Teenager killed by neighborhood watch captain

[onlyrp]

Indeed. The problem is you set up a false premise. The Police did investigate the Zimmerman shooting.

Yeah, but you see? You can't convince a conspiracy theorist that the police did their jobs, because police are always experts and incriminating any saint that crosses paths with them, so obviously if a person's isn't found guilty, it's false investigation.

They interviewed him, and found his story credible.

Which is what we're told in the liberty movement NEVER to believe. The police never believe what people say and they always do the wrong thing, if they arrest somebody, he's innocent, if they don't, he's guilty.

They examined the physical evidence, which was consistent with Zimmerman's testimony. They interviewed neighbors, most of whom were unhelpful but to the extent they could add anything, they tended to corroborate what Zimmerman said. Having no evidence that a crime was committed, the police made no arrests. That doesn't mean if evidence does turn up later they won't reconsider that position. But for now they have no cause to move forward. If you found yourself in your hypothetical alleyway situation, you'd be treated exactly the same.

or as a conspiracy theorist would say "they said they did it".

 

[Brian4Liberty]

I can't tell if you're sarcastic. You're suggesting that people shouldn't use their guns and instincts, and rely on the police?

Yes, it was sarcasm.

 

[Anti Federalist]

The law on this:

Q. When can I use my handgun to protect myself?

A. 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.

Example of the kind of attack that will not justify defending yourself with deadly force: Two neighbors got into a fight, and one of them tried to hit the other by swinging a garden hose. The neighbor who was being attacked with the hose shot the other in the chest. The court upheld his conviction for aggravated battery with a firearm, because an attack with a garden hose is not the kind of violent assault that justifies responding with deadly force.


Q. What if I see a crime being committed?

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/weapons/self_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.criminaldefenseattorneytampa.com/FloridaDefenses/DeadlyForceSelfDefense.aspx

From the facts presented thus far:

A - Zimmerman played free lance cop by following Martin AFTER being told to stand down.

B - Martin was unarmed and was committing no violent felony during the time Zimmerman had him "under surveillance".

C - A fistfight with a minor does not rise to the level of threat that would justify the use of deadly force.

He was unjustified, under current Stand Your Ground Florida law, in responding with deadly force, based on the facts as they appear now.

 

[BamaAla]

The law on this:

That's all well and good, but without case law adjudicated under comparable specific circumstances, it's as useless as tits on a boar hog.

Sit tight, chances are there will be a trial and we can put RPF lawyering and speculation behind us...for the most part; I wouldn't want to be tasked with finding an unbiased jury for this one!

 

[tod evans]

Sit tight, chances are there will be a trial and we can put RPF lawyering and speculation behind us...for the most part; I wouldn't want to be tasked with finding an unbiased jury for this one!

I'll bet ya' one cyber-dollar that this never sees a jury.

 

[Noble Savage]

16 year old shoots 5 other teens
http://www.fox59.com/news/wxin-dait...o-be-tried-as-adult-20120323,0,7022587.column
State Trooper saves one of the teenagers
http://www.fox59.com/news/wxin-stat...hooting-victims-life-20120325,0,3025187.story

 

[MelissaWV]

The law on this:





From the facts presented thus far:

A - Zimmerman played free lance cop by following Martin AFTER being told to stand down.

B - Martin was unarmed and was committing no violent felony during the time Zimmerman had him "under surveillance".

C - A fistfight with a minor does not rise to the level of threat that would justify the use of deadly force.

He was unjustified, under current Stand Your Ground Florida law, in responding with deadly force, based on the facts as they appear now.

Silly AF... laws are for chumps. Don't you know the guy said it was self-defense?

It will actually all hinge, just like in ding-dong-ditch, on whether or not it is considered two events... or one continuing event.

I love the people going "don't worry; this will go to trial eventually." It's the worst of both worlds: people who think he's guilty of a crime, but also don't want him to await trial by being arrested first.

As for me not wanting people to defend themselves, I'm all for it. I'm glad at the fundamental premise of Stand Your Ground, which is that you are not required to "attempt to flee." That was retarded at best. However, you are also not protected if you pursue. The idea that the police examined all the physical evidence, including ballistics and forensics, and that they interviewed all the witnesses (several have come forward in the past pair of weeks), and that they reviewed phone records and 9-1-1 tapes, all on the scene when they made the determination that Zimmerman was covered... I mean these guys are AMAZING! Please ignore, though, the reports that they coached witnesses, did not do a tox screen (standard procedure in these cases, btw), and anything else that makes Zimmerman anything less than a scared, feeble, pudgy guy with a gun defending himself from a towering thug with gold teeth and ink.

Seriously, those of you thinking THAT standpoint is "right" are being just as ridiculous as the ones touting Martin as a perfect angel who was just minding his own business when he was shot to death by a malicious, evil, racist vigilante.

 

[JenArt]

Wait. This is a gated community; Zimmerman has been captain of the Community Watch for how long, and has made how many calls to police since January? And yet he gave the reason that he stopped his vehicle to get out as…..needing to check a street sign. Am I the only one who finds that incredibly odd? Right there, his story loses credibility, at least for me. There is no way in hell that’s a convincing argument behind his motive for stopping and leaving his vehicle.

 

[Anti Federalist]

That's all well and good, but without case law adjudicated under comparable specific circumstances, it's as useless as tits on a boar hog.

Sit tight, chances are there will be a trial and we can put RPF lawyering and speculation behind us...for the most part; I wouldn't want to be tasked with finding an unbiased jury for this one!

Many of us carry sidearms, myself included.

I should have stayed out of these threads, as I stated right at the start.

But I've seen an awful lot of disinformation thrown out there as to what the law states on this.

