Trayvon Martin- Tragedy

[Johnfromokc]

Not that it is any of your business, but 1. The one I normally go to. *shrug*

So much for full disclosure and honesty.

I am not whining and crying. Just stop with your accusations against me personally. It is getting really freaking old and stale.

Your circular logic in defending Zimmerman while claiming you're not defending Zimmerman is beyond old.

More accusations against me personally John. Again....it is sad.

So now pointing out flaws in your convoluted circular logic argument is personal? Really Jay?

IDK, nor care. I dont make assumptions about others like you seem to like to do. But I guess it is why you like to make so many assumptions about Zimmerman as well.

You obvioulsy care because you keep coming back all butt-hurt. What's up with that?

Again, why dont you stop attacking ME? Like I asked 3 or 4 pages ago? Okay John?

Are you a conservative Jay? Some right wingers (not all) often call dissent "attack". Refuting your deeply flawed assumptions is not attacking you Jay. It's just a discussion. If you can't handle it, you have the choice to move on. Nobody is making you post anything - but if you post it, it is open to scrutiny.

Be honest here Jay - how are your personal political views affecting your opinion? Don't try and bullshit that you are unbiased - just be honest.

 

[Jaybird]

So much for full disclosure and honesty.

So now I am a liar? Sad. Your debating style disgusts me.

So now pointing out flaws in your convoluted circular logic argument is personal? Really Jay?

You are not pointing out flaws in my logic. You are attempting to throw mud at me. You can not argue with the facts I have presented, so you attempt to discredit me. As I said, it is very poor debating form. And trying to say it is 'pointing out flaws in my logic' is just more BS. You have done no such thing. You have instead, attempted to discredit me personally.

You obvioulsy care because you keep coming back all butt-hurt. What's up with that?

I just keep asking you to stop attacking my character, and try to attack my argument. You have failed to do so, so instead you simply continue to try to attack my character. If you can not argue against the actual facts, than your opinion is a total failure.

Are you a conservative Jay? Some right wingers (not all) often call dissent "attack". Refuting your deeply flawed assumptions is not attacking you Jay. It's just a discussion. If you can't handle it, you have the choice to move on. Nobody is making you post anything - but if you post it, it is open to scrutiny.

Be honest here Jay - how are your personal political views affecting your opinion? Don't try and bullshit that you are unbiased - just be honest.

My personal political views are none of your business, nor are they affecting the facts, yes facts...I have presented in this thread. If you wish to ignore facts, and make up your own opinions to support some distorted story that is stuck in your head because you are a media junkie that absorbs everything said to you, that is your problem, and not mine.

If you are not going to return to talking about the facts of this case, and instead want to continue to make this a debate about ME, than I have nothing further to add.

 

[The Man]

My internet sucks at the moment so I cant watch the videos or start scanning on the articles.

It is my gathering that the shooter was attacked by the one he shot..is this correct.
The shooter was a neighborhood watch guy...out watching the neighborhood.
The one that got shot was out walking in a gated community in the rain.
The shooter followed the guy ..was attacked by the one he was following and ultimately shot the guy.
There is a witness that shows the shooter was attacked.

Is the accurate?
I am just trying to sort out all the garbage that the news is famous for...and want the actual details of what happened.
I hate that bullshit...at one time..news was news...now its just a bunch of emotional garbage rather than an actual recording of events

 

[Jaybird]

My internet sucks at the moment so I cant watch the videos or start scanning on the articles.

It is my gathering that the shooter was attacked by the one he shot..is this correct.
The shooter was a neighborhood watch guy...out watching the neighborhood.
The one that got shot was out walking in gated community in the rain.
The shooter followed the guy ..was attacked by the one he was following and ultimately shot the guy.
There is a witness that shows the shooter was attacked.

Is the accurate?
I am just trying to sort out all the garbage that the news is famous for...and want the actual details of what happened.
I hate that bullshit...at one time..news was news...now its just a bunch of emotional garbage rather than recording of events

Those could be the actual details. We really are not sure about all of them. But it is better than I have seen many people believe with this story, with the way the media has shaped it.

And that is ultimately my biggest problem with this case. We actually know very little. And with the amount that we actually do know, we should not be jumping to conclusions and trying this case in the public sphere. To do so, is simply a witch hunt.

 

[The Man]

Those could be the actual details. We really are not sure about all of them. But it is better than I have seen many people believe with this story, with the way the media has shaped it.

