Self Defense Killing in Florida...Geeks got an opinion?

[nikki2200 4]

So, the funeral director who prepared Martin says that he did not see any evidence that Martin punched someone. Not conclusive, but I would expect that they could piece together different types of evidence to come to some sort of understanding of what happened.

 

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/29/10915887-police-video-shows-george-zimmerman-shortly-after-trayvon-martin-shooting

 

They didn't have the freaking medical examiners look at the body?

[phillybear 364]

The only thing I've seen is Zimmerman's lawyer saying he went to the doctor the next day and had a broken nose. Do you have a link to the medical reports from a doctor, because I haven't seen it.

 

I already posted the link. It's written in "White Latino" text color. I don't understand why you can't find it.

[KSB2424 3,082]

They didn't have the freaking medical examiners look at the body?

I have no idea if the medical examiner did or did not, but why would a funeral director looking at a body make you jump to that conclusion?

 

The incident happened February 26th, his funeral wasn't until March 12th. That's 15 days, normally it doesn't take 15 days to bury someone who has passed. Maybe it took 15 days because the family had to get the body back from the medical examiner.

 

Or maybe there is a two week greiving period based on the families religious beliefs.

 

Maybe anything, why not find out and not jump to a conclusion. Again.

 

[nikki2200 4]

I have no idea if the medical examiner did or did not, but why would a funeral director looking at a body make you jump to that conclusion?

 

The incident happened February 26th, his funeral wasn't until March 12th. That's 15 days, normally it doesn't take 15 days to bury someone who has passed. Maybe it took 15 days because the family had to get the body back from the medical examiner.

 

Or maybe there is a two week greiving period based on the families religious beliefs.

 

Maybe anything, why not find out and not jump to a conclusion. Again.

 

 

I wasn't jumping to a conclusion. I was wondering why a focking funeral director was giving a statement on whether or not Trayvon had participated in a fist fight prior to his death, which seems highly unusual and somewhat retarded. Because normally that would be up to the medical examiner, no? So in this one I was actually discounting this whole piece of "evidence".

 

But thanks for you jumping to a conclusion about me jumping to a conclusion.

[KSB2424 3,082]

But thanks for you jumping to a conclusion about me jumping to a conclusion.

This is the first good point you've made in 17 pages. Well done.

[TimmySmith 2,782]

I wasn't jumping to a conclusion. I was wondering why a focking funeral director was giving a statement on whether or not Trayvon had participated in a fist fight prior to his death, which seems highly unusual and somewhat retarded. Because normally that would be up to the medical examiner, no? So in this one I was actually discounting this whole piece of "evidence".

They did a complete autopsy. The funeral director was probably answering a reporter's question, and was talking out of his butt.

[KSB2424 3,082]

I was wondering why a focking funeral director was giving a statement on whether or not Trayvon had participated in a fist fight prior to his death, which seems highly unusual and somewhat retarded. Because normally that would be up to the medical examiner, no? So in this one I was actually discounting this whole piece of "evidence".

I think you actually have this nailed (finally). Last night I was watching CNN and Anderson Cooper was looking at that police video of Zimmerman in handcuffs at the police station. It was sort of blurry video yet he had it in slow motion trying to break it down as if he was John Madden with a telestrator. As if a video that you can't really see anything that was taken hours later was some damning evidence one way or the other. When I'm sure actual photographs and medical personell or documents will eventually be disclosed.

 

Now we have a funeral director acting like he's in CSI Samford or something.

 

This whole story is gone full crazy.

[Phurfur 70]

I wasn't jumping to a conclusion. I was wondering why a focking funeral director was giving a statement on whether or not Trayvon had participated in a fist fight prior to his death, which seems highly unusual and somewhat retarded. Because normally that would be up to the medical examiner, no? So in this one I was actually discounting this whole piece of "evidence".

 

For the same reason they used a much younger picture of him, to sway public opinion.

[nikki2200 4]

I think you actually have this nailed (finally). Last night I was watching CNN and Anderson Cooper was looking at that police video of Zimmerman in handcuffs at the police station. It was sort of blurry video yet he had it in slow motion trying to break it down as if it was John Madden with a telestrator. As if a video that you can't really see anything that was taken hours later was some damning evidence one way or the other. When I'm sure actual photographs and medical personell or documents will eventually be disclosed.

