17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #26

[songline]

OT :floorlaugh:

I called an old friend then we had 4 calles today just to catch up.
(we have not talked in some time). :floorlaugh:


Amungst other things I told him - I need a brake today. THAT's HIM.
His sense of humor change everything. he sent me a few You Tubs of him.
the reason I put one here is just incase anyone needs a laugh today.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2c5tc0pdaI&feature=relmfu"]The A-Hole Song - The Extra-Strength Version of the Serenity Prayer - YouTube[/ame]

 

[suzihawk]

Suzihawk,

When you say you know what DIDN'T happen, I assume from looking back at your original response that you dont believe that TM started the PHYSICAL confrontation. I understand your position, but that does not necessiarly mean that everyone else has to accept it as fact.

I personally have not seen enough evidence to decide who actually started the physical confrontation, and to me that is the crux of the entire case against GZ.

If I am in error, and you are referring to something else that "DIDN'T" happen, my apologies.

I was referring to this post:

But is that the law? If the situation was reverse and TM followed GZ, would GZ have every right to invoke SYG with a gun even if TM never physically attacked him?

I was questioning why we should debate things that DIDN'T happen. Trayvon didn't follow GZ.

Apology accepted.

 

[Karmady]

BBM. I guess one way to interpret the SYG law is that it only applies to preventing a forcible felony. I read it as being applicable when trying to prevent great bodily harm or to prevent a forcible felony.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...ng=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html

You are correct, imo

eta: this part, A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place

 

[AngelWings444]

It might have been wet grass. jmo

Wet grass without leaving a watermark on the jacket? I know, when I clean a spot off an item of clothing, that area shows a wet spot (unless I blow dry it :what. Since it was unusually "cold" that evening, I don't believe any water spot would be dry before getting to the police station.

 

[Phoenixfla]

I don't think the law allowed him to approach Trayvon and say and do "whatever he wanted." I just think the law allows him to follow Trayvon, approach him and address him verbally so long as the following, approaching and verbally communicating was not itself criminal. If GZ had come upon Trayvon screaming and swinging his fists or brandishing his weapon and saying he was going to shoot him, Trayvon would have had a legitimate fear of imminent and great bodily harm and SYG would not apply to GZ, imo. And who knows, maybe GZ did just that and his SYG defense will be unsuccessful. But following, approaching and verbally confronting in a non-assualtive (by the legal definition of assualt) manner is not against the law as I understand it. jmoo.

Very nice summary, and I concur. It all boils down to the PHYSICAL confrontation. If GZ tried to detain, "accost", restrain, hold, assult, or anything else that require GZ to touch TM, then I say lock him up, BUT if TM started the PHYSICAL confrontation by shoving, punching, etc. GZ, then I think GZ had every right to defend himself.

 

[grammieto5]

Forget it, it's not worth the trouble trying to discuss. Obviously everyone knows what exactly the SYG law is and how it can be used and not used.

wow I sure hope you never get on a jury If everyone knows what exactly the SYG law is and how it can be used and not used, why are so many around the country asking about it?

 

[AngelWings444]

Uhhh....I believe in this case it refers to "great bodily harm" such as if someone jumped on you and started smashing your head into the concrete several times.

If Zimmerman had his head "smashed" into the concrete several times, there would have been blood, a bandage, a mark..something significant. I don't think that story is going to fly.

JMO

 

[HiHater]

You are correct, imo

eta: this part, A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place

BBM...I just wanted to emphasize this.

 

[rotterdam]

BBM


But is that the law? If the situation was reverse and TM followed GZ, would GZ have every right to invoke SYG with a gun even if TM never physically attacked him?

Good question. Ambush is laying in waiting ready to attack. If I would have been in such a situation when some unidentified stranger would be following me and suddenly appears out of nowhere, I really do not know what I would do.
Especially if I had a gun ready to fire. I guess it would depend on the distance between me and the alleged assailant. I would attempt to make contact from a safe distance like I have a gun ,stay the heck away or else. And keep the gun ready if that character would come too close.
Trayvon, however, did not have a gun.

 

[flourish]

Isn't that's why it's called a 'hypothetical'? :waitasec:

The hypothetical is attempting to answer the question on the law? Do you know the answer?

Here's another hypothetical. If I start following you around the corner and you start getting scared, can you turn around, pull a gun out and shoot me, then claim SYG?

I'm not a lawyer, I'm just wondering if that's how the law is supposed to be interpreted.

I guess the question was more how do these hypothetical situations have anything to do with the actual facts of the case? At least that's been my question.

 

[Isabelle]

BBM


But is that the law? If the situation was reverse and TM followed GZ, would GZ have every right to invoke SYG with a gun even if TM never physically attacked him?

I don't believe he could.

 

[m00c0w]

Wet grass without leaving a watermark on the jacket? I know, when I clean a spot off an item of clothing, that area shows a wet spot (unless I blow dry it :what. Since it was unusually "cold" that evening, I don't believe any water spot would be dry before getting to the police station.

Or the moisture could have beaded up (given he was wearing what looks like a fleece jacket) and wouldn't necessarily be visible in the poor-resolution video.

 

[flourish]

Uhhh....I believe in this case it refers to "great bodily harm" such as if someone jumped on you and started smashing your head into the concrete several times.

Uhhh, I believe in this case there needs to be some proof of the alleged great bodily harm until we can state it as fact. IMO.

