thankfully, that demented form of injustice is not how our legal system is designed to work.

Taking a local and state law-enforcement case that’s not even a month old and turning it into a Federal case - brilliant. The shooting did not cross state lines, didn’t involve federal employees, and didn’t occur on federal property. No charges of corruption of due process have been leveled or investigated.

The fact that D.O.J. intervention here basically bypasses any criteria of due process and federalism for the sake of sensationalism and race-based politicking should clue everyone into the fact that involving the Obama Justice Department in this case makes the likelihood of justice being served drop like a rock.

It works like this:
Local → State → Federal

Not like this:
Local → Media → White House

• Marty Lund

NPR is reporting that Trayvon was suspended from school for 10 days for being in an “unauthorized area” of the school building.

That’s a stiff penalty.

 

[mlund]

NPR is reporting that Trayvon was suspended from school for 10 days for being in an “unauthorized area” of the school building.

That’s a stiff penalty.

Yeah, but if it’s a public school they generally reserve the stiff penalties for safety violations they could get sued over, not traditional disciplinary measures. Beat up other students? Vandalize school property? That’s fine (as long as its not a racial incident or gay-bashing). Get near the pool after hours? You’re in big trouble now! Getting into electrical stuff, water-hazards, chem labs, shop classrooms, bio-hazards, or construction zones would all probably provoke a harsh response from a school administration deathly afraid of being sued if a child injures themselves breaking campus rules.

• Marty Lund

 

[qui_est_ce]

Yeah, but if it’s a public school they generally reserve the stiff penalties for safety violations they could get sued over, not traditional disciplinary measures. Beat and rob other students? That’s fine (as long as its not a racial incident or gay-bashing). Get near the pool after hours? You’re in big trouble now! Getting into electrical stuff, water-hazard stuff, chem labs, shop classrooms, bio-hazards, or construction zones would all probably provoke a harsh response from a school administration deathly afraid of being sued if a child injures themselves breaking campus rules.

• Marty Lund

I guess Trayvon isn’t as young and innocent as that outdated picture of him plastered all over the media would suggest.

 

[maryjk]

NPR is reporting that Trayvon was suspended from school for 10 days for being in an “unauthorized area” of the school building.

That’s a stiff penalty.

With Obama’s luck, we will soon be finding out that Martin was involved in the recent rash of break ins.

(And before anyone jumps on me, NO that wouldn’t excuse anyone killing him. NO that wouldn’t mean that Zimmerman should get off. Just saying that when you are the President, sometimes it is better to hold off comment until you know the full story.)

 

[IAGladfelter]

True!

However, George Zimmerman is also not a police officer; therefore, Trayvon Martin was under no obligation to obey him or answer any of his questions. By chasing him down, it is Zimmerman who became the aggressor and Trayvon Martin was well within HIS rights to defend himself. You do not get to claim self-defense in an altercation you started. This is why people are ticked off that Zimmerman has not been charged.

Just a couple of thoughts: First, with a “Stand Your Ground Law” in place something like this shooting had to happen sooner or later. The Florida legislators and Governor should have known that.

That begs the question as to whether or not such laws exist in the first place. Does a private citizen have the right to use deadly force to keep people out of - or off of - their property, or does their right to self defense only go as far as calling the Police?

Next, Zimmerman was only a “watch captain,” not a police officer. It seems to me that as such, the only thing he would be able to do would be to call the police. The only equipment he should have had available would have been a cell phone with photo capacity or a police-issued walkie-talkie he could use to talk directly to police dispatch.

Another question is that Trayvon chose to enter the property of a fenced, gated community posted as “no trespassing.” Why did he do that? What was he thinking? Or, was he thinking? Arguably, Trayvon should have known better, and when challenged by the watch captain, why did he run?

All this could have been avoided if Trayvon had just stayed off the gated community’s property in the first place and walked around it. After all, why was that community gated and fenced with warning signs in the first place? To keep people who did not live there out!
Arguably, Trayvon should have known better. Had he thought gated communities were a new form of “fortress-segregation” and wanted to challenge the concept, then that would have been something for his parents to bring up with the City Council and local civil rights leaders.