Just like my constant preaching to STFU when confronted by cops, all I'm trying to do is make people aware of the law and keep fellow patriots out of prison.

 

[MelissaWV]

Maybe I'll have better luck in this thread, but I can't seem to get an answer as to how someone gets tackled/cold-cocked from behind, but lands on their back and has a broken nose, and no publicized (Zimmerman's camp is the one that really put the injuries out there) wounds consistent with being tackled from behind and knocked onto his front/side.

Then, without getting his clothes dirty, he rolled over to face his attacker, who then broke his nose in an attempt to get at the firearm Zimmerman was wearing but had holstered, because he obviously did not have it out when he was knocked over or earlier in the series of events, but Martin knew it was there and went for it anyhow in order to use it.

Sounds... right?

 

[kylejack]

Maybe I'll have better luck in this thread, but I can't seem to get an answer as to how someone gets tackled/cold-cocked from behind, but lands on their back and has a broken nose, and no publicized (Zimmerman's camp is the one that really put the injuries out there) wounds consistent with being tackled from behind and knocked onto his front/side.

Because that isn't what happened. The altercation took place behind the townhomes, as reported by numerous witnesses that called 911. "They're yelling behind my house." Zimmerman said, "You go past the clubhouse and make a left" and "I don't know the address, because it's a cut-through." He's referring to the sidewalk that goes between the units. Zimmerman was probably parked on Retreat View Circle, watching people come in and decide who looked suspicious.

The address the police report states is 1213 Twin Trees, so it's right behind one of those houses on east side of Twin Trees.

There's no way he was walking back to his car. The girlfriend said she overheard the start of their conversation.

Martin: "Why are you following me?"
Zimmerman: "What are you doing here?"

There's no way Zimmerman was surprised from behind.

 

[MelissaWV]

Yeah, after some searching I did find a better (non-speculative) account of how it happened. This "he was going back to his car and got jumped from behind" meme has been circulating quite quickly since yesterday. It makes Zimmerman out to be a shocked little angel, just as initial reports made it seem like Zimmerman was an evil racist who shot the kid in cold blood without a second thought.

The truth usually lies at neither pole, which is why this is thankfully now going to a grand jury.

 

[RonPaulMall]

The law on this:

C - A fistfight with a minor does not rise to the level of threat that would justify the use of deadly force.

He was unjustified, under current Stand Your Ground Florida law, in responding with deadly force, based on the facts as they appear now.

Your first points are irrelevant. Your last point is simply untrue. There is an eyewitness that reports Zimmerman on his back, screaming for help, with Martin on top of him punching him. That Zimmerman would reasonably fear great bodily harm in such a situation is not even subject to debate. If Martin initiated the attack, there was no crime. The only question that needs to be gotten to the bottom of is who attacked who. And that is something for an investigation, not a trial.

 

[GraniteHills]

Apart from thinking Zimmerman engaged in the kind of preventive violence RPers decry when tyrant-criminals like Obama and Bush do it, the more compelling thing is (as others have mentioned) the media virus the Obama Regime has spread:

The president came out nearly 2 weeks after the incident to publicize and comment on said incident. It was a DOA story for 2 weeks except on websites like this one.
The president calling attention to the story came at the same time Holder's anti-gun "brainwashing" quote came out.
Critical mass: get gun control back in the discussion, find incendiary story to exploit for political purposes.

This is a pretty blatant anti-gun narrative, in the thick of election season, complete with racial overtones for added explosive/indignant spiciness.

 

[Gary4Liberty]

Police came upon a dead body. The protocol in such a situation is not to arrest everybody within earshot of the body, but rather, to conduct an investigation to see if a crime was committed. The shooter reported to them his version of events, which if true would have indicated no crime was committed. The physical evidence and all other witnesses were consistent with the shooter's story. It is not an issue of "taking his word for it". He was the only eyewitness to the shooting. His testimony is the most crucial piece of evidence they have. Of course they are going to consider it when trying to determine what happened.

And Will Smith's analogy is a perfect example of the kind of knee jerk, unthinking analysis surrounding this case. Throwing flour on somebody is a crime. Killing someone who attacks you is not.

There is a record of what happened BEFORE the shooting that SCREAMS probable cause for murder. A man carrying a loaded gun admits to stalking another person who he considers a threat. When the kid reacts to defend himself, he is shot by the stalker. How is that self defense? The only one defending himself and fighting for his life is the kid. Zimmerman made his intentions clear. He was armed, he was stalking and following and getting closer. His intention is clear. It is probable that he provoked the kid to justify shooting him. Arrest him now!!

 

[Gary4Liberty]

Maybe I'll have better luck in this thread, but I can't seem to get an answer as to how someone gets tackled/cold-cocked from behind, but lands on their back and has a broken nose, and no publicized (Zimmerman's camp is the one that really put the injuries out there) wounds consistent with being tackled from behind and knocked onto his front/side.

Then, without getting his clothes dirty, he rolled over to face his attacker, who then broke his nose in an attempt to get at the firearm Zimmerman was wearing but had holstered, because he obviously did not have it out when he was knocked over or earlier in the series of events, but Martin knew it was there and went for it anyhow in order to use it.

Sounds... right?

since when is it unreasonable to attack a man with a gun who is following you at night? Trevon was justified in defending himself. Zimmerman was not. Execute him~!

 

[Gary4Liberty]

IT just occurred to me. This whole thing is so unreasonable. It reminds me that when things dont make sense its because there is a hidden agenda. The state god wants to get rid of a persons right to defend themselves so they will use this to get rid of the stand your ground and castle doctrines even though we know that this law does not apply to zimmerman because zimmerman was following, stalking and provoking the kid at night and carrying deadly force. Sllice him in half now!!!!

 

[Anti Federalist]

//