**Official** Trayvon Martin thread

[moo]

when zimmerman first called the police, he was very descriptive, sentences were long & he was cooperative. zimmerman was paying attention to both trayvon and the dispatcher. when that dispatcher told zimmerman to stop following he became upset. his answers were very SHORT.
yea yea
yep
mmmok
he sounded distracted then when he finally caught up with trayvon he said "LET ME CALL YOU BACK" if trayvon was a danger to that neighborhood he would've stayed on that phone to have the dispatcher document everything that happened like the other 911 calls.

they didn't say "LET ME CALL YOU BACK" they stayed on the phone to give out as much information as they could until they thought it was safe to hang up.

zimmerman didn't stay on the line because he found trayvon and didn't want to be recorded starting a fight.

 

[Kregisen]

It's insane that a story like this makes national headlines for an entire month when there are dozens of murders in this nation every day. If the media wasn't racist, they wouldn't only report stories where blacks are hurt by non-blacks. This is simply the truth, there's not really any refuting it. I see murders on the local news in phoenix every couple days. The media wants to live out their racism fetishes for whatever reason and it's b.s.

I don't know much about this story. From what I've read, according to police reports the kid started beating the man first. If that's true, is deadly force in self-defense warranted? I think if I was getting my head smashed into the ground, I would fear for my life and kill the person too. It's insane to see hundreds of people gathering in marches accross the country for something like this where there are real issues out there today.

 

[Anti Federalist]

I think folks are just making shit up at this point.

You may be right, I'll see if anybody posts anything credible to suggest that is what happened.

My understanding all along has been:

Martin was walking home, probably looking "thuggish".

Zimmerman spots him and starts to follow him through the neighborhood.

Zimmerman calls 911 and reports what he sees while following Martin around.

Zimmerman gets out of his car and starts following Martin on foot, they have some sort of non physical encounter, after which, Martin leaves.

Zimmerman follows Martin and at this point, 911 dispatch tells him "we don't need you to do that".

It is at this point, if all of the above is correct, that Zimmerman loses his justification for any use of deadly force.

There was no imminent threat to life or limb, the alleged aggressor was leaving the area and he was advised to not follow him.

Zimmerman catches up to Martin, there is a second confrontation that turns physical, Zimmerman is getting badly beaten, draws his weapon and shoots Martin dead.

 

[jmdrake]

So if a Police Officer follows somebody on a public street, and then "confronts" them by asking them what they are doing, your position is the person being asked has the right to start beating the living shit out of the officer, and then if the officer shoots him the officer has no self defense claim? I hate the cops more than anybody, but that is just insane. Everybody has the perfect right to follow a stranger and ask them a question, even cops. The stranger has the perfect right to tell them to buzz off. They don't have the right to attack them. If they do, the questioner has the right to respond with deadly force.

1) Why do you and others keep assuming that all Zimmerman did was "talk" to Trayvon? Because Zimmerman said so? You're just going to ignore the contradictory evidence?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/20/trayvon-martin-death-phone-call

2) In the case of a police officer he's supposed to identify himself. That at the very least puts the citizen on notice that he's being confronted by somebody armed. There is no record or even any claim that I've seen of Zimmerman saying anything like. "Excuse me. I'm neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman. I'm just out trying to make sure everyone is safe. Could you tell me who you are?" As far as Trayvon knew Zimmerman was a gang banger wondering why he (Trayvon) was on his "turf".

 

[Anti Federalist]

2) In the case of a police officer he's supposed to identify himself. That at the very least puts the citizen on notice that he's being confronted by somebody armed. There is no record or even any claim that I've seen of Zimmerman saying anything like. "Excuse me. I'm neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman. I'm just out trying to make sure everyone is safe. Could you tell me who you are?" As far as Trayvon knew Zimmerman was a gang banger wondering why he (Trayvon) was on his "turf".

Valid point.