And that is ultimately my biggest problem with this case. We actually know very little. And with the amount that we actually do know, we should not be jumping to conclusions and trying this case in the public sphere. To do so, is simply a witch hunt.

Its the best I could come up with for accuracy of details.....as most articles are just character attacks to the shooter..and the poor guy that got shot.
Then this is repeated over and over again more ranting than news.

But with the details gathered..The shooter isnt the total piece of shit he is portrayed to be.
This incident could have been avoided by all means....IMO the shooter just wanted to keep track of this guy until the police arrived.
Turned nasty at some point the shooter got his butt whipped...Times have changes..butt whippings are not simple like they used to be/people are out to hurt each other for real alot of times now.
True actual fear can be a factor of whether to shoot or not.

Now had this been a woman who pulled the trigger she would be wearing a ribbon around her neck as a hero IMO

 

[Alien Allen]

In todays paper they still are making it a racial issue and stating it was a white guy that shot.

John from what I read the father did not find out at the morgue. He filed a missing person report the next morning and police came to his house and then showed him a picture of the kid to see if he could identify the kid

Which leads me to the question.. The kid leaves the house at 7pm during a stop in a basketball game they were watching on tv. This is the fathers girlfriends house. How is that the father and fathers girlfriend missed all the commotion going on outside if the kid was 200' from their house??

 

[Jaybird]

Its the best I could come up with for accuracy of details.....as most articles are just character attacks to the shooter..and the poor guy that got shot.
Then this is repeated over and over again more ranting than news.

But with the details gathered..The shooter isnt the total piece of shit he is portrayed to be.
This incident could have been avoided by all means....IMO the shooter just wanted to keep track of this guy until the police arrived.
Turned nasty at some point the shooter got his butt whipped...Times have changes..butt whippings are not simple like they used to be/people are out to hurt each other for real alot of times now.
True actual fear can be a factor of whether to shoot or not.

Now had this been a woman who pulled the trigger she would be wearing a ribbon around her neck as a hero IMO

And I agree with everything you say. Especially about the part if the shooter had been a woman, and being a hero instead of a goat. Instead, the guy has a $10,000 bounty on his head by an actual vigilante group.

This has simply turned disgusting, based on blatant media distortions and ignoring of actual fact. I see some media outlets backtracking a bit from the crazy and ridiculous story they originally portrayed this to be. But, they still rarely talk about actual facts, and instead has turned it into a political discussion. Sad thing is....when they move on, the actual facts wont come out. And if Zimmerman is treated fairly in court, and the public never hears all of the grey in this case, and Zimmerman does 'get off' there will be absolute outrage, because all everyone is gonna remember is...the original absurd story that was being sold when this went national. ie...A crazed vigilante foaming at the mouth and screaming racial epithets, stalked down and caught up to a 12 yr old baby faced boy, while the boy was crying out for help and screaming for mommy, and shot him in cold blood. And then an inept and racially biased police force showed up, told the foaming lunatic that it was self defense, slapped him on his butt and told hm to go his merry way. :/

Disturbing and disgusting dont even begin to portray how I feel the media has handled this case.

 

[The Man]

In todays paper they still are making it a racial issue and stating it was a white guy that shot.

John from what I read the father did not find out at the morgue. He filed a missing person report the next morning and police came to his house and then showed him a picture of the kid to see if he could identify the kid

Which leads me to the question.. The kid leaves the house at 7pm during a stop in a basketball game they were watching on tv. This is the fathers girlfriends house. How is that the father and fathers girlfriend missed all the commotion going on outside if the kid was 200' from their house??

I remember reading something similar ....How could the father or Fathers gf not know?
So somethings seems odd in that respect.
I also read some talk of candy.
Which makes no sense either...17 year old out walking in the rain in relation to candy.
Turning it into a racial killing just goes to show how far south the quality of news has become...especially when the races aren't even correct.

 

[Johnfromokc]

Jaybird - I have to say I have never seen someone come across as such a whiner as you. You say you want to discuss facts, but all you do is repeat talking points from your gun forum and then cry when it is refuted. Either man up and discus or go the fuck on if you can't handle the discussion.

Here are the facts in short form:

17 year old Trayvon Martin is returning from a store after purchasing candy and a soft drink. It is drizzling rain. Martin is dressed in jeans and a gray hoodie. As Martin walks back home from the store, he is talking to his girlfriend on his cell phone.

1. Zimmerman, self-appointed neighborhood watch captian sees Martin walking down a sidewalk and thinks Martin "Looks suspicious".

