17-yo Teen Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #7

[vlpate]

And here I thought they didn't bother to interview witnesses.

Cheryl Brown's son A (13) was less than 20 yards away when TM was shot on the night of February 26. Austin did not see much but heard plenty. Enough to cause him stress and worry, wondering what if it had been him out there that night instead of TM.

"That investigator said flat out that we don't think it was self-defense," Brown said, recalling the day the police came to interview Austin. "Several times he said, 'I have kids, and I'm going to tell you something that I don't tell many people.' He looked at me and said, 'You have to read between the lines. There's some stereotyping going on.'"

She continued: "He stood here in my family room telling me that this guy [Zimmerman] is not right and it wasn't self-defense and that they have to prove that it wasn't. He was adamant about that. I don't know if that was to make me less uncomfortable or to make us feel that he was on our side."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/17/trayvon-martin-killing-yo_n_1355795.html

 

[rotterdam]

I don't know if the officer is competent or not. I what to know if it's a fact that GZ had no blood on his clothes.

IMO, based on the fairly scarce info released so far, we really do not know one way or the other. Pure speculation.

 

[Dr.Fessel]

I just heard on KFI radio, while in my car, that TM had been suspended three times, not once. And one time it was because he had a screwdriver and women's jewelry, making school officials think he had been stealing. ??

And the other time it was for being in a restricted area, which again made them think he was casing the area or being shady in some way. I used to work in a school and the restricted areas were often where employees kept belongings while they worked.

I am not saying that this means TM should have been shot. But it does make me wonder if he might have been looking into windows or cars, as GZ said he was. Just because TM did go to the store for skittles that does not mean he wasn't possibly looking for open windows or unlocked cars as well. I think his family has been trying to paint him as an angel and I am not sure if it is entirely accurate.

Sometimes the truth is somewhere in the middle, imo.

Zimmerman never said Martin was looking in windows or cars.

Here is the transcript of the 911 call.


[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7715220&postcount=41"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - FL - 17-yo Teen Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #4[/ame]

 

[tlcya]

I just heard on KFI radio, while in my car, that TM had been suspended three times, not once. And one time it was because he had a screwdriver and women's jewelry, making school officials think he had been stealing. ??

And the other time it was for being in a restricted area, which again made them think he was casing the area or being shady in some way. I used to work in a school and the restricted areas were often where employees kept belongings while they worked.

I am not saying that this means TM should have been shot. But it does make me wonder if he might have been looking into windows or cars, as GZ said he was. Just because TM did go to the store for skittles that does not mean he wasn't possibly looking for open windows or unlocked cars as well. I think his family has been trying to paint him as an angel and I am not sure if it is entirely accurate.

Sometimes the truth is somewhere in the middle, imo.

regarding the jewelry, TM was not suspended for that. He was suspended for graffiti and when searching his bag regarding graffiti school personnel allegedly found a flat head screwdriver and 12 pieces of women's jewelry there. TM's parents were not notified, LE was not called and no action was taken in regards to the jewelry.

Not splitting hairs, just trying to maintain accuracy. I do tend to agree. Sides have formed, the lines have been drawn and various campers on either side of this fence (nationally not referring to WS members) have done their best to paint both parties in the most or least flattering light depending on how it serves that camper's particular agenda.

 

[sabrecmc]

I'm really interested in finding out, if we are ever able to, who it was screaming for help on the 911 call. That person seemed in genuine distress. Sounds like some experts may be able to help with that:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...tin-shooting/2012/03/27/gIQAp0bWeS_story.html

 

[Sensei]

Again, he was injured. His injuries are described in the initial police report.

The link is in this thread.

Yes, they are described in a general sort of way. I would expect to see pictures, and medical reports that show that those injuries did in fact rise to the level of being able to believe that someone was fighting for their life, but we have a link that also claims that Zimmerman wanted medical attention that night and did not get it, and there have been reports from the neighbors who state that the did not see any injuries on Zimmerman after the gunshot.

People can say anything and in this case agendas abound, GZ doesn't want to go to jail, the SPD do not want their shoddy and possibly criminal methods of "investigating" this case to come to light, those who want SYG repealed are going to push the case that way, and those who are in the NRA are going to push it the other way. The family wants answers as to why and how their child died, and a lot of people want to simply make it a racial issue, some want to make money and some want to get attention...and each has his own reason for wanting to beleive that things went down the way they want them to....only forensice evidence is without bias and maybe a few of the witnesses who have no dog in the fight...all else is suspect. IMO JMHO and stuff.

 

[jjenny]

I'm really interested in finding out, if we are ever able to, who it was screaming for help on the 911 call. That person seemed in genuine distress. Sounds like some experts may be able to help with that:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...tin-shooting/2012/03/27/gIQAp0bWeS_story.html

Supposedly a voice matching technology can clarify who is screaming. I am not sure.

 

[Wise Old Owl]

I'm really interested in finding out, if we are ever able to, who it was screaming for help on the 911 call. That person seemed in genuine distress. Sounds like some experts may be able to help with that:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...tin-shooting/2012/03/27/gIQAp0bWeS_story.html

JMHO and all that there - but I think the FBI has access to the best of the best in equipment. They will be able to "graph" that voice pattern and they'll do the same to both GZ's and Trayvon's voice patterns. They should be most definitely able to id which one is the one heard screaming.

