Trayvon Martin: 'Shoot first' law under scrutiny

[SamH]

At least you’re willing to admit that Trayvon may have started a physical altercation with him. Unfortunately, the law obviously disagrees with you. IF and only if the police find enough to make an arrest, will this be prosecuted.

Actually that’s in the case of the police making an arrest without a warrant - which is what would have been the case here.

 

[pnewton]

With Eric Holder in charge you can count on it. Look what just happened to his “signature” case in Michigan. The prosecutors presented their case and the judge dropped most of the charges before the defense even started. Basically she could find no laws broken by 5 of the defendants that have been held without bail for nearly two years.

In the case of the ones I know, two people where arrested and had to go to trial. One was acquitted, the other with a hung jury, eleven to one for acquittal. I do not trust that the Justice Department will act objectively.

 

[pnewton]

There is no evidence that Zimmerman confronted Martin.

There is evidence that he Martin knew he was being followed and was anxious about it (the call to the girlfriend). This will come down to which witnesses seem credible and for how much, or hopefully, enough forensic data to establish support for one witness or another. Zimmerman and Martin is a case of he said, he dead. Witnesses can not always be reliable, as in the case of the two that contradicted each other on who was on top of whom.

 

[johnnyjones]

Some have interjected that because Catholisism is pro life Zimmerman is automatically wrong. This is a convoluted view. Self defense, if that is proven to be the case, is justifiable.

 

[maryjk]

There is evidence that he Martin knew he was being followed and was anxious about it (the call to the girlfriend). This will come down to which witnesses seem credible and for how much, or hopefully, enough forensic data to establish support for one witness or another. Zimmerman and Martin is a case of he said, he dead. Witnesses can not always be reliable, as in the case of the two that contradicted each other on who was on top of whom.

Does anyone have information showing that the girlfriend has spoken with police? Or is her statement still just from what she told the family lawyer?

 

[sw85]

There’s something telling in that Martin’s body had no injuries besides the gun shot wound, where Zimmerman’s did.

 

[johnnyjones]

And another thing; Martin was around 140 lbs and Zimmerman is about 250lbs. How could a kid much smaller than him honestly beat him up?

It’s time to stop with the weight issue. What world are you living in? A young kid is strong and can throw down those weighing more than him, especially if he’s been a football player. Zimmerman isn’t the picture of health either.

 

[fix]

Some have interjected that because Catholisism is pro life Zimmerman is automatically wrong. This is a convoluted view. Self defense, if that is proven to be the case, is justifiable.

Not only justifiable but the one who dies is responsible for their own death. We should pray for all involved.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

There is evidence that he Martin knew he was being followed and was anxious about it (the call to the girlfriend). This will come down to which witnesses seem credible and for how much, or hopefully, enough forensic data to establish support for one witness or another. Zimmerman and Martin is a case of he said, he dead. Witnesses can not always be reliable, as in the case of the two that contradicted each other on who was on top of whom.

If Martin thought he was being followed and was afraid, why didn’t he just go to his father’s house? Why did HE evade Zimmerman and then confront Zimmerman at his truck? Why didn’t he just let Zimmerman go to his truck and drive away? If he thought that Zimmerman was stalking him, why didn’t he call 911?

 

[fix]

I deepy resist anyone’s claim that this child was not A CHILD.

HE WAS A child.
YET DENY POSTERS DENY IT OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

SO VERY WRONG - ALMOST A TRAGEDY APART FROM THE CENTRAL ONE.

Again, only emphasizing one aspect of this situation, while not honestly relating all that is true here, really is a disservice.

The fact that a person is termed a “child” by some legal definition does not mean his actions were child-like or that his free will was compromised, or that he cannot take a life.

Is it fair to keep restating the person in question is a “child” while ignoring all other relevant factors?

 

[SamH]

And another thing; Martin was around 140 lbs and Zimmerman is about 250lbs. How could a kid much smaller than him honestly beat him up?

