Trayvon Martin: 'Shoot first' law under scrutiny

[Stjudeprayforus]

What I find incredibly sad is this kid was a thug at 17.
Where the heck were his parents in his life?

His twitter feed is disgusting. He was a thief, probably selling drugs and a thug.

I am a single mom whose son is 19. Over my dead lifeless body would my son go down this path.

His parents failed him. Then trademark his name after the fact. Disgusting.

Sadly,odds are this kid would have ended up dead or in prison regardless of George Zimmerman.

What do you expect from a society that views a child as a lump of cells and not a precious gift from God.

Hug your kids, folks.

 

[Geist]

His head was not smashed. He did not even get transported to the ER. We do not know who threw the first punch, or whether it was a “sucker punch”. Remember earlier when someone quoted the Catechism. It applies to Trayvon Martin as much as it does to George Zimmerman.

Sigh.

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2120504/Trayvon-Martin-case-He-suspended-times-caught-burglary-tool.html

Trayvon’s parents and civil rights leaders spoke after a dramatic police account of the fatal shooting claimed the black teen launched an unprovoked attack on the neighborhood watch volunteer in which he punched him in the face, knocked him to the ground and**then bashed his head into the sidewalk several times before trying to grab his gun.

The report, leaked to the Orlando Sentinel and ABC News and based on anonymous sources, supports accounts from George Zimmerman’s allies that he acted in self-defense** when he shot dead the 17-year-old one month ago in Sanford Florida.

 

[catharina]

You mean you don’t accuse because “You don’t BELIEVE it?” or because you assert GZ did’yt listen to the 9911 operator. Or “this wouldn’t have happened” if GZ would have “watched” instead have done more. Your contradicting yourself all over the place.

You didn’t care one bit about new evidence a day ago. You had GZ guilty (accused) with you as judge and jury along with the rest of some media outlets and “leaders”.

George Zimmerman killed a child.
He admits to doing exactly that.

I’ve said so from the start.
You don’t have to like it.

 

[pnewton]

Just for a change of pace, since there is already so much speculation, how far do you think this will go? I say there will be a criminal trial, with the outcome being a toss-up, but only on a less charge, and a civil trial that Zimmerman will lose.

Who knows, but on this we can at least agree it is speculative.

 

[donsnow]

Right, but if you could, please provide what activity at this point was ILLEGAL in Zimmerman’s case, provided that his explanation of self defense is true (which I am not sure of).

The fact that YOU wouldn’t carry a loaded gun (an unloaded gun is also known as a “club”) doesn’t make the act of doing so, or following someone you think is suspicious a crime.

Good afternoon, scipio,

I don’t know about the municipality where Zimmerman and Trayvon were, but in my town in Texas, the neighborhood watch calls in the suspicious person then let the police take care of it. Furthermore, when I was an uniformed security guard here, both armed and unarmed, it was never my duty nor was I permitted to pursue a suspicious person.

God loves you,
Don

 

[Geist]

So if a 9-11 dispatcher told you not to chase someone whom you had not seen committing any crime, you’d feel totally free to do that?

I can follow whoever I want, why? Freedom…is a wild concept for some.

If, conversely, you were walking down the street in a strange neighborhood, caught with nothing on you to defend yourself but a bag of Skittles and a glass bottle of iced tea, and some guy with a gun who had a weight advantage on you was checking you out, would you think it an admission of guilt if you were to run? If he started chasing you and caught up with you, muttering “these a******s always get away” into his cell phone, would you say someone in that position should just let himself be apprehended? Are you saying that people who are looked at by a stranger and react by running deserve whatever treatment they get?

The gun was concealed, how would I know he had it unless I attacked him? And yes, gated communities will have people following you or watching you. Kind of the point.

That’s just the thing. I don’t accept that if a stranger in my neighborhood walking down my street looking at the houses deserves to be run down by the neighbors, let alone shot. Say that I live dangerously, but I don’t see how you let Zimmerman do what he did and still claim you live in a free country. What you’re going to live in is a country ruled by self-important paranoids.

he was shot for trying to kill a man. Not for walking down the street.

