17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #32

[Ninety5rpm]

So every stranger in a gated community is suspicious and a stranger following someone isn't?

Of course not. Why do you say that?

It's just that if you're a visitor/guest, you wouldn't expect to recognize hardly anyone.

But that aside, yeah, TM could have assumed GZ was suspicious too. He was certainly free to call the police and follow him.

 

[elementary]

Zimmerman enrolled in Seminole State College in 2009, and in December 2011 he was permitted to participate in a school graduation ceremony, despite being a course credit shy of his associate's degree in criminal justice. Zimmerman was completing that course credit when the shooting occurred.

What? Why the special treatment?

Hmmmm. Now why would he want to do that? Who doesn't complete their courses first before they take their degree? What's the motivation? Also, who throws themselves a celebration party when you haven't finished your degree? What was the rush?

And why was he so special?

 

[Emeralgem]

BBBM

:floorlaugh: Did this strike anyone else as hilarious? OMG, that's one helluva PR person. :floorlaugh:

I viewed her actions as being somewhat cowardly..Par for the course though IF you think about it.. When it comes to being confronted about how The GOOD OLE BOY sytem works in our society those in the know usually refuse to answer any questions concerning the matter.. ....JMHO

 

[francie]

Zimmerman enrolled in Seminole State College in 2009, andin December 2011 he was permitted to participate in a school graduation ceremony, despite being a course credit shy of his associate's degree in criminal justice. Zimmerman was completing that course credit when the shooting occurred.

What? Why the special treatment?

BBM~

IIRC college courses are 3-4 units/each depending on quarter or semester system and a lab or whatever might be 1 unit, so I personally don't believe this. jmo. In fact the only way I'd believe George even finished ONE college level class is if I see his official transcripts. jmo. And didn't Casey also say she was one credit or a half credit away from graduating high school? LOL. All jmo.

:moo:

 

[Kimberlyd125]

IF I remember correctly, all police said was that they seen the picture or knew about the picture? I don't think they actually said they had it?

MOO

Looking at the ABC article, it does say LE had seen the photo.

But, IMO, if ABC says they have seen it (in the article where we are seeing it for the first time), that tells me LE had the photo before ABC released it in their news story.

I'm sure if the saw the photo, they made a copy of it.

JMO

 

[HiHater]

Was Bill Lee still teaching at the college at the time?

Lee has been the director of Seminole State College's Center for Public Safety since 2009, according to the college's website.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com...tooley-police-chief-sanford-police-department

Billy R. Lee, an associate dean at Seminole State College and former captain of the Seminole County Sheriff’s Office, was named Tuesday as Sanford’s new police chief.

http://mysanfordherald.com/view/ful...es-Lee-as-new-police-chief?instance=news_page

 

[suzihawk]

IIRC, The photo was given to LE before it was reported on by ABC.
I don't know when it was given to LE, or who gave it to them, but I do seem to remember reading that LE had the photo.

JMO

Do you have a link for this? I don't recall reading that. TIA

 

[elementary]

I don't think LE took that picture just like I don't think an officer would have gone to ABC and given them the picture right in the middle of an ongoing investigation by the Justice Department unless this officer was planning on changing careers. jmo

This raises another question that I have. Was someone paid for that photo? If so, how much, and to whom did this money go?

 

[Sensei]

BBBM

:floorlaugh: Did this strike anyone else as hilarious? OMG, that's one helluva PR person. :floorlaugh:

I guess maybe she was afraid the good ol standby "NO COMMENT" was insufficient, and that actually bolting from the reporters might just convince them:doorhide:

 

[Reader]

Is not up to the court to read anything more into the probable cause affidavit other than what it contains. For the same reason, evidence that GZ was acting in self defense SHOULD HAVE been included.

The PCA is only to document the reasons for a subject to be charged, not to provide information for a defense.

 

[mercuriod]

Looking at the ABC article, it does say LE had seen the photo.

But, IMO, if ABC says they have seen it (in the article where we are seeing it for the first time), that tells me LE had the photo before ABC released it in their news story.

I'm sure if the saw the photo, they made a copy of it.

JMO

Isn't ABC the network that altered the 911 tapes, isn't ABC the network that paid Casey Anthony $200K for a photo? If ABC "says" it I highly doubt it is factual.

 

[Just K]

Investigator Gilbreath admitted GZ had two laserations to his head. The EMT report would have stated that. Before the picture taken on the phone can be admitted as evidence it would have to be verified. Obviously the time does not match up with the police report if that was GZ on a phone. Plus how would someone know there would have been an issue regarding those cuts?? You just shot someone why would a neighbor be taking a picture of your head. Why would a neighbor be close enough to a suspect 3 minutes after LE arrive at the scene when LE had already reported GZ as being in custody???? There are a lot of questions about this pictures. Why are there two different reports about who took this picture??? And we still do not have a name but somehow ABC received it and not LE. jmo

Not to mention, universal precautions were not taken...not wearing gloves, when touching a bloody person, is a big no-no. Just the thought that the one officer was definitly touching GZ and his clothing without any concern for spreading or contracting contagious blood-born diseases like AIDS & Hepatitis C is just unbelievable .