 

Now we have a funeral director acting like he's in CSI Samford or something.

 

This whole story is gone full crazy.

 

I have been saying all along this story has gone crazy. Look at my posts from days ago. But somehow you have determined that I have already convicted Zimmerman. Which I never did. I was the first one to post after the new evidence came out about how crazy it would be if Trayvon actually did attack him and what a focking mess this was, although I find that a little hard to believe given the chain of events.

 

But it appears we have a jumping to conclusions problem in this thread.

[Phurfur 70]

I think you actually have this nailed (finally). Last night I was watching CNN and Anderson Cooper was looking at that police video of Zimmerman in handcuffs at the police station. It was sort of blurry video yet he had it in slow motion trying to break it down as if it was John Madden with a telestrator. As if a video that you can't really see anything that was taken hours later was some damning evidence one way or the other. When I'm sure actual photographs and medical personell or documents will eventually be disclosed.

 

Now we have a funeral director acting like he's in CSI Samford or something.

 

This whole story is gone full crazy.

 

Like the Duke Lacrosse Scandal or the cop incident in NY.

[nikki2200 4]

For the same reason they used a much younger picture of him, to sway public opinion.

 

I also think the media is glomming onto any tidbit of information they can get their hands on whether it makes sense or not to keep the story going.

[IGotWorms 3,297]

The bottom line is maybe this Zimmerman guy really is some weirdo guy that cold blooded killed Martin. OR maybe, after the facts come out, it really was self defense. Either way to many people jumped to to many conclusions. Everybody, including the Black Panthers and the Rednecks need to sit back, take a breath. The facts will come out and justice, whatever that is, will be served.

 

That sounds fair and reasonable, but let me ask you this: who do you think should determine whether it was self-defense? A jury or someone else?

[IGotWorms 3,297]

So, the funeral director who prepared Martin says that he did not see any evidence that Martin punched someone. Not conclusive, but I would expect that they could piece together different types of evidence to come to some sort of understanding of what happened.

 

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/29/10915887-police-video-shows-george-zimmerman-shortly-after-trayvon-martin-shooting

 

Did they do an autopsy on Martin? I'd like to hear from someone more official on this because if Martin really didn't look like he had hit anyone that is obviously a HUGE piece of evidence that could convict Zimmerman for murder.

[KSB2424 3,082]

That sounds fair and reasonable, but let me ask you this: who do you think should determine whether it was self-defense? A jury or someone else?

The police take evidence to a prosecuter and if the state thinks they have a case (at that time) then it goes to a jury. If new evidence comes in later, then the police takes the new evidence to the prosecuter who then decides if they can win a case and if so it goes to a jury. Like all other crimes happen?

 

Haven't you seen Law and Order?

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Did they do an autopsy on Martin? I'd like to hear from someone more official on this because if Martin really didn't look like he had hit anyone that is obviously a HUGE piece of evidence that could convict Zimmerman for murder.

 

Yes, they did do an autopsy on him. Results will not be shared until the investigation is done.

[IGotWorms 3,297]

The police take evidence to a prosecuter and if the state thinks they have a case (at that time) then it goes to a jury. If new evidence comes in later, then the police takes the new evidence to the prosecuter who then decides if they can win a case and if so it goes to a jury. Like all other crimes happen?

 

Haven't you seen Law and Order?

 

I'm actually familiar with how the criminal process works and not just from TV shows. Maybe I should have phrased my question differently: based on what you have heard and read, do you think there is enough of a question about the validity of self defense that it should be put in front of a jury?

[IGotWorms 3,297]

Yes, they did do an autopsy on him. Results will not be shared until the investigation is done.

 

Thanks

[DankNuggs 305]

I'm actually familiar with how the criminal process works and not just from TV shows. Maybe I should have phrased my question differently: based on what you have heard and read, do you think there is enough of a question about the validity of self defense that it should be put in front of a jury?

Do you believe the public has been afforded the same depth of evidence and testimony as the police investigation?

[DankNuggs 305]

Have we all forgotten the lessons of the casey anthony case?