That’s what I think Zimmerman seems most likely to be guilty of: Not racism, but arrogance, arrogance that thinks it can decide when someone needs to be killed. I don’t think that anyone of any age, no matter how menancing a mug the good Lord put on their face or how nosy they are about what’s in their host’s neighbor’s yards as they walk down the sidewalk, deserves to be killed because they had the bad luck to run into some self-appointed Barney Fife! You ought to be free to walk or run to 7-11 and back in a strange neighborhood without any fear of getting shot by a paranoid neighbor!

Yeah, he was climbing back into his car to leave when he was confronted by the “child”. Hardly the scenario you are spinning.

He was just doing his job as a neighborhood watch volunteer…which involves watching oddly enough.

 

[sw85]

Just for a change of pace, since there is already so much speculation, how far do you think this will go? I say there will be a criminal trial, with the outcome being a toss-up, but only on a less charge, and a civil trial that Zimmerman will lose.

Who knows, but on this we can at least agree it is speculative.

If the analysis I relayed here earlier is any indication I don’t see how it can go to trial. The evidence against Zimmerman would be incredibly flimsy to non-existent, and the risk of mistrial (given the extremely emotively charged nature of the case) is astronomical.

So I guess I think (a) no trial, but (b) if there is a trial (unlikely), it will be a long and difficult one and it will not find Zimmerman guilty.

 

[Tommy72]

Donsnow has the best post in the thread.

 

[pnewton]

Sigh.

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2120504/Trayvon-Martin-case-He-suspended-times-caught-burglary-tool.html

I know what the different reports say. I also know his head was not caved in, nor was he transported to the hospital. I know his head was bleeding. I know the police said that Zimmerman looked like he had been on the grass.

 

[Geist]

George Zimmerman killed a child.
He admits to doing exactly that.

I’ve said so from the start.
You don’t have to like it.

And what did that “child” do to provoke George Zimmerman into having to defend his life?

Wave a bag of skittles at him? Or pounce like an animal?

 

[catharina]

So if a 9-11 dispatcher told you not to chase someone whom you had not seen committing any crime, you’d feel totally free to do that?

If, conversely, you were walking down the street in a strange neighborhood, caught with nothing on you to defend yourself but a bag of Skittles and a glass bottle of iced tea, and some guy with a gun who had a weight advantage on you was checking you out, would you think it an admission of guilt if you were to run? If he started chasing you and caught up with you, muttering “these a******s always get away” into his cell phone, would you say someone in that position should just let himself be apprehended? Are you saying that people who are looked at by a stranger and react by running deserve whatever treatment they get?

That’s just the thing. I don’t accept that if a stranger in my neighborhood walking down my street looking at the houses deserves to be run down by the neighbors, let alone shot. Say that I live dangerously, but I don’t see how you let Zimmerman do what he did and still claim you live in a free country. What you’re going to live in is a country ruled by self-important paranoids.

That’s what I think Zimmerman seems most likely to be guilty of: Not racism, but arrogance, arrogance that thinks it can decide when someone needs to be killed. I don’t think that anyone of any age, no matter how menancing a mug the good Lord put on their face or how nosy they are about what’s in their host’s neighbor’s yards as they walk down the sidewalk, deserves to be killed because they had the bad luck to run into some self-appointed Barney Fife! You ought to be free to walk or run to 7-11 and back in a strange neighborhood without any fear of getting shot by a paranoid neighbor! YUP.

If the citizens of the State of Florida think otherwise, they can keep the whole nutty war zone that they’re asking for, and good riddance!

 

[SamH]

Zimmerman was right to call in the suspicious sighting. We do not know if he hailed Trayvon to halt, or not. All we know, is that he pursued Trayvon when told it wasn’t necessary by his dispatcher. So, both men (Trayvon was a young man, not a child) were culpable for the incident.

Actually all evidence indicates that he did not pursue Martin after being told he didn’t need to do that. We do know that Zimmerman was not pursuing Martin (didn’t even know he was still in the area) when Martin attacked him.

 

[sw85]

Re: him being a child, this is applicable as a legal term only. Martin was substantially taller and heavier than I am, and I’m 26. It’s reasonable to conclude that a very tall person is in fact an adult, esp. when there is no immediately available evidence to the contrary.

