Neighborhood watch captain kills black teen - doesn't get arrested

[iceberg]

Zimmerman traced the tweets — which he said have been retweeted by actor-director Spike Lee — to a man in California. Zimmerman has implored the man to stop and said he received this response, "Black power all day. No justice, no peace" and an obscenity.

http://blog.ctnews.com/hottopics/2012/03/28/spike-lee-retweets-wrong-george-zimmerman’s-address/

a "george zimmerman" did live there in 1995 briefly, but not the shooter.

 

[Romo_To_Dez]

Arrested and charged for what exactly? Defending himself against his attacker? I don't think so.

A grand jury may still indict him so we will have to wait and see.

The New Investigator will agree or disagree with you on whether or not Trayvon was the attacker or if Zimmerman used reasonable force.


If the screams on the tape on Trayvon then what? When Zimmerman defenders still see him as an someone who attacked out of aggression?

 

[WoodysGirl]

Zimmerman traced the tweets — which he said have been retweeted by actor-director Spike Lee — to a man in California. Zimmerman has implored the man to stop and said he received this response, "Black power all day. No justice, no peace" and an obscenity.

http://blog.ctnews.com/hottopics/2012/03/28/spike-lee-retweets-wrong-george-zimmerman’s-address/

a "george zimmerman" did live there in 1995 briefly, but not the shooter.

Spike was wrong and that other guy is an outright idiot.

I believe he should be arrested.

 

[iceberg]

Spike was wrong and that other guy is an outright idiot.

I believe he should be arrested.

100% agreed.

 

[Romo_To_Dez]

Zimmerman traced the tweets — which he said have been retweeted by actor-director Spike Lee — to a man in California. Zimmerman has implored the man to stop and said he received this response, "Black power all day. No justice, no peace" and an obscenity.

http://blog.ctnews.com/hottopics/2012/03/28/spike-lee-retweets-wrong-george-zimmerman’s-address/

a "george zimmerman" did live there in 1995 briefly, but not the shooter.

Of course Spike Lee thinks that there is one George Zimmerman in the world, just like others think that there is only one person by the name of Trayvon Martin.

Spike Lee needs to stop and turn to opposing annoying Basketball players at Knicks games.

 

[Brian_C82]

Well, the law also happens to agree that fists vs. pistol is not equal force.

Absolutely wrong. If you're justified in using deadly force, it doesn't matter what weapon you use as long as it's legal. There have been many, many cases of police using their guns against people who were armed with nothing but their fists. If fists are used as a deadly weapon, then they can be countered with a deadly weapon. It doesn't matter if Zimmerman used a swiss army knife or a 44 magnum.

You also still, in public, have the duty to retreat. Zimmerman had a truck - why did he get out of his truck?

Uh, because that's what neighborhood watch people do all the time? Zimmerman had every right to follow Trayvon and observe his actions. You don't waive your right to self defense by getting out of your car. The Stand Your Ground law still applies in this case, as Zimmerman's lawyer pointed out.

It's kind of amusing how Trayvon's supporters keep talking about the "duty to retreat". That's precisely what Zimmerman was doing when Trayvon attacked him. Zimmerman was walking back to his truck when Trayvon confronted him, exchanged words, and started throwing punches. Trayvon started the altercation, initiated the use of deadly force, and didn't give Zimmerman the option to retreat by pinning him to the ground. He sealed his own fate with a series of poor decisions.

 

[JBond]

So am I.

"The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated without any design to effect death . . . is murder in the third degree and constitutes a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084." Title XLVI, Sec. 782.04 Crimes, Homicide (2011).

I am no lawyer, but isn't the key word there unlawful? Is there such a thing as a lawful shooting? Self defense? I don't know so I am asking. I much more familiar with Kansas law regarding lawful use of a fire arm. They drill it into you during the CC training.

 

[JBond]

Some think that Zimmerman had a reason to fear for his life. Because I guess they think that Trayvon was viciously beating Zimmerman and would have kept going until Zimmerman was dead.

I'm assuming that this is Zimmerman's defense and his only defense because Trayvon was unarmed. So Zimmerman;s lawyer will try to convince the jury that Trayvon's fists could have been deadly weapons.