How well do short fat dudes fare in any physical event? Ever seen a short fat man win a foot race? How many times does a short fat out of shape guy win a boxing, MMA or wrestling match? I can only think of one that did reasonably well (Butterbean) but he wasn’t the typical fighter either (and he wasn’t short). There’s a reason Zimmerman was puffing just getting out the seat of his truck.

 

[SamH]

Is it fair to keep restating the person in question is a “child” while ignoring all other relevant factors?

When that’s all you have…

 

[qui_est_ce]

Again, only emphasizing one aspect of this situation, while not honestly relating all that is true here, really is a disservice.

The fact that a person is termed a “child” by some legal definition does not mean his actions were child-like or that his free will was compromised, or that he cannot take a life.

Is it fair to keep restating the person in question is a “child” while ignoring all other relevant factors?

IMHO we ought to be outraged that a child would so violently attack a person talking on his cell phone to 911 operators while returning to his vehicle.

 

[catharina]

Again, only emphasizing one aspect of this situation, while not honestly relating all that is true here, really is a disservice.

The fact that a person is termed a “child” by some legal definition does not mean his actions were child-like or that his free will was compromised, or that he cannot take a life.

Is it fair to keep restating the person in question is a “child” while ignoring all other relevant factors?

I only state it (again and again and again) when
other posters continue to deny it. He was a child.

 

[sw85]

I only state it (again and again and again) when
other posters continue to deny it. He was a child.

The problem, as I’ve said before, is that this isn’t really relevant to anything, for several reasons:

(1) Zimmerman had no way of knowing Martin was legally a child, given that he had the build and stature of an adult.

(2) Nothing in self-defense laws prohibits you from killing a child (esp. those you cannot reasonably be expected to know is a child) in self-defense if you have reasonable fear for your life.

(3) Nothing in the legal definition of a child precludes a muscular, 6’3" person capable of overpowering and beating you severely, and thus nothing in the legal definition of a child precludes the possibility that a child can provoke reasonable fear for your life.

So Martin’s “childhood” is largely irrelevant. It’s reasonable to assume that those stressing his “childhood” are deliberately equivocating between the legal definition (anyone under age 18) and the common-sense definition (pre-pubescent person) so as to unduly provoke rage against Zimmerman without respect to what actually happened.

 

[prodigalson2011]

I must admit my own opinion has become less and less certain the more witnesses and details come forth. At this point, it’s looking like Zimmerman has a pretty solid case. I wasn’t aware earlier, for instance, that he was still on the line with the 911 operators when he was walking back to his SUV.

 

[catharina]

The problem, as I’ve said before, is that this isn’t really relevant to anything, for several reasons:

(1) Zimmerman had no way of knowing Martin was legally a child, given that he had the build and stature of an adult.

(2) Nothing in self-defense laws prohibits you from killing a child (esp. those you cannot reasonably be expected to know is a child) in self-defense if you have reasonable fear for your life.

(3) Nothing in the legal definition of a child precludes a muscular, 6’3" person capable of overpowering and beating you severely, and thus nothing in the legal definition of a child precludes the possibility that a child can provoke reasonable fear for your life.

So Martin’s “childhood” is largely irrelevant. It’s reasonable to assume that those stressing his “childhood” are deliberately equivocating between the legal definition (anyone under age 18) and the common-sense definition (pre-pubescent person) so as to unduly provoke rage against Zimmerman without respect to what actually happened.

Zimmerman’s personal set of fears led him to view a CHILD as
a menace - although the child was doing what he should be doing
and located where he should have been located; he left his father’s
supervision to go and buy some skittles for his younger brother and
an iced tea. Zimmerman’s perceptions were off the mark; he acted
on those perceptions anyway.

 

[sw85]

Zimmerman’s personal set of fears led him to view a CHILD as
a menace - although the child was doing what he should be doing
and located where he should have been located; he left his father’s
supervision to go and buy some skittles for his younger brother and
an iced tea. Zimmerman’s perceptions were off the mark; he acted
on those perceptions anyway.