But again that's JMHO

 

[m00c0w]

regarding the jewelry, TM was not suspended for that. He was suspended for graffiti and when searching his bag regarding graffiti school personnel allegedly found a flat head screwdriver and 12 pieces of women's jewelry there. TM's parents were not notified, LE was not called and no action was taken in regards to the jewelry.

Not splitting hairs, just trying to maintain accuracy. I do tend to agree. Sides have formed, the lines have been drawn and various campers on either side of this fence (nationally not referring to WS members) have done their best to paint both parties in the most or least flattering light depending on how it serves that camper's particular agenda.

BBM

LE was notified; the report said that the jewelry was sent to Miami-Dade detectives. The parents say they weren't told, but I'm not sure why that omission would have been made if the police were involved. Perhaps it just wasn't mentioned in the suspension forms, and Trayvon (like any other kid) didn't want to incur any more wrath from his parents. I've certainly omitted things before

 

[tlcya]

And here I thought they didn't bother to interview witnesses.

true, but the rest of the story at link also once more suggests (by different witnesses than previously) that LE attempted to encourage the statements to lean towards GZ's version of events more so than what the witness wanted to say.

 

[LambChop]

I really don't have any evidence to refute the opinions you've displayed. Thank you for admitting the error about the 911 tapes, though. That's been widely mischaracterized in the media for some reason.

I want to address this last issue with you. It is my belief that if someone exercised a proper use of force in a clear self-defense scenario, they have every right to not be arrested. Let me give you this scenario (I am in no way comparing this to the case this thread is about, this is just an attempt to explain why the law is the way it is) -

Say John is a student at a local college, and has just stopped at a store to pick up some stuff for the night. Upon returning to his car, two males approach him at knifepoint and demand he hand over his keys. John pulls a gun of his own and shoots one individual in the head, killing him, and clips the second male. John has sustained injuries of his own during the conflict. Police are called to the scene. Given that John just fought for his life, and that he is clearly a victim in this scenario, do you think it would be morally or ethically right to mandate he gets arrested simply because he used deadly force? This man, a victim, should not have to lose time off from school and work because of a situation he was thrown into and in which he was forced to defend himself. That is the standpoint from which this law was written. It's not an attempt to protect anyone but a victim of a violent crime that was forced to ultimately defend themselves. The law makes clear exceptions for individuals that are suspected of actually using such force unlawfully; whether the police or prosecutor decides there's enough probable cause is an entirely different story.

JMO

Btw - that's a legitimate story that happened here in Atlanta, FWIW.

I think John was within his rights because he was not engaging these men, did not seek them out, did not follow them in any way. Not the case with GZ having been told to let LE handle it he alone made the decision to pursue.

This case will hurt the stand your ground law because those who are innocent victims could lose the power of this law. The same outrage that pressured this law to be passed will now cause it to be removed. It was meant for someone who is going about their business, minding their business, on their property, getting into their property or just standing outside a restaurant and being threatened. Basically it's 'I was minding my own business and someone threatened my life'. GZ was not doing that. He pursued TM when he did not have to. No one asked him to give chase, he was told to stand down and wait for LE to get there. He did not do that. The minute he started after TM he became the aggressor because TM did not know who he was. The only one who could have controlled the event was GZ. LE could not stop it from happening, although they tried. jmo

 

[Kimberlyd125]

true, but the rest of the story at link also once more suggests (by different witnesses than previously) that LE attempted to encourage the statements to lean towards GZ's version of events more so than what the witness wanted to say.

I find that hard to believe.

Perhaps the witnesses are jumping on the bandwagon.

 

[mikeysmommom]

I just heard on KFI radio, while in my car, that TM had been suspended three times, not once. And one time it was because he had a screwdriver and women's jewelry, making school officials think he had been stealing. ??

And the other time it was for being in a restricted area, which again made them think he was casing the area or being shady in some way. I used to work in a school and the restricted areas were often where employees kept belongings while they worked.

I am not saying that this means TM should have been shot. But it does make me wonder if he might have been looking into windows or cars, as GZ said he was. Just because TM did go to the store for skittles that does not mean he wasn't possibly looking for open windows or unlocked cars as well. I think his family has been trying to paint him as an angel and I am not sure if it is entirely accurate.

Sometimes the truth is somewhere in the middle, imo.

Have you seen the link on the first page about TM Punching his bus driver ,I believe it was a day or two before this happened IMO That is a violent action and shows TM was very capable of attacking GZ.Also about the jewelry found on TM that was sent to Dade county police I really wish we could find out exactly where it came from.IMO GZ did see what he reported.No one should have ended up
dead but once attacked GZ had the right IMO to save his own life.If he feared for his safety he would have called 911 IMO.

ETA Link

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/cutline...erge-facebook-twitter-accounts-180103647.html

"With a single punch," the Orlando Sentinel, citing police sources, reported Monday, "Trayvon Martin decked the Neighborhood Watch volunteer ... climbed on top of [him] and slammed his head into the sidewalk several times, leaving him bloody and battered."