Also, what anyone “deserves” has nothing to do with this. If Zimmerman’s side of the story is true, he acted in self-defense, not out of a misplaced notion of justice.

 

[scipio337]

Good afternoon, scipio,

I don’t know about the municipality where Zimmerman and Trayvon were, but in my town in Texas, the neighborhood watch calls in the suspicious person then let the police take care of it. Furthermore, when I was an uniformed security guard here, both armed and unarmed, it was never my duty nor was I permitted to pursue a suspicious person.

God loves you,
Don

Thank you Don, and I can understand that it would be a job policy, given the nature of your work, and liability of the employer,

but without knowing FL law, does this rise to the level of a crime? Either on a municipal or state level?

 

[Geist]

I know what the different reports say. I also know his head was not caved in, nor was he transported to the hospital. I know his head was bleeding. I know the police said that Zimmerman looked like he had been on the grass.

wait now, you said “his head was not smashed”…now its “was not caved in”?

It would have been if his head had been smacked into the sidewalk a few more times.

Should he have waited to that point to defend himself?

As brain dead or a corpse?

His head was being smashed into the concrete actually as the police report states. Thats enough to brain damage or kill someone given enough hits.

 

[catharina]

Good afternoon, scipio,

I don’t know about the municipality where Zimmerman and Trayvon were, but in my town in Texas, the neighborhood watch calls in the suspicious person then let the police take care of it. Furthermore, when I was an uniformed security guard here, both armed and unarmed, it was never my duty nor was I permitted to pursue a suspicious person.

God loves you,
Don

That is the guideline for all neighborhood watch programs
as presented by the Nat’l Sheriffs Assn Manual on the subject.

However the Sanford group was NOT registered with the national group.

 

[fix]

Remember earlier when someone quoted the Catechism. It applies to Trayvon Martin as much as it does to George Zimmerman.

Indeed it does, yet few are accusing Martin of wrong doing. I asked a general question before in this thread. I am wondering if anyone is willing to answer it?

If we assume that GZ made an error in judgment, not saying he did, does that mean he has no right to self defense? Not legally but morally?

How many blows did GZ need to receive before people think he has a right to feel his life is in danger?

Referring to a 6’3" male has a “child” in an attempt shape the conversation seems disingenuous. One of the few “facts” we are aware of is that many are calling for the arrest of GZ. Is that because we all want a fair hearing or is it a rush to judgment based on bias?

I really wonder whether justice can be served in a case like this.

 

[pnewton]

If the analysis I relayed here earlier is any indication I don’t see how it can go to trial. The evidence against Zimmerman would be incredibly flimsy to non-existent, and the risk of mistrial (given the extremely emotively charged nature of the case) is astronomical.

So I guess I think (a) no trial, but (b) if there is a trial (unlikely), it will be a long and difficult one and it will not find Zimmerman guilty.

Aha. Something concrete we may be able to test in a few weeks. If you were close enough, or our technology advanced enough as I said earlier, I would suggest we put a beer on it.

 

[johnnyjones]

What I find incredibly sad is this kid was a thug at 17.
Where the heck were his parents in his life?

His twitter feed is disgusting. He was a thief, probably selling drugs and a thug.

I am a single mom whose son is 19. Over my dead lifeless body would my son go down this path.

His parents failed him. Then trademark his name after the fact. Disgusting.

Sadly,odds are this kid would have ended up dead or in prison regardless of George Zimmerman.

What do you expect from a society that views a child as a lump of cells and not a precious gift from God.

Hug your kids, folks.

Do you think his parents should be trademarking his name if it appears on cds, print and the like?

 

[catharina]

Re: him being a child, this is applicable as a legal term only. Martin was substantially taller and heavier than I am, and I’m 26. It’s reasonable to conclude that a very tall person is in fact an adult, esp. when there is no immediately available evidence to the contrary.

Also, what anyone “deserves” has nothing to do with this. If Zimmerman’s side of the story is true, he acted in self-defense, not out of a misplaced notion of justice.

Yep, a legal term and this is all about the Law.