 

[LambChop]

Of course not. Why do you say that?

It's just that if you're a visitor/guest, you wouldn't expect to recognize hardly anyone.

But that aside, yeah, TM could have assumed GZ was suspicious too. He was certainly free to call the police and follow him.

Which he did not and that proves he was not interested in GZ and just wanted to get back and watch that game. Wasn't that an important game that night??? jmo

 

[elementary]

Of course not. Why do you say that?

It's just that if you're a visitor/guest, you wouldn't expect to recognize hardly anyone.

But that aside, yeah, TM could have assumed GZ was suspicious too. He was certainly free to call the police and follow him.

Because that is the inference in your logic. As for the latter argument, if someone seems to be following me, in this ambiguous situation I would be rushing home as best I could. Home, in this case, was just seconds around the corner. It's just common sense.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Isn't ABC the network that altered the 911 tapes, isn't ABC the network that paid Casey Anthony $200K for a photo? If ABC "says" it I highly doubt it is factual.

NBC altered the tapes.

I don't know about Casey's photo.
Different case.

 

[jaded cat]

I think a possible scenario, perhaps the most likely, is that because GZ was following TM, TM got angry and physically confronted GZ, to which GZ responded justifiably with deadly force.

But following someone does not justify such a reaction any more than wearing revealing clothing justifies rape.

And I don't think being physically confronted merely for following someone is sufficiently likely to warrant not doing it.

I have not looked at the NW documentation so don't know if it says not to following unrecognized/suspicious people in the neighborhood. But even if it does say that, that might be a reason for GZ to not be on NW, but it would not justify TM physically confronting GZ, if that's what happened, nor would it negate GW's right to defend himself, so I don't think there is very much legal relevance to this issue in this case.

It might be helpful to you to read some of the earlier threads where this was discussed in detail. GZ was most assuredly a member of the NW so it is extremely legally relevant to this case. NW members are instructed not to follow or be armed when they are on patrol. GZ failed to follow both these policies.

 

[LambChop]

This raises another question that I have. Was someone paid for that photo? If so, how much, and to whom did this money go?

What does not make sense to me is if that is GZ's arm holding the phone to his ear in that picture why are the sleeves of his jacket gray when the sleeves to his jacket were red???? jmo

 

[Kimberlyd125]

It might be helpful to you to read some of the earlier threads where this was discussed in detail. GZ was most assuredly a member of the NW so it is extremely legally relevant to this case. NW members are instructed not to follow or be armed when they are on patrol. GZ failed to follow both these policies.

But we don't know what the rules were at GZ's development do we?

I haven't seen that info posted anywhere but I may have missed it.

 

[Boytwnmom]

he knows NOTHING about this case and always criticizes police, defends criminals and trashes victims. Not impressed.

And, he is WRONG-his the Probable Cause document does NOT have to contain an argument against what they're asking for-that's the job of the defense and why it's called a PROBABLE CAUSE AFFIDAVIT-it's about WHY the state believes there's probable cause-not about why other people might not believe it or a compendium of opposing views etc. The Judge decides whether there's probably cause-the state argues why there is-that's the process. This is not some "special" document-it's just what it says it is-an affidavit of "probable cause" and He knows that-that's why he's saying it's "unethical" trying to conflate the duty to turn over Exculpatory Evidence with some requirement that the state argue against itself-it's simply absurd. It would only be unethical if someone were lying in the affidavit but that would be true of anything they file.

Please forgive me if I put a little more creedence in the statement by the Harvard Law Professor:

 

[MaryAnn]

Of course not. Why do you say that?

It's just that if you're a visitor/guest, you wouldn't expect to recognize hardly anyone.

But that aside, yeah, TM could have assumed GZ was suspicious too. He was certainly free to call the police and follow him.

It all happened so fast. TM was just a kid not knowing he had a lose cannon following him. I doubt that TM realized the danger he was in until GZ approached him. TM was doing what every 17 year old boy does walk and talk on the phone. I'm trying to think of what my Son would have done at that age and I doubt he would have immediately called the police!!

It's frightening to me that people think that GZ was in the right? TM wasn't doing anything suspicious in the first place and then to be shot down because he wasn't recognized?

Does this mean that anyone living in a gated community in Florida shouldn't have any visitors and if they do don't let them out of the house for fear of being shot dead because their face is unfamiliar??