2. Zimmerman calls police and tells dispatcher he sees a suspicious black male in his late teens.

Note - full transcripts are posted in this thread as well as the audio for anyone to read and hear.

3. Police operator tells Zimmerman not to follow Martin and instructs him to wait for police.

4. Instead of waiting for police, Zimmerman goes looking for Martin.

5. In a wide open area with clear visibility in all directions from which Zimmerman could have easily observed Martin from a safe distance, Zimmerman and Martin engage in a physical struggle which Zimmerman could have completely avoided had he listened to police dispatcher.

6. Zimmerman shoots Martin in the chest, killing Martin.

What is up for debate here is how Zimmerman wound up in the physical altercation with Martin in the first place.

What is not up for debate is the fact that Zimmerman was told not to follow Martin and in addition to that, Zimmerman was enrolled in law enforcement courses at a local community college, AND had previously been told by the Sanford Police Departments Crime Prevention officer to "never confront a suspect. Observe from a safe distance and wait for police".

Some are vigorously attempting to justify the homicide that would have been avoided had Zimmerman followed his training and instructions by the police operator.

If you look at the overhead photograph of the condominum complex, Zimmerman had unobstructed view for 100 yards or more and had absolutely no reason to come anywhere near Martin.

Extreme left wingers are calling the issue racism and extreme gun rights right wingers are doing exactly the same from the opposite view. I do not agree with either of these views.

My position is simply that Zimmerman should have been arrested and charged with some form of homocide for failing to follow the police operator's instructions and failing to follow the repeated instructions of the Sanford PD's Crime Prevention Officer.

This issue blew up after Zimmerman was never placed under arrest and on-call prosecutors declined to visit the crime scene. The police have given the perception that their investigation was not thorough, hence the national outrage. So - here we are.

 

[Jaybird]

HAHA John. Your 'facts' are such distortions it is actually sad. So I stopped reading. Does anyone know if this forum has an ignore feature?

 

[Aeval]

I, personally, don't think it's a racial issue. I think Zimmerman was wrong in his actions from the very beginning though.

According to usaonwatch.org:

Patrol members should be trained by law enforcement. It should be emphasized to members that they do not possess police powers and they shall not carry weapons or pursue vehicles. They should also be cautioned to alert police or deputies when encountering strange activity. Members should never confront suspicious persons who could be armed and dangerous. Patrol members can be equipped for their duties. For example, flashlights or searchlights are necessary for night patrols. Many mobile patrols use cell phones or two-way radios to contact a citizen-manned base station, which in turn contacts law enforcement officials when necessary. Remember your partnerships and ask for donations from local businesses.

IMO, he thought this didn't apply to him, why...I don't know.

Florida law states:

Florida law justifies use of deadly force when you are:

• Trying to protect yourself or another person from death or serious bodily harm;
• Trying to prevent a forcible felony, such as rape, robbery, burglary or kidnapping.

Using or displaying a handgun in any other circumstances could result in your conviction for crimes such as improper exhibition of a firearm, manslaughter, or worse.

Did he think he was at risk of death or serious bodily harm? Who knows...BUT...he saw Trayvon Martin before he called 911, he knew his size and he should have assessed what risks were involved before stepping outside of his vehicle to follow him...something he was TOLD to not do.

I believe he took comfort in the fact that he was carrying a gun, I believe that he was a cop wanna be with a temper (past criminal charges of aggression, which makes me wonder why he was even granted a gun license), and I believe he should definitely be charged/convited for this crime.

 

[Johnfromokc]

In todays paper they still are making it a racial issue and stating it was a white guy that shot.

For the record, I do not believe Zimmermans actions were racially motivated. I also disagree that this should be portrayed as a race issue by either side.

My whole issue here is that Zimmerman should have been arrested and charged, but he was not.

John from what I read the father did not find out at the morgue. He filed a missing person report the next morning and police came to his house and then showed him a picture of the kid to see if he could identify the kid

Here is the fathers own words:

"I had gone out for dinner," says Tracy, "and when I got home, Trayvon wasn't there. I tried calling his cell phone several times, and it went straight to voicemail. I wasn't that worried, because he had been spending time with my 20-year-old nephew who was a responsible young man. There wasn't a panic that he wasn't at home. I figured that they had gone to the movies, because they had said they might. So I laid down, thinking they would show up later."

Once the calls were not returned, and Trayvon did not return home, Tracy said the next morning he started to get worried

"I started making calls, and I reached my nephew," Martin says. "He said he hadn't seen Trayvon. Then I really started getting worried. So I called the Sheriff's department to file a missing persons report. I let them know it hadn't been 24 hours, but it was unusual for Trayvon not to return home."

