FL - 17-yo Boy Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain

[gracielee]

"Trayvon Martin was shot dead after he took a break from watching NBA All-Star game television coverage to walk 10 minutes to a convenience store to buy snacks including Skittles candy requested by his 13-year-old brother, Chad, the family's lawyer Ben Crump said."
According to the orlando sentinal diagram I don't think that walk was 10 minutes. I hate when lawyers/families/media do this. This is exactly what makes me question everything that comes from him now. What made me look deeper into this case was the jr high photo the family released and then a few days later finding out he is 6'3". Why would they release that photo when there were many other more recent photos available? (now I am answering myself- possibly because that photo showed how they saw him-young, happy, vulnerable, handsome.)
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/08/us-crime-florida-neighborhoodwatch-idUSBRE82709M20120308

That was my problem too. It seemed the more articles I read, the more various supposed *facts* came into question. First he's a young boy, photo looked about 12 or 14, then I read he's six foot three inches and 17. First he's there with his father and step mother, then nobody actually lives there but dad's girlfriend. Dad lives in Miami. I'd like to know when exactly he left the house, how long he was gone before the shooting. Is there video of him at the convenience store?? Convenience stores always have video. What time was it?

 

[SoBeCzar]

Thought it might help to link to FL self defense law and "The Stand Your Ground Law".

http://www.cfif.org/htdocs/freedomline/current/in_our_opinion/florida-self-defense-law.htm
The Florida law is not a gun law. Period. It contains zero references to guns or shooting, unless you feel propagandistically compelled to count one of those ubiquitous legislative “Whereases” that references the Florida Constitution’s “right of the people to bear arms…”

The Florida law is a self-defense, self-protection law. It has four key components:

It establishes that law-abiding residents and visitors may legally presume the threat of bodily harm or death from anyone who breaks into a residence or occupied vehicle and may use defensive force, including deadly force, against the intruder.


In any other place where a person “has a right to be,” that person has “no duty to retreat” if attacked and may “meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.”


In either case, a person using any force permitted by the law is immune from criminal prosecution or civil action and cannot be arrested unless a law enforcement agency determines there is probable cause that the force used was unlawful.


If a civil action is brought and the court finds the defendant to be immune based on the parameters of the law, the defendant will be awarded all costs of defense.
http://www.self-defender.net/law2.htm

776.031 Use of force in defense of others.--A person is justified in the use of force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate such other's trespass on, or other tortious or criminal interference with, either real property other than a dwelling or personal property, lawfully in his or her possession or in the possession of another who is a member of his or her immediate family or household or of a person whose property he or she has a legal duty to protect. However, the person is justified in the use of deadly force only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.
History.--s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1189, ch. 97-102.

776.041 Use of force by aggressor.--The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:

(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
These are snipped but can be read in full at the links.
Unless GZ could not escape being severely beaten he was in the wrong.

 

[HiHater]

Must read!!!!. If this is an accurate article then it gives a lot of information. I am very wary of media nowadays, but this reporter seems to have covered a lot of things!!!!
http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/trayvon-martin-911-tapes-who-screamed-help-shot-rang-out

"Police also said that Trayvon's father, Tracy Martin, told them the voice pleading for help was not Trayvon. The family claims the police are lying, and pointed out that once the audio quality was cleaned up the father said that the voice did indeed belong to his son."

Confusing?? In attempt to do statement analysis like Peter hyatt. They say LE was lying when they said dad said it wasn't TM pleading for help, but then contradict themselves by saying when the audio was cleaned up dad said it was TM.

After reading this article, I can see better how LE did not feel they could disprove the self defense claim.

It's not confusing at all. Initially Tracy Martin said the audio was too distorted, so he could not say for sure who it was on the tape. Once the audio was cleaned up, he was able to make a positive i.d.

There's no contradiction. I don't think anyone could make out who was pleading for help based on the original tape (the one we have heard).

But I have serious doubts that a person with a gun---who ultimately was not afraid to use it---would be calling for help like that. If you have a gun, and someone is attacking you, you have all the help you need.

Why didn't the shooter continue calling for help after the shot was fired? By many accounts, he said "it was self-defense" and started pacing...

 

[gracielee]

So then who was it calling for help on the 911 call, GZ or TM? GZ told the cops he was calling for help. TM's dad said 'it wasn't his son calling for help' when he first heard the tapes. So who was it?

 

[HiHater]

So then who was it calling for help on the 911 call, GZ or TM? GZ told the cops he was calling for help. TM's dad said 'it wasn't his son calling for help' when he first heard the tapes. So who was it?

There's nothing there, if ya know what I mean...