 

Getting all wound up with high level charges without the evidence to back it up can be very harmful... Let a guilty person walk.

 

 

There should be the expectation that an investigation will be proper and thorough

[IGotWorms 3,297]

Do you believe the public has been afforded the same depth of evidence and testimony as the police investigation?

 

Of course not. But the police (or more accurately the DA in this case) can make an incorrect decision. Often other factors besides just the evidence come into play, like political pressure, career protection/enhancement, or personal biases.

[Vikings4ever 496]

The police take evidence to a prosecuter and if the state thinks they have a case (at that time) then it goes to a jury. If new evidence comes in later, then the police takes the new evidence to the prosecuter who then decides if they can win a case and if so it goes to a jury. Like all other crimes happen?

 

Haven't you seen Law and Order?

In addition to this, according to the Stand Your Ground law, it's illegal to arrest someone who acted in self defense. If Zimmerman was arrested, and later found to have acted in self defense, the cops have a big lawsuit on their hands. So he won't be arrested until/unless the prosecutors are DAMN sure they have a good case.

[Strike 3,934]

I'm actually familiar with how the criminal process works and not just from TV shows. Maybe I should have phrased my question differently: based on what you have heard and read, do you think there is enough of a question about the validity of self defense that it should be put in front of a jury?

 

From what I've heard and read I think it would be easy for any reasonably competent attorney to create reasonable doubt. That may be why he hasn't been arrested yet. I suspect people like you and Nikki are hoping for an outraged jury that hangs the man anyways but that's not how our system is supposed to work. What I wouldn't want to see is them prosecuting him and losing and then not being able to prosecute him again when they actually have a case due to double jeopardy.

[IGotWorms 3,297]

In addition to this, according to the Stand Your Ground law, it's illegal to arrest someone who acted in self defense. If Zimmerman was arrested, and later found to have acted in self defense, the cops have a big lawsuit on their hands. So he won't be arrested until/unless the prosecutors are DAMN sure they have a good case.

 

I'd be interested to see if it would really play out like that. Usually prosecutors have absolute prosecutorial immunity for charging people--even if it turns out the charges were totally false and even if the prosecutor KNEW it was false, they and their office are still immune from suit. The reason for absolute immunity is obvious: without it prosecutors would be constantly subject to lawsuit so they could never get their job done effectively.

 

So what I'm wondering is, does Florida's law override this immunity? I don't know enough about the subject but I am guessing it probably could.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

In addition to this, according to the Stand Your Ground law, it's illegal to arrest someone who acted in self defense. If Zimmerman was arrested, and later found to have acted in self defense, the cops have a big lawsuit on their hands. So he won't be arrested until/unless the prosecutors are DAMN sure they have a good case.

 

 

That is your interpretation. The people that wrote the law disagree

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57401619-504083/author-of-stand-your-ground-law-george-zimmerman-should-probably-be-arrested-for-killing-trayvon-martin/

(CBS/AP) SANFORD, Fla. - The authors of Florida's controversial "stand your ground" self-defense law say George Zimmerman should probably be arrested for shooting Trayvon Martin, reports the Miami Herald.

 

"He has no protection under my law," former Sen. Durell Peaden told the newspaper.

 

 

Florida's law, called "stand your ground" by supporters and "shoot first" by critics, was passed in 2005 and permits residents to use deadly force if they "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."

 

 

Traditionally, self-defense laws did not typically extend beyond a person's home, but the Florida law, and at least 20 more passed across the country since them, allows a resident to "meet force with force" almost anywhere, including the street or a bar.

 

 

Zimmerman, 28, reportedly admitted to police that he shot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin on the evening of February 26. He was released without being charged after claiming he killed the boy in self-defense. But 911 recordings released over the weekend suggest that Zimmerman, who has a concealed weapons permit and volunteered in an apparently informal neighborhood watch program, pursued Martin, despite being told police were on their way.

 

 

It is the fact that Zimmerman ignored the 911 operator's advice not to follow Martin that former Sen. Peaden says disqualifies him from claiming self-defense under the law.

 

 

"The guy lost his defense right then," Peaden told the Miami Herald. "When he said 'I'm following him,' he lost his defense."