Once the authorities were contacted Tracy faced every parent's fear head on as the officers asked him for a photo of his missing son.

"I had one on my phone, so I showed it to him," Tracy says, his voice tightening. "He told me he was going to show me a photo and ask if it was my son. He pulled out a photo of Trayvon's dead body. And the nightmare began."
　

Which leads me to the question.. The kid leaves the house at 7pm during a stop in a basketball game they were watching on tv. This is the fathers girlfriends house. How is that the father and fathers girlfriend missed all the commotion going on outside if the kid was 200' from their house??

See the fathers words above. Why are people so intent on attacking the parents and blaming the victim here? It seems the exact reverse of one side claiming racism.

A human being has been killed. This killing would have been avoided if Zimmerman had not disregarded police instructions.

 

[The Man]

And I agree with everything you say. Especially about the part if the shooter had been a woman, and being a hero instead of a goat. Instead, the guy has a $10,000 bounty on his head by an actual vigilante group.

This has simply turned disgusting, based on blatant media distortions and ignoring of actual fact. I see some media outlets backtracking a bit from the crazy and ridiculous story they originally portrayed this to be. But, they still rarely talk about actual facts, and instead has turned it into a political discussion. Sad thing is....when they move on, the actual facts wont come out. And if Zimmerman is treated fairly in court, and the public never hears all of the grey in this case, and Zimmerman does 'get off' there will be absolute outrage, because all everyone is gonna remember is...the original absurd story that was being told when this went national. ie...A crazed vigilante foaming at the mouth and screaming racial epithets, stalked down and caught up to a 12 yr old baby faced boy, while the boy was crying out for help and screaming for mommy, and shot him in cold blood. And then an inept and racially biased police force showed up, told the foaming lunatic that it was self defense, slapped him on his butt and told hm to go his merry way. :/

Disturbing and disgusting dont even begin to portray how I feel the media has handled this case.

Indeed...same would apply if it were an 80 year old man.
But it appears that the shooter is totally disregarded as to whether it is justified as the one that got shot was 17
17 yes...but well capable of whipping some ass as he did whip the shooters ass....not the young innocent kid that is being portrayed but very capable young man.

IMO the shooter will not be found guilty if it is pursued....once sorting through all the bullshit there isnt much to the case...other than did the shooter have reasonable fear of his well being in jeopardy.

I hate to vote early on this one, I always error on the side of caution and give the benefit of the doubt...I do not at this time see anything that shows the shooter to be the low life murderer that he is portrayed to be.

Truth be know the guy has probably been puking his guts out as he just took a human life and is dealing with a lot of emotion at this time

 

[Jaybird]

Indeed...same would apply if it were an 80 year old man.
But it appears that the shooter is totally disregarded as to whether it is justified as the one that got shot was 17
17 yes...but well capable of whipping some ass as he did whip the shooters ass....not the young innocent kid that is being portrayed but very capable young man.

IMO the shooter will not be found guilty if it is pursued....once sorting through all the bullshit there isnt much to the case...other than did the shooter have reasonable fear of his well being was in jeopardy.

I tend to agree. I feel he would have been found not guilty as well, which is why the prosecutors were considering not charging Zimmerman. And if those screams heard on the 911 calls were actually Zimmerman, as an eye witness states, then I would certainly believe he feared for his life. A person does not scream that way unless they are actually deeply in fear. The screams sent chills into my very bones. And that is why I think that part is so important, and why the DA probably didnt want to pursue charges. If the defense can put those screams in Zimmerman's mouth, which it totally appears they can, I do not see how one could not say Zimmerman was in fear for his life. And therefore it is then self-defense.

And because of that, this is a losing case for the DA from the get go. So, if the DA did pursue charges, they would actually be putting him to trial, simply to put him through a trial. Our criminal justice system makes those decisions all the time, and that is the way it should be. It should not be up to the 'mob' what charges are filed or not.

I hate to vote early on this one, I always error on the side of caution and give the benefit of the doubt...I do not at this time see anything that shows the shooter to be the low life murderer that he is portrayed to be.

Truth be know the guy has probably been puking his guts out as he just took a human life and is dealing with a lot of emotion at this time

Exactly.

 

[Johnfromokc]

I, personally, don't think it's a racial issue. I think Zimmerman was wrong in his actions from the very beginning though.