Police lied Friday, Crump said, when they said Tracy Martin said the voice crying for help was not his son. What Tracy Martin told police, Crump said, was that "he couldn't tell, that it was too distorted."

The audio has since been cleaned up, and now Tracy Martin has no doubt but that the voice is his son, Crump said.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/os-trayvon-martin-shooting-911-call-20120316,0,573686.story?page=2

I don't think we should doubt whether or not a parent recognized their own child's voice, especially when the audio was probably cleaned up for the sole purpose of clarifying who it was on the tape. Why was the tape "cleaned up"? The only logical answer is because the parents/police could not immediately determine whose voice it was.

 

[Yoda]

Thought it might help to link to FL self defense law and "The Stand Your Ground Law".

http://www.cfif.org/htdocs/freedomline/current/in_our_opinion/florida-self-defense-law.htm
The Florida law is not a gun law. Period. It contains zero references to guns or shooting, unless you feel propagandistically compelled to count one of those ubiquitous legislative “Whereases” that references the Florida Constitution’s “right of the people to bear arms…”

The Florida law is a self-defense, self-protection law. It has four key components:

It establishes that law-abiding residents and visitors may legally presume the threat of bodily harm or death from anyone who breaks into a residence or occupied vehicle and may use defensive force, including deadly force, against the intruder.


In any other place where a person “has a right to be,” that person has “no duty to retreat” if attacked and may “meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.”


In either case, a person using any force permitted by the law is immune from criminal prosecution or civil action and cannot be arrested unless a law enforcement agency determines there is probable cause that the force used was unlawful.


If a civil action is brought and the court finds the defendant to be immune based on the parameters of the law, the defendant will be awarded all costs of defense.
http://www.self-defender.net/law2.htm

776.031 Use of force in defense of others.--A person is justified in the use of force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate such other's trespass on, or other tortious or criminal interference with, either real property other than a dwelling or personal property, lawfully in his or her possession or in the possession of another who is a member of his or her immediate family or household or of a person whose property he or she has a legal duty to protect. However, the person is justified in the use of deadly force only if he or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony.
History.--s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1189, ch. 97-102.

776.041 Use of force by aggressor.--The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:

(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
These are snipped but can be read in full at the links.
Unless GZ could not escape being severely beaten he was in the wrong.

In the last article I posted, that seems very thorough, it said TM had GZ on the ground and punched him in the nose. GZ yelled for help, pulled his gun and shot TM. It does not sound like GZ was getting pummeled or even reported it that way. It sounds like, IMO, TM bopped him one time and that was probably a stop following me/get away from me punch.
I don't know what to think. I can understand TM punching him in an attempt to get GZ to back off from following him. I don't know if any words were exchanged, but if not then TM would have no idea why this person was following him. And I can also understand GZ's situation. The article said TM turned and approached GZ. Again if no words were said then GZ sees the teen he thought was suspicious coming at him, he ends up on his back getting punched in the face, in fear he pulls his gun and shoots. Looking at it from the outside he should have realized TM was no longer attacking him. IMO in order for GZ to pull the gun from his waistband TM was probably starting to retreat off of him. But I think GZ could have been afraid when confronted and
struck and shot him out of fear. Even the description from one of the witnesses said he looked like "what did I just do". I would think that if he was in attack mode or angry that he had been struck he would not have immediately looked worried-it would have taken a minute to shake that aggressiveness.
Moo

 

[HiHater]

Are we sure the other burglary suspects were not already apprehended? No.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...12+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

What is at the link is this:

The Retreat at Twin Lakes
Our Neighborhood Watch leads to four arrests in burglaries in the RTL. Great job! This is why we need more residents calling the Sanford PD Non-emergency number to report suspicious activity.
Like · Comment · February 12 at 8:34am ·

George Zimmerman "liked" this post.

 

[HiHater]

Are we sure the other burglary suspects were not already apprehended? No.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...12+&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a

What is at the link is this:



George Zimmerman "liked" this post.

Sorry to quote myself, but I think it's notable that none of the "real" criminals were injured, shot, or killed.

 

[Yoda]

There's nothing there, if ya know what I mean...



http://www.sun-sentinel.com/os-trayvon-martin-shooting-911-call-20120316,0,573686.story?page=2

I don't think we should doubt whether or not a parent recognized their own child's voice, especially when the audio was probably cleaned up for the sole purpose of clarifying who it was on the tape. Why was the tape "cleaned up"? The only logical answer is because the parents/police could not immediately determine whose voice it was.