 

 

Rep. Dennis Baxley, Peaden's co-sponsor in the Florida House, agrees with his former colleague, telling the newspaper that the law does not license neighborhood watch or others who feel "like they have the authority to pursue and confront people. That is aggravating an incident right there."

 

[DankNuggs 305]

That is your interpretation. The people that wrote the law disagree

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57401619-504083/author-of-stand-your-ground-law-george-zimmerman-should-probably-be-arrested-for-killing-trayvon-martin/

So if Trayvon WAS armed, and shot at Zimmerman, he would be incorrect to believe he could fire back under self defense?

 

 

I don't get the argument that he 'lost' his right to self defense... The fact he was acting in a neighborhood watch capacity, and was within that neighborhood area seems reasonable to me...

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

So if Trayvon WAS armed, and shot at Zimmerman, he would be incorrect to believe he could fire back under self defense?

 

 

I don't get the argument that he 'lost' his right to self defense... The fact he was acting in a neighborhood watch capacity, and was within that neighborhood area seems reasonable to me...

 

According to the guys who wrote the bill, they said that once Zimmerman had a chance to retreat to avoid the situation and there was no imminent danger, once he went back and approached Martin he lost his right to self-defense under the law that they felt they wrote.

 

Also, the police CAN arrest Zimmerman.

 

The related section of the law reads:

776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—

 

(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.

 

(2) 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.

(3) 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).

 

 

So, long as they have probable cause, they can arrest him. Their only exposure might be for attorney's fees in defense of a civil action brought by someone else AND the court found that the defendent was covered under the law.

[Strike 3,934]

According to the guys who wrote the bill, they said that once Zimmerman had a chance to retreat to avoid the situation and there was no imminent danger, once he went back and approached Martin he lost his right to self-defense under the law that they felt they wrote.

 

Legislators often write laws that end up not being interpreted the way they want.

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Legislators often write laws that end up not being interpreted the way they want.

 

No question, but given the untested nature of the law, I am going to give more weight to their comments than those of the folks here.

[nikki2200 4]

Do you believe the public has been afforded the same depth of evidence and testimony as the police investigation?

 

Well a couple of things here.

 

1. The chief investigator on the case, after interviewing Zimmerman, and collecting all of the evidence, recommended in a written affidavit that he be charged with homicide. So apparently the dude who had ALL the information thought there was enough there.

 

2. We do know that at least some of the available information was not even collected by the police because the person who was on the phone with Trayvon at the time that this went down, is going to testify that Trayvon was scared that someone was following him and Zimmerman approached him and a scuffle ensued, was not even interviewed by the police.

 

Like I said 8 pages ago, the thing that baffles me most about this case and why it pisses me off, is what kind of focked up laws are there in Florida where someone doesn't even have to stand trial for killing another human being under extremely extremely questionable circumstances. There is absolutely nothing cut and dry about this at all, and I can't see how our entire criminal justice system could be side-stepped in a case such as this. And apparently the guy who was in charge of collecting all the evidence thought that Zimmerman should have to stand trial as well.

[nikki2200 4]

I suspect people like you and Nikki are hoping for an outraged jury that hangs the man anyways but that's not how our system is supposed to work.

 

Link?

 

[Strike 3,934]

Link?

 

 

It's a reasonable conclusion. The defense doesn't have to prove self defense. They only have to make it sound possible. If it sounds even remotely possible then the jury has reasonable doubt. I don't see how any unbiased jury could convict this guy based upon what's been put out in the media and/or posted in this thread. Therefore, since you want him prosecuted based upon that limited and contradictory evidence, you must be hoping for a bunch of people on the jury that think the way you do - based on emotion and limited rationality.

[MDC 5,875]

The fact he was acting in a neighborhood watch capacity

 

You should know by now that Zimmerman was only part of a 'neighborhood watch' in his head.

[nikki2200 4]

It's a reasonable conclusion. The defense doesn't have to prove self defense. They only have to make it sound possible. If it sounds even remotely possible then the jury has reasonable doubt. I don't see how any unbiased jury could convict this guy based upon what's been put out in the media and/or posted in this thread. Therefore, since you want him prosecuted based upon that limited and contradictory evidence, you must be hoping for a bunch of people on the jury that think the way you do - based on emotion and limited rationality.