According to usaonwatch.org:

Patrol members should be trained by law enforcement. It should be emphasized to members that they do not possess police powers and they shall not carry weapons or pursue vehicles. They should also be cautioned to alert police or deputies when encountering strange activity. Members should never confront suspicious persons who could be armed and dangerous. Patrol members can be equipped for their duties. For example, flashlights or searchlights are necessary for night patrols. Many mobile patrols use cell phones or two-way radios to contact a citizen-manned base station, which in turn contacts law enforcement officials when necessary. Remember your partnerships and ask for donations from local businesses.

IMO, he thought this didn't apply to him, why...I don't know.

Florida law states:

Florida law justifies use of deadly force when you are:

• Trying to protect yourself or another person from death or serious bodily harm;
• Trying to prevent a forcible felony, such as rape, robbery, burglary or kidnapping.

Using or displaying a handgun in any other circumstances could result in your conviction for crimes such as improper exhibition of a firearm, manslaughter, or worse.

Did he think he was at risk of death or serious bodily harm? Who knows...BUT...he saw Trayvon Martin before he called 911, he knew his size and he should have assessed what risked were involved before stepping outside of his vehicle to follow him...something he was TOLD to not do.

I believe he took comfort in the fact that he was carrying a gun, I believe that he was a cop wanna be with a temper (past criminal charges of aggression, which makes me wonder why he was even granted a gun license), and I believe he should definitely be charged/convited for this crime.

Exactly! It really is a cut and dried case. I'm still amazed at the people who are still attempting to justify Martin's killing. And all of these people who support Zimmerman thus far are known to be conservative politically. That's really sad. A human being has been killed for no good reason and people are attempting to justfy it for political reasons.

And, once again - for the record - I disagree with the notion that Zimmerman is a racist or even a bigot. I also disagree with those on the political left that are attempting to make this a race issue. It is a police incompetence issue. It is a poor decision by Zimmerman issue. It is a homocide issue.

Zimmerman needs to be charged and tried. If Zimmerman can prove his innocence in court, so be it. If he is let go, we best brace for a civil disturbance like we have not seen in decades.

 

[Mercury]

Exactly! It really is a cut and dried case. I'm still amazed at the people who are still attempting to justify Martin's killing. And all of these people who support Zimmerman thus far are known to be conservative politically. That's really sad. A human being has been killed for no good reason and people are attempting to justfy it for political reasons.

And, once again - for the record - I disagree with the notion that Zimmerman is a racist or even a bigot. I also disagree with those on the political left that are attempting to make this a race issue. It is a police incompetence issue. It is a poor decision by Zimmerman issue. It is a homocide issue.

Zimmerman needs to be charged and tried. If Zimmerman can prove his innocence in court, so be it. If he is let go, we best brace for a civil disturbance like we have not seen in decades.

I think this is a pretty well said. For what is public knowledge at this point ... it looks pretty bad for Zimmerman for not following the 911 operators instructions.

And yes ... if Zimmerman walks, there probably will be some serious civil disturbances.

 

[Jaybird]

For anyone wondering what actual Florida Laws would be applicable to this case.

The Florida Statute for Self-defense is [SIZE=-1]776.013
[/SIZE]http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html

[SIZE=-1]776.013 [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]—[/SIZE][SIZE=-1](1) [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:[/SIZE][SIZE=-1](a) [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1](b) [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1](2) [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:[/SIZE][SIZE=-1](a) [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1](b) [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]The person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1](c) [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1](d) [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1](3) [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1](4) [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1](5) [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]As used in this section, the term:[/SIZE][SIZE=-1](a) [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]“Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1](b) [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]“Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1](c) [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]“Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]

The part in red is the actual part of the code that is the SYG provision. And I agree that is not really applicable in this case. SYG is not the issue at all, as this is a case of standard self-defense, as Zimmerman could not 'retreat' at the time of the attack.

Now, the part of Florida Law that is very applicable to this case is codified in another section entirely. And it is the reason Zimmerman was not arrested, if the prosecution saw no reason to proceed further.

[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]776.032 [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.[/SIZE][SIZE=-1]—[/SIZE][SIZE=-1](1) [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1](2) [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but 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.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1](3) [/SIZE][SIZE=-1]The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).[/SIZE]

[SIZE=-1]
[/SIZE]http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?mode=View Statutes&SubMenu=1&App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=776.032&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.032.html
[SIZE=-1]
And that is the way it should be. It is simply protecting people that use justifiable self-defense from having to deal with prosecutors that want to use a "lock em up and let the chips fall where they will" mentality when they have no evidence to say the shooting was not self-defense. But it is NOT a shoot first and ask questions later law like some like to portray for political reasons. It simply says that unless the Prosecution can show just cause to bring charges, it can not. Now if a Prosecution tried to bring charges anyways? The matter would be decided by a judge in a pre-trial hearing.