Does Zimmerman have any medical records to prove his injuries or would it just end up as hear say in court?

I agree that a gun against fists is not equal force. Zimmerman was that overpowered that he couldn't have punched back or pushed Trayvon off of him?

Again you are light on the details. He did not use just his fists. He was bashing the guys head into the concrete and trying to take his gun. It is completely reasonable to believe your life is in danger in such a circumstance. If TM had not attacked him none of this would never have happened.

How many times would your head have to be bashed against the concrete before you became a little concerned?

 

[03EBZ06]

I love how Zimmerman defenders blasting those who are defending TM for jumping into conclusion and yet they know for certain that TM attacked GZ and that is was an act of self defense solely based on one person's account who could say whatever to himself in a positive light and he has no one to refute his story right now.

We simply don't know for certain what took place, we don't know for certain who initiated physical altercation. Zimmerman may or may not be telling the truth, we don't know that for certain. smh

 

[iceberg]

I love how Zimmerman defenders blasting those who are defending TM for jumping into conclusion and yet they know for certain that TM attacked GZ and that is was an act of self defense solely based on one person's account who could say whatever to himself in a positive light and he has no one to refute his story right now.

We simply don't know for certain what took place, we don't know for certain who initiated physical altercation. Zimmerman may or may not be telling the truth, we don't know that for certain. smh

i see more people looking / waiting for ALL evidence before defending anyone.

 

[casmith07]

Absolutely wrong. If you're justified in using deadly force, it doesn't matter what weapon you use as long as it's legal. There have been many, many cases of police using their guns against people who were armed with nothing but their fists. If fists are used as a deadly weapon, then they can be countered with a deadly weapon. It doesn't matter if Zimmerman used a swiss army knife or a 44 magnum.

I have studied/am studying criminal law as my primary focus, and have tried a handful of cases pro hac vice. You're wrong.

Uh, because that's what neighborhood watch people do all the time? Zimmerman had every right to follow Trayvon and observe his actions. You don't waive your right to self defense by getting out of your car. The Stand Your Ground law still applies in this case, as Zimmerman's lawyer pointed out.

It's kind of amusing how Trayvon's supporters keep talking about the "duty to retreat". That's precisely what Zimmerman was doing when Trayvon attacked him. Zimmerman was walking back to his truck when Trayvon confronted him, exchanged words, and started throwing punches. Trayvon started the altercation, initiated the use of deadly force, and didn't give Zimmerman the option to retreat by pinning him to the ground. He sealed his own fate with a series of poor decisions.

Every neighborhood watch that I've ever known has been the "eyes" for the police (hence the eye logo). They are not law enforcement, and are not to take the law into their own hands, especially with someone just walking down the street.

I guess I'm going to need to post my explanation of self-defense as an affirmative defense, burden of proof, duty to retreat, etc. to include the history behind the common law roots of self-defense.

 

[Romo_To_Dez]

Again you are light on the details. He did not use just his fists. He was bashing the guys head into the concrete and trying to take his gun. It is completely reasonable to believe your life is in danger in such a circumstance. If TM had not attacked him none of this would never have happened.

How many times would your head have to be bashed against the concrete before you became a little concerned?

We don't know if Zimmerman just walked back to his truck. Of course Zimmerman like anyone else who doesn't want to go to jail for murder or manslaughter will lie and twist the account of things to their defense.

If Zimmerman wants to get off he is not going to be honest about attacking Trayvon if he did make any kind of physical contact with Trayvon to have the tables turn on him and have Trayvon get the upper hand.

I'm not saying that Zimmerman is lying, but it's not like the word of the killer should always be trusted, because lots of people convicted of murder have lied about how the killing happened and others flat out deny all together that they did it.

The New Investigators will decide if Zimmerman can remain a free man , not just with the "Evidence" that the SPD has leaked out on Zimmerman's side with information that they aren't even suppose to end up leaking. But are doing it to try to clear their name

 

[casmith07]

I am no lawyer, but isn't the key word there unlawful? Is there such a thing as a lawful shooting? Self defense? I don't know so I am asking. I much more familiar with Kansas law regarding lawful use of a fire arm. They drill it into you during the CC training.