That has nothing to do with anything (and again, I can’t help but note you continue to equivocate between two different meanings of the word “child”). Following up on a hunch is not against the law. Assaulting someone is. Zimmerman’s side of the story is that he was confronted by Martin after stopping his pursuit of Martin and was assaulted by him without provocation. What little we know of the evidence seems to support this take (i.e., Martin’s body was uninjured save for the bullet wound where Zimmerman was severely bloodied with grass stains on his back; one eyewitness confirming that Zimmerman was screaming for help and being attacked by Martin, who was on top of him; and the failure of Zimmerman’s gun to cycle, suggesting that the slide was being gripped at the time it was fired, i.e., that this was not a gangland-style execution).

I grant this is a loose impression formed by what little we know. It will almost certainly change as more details come to light. What is clear is that continuing to harp on Martin’s “childhood” when you know this is only a legal distinction with no correspondence to objective reality clarifies nothing.

 

[Scott_Lafrance]

I must admit my own opinion has become less and less certain the more witnesses and details come forth. At this point, it’s looking like Zimmerman has a pretty solid case. I wasn’t aware earlier, for instance, that he was still on the line with the 911 operators when he was walking back to his SUV.

What is completely lost in this story is how Zimmerman, who has a wife and kids, took time away from them to serve as a neighborhood watch when his neighborhood was undergoing a stretch of burglaries. He actually put himself into a potentially dangerous situation trying to deter crime in his neighborhood. I am sure that if you asked him, he would tell you that shooting a neighbor’s kid was the last thing on his mind that night. Now, he has to live in hidding because race-baiting hate pimps like Spike Lee have effectively put a bounty on his head and gave out (erroneous) information on how to find him. But no. All we are getting is “He stalked a black child and murdered him” when that doesn’t even line up with what is now common knowledge. And as time passes, Zimmerman’s story is holding steady while Martin’s story is getting murkier and murkier. There are stories out now about his Twitter account and potential gang and drug affiliations, how he may have been suspended for possession of drugs AND possession of stolen property, and there is a forming (but weak) link between him and the gang who is thought responsible for the break-ins that were happening in the neighborhood where Zimmerman was acting as a neighborhood watch. I don’t know if any of this is true. Apparent the stuff about his Twitter account IS true and the Internet is abuzz with it. It is this Twitter feed that is creating connections between Martin and suspected gang activity and drug dealing.

 

[catharina]

I spent 40+ yrs of my adult life in Chicago.
I know that not all cops are the “good guys.”

It’s a safe guess that such police also show up in the South too.
Glad to see that one of those has left the force in New Orleans.

cnn.com/2012/03/27/us/florida-teen-louisiana-officer/?hpt=ju_c1

"A New Orleans police officer who posted an offensive comment online about slain Florida teen Trayvon Martin resigned on Tuesday.

Superintendent Ronal Serpas accepted his resignation.

“My responsibility to the people of New Orleans, as well as to the professional officers on this police force, demanded I take swift action in this matter. I have accepted Giroir’s resignation, and believe it is in the best interest of this department and this city,” Serpas said.

Under a news story on Martin, officer Jason Giroir wrote on the website of CNN affiliate WWL: "Act like a Thug Die like one!"

He admitted to the post and submitted his resignation after being told Serpas was calling for a pre-termination hearing, according to police.

The superintendent suspended Giroir without pay on Monday, when news of the incident broke.

“To say that I’m angry is an understatement. I’m furious,” Serpas said then.

Trayvon Martin, 17, was killed February 26 as he walked back to his father’s fiancee’s house in Sanford, Florida, after a trip to a convenience store. Police say he was unarmed, carrying a bag of Skittles candy and an iced tea. He was shot by George Zimmerman, who has told authorities he was acting in self defense."