 

[LambChop]

BBM. I guess one way to interpret the SYG law is that it only applies to preventing a forcible felony. I read it as being applicable when trying to prevent great bodily harm or to prevent a forcible felony.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...ng=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html

There never was a crime. There never was any indication of a crime. It's never been a crime to walk down the street. There was never a threat to GZ while he was in his car and calling 911. Getting out of the vehicle was the start and had he just listened to what he was being told....LE was on the way, no need to follow, the incident would never have happened.

Think about it. Someone follows you by car, staring at you and he was because GZ's every move and then the man gets out of the car to follow you on foot and eventually catches up with you. How do we think we would feel if we were TM. There is more evidence that TM is the one who feared for his life than there ever has been for GZ. TM was on his way home. GZ lived on the other side of the community, knew LE was coming, never identified himself and still continued to pursue TM even though he was told to return to his vehicle. What would you think if someone did that to you....someone you did not know and all of a sudden they are in front of you and you had nothing to protect yourself with???

I just don't see GZ running after TM and not knowing where TM is (because he said so himself....I don't know who this kids is....) not exposing his gun or having his hand on it so he could pull it out easily. TM had more of a right to fear his life was threatened than GZ. jmo

 

[HiHater]

Very nice summary, and I concur. It all boils down to the PHYSICAL confrontation. If GZ tried to detain, "accost", restrain, hold, assult, or anything else that require GZ to touch TM, then I say lock him up, BUT if TM started the PHYSICAL confrontation by shoving, punching, etc. GZ, then I think GZ had every right to defend himself.

IMO, GZ initiated the physical confrontation when he chased and followed Trayvon. BUT FOR GZ's actions, he never would have even come into contact with Trayvon.

I think a jury will ask themselves these questions.

1. What is the point of chasing and following someone you don't intend to catch?

2. If you do catch that person, what would your next course of action be?

Neither have answers favorable to the accused. LE was already on the way, and as a private citizen, there was nothing else GZ could legally do.

Of course, :moo:

 

[Nova]

:waitasec: I'm confused by what you mean here? Are you saying in GZ's mind, racial profiling isn't a crime, therefore there is no need to charge him as such?

No, he's saying that racial profiling isn't a crime when it is done by a private citizen such as GZ. So there was no reason for the SA to mention it in her affidavit.

Yes, some government agencies have rules against racial profiling and the Supreme Court has ruled against profiling by officers of the court (in jury selection), for example.

But a private citizen like GZ can call the police because he finds black people suspicious. And I can lock my car doors when a black person walks past my car. Etc. and so forth.

 

[highflyer]

If I would do the same analogy I would get band
I sure can see a very different Trayvon then you all want to see.
He still deserves to be alive.
So in no way does my opinion of him negate that his parents deserve real answers.

I also can see a want to be cop, not a murderer...
Something needs to be done to curb this boy’s enthusiasm.
But I will not put him out to dry till all the facts are on the table.
I mean all the facts. Rushing to judgment is what the cops did and I did not like them doing it either.

My Brother in-law is a lawyer in Florida - he says IF GZ did not get out of his car
we would be looking at a different case. So while it was legal for him to get out of the car
it was a very bad decision, because even if Tryavon hit him first.

Why would think you would get banned? GZ is not a boy. GZ is 28 years old.

 

[Phoenixfla]

If Zimmerman had his head "smashed" into the concrete several times, there would have been blood, a bandage, a mark..something significant. I don't think that story is going to fly.

JMO

You seem very sure that there was no blood or marks. I have not seen any clear photos of GZ from the night of the incident. Perhaps you can forward them to me?

 

[songline]

I don't want to see Trayvon in any particular way. That implies some kind of bias on my part or on the part of others here. Where would that bias come from? I didn't know him and I don't know George Zimmerman. I became interested in the case because an unarmed teen was shot and there was no arrest and I wanted to know why. I care a lot about justice. I have listened to the non-emergency call and all the 911 tapes, tried to figure out the time line, taken into account that Trayvon WAS on the phone with his girlfriend 41 to 71 seconds before he was shot (keeping aside what she may have heard) and IMO opinion George Zimmerman's story as it appears in the Orlando Sentinel and which was confirmed by police as accurate is just plain unbelievable.

I don't know why you see Trayvon the way you do, what makes you think he must have attacked Zimmerman first. I find it very painful to read that you think "he still deserves to be alive." Still meaning 'despite what?' His English teacher said he was an A and B student who majored in cheerfulness. He was looking at colleges. His coach has talked about what a wonder kid he was. He has never been arrested. Yes, he's been suspended but so are many kids these days. Teenagers act up. They aren't adults yet and need guidance. Trayvon has a wonderful family. I am very impressed with his father, mother, and brother and I have no doubt they were providing him with that guidance. If Trayvon's suspensions are deemed important than I don't know why Zimmerman pleading guilty to assaulting a police officer at 21 means nothing.

Maybe I miss used a word or two. but clearly I always say everyone deserves to be alive. We are not God.
I do not know how wonderful any of them are at all. You seem to know.
Bringing Al S. ++ on tells me enough.
NO that is not the only way to have gotten attention for a case the police messed up.
I do not see wonderful at all. I do see that it is your opinion.

I never ever said that GZs history means nothing.
I know this case puts a lot of words in many people’s mouths that are none
other they personal View. We all have a right to a personal view.
I do not have your view. I do not need that. My view is simple:

When all the facts are on the table then I will make my assessment as to what I really think.
NO not yet, not now, and definitely never jumping on any band wagon, never did, never will.

 

[songline]

Why would think you would get banned? GZ is not a boy. GZ is 28 years old.

if I say what I really think, I would.