One way to deal with this sort of thing in the future might be to require (and this would take a city ordinance and/or State law) that all community watchers be required to enlist as City Auxiliary Police Officers, be trained in law enforcement principles, and if armed, have to go through the same weapons training as the city Police, with regular police cadets prior to commissioning, and be under the command and control of the regular City Police.

Then, they would be sworn local peace officers, identified by uniforms and badges, not merely civilians. If there was a shooting, then, they would have to surrender their badge and gun, and have the shooting investigated by the City Police Internal Affairs Bureau as if they were regular Police, and, if the shooting was not a “good” one, be charged accordingly, as would happen to regular Police. Or, if not armed, have it be made clear that as Auxiliary Police Officers, they had only the power to detain for arrest by regular Police and not use deadly force as is the case for New York City’s Auxiliary Police. Were that done, there would be no problem.

What is unacceptable is the sort of “wild west” vigilanate law enforcement by private citizens whether neighborhood watch members or not, who believe their use of deadly force is authorized by “Castle Laws” and “Stand Your Ground Laws.”

Blessings,
Irl

 

[L_piperatus]

The fact that D.O.J. intervention here basically bypasses any criteria of due process and federalism for the sake of sensationalism and race-based politicking should clue everyone into the fact that involving the Obama Justice Department in this case makes the likelihood of justice being served drop like a rock.

It works like this:
Local → State → Federal

Not like this:
Local → Media → White House

• Marty Lund

This is going to be interesting to watch, as far as Mr. Obama is involved. If his machine could sell it as a White-on-Black crime, it would be more useful for his re-election campaign. But since it turned out George Zimmerman is Hispanic, selling the case as a Hispanic-on-Black crime has its dangers. Obama could alienate Hispanic voters, and he needs the Hispanic vote.

 

[Lujack]

Just a couple of thoughts: First, with a “Stand Your Ground Law” in place something like this shooting had to happen sooner or later. The Florida legislators and Governor should have known that.

That begs the question as to whether or not such laws exist in the first place. Does a private citizen have the right to use deadly force to keep people out of - or off of - their property, or does their right to self defense only go as far as calling the Police?

Next, Zimmerman was only a “watch captain,” not a police officer. It seems to me that as such, the only thing he would be able to do would be to call the police. The only equipment he should have had available would have been a cell phone with photo capacity or a police-issued walkie-talkie he could use to talk directly to police dispatch.

Important thing to note-Zimmerman wasn’t actually even that. This community has no officially registered neighborhood watch, other than the self-proclaimed Mr. Zimmerman.

Another question is the young victim chose to enter the property of a fenced, gated community posted as “no trespassing.” What was he thinking? Or, was he thinking?
He should have known better, and when challenged by the watch captain, why did he run?

Probably that it was a shorter way home through a safe neighborhood. And again, Zimmerman wasn’t actually a watch captain, he was just some guy who declared himself to be that. And even if he was, to Mitchell he was nothing but some creepy guy following him.

All this could have been avoided if he had just stayed off the gated community’s property in the first place. After all, why was that community gated and fenced with warning signs in the first place? He should have known better. Had he thought gated communities were a new form of “fortress-segregation” and wanted to challenge the concept. That would have been something for his parents to bring up to the City Council.

All this could have been avoided if he hadn’t wanted an unhealthy snack like Skittles. All this could have been avoided if he’d driven instead of walked.

All this could have been avoided if Zimmerman hadn’t shot him!!! Even if he was doing something egregiously wrong by walking home through a safe neighborhood…it isn’t a capital offense!

One way to deal with this sort of thing in the future might be to require (and this would take a city ordinance and/or State law) would be for all community watchers to join the city Auxiliary Police, be trained in law enforcement principles, and if armed, have to go through the same weapons training as the city Police, with regular police cadets prior to commissioning, and be under the command and control of the regular City Police.

Then, they would be local peace officers, not merely civilians, and if there was a shooting, they would have to surrender their badge and gun, and have the shooting investigated by the City Police Internal Affairs Bureau as if they were regular Police, and, if the shooting was not a “good” one, be charged accordingly, as would happen to regular Police. Or, if not armed, have it be made clear that as Auxiliary Police Officers, they had only the power to detain for arrest by regular Police and not use deadly force as is the case for New York City’s Auxiliary Police. Were that done, there would be no problem.