Edit: every word is a key word

A lawful shooting would be if you were threatened with deadly force by way of a gun, and you used your own gun to defend yourself.

The courts have even held (Supreme Court of Florida, I might add) that "warning shots" are insufficient to satisfy the deadly force requirement in order to activate the self-defense immunity for the use of deadly force to protect yourself or others. There was a specific case where a guy was attempting to pistol whip another guy in his own car and the gun discharged, causing a death, and they said self-defense didn't count and affirmed judgment for the negligent homicide.

 

[03EBZ06]

i see more people looking / waiting for ALL evidence before defending anyone.

Then my comment doesn't apply to them since they are not ardent GZ or TM supporters

 

[JBond]

We simply don't know for certain what took place, we don't know for certain who initiated physical altercation. Zimmerman may or may not be telling the truth, we don't know that for certain. smh

Too bad everyone did not have that attitude early. Instead the were led around like children by the media and told what to believe. And the ate up every word because it aligned with their world view. Even my more conservative friends on the site were ready to hang Zimmerman. A few have come back to reality and realize more info is needed.

 

[casmith07]

We don't know if Zimmerman just walked back to his truck.

This is all that I'm hoping to help people to understand. The evidence (which none of us would be privy to anyway, as we aren't on the federal investigation team nor will any of us be in the courtroom) is not there yet, and all of these "stories" that people are choosing to believe are largely based on confirmation bias.

What we do know is that Zimmerman followed Martin, was told not to follow him by the 911 operator, and that ultimately Martin, who was not armed, was shot and killed by Zimmerman.

Everything else inbetween is he said/he said and none of it is fact. All I'm hoping to do is to help people to better understand the law so that if and when the facts of the investigation do come out, people have a greater understanding of the situation as a whole and a better appreciation for the law and the legal system.

 

[JBond]

A lawful shooting would be if you were threatened with deadly force by way of a gun, and you used your own gun to defend yourself.

The courts have even held (Supreme Court of Florida, I might add) that "warning shots" are insufficient to satisfy the deadly force requirement in order to activate the self-defense immunity for the use of deadly force to protect yourself or others. There was a specific case where a guy was attempting to pistol whip another guy in his own car and the gun discharged, causing a death, and they said self-defense didn't count and affirmed judgment for the negligent homicide.

Interesting...Thanks casmith07

 

[JBond]

I have studied/am studying criminal law as my primary focus, and have tried a handful of cases pro hac vice. You're wrong.



Every neighborhood watch that I've ever known has been the "eyes" for the police (hence the eye logo). They are not law enforcement, and are not to take the law into their own hands, especially with someone just walking down the street.

I guess I'm going to need to post my explanation of self-defense as an affirmative defense, burden of proof, duty to retreat, etc. to include the history behind the common law roots of self-defense.

I have been a part of several watch programs and it was not unusual to ask strangers in the neighborhood what they were doing. Most of the time they were friends or relatives of someone living there and said so. Not a single time did they attack me. My point being, yes we are eyes for the police but that does not preclude us from saying "Hi, are you new to the neighborhood?"

 

[Doomsday101]

Too bad everyone did not have that attitude early. Instead the were led around like children by the media and told what to believe. And the ate up every word because it aligned with their world view. Even my more conservative friends on the site were ready to hang Zimmerman. A few have come back to reality and realize more info is needed.

I admit given the 1st reports I was sold that Zimmerman was guilty as could be. I don't feel good about that. As more info came out so has my doubt of what took place.

At this stage I'm not proclaiming innocent or guilt I want to see a full investigation and justice served but that is justice based on facts.

Like many I sometimes will forget we are innocent until proven guilty it is one of the most basic rights we have.

 

[casmith07]

I have been a part of several watch programs and it was not unusual to ask strangers in the neighborhood what they were doing. Most of the time they were friends or relatives of someone living there and said so. Not a single time did they attack me. My point being, yes we are eyes for the police but that does not preclude us from saying "Hi, are you new to the neighborhood?"

Absolutely correct. It also prevents you from calling the police with frivolous complaints. If someone strange is walking through, and you ask them what they're doing and they don't have a good reason, then you can call the police with that information.

It would be embarrassing to call the police on your new neighbors