17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #31

[impatientredhead]

I'm not at all familiar with conceal weapons laws. Florida allows open carry within certain parameters but I don't know the details. I do know when I was assaulted on my property my Dad's LE friends said I could carry my 22 on my hip in a holster without any kind of permit as long as it was fully visible and not hidden and as long as I was on my property doing my regular routine. I elected not to - the revolver would have been in the way and *I* considered it a provocation that could escalate the situation.

But would carrying a weapon in his hand be considered 'brandishing' which I believe is illegal, concealed carry or permit not?

Here is information from last year about open carry in Florida:


I'm not sure if this change passed, though. BTW, my incident happened in 1989 - laws could have been passed banning and allowing open carry many times since then, so I don't know what the actual laws were back then.

IMO, JMO, etc.

Yes, carrying the gun in his hand would be brandishing a weapon and it is exactly why GZ didn't say that. IMO and only my opinion, GZ had his weapon in hand when the confrontation happened, that is why TM responded the way he did, and why GZs only real injury is the wound to his head. His hands were on his gun when hit the ground and didn't break his fall. TMs only injury is the gunshot, GZ never struck him because his hands were on his gun. Speculation and totally unprovable, not enough to hang a case on.

 

[annalia]

You do have a right to confront anyone you choose, but that person also has a right to react based on how they perceive the confrontation. It is not against the law, per se, to follow (or CHASE) anyone, but it does have the potential to create a hostile situation. It's aggravating, and if you are pursuing someone, you are the aggressor. Under no circumstance is someone who is running AWAY posing an active threat to a person who is following them. I'd have to double check, but I don't even think police officers can use deadly force on a fleeing felon. This situation, in my opinion, is not a series of events as some like to portray it. It's one continuous occurrence; from the time GZ got out of his car and started following Trayvon, he was the aggressor.

Like fruits from a bad tree, GZ cannot be the pursuer, the chaser, the follower, the aggressor up until the actual confrontation happens. That makes no sense. He initiated the confrontation. Trayvon had no reason to approach him, he wasn't the one who had deemed someone suspicious and decided that the person would not get away.
I don't think any lawyer would go into court and say "sure, my client was following the victim, but the victim completely overreacted and became aggressive." That's what's being argued on this forum. It's completely flawed logic IMO.

Most reasonable people don't follow people who they deem to be "suspicious", and most reasonable people would be fearful if a stranger was following them. Jurors are reasonable people.

JMO MOO IMO

BBM

And there have been legal experts who have said exactly that, GZ's intent that night would make him the First Aggressor.

Obviously none of us here are experts, but it seems that for evey legal analyst or expert who says that nothing GZ was illegal, he could chase him, follow him, carry his gun, say whatever he wanted and it's still SYG, there's another legal expert who disagrees and says that it shows he was the First Aggressor so SYG doesn't apply to him.

It will be very interesting to see what transpires during the SYG hearing, if there is one.

JMHO

 

[Sensei]

So, what your saying is if I notice someone watching me, I make sure I get out of his line of sight, then I go about my business (talking on the phone, keep walking, etc), then I see this person again and he says to me 'why are you here', and I say something back and a confrontation ensues, I'd be perfectly in the right of anything I do to the person who confronted me, because I didn't like him watching me and asking a question?

Only if you kill the person...then you can claim that you were attacked and it's all good from there the police can't even arrest you. <sarcasm off>

Instead of TM and GZ lets substitute any other 17 yr old kid and any old person armed with a gun but instead of a subdivision, make it in a dark desserted parking garage...The armed man is following the kid, the kid ducks behind a car and goes up one level in an attempt to get away...then realizes that the armed man (he does not have to know the man is armed at that time) is right there, almost right at him. This man is not wearing anything identifying him as anyone but an unknown strange guy...and he asks an aggressive and accusatory question, does this kid have to actually wait for this strange guy to actually hurt him before defending himself? Would you want YOUR kid to actually wait until the guy put his hands on you before they decided to defend themselves? Do you think the kid should just run, since he already tried to get away from the guy once, why would he think that running is going to provoke anything other than the guy chasing him and then hurting him....

sometimes following is NOT just following it is intimidating, and a question is not just a mellow innocuous question it is verbal aggression...so in a similar situation what exactly would you do if you were sure that this strange guy was going to hurt you?

 

[impatientredhead]

Have we been successful in finding anything in the statutes in Florida or case law that addresses the issue of Zimmerman stalking a minor? I would think that the laws of stalking would be considerably different if the person being stalked is a minor.


~jmo~

If the police haven't told you not to contact someone and you have violated it how can you be guilty of stalking someone? This was their first interaction by all accounts. :waitasec:

 

[HiHater]

So, what your saying is if I notice someone watching me, I make sure I get out of his line of sight, then I go about my business (talking on the phone, keep walking, etc), then I see this person again and he says to me 'why are you here', and I say something back and a confrontation ensues, I'd be perfectly in the right of anything I do to the person who confronted me, because I didn't like him watching me and asking a question?