Do some not like that part of Florida statute? Certainly. And you can argue it all you want. But I personally do not want prosecutors to use a "lock em up and let the chips fall where they will" mentality. If they have evidence that can justify a shooting was not self-defense, you wont be prosecuted. If there is evidence to say it was not justified? Well, then let the chips fall where they may. *shrug*

Could there be changes coming to Florida statute because of this case? Possibly. Can it adversely effect self defense in this state? Possibly. But I would rather that occur, than fry some guy that had a justifiable right to use self-defense. As I said, it would be far easier for me, to not care if this guy is charged and convicted of a crime. But that doesnt mean it is right, or okay...by law on the books right now.


[/SIZE]

 

[The Man]

I tend to agree. I feel he would have been found not guilty as well, which is why the prosecutors were considering not charging Zimmerman. And if those screams heard on the 911 calls were actually Zimmerman, as an eye witness states, then I would certainly believe he feared for his life. A person does not scream that way unless they are actually deeply in fear. The screams sent chills into my very bones. And that is why I think that part is so important, and why the DA probably didnt want to pursue charges. If the defense can put those screams in Zimmerman's mouth, which it totally appears they can, I do not see how one could not say Zimmerman was in fear for his life. And therefore it is then self-defense.

And because of that, this is a losing case for the DA from the get go. So, if the DA did pursue charges, they would actually be putting him to trial, simply to put him through a trial. Our criminal justice system makes those decisions all the time, and that is the way it should be. It should not be up to the 'mob' what charges are filed or not.


Exactly.

I think the early investigations shown that he was indeed,in fear,and was assaulted as evidenced by witness account,abrasions and that he was assaulted and his clothes showing he had been on his back.

I can very well see where fear comes into play here....and having to make that decision.

I am only speculating/but I suspect the shooter did approach the guy/the young man got mouthy and saw the watchman as an authority figure such as the "po po"..some words were ex changed ,then the event.



I have been in gated communities it is very common to be approached and asked some basic questions to see if the person is a guest etc."havent see you around who are you with?"

Just reply "Yeah am over at such and such for the day..we are doing cooking some steaks tonight, little reunion."
I can see how a watchman could very well be in fear of his life if attacked for asking such a question

 

[Jaybird]

I think the early investigations shown that he was indeed,in fear,and was assaulted as evidenced by witness account,abrasions and that he was assaulted and his clothes showing he had been on his back.

I can very well see where fear comes into play here....and having to make that decision.

I am only speculating/but I suspect the shooter did approach the guy/the young man got mouthy and saw the watchman as an authority figure such as the "po po"..some words were ex changed ,then the event.



I have been in gated communities it is very common to be approached and asked some basic questions to see if the person is a guest etc."havent see you around who are you with?"

Just reply "Yeah am over at such and such for the day..we are doing cooking some steaks tonight, little reunion."
I can see how a watchman could very well be in fear of his life if attacked for asking such a question

And all of that may have happened. I am not saying it did or did not. We really do not know. The actual 'confrontation' could have happened any number of ways. Me personally though? If Zimmerman had stopped Martin to question him? Then I dont think it is as clear cut imo as to a self-defense claim. It still could be though. I just dont know. I wasn't there. But if he did actually stop and question Martin first, that was a very very very stupid thing to do by Zimmerman. Criminal? Probably not.

Would it remove his right to self defense if actually physically attacked?? That would be the ultimate question. And IDK what the answer to that would be, but it would be a very interesting case study, and would probably go up the ladder to at least the FL Supreme Court, possibly higher. If Zimmerman IS ultimately charged and convicted because of such a situation? We could be seeing a landmark case study on self-defense laws in this country in the making. I hope, that is all the outcome would be from this case, but there are many other possibly far worse outcomes that can come out of this case. :/

 

[Mercury]

I can see how a watchman could very well be in fear of his life if attacked for asking such a question

This is a valid point as well.

I guess it boils down to, did Zimmerman act overly aggressive towards Martin or did Martin act overly aggressive with Zimmerman? Which of the two acted outside of law first?

I still can't help but have a gut feeling that this whole thing could have been avoided if Zimmerman would have just kept his distance while on the phone with 911 and allow the authorities to handle it.