 

[RonPaulMall]

Zimmerman follows Martin and at this point, 911 dispatch tells him "we don't need you to do that".

It is at this point, if all of the above is correct, that Zimmerman loses his justification for any use of deadly force.

Again, completely, 100% utterly false. Back up your statement with statutory language to support your assertion, or stop posting in this thread. There is enough disinformation going around. People like you are just egging the lynch mob on.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Young black men are by far the greatest danger to other young black men.

It's insane that a story like this makes national headlines for an entire month when there are dozens of murders in this nation every day. If the media wasn't racist, they wouldn't only report stories where blacks are hurt by non-blacks. This is simply the truth, there's not really any refuting it. I see murders on the local news in phoenix every couple days. The media wants to live out their racism fetishes for whatever reason and it's b.s.

I don't know much about this story. From what I've read, according to police reports the kid started beating the man first. If that's true, is deadly force in self-defense warranted? I think if I was getting my head smashed into the ground, I would fear for my life and kill the person too. It's insane to see hundreds of people gathering in marches accross the country for something like this where there are real issues out there today.

 

[RonPaulMall]

1) Why do you and others keep assuming that all Zimmerman did was "talk" to Trayvon? Because Zimmerman said so? You're just going to ignore the contradictory evidence?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/mar/20/trayvon-martin-death-phone-call

I assume it because that is what Zimmerman said and there is no evidence to contradict it. I read the entire article you linked, and nothing in that article suggests Zimmerman's account is untrue. The burden of probable cause falls on the state. Without any evidence or reasonable belief Zimmerman committed a crime, they are prohibited from making an arrest.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Quote Originally Posted by Anti Federalist

Zimmerman follows Martin and at this point, 911 dispatch tells him "we don't need you to do that".

It is at this point, if all of the above is correct, that Zimmerman loses his justification for any use of deadly force.

Again, completely, 100% utterly false. Back up your statement with statutory language to support your assertion, or stop posting in this thread. There is enough disinformation going around. People like you are just egging the lynch mob on.

From the state of Florida's CCW legal web page.


Also, if the criminal runs away, you cannot use deadly force to stop him, because you would no longer be "preventing" a crime. If use of deadly force is not necessary, or you use deadly force after the crime has stopped, you could be convicted of manslaughter.

http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/weapons/self_defense.html



I have in no way way "egged on" a lynch mob.

And I will not be told where and when I can post.

Get over yourself and your emotions.

 

[Kregisen]

From the state of Florida's CCW legal web page.


A. A license to carry a concealed weapon does not make you a free-lance policeman. But, as stated earlier, deadly force is justified if you are trying to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.

The use of deadly force must be absolutely necessary to prevent the crime.

Also, if the criminal runs away, you cannot use deadly force to stop him, because you would no longer be "preventing" a crime. If use of deadly force is not necessary, or you use deadly force after the crime has stopped, you could be convicted of manslaughter.

http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/wea...f_defense.html

Florida law also provides that the use of deadly force is not justified if the defendant is charged with an independent forcible felony, and the defendant was attempting to commit a felony or the defendant initially provoked the use of force against himself.

http://www.criminaldefenseattorneyta...lfDefense.aspx

This is not what your other post said. Your other post said if Martin walked away, and Zimmerman ran after him. If Martin then attacked Zimmerman after Zimmerman followed him a 2nd time, of course it is justified deadly force.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

No, nothing happened at all to him until this media/government circus sprang up, (which I remain convinced was pre-meditated and well planned and not accidental).

That's a crazy conspiracy! Politics never have a bearing on what stories are covered by our unbiased media. Now excuse me while I do what millions of other outraged citizens are doing because of this story, and donate some money to the Obama re-election fund.

zimmerman did not stop following him. he LIED. you can hear it in his voice he was still looking for him.

Wow, you're as good as the guy from the TV show "Lie to Me".