If you took the gun out the equation and the events happened the exact same way, with an assumption that TM started the physical confrontation, could GZ not press charges for assault?

First of all, you're not just "seeing" this person again, you're now approaching them after having been following them. That is threatening behavior. You have not told the person your purpose. In this case, even after Trayvon asked why he was being followed, he was not answered.

If you initiated the confrontation, you're the aggressor. There's more to it than not liking the fact that someone is watching you or asking you something, there's a perception of threat. There's fear.

If you attacked that person, who confronted you in a manner that caused you to fear great bodily harm, you'd be standing your ground.

 

[cityslick]

Only if you kill the person...then you can claim that you were attacked and it's all good from there the police can't even arrest you. <sarcasm off>

Instead of TM and GZ lets substitute any other 17 yr old kid and any old person armed with a gun but instead of a subdivision, make it in a dark desserted parking garage...The armed man is following the kid, the kid ducks behind a car and goes up one level in an attempt to get away...then realizes that the armed man (he does not have to know the man is armed at that time) is right there, almost right at him. This man is not wearing anything identifying him as anyone but an unknown strange guy...and he asks an aggressive and accusatory question, does this kid have to actually wait for this strange guy to actually hurt him before defending himself? Would you want YOUR kid to actually wait until the guy put his hands on you before they decided to defend themselves? Do you think the kid should just run, since he already tried to get away from the guy once, why would he think that running is going to provoke anything other than the guy chasing him and then hurting him....

sometimes following is NOT just following it is intimidating, and a question is not just a mellow innocuous question it is verbal aggression...so in a similar situation what exactly would you do if you were sure that this strange guy was going to hurt you?

I'd keep running or use my phone to call 911 if I thought I was in danger. I'm not a teenager though.

 

[HiHater]

If the police haven't told you not to contact someone and you have violated it how can you be guilty of stalking someone? This was their first interaction by all accounts. :waitasec:

The police don't have to tell you not to follow someone for it to be against the law...They had at least two interactions as part of the same incident. IMO

 

[HiHater]

I'd keep running or use my phone to call 911 if I thought I was in danger. I'm not a teenager though.

Have you ever been in a situation like this?

 

[Rob774]

I'm not sure exactly how tall and how much either person weighed that night. What could matter more is who was more physically fit. When I was 17-18yrs old I was at my peak in regards to strength and overall fitness. I was in HS, got regular exercise in PE class and the job I had was very physical. By the time I was 28yrs old I didn't get near the exercise that I did when I was younger because of the type of job I had and my lifestyle. I wasn't nearly as strong at 28 as I was at 17yrs old. I have know idea of how psychically fit GZ or Trayvon was that night but I can speculate. JMO.

Me and you differ. When i was 17 i was at my peak of physicality, meaning i could dunk a basketball. But i was only 6' 165. By the time i hit 28, i could no longer dunk, which means i lost a few inches from my vertical, but i was a more rounded specimen since i continued to work out. I had put on about 20lbs of muscle. But at 6'2, 185, friends still called me "skinny." Heck, i'm 202 now, and still considered thin. But my point is, the drop off from 17-28... very little athletically. But i made huge strides in my level of strength. Very few 17 years could of taken me when i was 28.

 

[Sensei]

I'd keep running or use my phone to call 911 if I thought I was in danger. I'm not a teenager though.

If Trayvon HAD called 911 the outcome would have been the same, since the police arrived one minute AFTER the shooting.

 

[cityslick]

Have you ever been in a situation like this?

Where I felt threatened? Yes. But then again I'm not that much of a fighter when dealing with confrontation. I'd hold my own but I'd have to really be forced into that kind of scenario.

 

[impatientredhead]

Only if you kill the person...then you can claim that you were attacked and it's all good from there the police can't even arrest you. <sarcasm off>

Instead of TM and GZ lets substitute any other 17 yr old kid and any old person armed with a gun but instead of a subdivision, make it in a dark desserted parking garage...The armed man is following the kid, the kid ducks behind a car and goes up one level in an attempt to get away...then realizes that the armed man (he does not have to know the man is armed at that time) is right there, almost right at him. This man is not wearing anything identifying him as anyone but an unknown strange guy...and he asks an aggressive and accusatory question, does this kid have to actually wait for this strange guy to actually hurt him before defending himself? Would you want YOUR kid to actually wait until the guy put his hands on you before they decided to defend themselves? Do you think the kid should just run, since he already tried to get away from the guy once, why would he think that running is going to provoke anything other than the guy chasing him and then hurting him....

sometimes following is NOT just following it is intimidating, and a question is not just a mellow innocuous question it is verbal aggression...so in a similar situation what exactly would you do if you were sure that this strange guy was going to hurt you?

That is why this law is so ridiculous though, change it slightly to TM is 18 and can legally carry a weapon as well or in freak accident GZ died from a concussion when he hit the ground, SYG would then be on TMs side.

Same scenario, different dead person, immunity swings to the living in that particular scenario. They both would have fear of serious injury at that time. It is ridiculous in its exclusion of behavior leading up to the death.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Have we been successful in finding anything in the statutes in Florida or case law that addresses the issue of Zimmerman stalking a minor? I would think that the laws of stalking would be considerably different if the person being stalked is a minor.