 

[m00c0w]

I think John was within his rights because he was not engaging these men, did not seek them out, did not follow them in any way. Not the case with GZ having been told to let LE handle it he alone made the decision to pursue.

This case will hurt the stand your ground law because those who are innocent victims could lose the power of this law. The same outrage that pressured this law to be passed will now cause it to be removed. It was meant for someone who is going about their business, minding their business, on their property, getting into their property or just standing outside a restaurant and being threatened. Basically it's 'I was minding my own business and someone threatened my life'. GZ was not doing that. He pursued TM when he did not have to. No one asked him to give chase, he was told to stand down and wait for LE to get there. He did not do that. The minute he started after TM he became the aggressor because TM did not know who he was. The only one who could have controlled the event was GZ. LE could not stop it from happening, although they tried. jmo

I specifically stated in my post that I was not trying to make an allegory to this event. The police have the tools necessary to make an arrest and even seek conviction if they feel there is cause enough. It's not like this law ties their hands. I was simply demonstrating why this law exists. This case is not representative of its main intent.

 

[LambChop]

BBM

LE was notified; the report said that the jewelry was sent to Miami-Dade detectives. The parents say they weren't told, but I'm not sure why that omission would have been made if the police were involved. Perhaps it just wasn't mentioned in the suspension forms, and Trayvon (like any other kid) didn't want to incur any more wrath from his parents. I've certainly omitted things before

I think it was pictures of the jewelry were sent to Miami-Dade. The school kept the jewelry. I doubt they still have it and it could be the owner claimed it. I can't imagine the school keepting the jewelry if it were never claimed. What if it belonged to TM's mother? The school would have no right to keep it and not tell her. I don't think we have to full story on this one other than he was never charged regarding the jewelry which tells me it belonged to someone else and they eventually got the name. jmo

 

[m00c0w]

I think it was pictures of the jewelry were sent to Miami-Dade. The school kept the jewelry. I doubt they still have it and it could be the owner claimed it. I can't imagine the school keepting the jewelry if it were never claimed. What if it belonged to TM's mother? The school would have no right to keep it and not tell her. I don't think we have to full story on this one other than he was never charged regarding the jewelry which tells me it belonged to someone else and they eventually got the name. jmo

BBM

You are correct. The original report was hazy about this. It appears it's since been clarified.

The investigator later saw Martin mark a door with "W.T.F." or "what the f--k," the report said. When the school cop searched Martin's backpack the next day looking for the graffiti marker, he reported he found women's jewelry and a screwdriver described as a "burglary tool," the report said.

According to the report, the 12 pieces of jewelry included silver wedding bands, earrings with diamonds and a watch. The investigator asked about the jewelry and "Martin replied it's not mine. A friend gave it to me," the report said.

"We have received several inquiries from media outlets regarding an incident that occurred on October 21, 2011, at Dr. Michael M. Krop High School involving Trayvon Martin," Miami-Dade Police said in a statement released Tuesday. "At that time, the Miami-Dade Police Department (MDPD) was contacted by Miami-Dade Schools Police Department (MDSPD) to assist in identifying property found in Trayvon Martin’s possession. Our records yielded negative results and MDSPD was advised of such findings."

http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/...From-School-Three-Times-Report-144403305.html

 

[tlcya]

I think it was pictures of the jewelry were sent to Miami-Dade. The school kept the jewelry. I doubt they still have it and it could be the owner claimed it. I can't imagine the school keepting the jewelry if it were never claimed. What if it belonged to TM's mother? The school would have no right to keep it and not tell her. I don't think we have to full story on this one other than he was never charged regarding the jewelry which tells me it belonged to someone else and they eventually got the name. jmo

according to the reports I read TM told school officials the jewelry belonged to a friend that he declined to name.

 

[vlpate]

I think it has been stated all along the narcotics officer was the first one to question Zimmerman in the homicide investigation.

No, actually, when it fits their purpose, only a narcotics detective interviewed GZ. I see it in the media as well. It is thrown in as an element of the perceived incompetency of the investigation.

 

[katydid23]

BBM

I don't remember Zimmerman saying he was looking in windows or cars. I don't think that is true.

“It’s raining. He’s just walking around, looking about,” Zimmerman told the dispatcher. “He’s just staring looking at all the houses.”


Some inyterpreted that to mean he was casing houses. Probably he was just lost.

 

[LambChop]

I specifically stated in my post that I was not trying to make an allegory to this event. The police have the tools necessary to make an arrest and even seek conviction if they feel there is cause enough. It's not like this law ties their hands. I was simply demonstrating why this law exists. This case is not representative of its main intent.

The law is a good one, I agree with what you were posting. I would want to know that if I hit an armed intruder in my home over the head with an iron frying pan and killed them that I would have some protection under the law. Most people disagree in this case because they see GZ as the aggressor because he pursued TM when he did not have to. I see the potential for the law either to be rewritten and if not, I fear it will be gone. Public pressure will do that. jmo