What is unacceptable is the sort of “wild west” vigilanate law enforcement by private citizens whether neighborhood watch members or not, who believe their use of deadly force is authorized by “Castle Laws” and “Stand Your Ground Laws.”

This I absolutely agree with you on, except for the fact that (like I said before) Mr. Zimmerman wasn’t even on a Neighborhood Watch Organization, he’s just declared himself to be one and acted like it means something.

 

[Lujack]

I guess Trayvon isn’t as young and innocent as that outdated picture of him plastered all over the media would suggest.

Yeah, he must have been some kind of a real thug to get suspended from school. It isn’t like normal kids ever get that kind of a punishment.

And even if he was a genuine troublemaker, my God, he was shot dead in the streets! He could have been the most obnoxious kid in the world and that shouldn’t have happened to him!

 

[sw85]

Just a couple of thoughts: First, with a “Stand Your Ground Law” in place something like this shooting had to happen sooner or later. The Florida legislators and Governor should have known that.

How? People keep saying this and I continue not to see any logical way that a law loosening the standards for self-defense extends to behaviors that are clearly not self-defense-related. I grant this could be a lack of imagination on my part.

Actively pursuing someone you suspect is a criminal is not self-defense. It is vigilantism at best and harassment at worst.

The media keeps saying the law is to blame, but how? It reeks to me of them making a giant stretch to against a law they hate and have always hated.

 

[Lujack]

This is going to be interesting to watch, as far as Mr. Obama is involved. If his machine could sell it as a White-on-Black crime, it would be more useful for his re-election campaign. But since it turned out George Zimmerman is Hispanic, selling the case as a Hispanic-on-Black crime has its dangers. Obama could alienate Hispanic voters, and he needs the Hispanic vote.

Or maybe, just maybe, perhaps a man with two young daughters is shaken by the shooting death of a young man who was walking home from a convenience store. Perhaps his statement wasn’t a calculated move, but a genuine expression of sympathy and grief from a parent.

I mean, I know people on here are not fond of the President, but he isn’t some kind of a robot. I think if he hugged his daughters in public, some people would try to find a political motivation.

 

[mlund]

Just a couple of thoughts: First, with a “Stand Your Ground Law” in place something like this shooting had to happen sooner or later. The Florida legislators and Governor should have known that.

You’ve got it backwards.

Something like this shooting had to happen sooner or later - regardless of Stand Your Ground. Zealots would then, as they always do, seek to use the media exposure to attack the rights of law-abiding citizens, and Stand Your Ground would be a target of choice.

The idea that the Stand Your Ground Law contributed to misconduct in this case is an unsubstantiated absurdity only the media could love. Castle Laws and Stand Your Ground Laws only serve as clarifications to curb bad lawsuits and costly improper prosecution of people whose right to self-defense is already part of the Natural Law and common law.

• Marty Lund

 

[catharina]

You’ve got it backwards.

Something like this shooting had to happen sooner or later - regardless of Stand Your Ground. Zealots would then, as they always do, seek to use the media exposure to attack the rights of law-abiding citizens, and Stand Your Ground would be a target of choice.

The idea that the Stand Your Ground Law contributed to misconduct in this case is an unsubstantiated absurdity only the media could love. Castle Laws and Stand Your Ground Laws only serve as clarifications to curb bad lawsuits and costly improper prosecution of people whose right to self-defense is already part of the Natural Law and common law.

• Marty Lund

How does “Stand your ground” translate to chase
a child and then kill him? The child was also
a law-abiding citizen and now he’s dead.

 

[FromTheAshes777]

You’ve got it backwards.

Something like this shooting had to happen sooner or later - regardless of Stand Your Ground. Zealots would then, as they always do, seek to use the media exposure to attack the rights of law-abiding citizens, and Stand Your Ground would be a target of choice.

The idea that the Stand Your Ground Law contributed to misconduct in this case is an unsubstantiated absurdity only the media could love. Castle Laws and Stand Your Ground Laws only serve as clarifications to curb bad lawsuits and costly improper prosecution of people whose right to self-defense is already part of the Natural Law and common law.

• Marty Lund

Exactly.

What Zimmerman did could never be defined in any state as self defense. The problem here is the proper enforcement of the law, not the law itself.