~jmo~

Under the Florida statute for stalking, it changes from a misdemeanor to a felony if the minor is under 16 yrs of age.

(5)&#8195;Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks a minor under 16 years of age commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...ing&URL=0700-0799/0784/Sections/0784.048.html

 

[Kimster]

Stop discussing what other posters should be posting NOW. If you see victim bashing, alert the post. Mods don't read every post and by bringing this up on the thread, you are merely going to start problems.

 

[Sensei]

Where I felt threatened? Yes. But then again I'm not that much of a fighter when dealing with confrontation. I'd hold my own but I'd have to really be forced into that kind of scenario.

And yet you are comfortable suggesting that Trayvon apropo of nothing was ready to take the first swing and try to kill Zimmerman with his bare hands.

I still want someone else to take a run at Papa's calculation which I actually did, and I do believe that if the prosecution is paying attention they are going to ask George Zimmerman how it is that the story that His Attorney is claiming and three other sources are claiming could be true....How could he have been doing and going what he said he was doing and going where he claimed to be going when he was attacked by Trayvon when the best calculation I can come up with being very generous with times and distances show that if his story is true then Trayvon attacked him while he was still on the phone with LE dispatch....he is going to have to explain that I believe. IMO JMHO and stuff.

 

[jaded cat]

You don't think someone can take someone else out that outweighs them by 20 lbs? That's not been my experience.

I believe GZ outweighed TM by more than 20-25 pounds. TM at 150 and GZ at 200 or so. GZ and his family have indicated he's lost a lot of weight since the incident.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Me and you differ. When i was 17 i was at my peak of physicality, meaning i could dunk a basketball. But i was only 6' 165. By the time i hit 28, i could no longer dunk, which means i lost a few inches from my vertical, but i was a more rounded specimen since i continued to work out. I had put on about 20lbs of muscle. But at 6'2, 185, friends still called me "skinny." Heck, i'm 202 now, and still considered thin. But my point is, the drop off from 17-28... very little athletically. But i made huge strides in my level of strength. Very few 17 years could of taken me when i was 28.

Thanks for your reply. You make a good point. Without knowing more about GZ and Trayvons exercise habits it's hard to say who was or wasn't physically fit. At this point we can only speculate.

 

[tehcloser]

My now 30 year old sons could eaisly have beaten their then 17 year old, football playing, basketball playing, baseball playing arses up in a hurry. And no...they are not still working out.

 

[atthelake]

<snip> himself said he was running, that does not mean that he ran all the way home....It may mean that he ran until he was out of site behind the buildings on the sidewalk and then stopped to catch his breath and talk to his girl...he may have been only mildly apprehensive when he ran and tried to get out of GZ's site...but can you imagine the escalation of that mild apprehension to outright fear when he realized that GZ was now on foot and approaching him...Trayvon was not required to run home, he may have thought that it was all over and he was just dawdling along hanging on the sidewalk talkin to his girl so he could do so in private until confronted by the guy who had watched and followed him before....Trayvon did NOT have the requirement to go straight home, and attempt to avoid the crazy guy who had been following him, he did not have less rights or more responsibilities to avoid a confrontation than George Zimmerman did

Trayvon was found almost on his doorstep, while George was found in an area that he would NOT have been if he had not been following Trayvon, he had the right to be there but he has not explained in a logical and reasonable way exactly what he was doing there if not following Trayvon..IMO JMHO and stuff.

:rocker:.....yep, that sums it up IMHO for me.....yet now the legal morass of the LAW and the wheels of justice continues under a microscope for the masses (including :websleuther:'s) to have heated debates.

While I agree with the above - I don't know the subtleties of law, nor have an opinion yet how this should or will play out, nor do I have much evidence to base an opinion on this travesty.

I will continue to have interest in others opinions, and visit here infrequently, yet will await any for myself for that time which we have better information and real evidence that is anticipated will come out later through Sunshine laws or the courts. I have not turned on one show yet for this case - as I got in a vortex and lost 3 years of my life with the *other Florida case* - and I don't want that to happen again. This case will not again be one to take over my life.

I look forward to the time that the prosecution's evidence is released, then perhaps I can begin discussing the information more informed, and more *sleuthing* vs. unbased opinion can be offered.

I do hope at a later time we will congregate in real time and visit in the chat room downstairs - as that was so very beneficial in the *other case* in Florida where the conversations were *live* and immediate.

:twocents: :seeya:

 

[grammieto5]

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...eading-to-the-shooting-of-trayvon-martin.html

Zimmerman had lived there since 2009 I believe.



~jmo~

Thank you for this, it is very interesting. So it would seem to me, as close as Brandi lived to GZ, if all this crime was going on she would have some knowledge of it. Even if Brandi and GZ do not know each other with something as important as all this crime neighbors would talk about it. That is why GZ murdered Trayvon, right, GZ thought Trayvon was involved in all this crime????