 

[Anti Federalist]

This is not what your other post said. Your other post said if Martin walked away, and Zimmerman ran after him. If Martin then attacked Zimmerman after Zimmerman followed him a 2nd time, of course it is justified deadly force.

No, not if Zimmerman had followed.

If he was just sitting there in his car, or walking away, the second time, then it would be justified.

 

[Kregisen]

No, not if Zimmerman had followed.

If he was just sitting there in his car, or walking away, the second time, then it would be justified.

Where do you get the information that says that if you follow a suspect a 2nd time and he attacks you, you are not justified in deadly force?

 

[TheeJoeGlass]

From the state of Florida's CCW legal web page.


Also, if the criminal runs away, you cannot use deadly force to stop him, because you would no longer be "preventing" a crime. If use of deadly force is not necessary, or you use deadly force after the crime has stopped, you could be convicted of manslaughter.

http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/weapons/self_defense.html



I have in no way way "egged on" a lynch mob.

And I will not be told where and when I can post.

Get over yourself and your emotions.

Trayvon wasn't a criminal until he assaulted Zimmerman which is what the eye witness and police deptartment believe happend. Nothing before the point that Trayvon makes contact which is proven by the eye witness was a crime. Zimmerman was not wrong for asking questions, Martin was not wrong for being black or running away. The only thing that matters is who fired the first shot. If the eye witness who is also black was lying or recants his story, Zimmerman is dog meat. He won't last two days in the federal pen.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Where do you get the information that says that if you follow a suspect a 2nd time and he attacks you, you are not justified in deadly force?

You just quoted it.

Martin was leaving, he was walking away and no crime had been committed by him.

If you follow after somebody and then it results in a deadly encounter, when, had you just let them leave nothing would have happened, you don't have legal DF justification. You, in the eyes of the law have now become the instigator.

This is CCW law 101.

 

[jmdrake]

I assume it because that is what Zimmerman said and there is no evidence to contradict it. I read the entire article you linked, and nothing in that article suggests Zimmerman's account is untrue. The burden of probable cause falls on the state. Without any evidence or reasonable belief Zimmerman committed a crime, they are prohibited from making an arrest.

The article I linked to provides evidence that some kind of altercation occurred before Zimmerman was on the ground getting what may have been a well deserved beating. If you can't see it...well you just can't see. And there is probable cause for an arrest simply by the fact that Trayvon is dead. Self defense is an affirmative defense. It does not negate the initial probable cause. As an attorney you should know that. Sure at trial the state would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman was not acting in self defense. But that's not the probable cause standard.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Trayvon wasn't a criminal until he assaulted Zimmerman which is what the eye witness and police deptartment believe happend. Nothing before the point that Trayvon makes contact which is proven by the eye witness was a crime. Zimmerman was not wrong for asking questions, Martin was not wrong for being black or running away. The only thing that matters is who fired the first shot. If the eye witness who is also black was lying or recants his story, Zimmerman is dog meat. He won't last two days in the federal pen.

I suspect this poor bastard is dog meat anyway.

It will all hinge on exactly when and where the second encounter took place.

 

[TheeJoeGlass]

Where do you get the information that says that if you follow a suspect a 2nd time and he attacks you, you are not justified in deadly force?

Because both men retreated. The second that Zimmerman was told to stop and lost Martin, that encounter was a lawful encounter as both men exercised their right to jet. If Zimmerman continued to follow, and if that can be proven, then he is in big trouble.

 

[TheeJoeGlass]

I suspect this poor bastard is dog meat anyway.

It will all hinge on exactly when and where the second encounter took place.

Agreed. I have a lot of respect for your opinion and knowledge.

 

[Anti Federalist]

Because both men retreated. The second that Zimmerman was told to stop and lost Martin, that encounter was a lawful encounter as both men exercised their right to jet. If Zimmerman continued to follow, and if that can be proven, then he is in big trouble.

Exactly.

If that's the case or not remains to be seen, but it seems to be, based on what's been released so far.