IMO I can see dad listening to the original tape and saying it wasn't his son. And I can see dad changing his mind when the audio was enhanced. When I read the statement red flags went up when they said dad recognized him when the audio was enhanced. To me that meant he didn't recognize his voice earlier. I don't know why police would lie, but people are saying that this town's LE are no good so I'll take that into account.

Hihater,
I just want to say thank you for discussing the events and also for listening to the 911 tapes. That must have been awful.

 

[gracielee]

There's nothing there, if ya know what I mean...



http://www.sun-sentinel.com/os-trayvon-martin-shooting-911-call-20120316,0,573686.story?page=2

I don't think we should doubt whether or not a parent recognized their own child's voice, especially when the audio was probably cleaned up for the sole purpose of clarifying who it was on the tape. Why was the tape "cleaned up"? The only logical answer is because the parents/police could not immediately determine whose voice it was.

IMO, Crump hasn't been forthcoming in many of his remarks, so why should I believe 'the police lied' because *he* said it.

 

[HiHater]

And according to LE, they don't have the evidence to prove he's lying. No prosecutor wants to take a case they can't win, and according to them (and we don't know how they came up with this) they don't have anything to dispute GZ's claim.

The prosecution doesn't PROVE anything in a self-defense case, that burden shifts to the defendant and his or her attorneys.

 

[HiHater]

IMO, Crump hasn't been forthcoming in many of his remarks, so why should I believe 'the police lied' because *he* said it.

You don't have to believe anything. As I said before, you can google Crump and check his track record. Do the same for Sanford PD, and that discrepancy will speak for itself.

 

[ynotdivein]

I'm still stuck on logistics here. Scratching my head over the fact that Tray was shot in the chest, but was found face down (described in multiple news articles including this one; original source may be Orlando Sentinel). Some articles also reported witnesses stating that GZ was standing over Tray, straddling him, when they arrived on the scene (MC being one of these witnesses, as reported here).

I'm just trying--unsuccessfully so far--to work out in my head how this would tie in to a hand-to-hand scuffle, possibly over the gun.

Meantime, two recent articles I haven't seen posted yet:

Shooter of Trayvon Martin a habitual caller to 911

Trayvon Martin Killing's Youngest Witness, 13, Still Can Hear the Screams

 

[MicciStella]

I listened to the description given my GZ on the 911 call. He described him as 'walking along in the rain, looking at all the various homes'......

When I walk my puppies I look at the houses and yards too... And I think not only me... That is just normal....

Micci

 

[Yoda]

Question for those that listened to 911 calls. When describing what was seen and what was heard did all of the witnesses refer to TM and GZ as men, man, guy? Did any tell the 911 operator it was a little boy, a kid, or a teen? Tia

 

[gracielee]

Does anyone know if the autopsy report has been released yet? It would be extremely helpful to know the trajectory of the bullet, how close was the gun to the victim when it was fired?

 

[HiHater]

Question for those that listened to 911 calls. When describing what was seen and what was heard did all of the witnesses refer to TM and GZ as men, man, guy? Did any tell the 911 operator it was a little boy, a kid, or a teen? Tia

I believe they said men or males. I don't remember anyone saying "boys".

The only person to describe Trayvon as a teenager was George Zimmerman. :waitasec:

 

[Yoda]

I listened to the description given my GZ on the 911 call. He described him as 'walking along in the rain, looking at all the various homes'......

I wonder if he was lost. The condos all look alike in that neighborhood. Or maybe he was piddling along in no hurry to get back, but that would contradict what the lawyer said about the run to get smacks during the game.

 

[gracielee]

Question for those that listened to 911 calls. When describing what was seen and what was heard did all of the witnesses refer to TM and GZ as men, man, guy? Did any tell the 911 operator it was a little boy, a kid, or a teen? Tia

I'd have to listen to the tapes again to give a reliable answer. I know a couple referred to a boy, some said it was too dark outside to see much of anything. Some said a confrontation of some sort first occurred a distance away from where the shooting took place. When I listened to them, there was only one of the calls where the calls for help were heard. IIRC, it was the second call. I never did hear two shots, I only heard one shot, again, IIRC on the second call. The last call released, # 7, sounded like an elderly woman who was extremely upset. Her call lasted something like 14 minutes, and ended with the 911 operator telling her he'd try to get someone to come to her house. She was really upset, said she was shaking, couldn't stop shaking, etc.

 

[MicciStella]

Does anyone know if the autopsy report has been released yet? It would be extremely helpful to know the trajectory of the bullet, how close was the gun to the victim when it was fired?

Or if there were any other injuries, abrasions, and so on...
And I wonder if the police or someone took pictures of the claimed injuries of GZ..

Micci