 

Link to where I said I wanted him prosecuted?

 

 

I believe I actually said several times in a discussion with YOU a few days ago that there is no way Zimmerman can get a fair trial now and this whole thing was a mess and that an impartial jury should have heard all of the evidence and made their decision the way our justice system is supposed to work, not the entire country through the media.

 

Isn't that right?

 

I'm glad you aren't one of the jurors on this case because your reasonable conclusion is not reasonable at all.

[nikki2200 4]

You should know by now that Zimmerman was only part of a 'neighborhood watch' in his head.

 

Wait... What?????

[Strike 3,934]

Link to where I said I wanted him prosecuted?

 

 

I believe I actually said several times in a discussion with YOU a few days ago that there is no way Zimmerman can get a fair trial now and this whole thing was a mess and that an impartial jury should have heard all of the evidence and made their decision the way our justice system is supposed to work, not the entire country through the media.

 

Isn't that right?

 

I'm glad you aren't one of the jurors on this case because your reasonable conclusion is not reasonable at all.

 

Yeah, Ok. Cause you haven't been saying this for, oh, like 8 pages:

 

 

Like I said 8 pages ago, the thing that baffles me most about this case and why it pisses me off, is what kind of focked up laws are there in Florida where someone doesn't even have to stand trial for killing another human being under extremely extremely questionable circumstances. There is absolutely nothing cut and dry about this at all, and I can't see how our entire criminal justice system could be side-stepped in a case such as this. And apparently the guy who was in charge of collecting all the evidence thought that Zimmerman should have to stand trial as well.

 

What did you mean when you said that the guy in charge of collecting all the evidence thought Zimmerman should have to stand trial "as well"? A reasonable person would interpret that as "in adddition to" and in the context of that paragraph one would assume that means in addition to YOU. So excuse me if I don't believe you when you say you don't want him prosecuted. I gotta say, you've set a new bar for looking foolish in this thread. Good job!

 

[parrot 789]

Well a couple of things here.

 

1. The chief investigator on the case, after interviewing Zimmerman, and collecting all of the evidence, recommended in a written affidavit that he be charged with homicide. So apparently the dude who had ALL the information thought there was enough there.

 

And a PROSECUTOR decided they should not file charges initially. Was he not also in possession of 'ALL' the information? And who do you suppose is better versed in the applicable laws?

 

 

Like I said 8 pages ago, the thing that baffles me most about this case and why it pisses me off, is what kind of focked up laws are there in Florida where someone doesn't even have to stand trial for killing another human being under extremely extremely questionable circumstances. There is absolutely nothing cut and dry about this at all, and I can't see how our entire criminal justice system could be side-stepped in a case such as this. And apparently the guy who was in charge of collecting all the evidence thought that Zimmerman should have to stand trial as well.

 

Why do you say the criminal justice system has been "side-stepped"? It hasn't, it's still playing itself out.

[parrot 789]

Link to where I said I wanted him prosecuted?

 

 

I'm thoroughly bum-puzzled at this point.

[gocolts 300]

He looks completely okay to me in that video. I think you can make a very slight red mark on the back of his head but I've looked a hell of a lot worse than that after a night of drinking in my college days.

 

And if he was treated for head wounds beforehand wouldn't he have bandages on him still? Or something to indicate that he had been hurt? Or do you think the EMTs have some kind of magical instant gash healing elixir?

 

I stand by my previous guess as to what happened. Martin dared to fight back, so this guy lost his sh!t and killed him.

 

Murder two.

I just watched the Martin Bashir show on MSNBC. They were showing the video you THINK shows no injuries.

 

It was focking hilarious. Bashir was saying you can not see any injuries on Zimmerman in the video and as he was saying it, they put an up close view of the back of Zimmerman's head on split screen and you can CLEARLY see the the head wound.

[Mungwater 588]

Thinking of the stand your ground law and seeing gocolts post made me think, would gocolts have to lock his wheel in order to be compliant?

[Patriotsfatboy1 1,432]

Thinking of the stand your ground law and seeing gocolts post made me think, would gocolts have to lock his wheel in order to be compliant?

 

No, he would just not be forced to go in reverse.