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

[Deleted member 39678]

She seems pretty sure the fight started 3-4 houses away from her backyard, and the boy was shot at her backyard. So it appears at some point the two of them (GZ and the boy) traveled together to where the boy was shot at. She also says the boy was face down so I am curious as to what autopsy says about direction in which the boy was shot (from the front or from the back?)

She stated that she heard the "little boy" cry and didn't hear any kind of fight. She got the information about a fight later on from her neighbors.

The autopsy would show the entry of the bullet and it's direction while traveling thru the body. If Trayvon was shot in the back while trying to escape, that would show it.

http://www.wftv.com/videos/news/interview-with-witness-of-sanford-teen-shooting/vGYPW/

 

[Rob774]

I think that this interview with a women named Mary C. is the the one your talking about. I'm not sure about what she knows. One thing that bothered me was at the very end of this long interview, she asked why wasn't he arrested,and then brought to trial where he could then prove his innocence. She want's this guy thrown in jail until he can prove that he's innocent. Sorry Mary, it doesn't work that way in America.

http://www.wftv.com/videos/news/interview-with-witness-of-sanford-teen-shooting/vGYPW/

Yes, we know innocent until proven guilty. But under reasonable circumstances, he would. Of been arrested, and then would of had to prove his guilt.

Some folk at this PD will come under a lot of fire before this all over. And it wouldn't.shock. me if it were found out thar GZ was somehow connected to someone of power/ influence down there.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Yes, we know innocent until proven guilty. But under reasonable circumstances, he would. Of been arrested, and then would of had to prove his guilt.

Some folk at this PD will come under a lot of fire before this all over. And it wouldn't.shock. me if it were found out thar GZ was somehow connected to someone of power/ influence down there.

He may still be arrested. It's up to the States Attorneys office now. If there really is a conspiracy to keep GZ out of trouble, it would have to a very big one. And very high stakes. Covering up a murder is about as big as it could get. One bad cop couldn't do it by himself. JMO.

 

[LolaMoon08]

Do we know if Zimmerman had a job? I know he was going to school? School is expensive? He was living in a decent gated community? I think neighbors would have talked had he lived with his parents? I think we would know if he had roommates? I'm just curious how Zimmerman could afford both college and a place like that by himself?

We have heard nothing from the parents/family/friends of Zimmerman. You would think that anyone, even if it was in self-defense, would be devastated about taking another human beings life? I'm just surprised that no one has spoken up for him? Except the police? Is his family a family of money? Importance? Someone who makes generous donations for certain elected officials (Sheriff) during election years?

There is not even a lawyer for Zimmerman speaking on his behalf?

http://www.wftv.com/news/news/cops-son-caught-on-cam-punching-homeless-man/nKGLk/

Here's another Sanford, Florida case. Just look into this kids past and you'll see just how much he has gotten away with for having the right people in his family. Sick!

ETA: Here's what Sanford Police said about not arresting the kid on the spot.

"Despite the video, the police report says accounts on scene were conflicting and the victim was uncooperative. Officers said that is why Sanford police didn't make an arrest."

ETA: And the victim was uncooperative because he was unconscious for quite a while.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Do we know if Zimmerman had a job? I know he was going to school? School is expensive? He was living in a decent gated community? I think neighbors would have talked had he lived with his parents? I think we would know if he had roommates? I'm just curious how Zimmerman could afford both college and a place like that by himself?

We have heard nothing from the parents/family/friends of Zimmerman. You would think that anyone, even if it was in self-defense, would be devastated about taking another human beings life? I'm just surprised that no one has spoken up for him? Except the police? Is his family a family of money? Importance? Someone who makes generous donations for certain elected officials (Sheriff) during election years?

There is not even a lawyer for Zimmerman speaking on his behalf?

http://www.wftv.com/news/news/cops-son-caught-on-cam-punching-homeless-man/nKGLk/

Here's another Sanford, Florida case. Just look into this kids past and you'll see just how much he has gotten away with for having the right people in his family. Sick!

ETA: Here's what Sanford Police said about not arresting the kid on the spot.

"Despite the video, the police report says accounts on scene were conflicting and the victim was uncooperative. Officers said that is why Sanford police didn't make an arrest."

ETA: And the victim was uncooperative because he was unconscious for quite a while.

BBM
Here's another article showing that the young man was willing to pay the victims medical bills.

January 25, 2011|By Rene Stutzman, Orlando Sentinel

The son of a Sanford police officer who's charged with sucker punching a homeless man has agreed to pay the victim's medical bills and make donations to several non-profit groups, according to a local attorney.

And it looks like the Seminole County Sheriffs Office is conducting an investigation.

The Sanford Police Department has launched an investigation into nine officers associated with the case, trying to determine why there was no arrest the night Collison punched Ware. That is being conducted by the Seminole County Sheriff's Office.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com...0125_1_sanford-bar-medical-bills-homeless-man

 

[LolaMoon08]

BBM
Here's another article showing that the young man was willing to pay the victims medical bills.

January 25, 2011|By Rene Stutzman, Orlando Sentinel



And it looks like the Seminole County Sheriffs Office is conducting an investigation.



http://articles.orlandosentinel.com...0125_1_sanford-bar-medical-bills-homeless-man

It's already a done case. His parents paid off the homeless man and the charges were reduced and he was given a years probation.

I'm only bringing this case up to show that the Sanford Police have a habit of not arresting people with their excuse being, even when the crime was clearly videotaped, because the victim was uncooperative (unconscious in this case/dead in Tray's case) and they claim there was conflicting witness statements (in this case there were no conflicting statements/in Tray's case, we have no idea because they won't release the 911 tapes but a neighbor has come forward stating that one of the officers "corrected" a statement for her). The Sanford Police had no intention of ever arresting/charging Justin Collison of anything until the video went viral and there was a public outcry. Even when the judge had signed the arrest warrant, the Sanford Police didn't even put it in their computers so when Justin showed up to turn himself in, they turned him away.

There is some serious corruption going on in Sanford, imo.

 

[angelmom]

I think that this interview with a women named Mary C. is the the one your talking about. I'm not sure about what she knows. One thing that bothered me was at the very end of this long interview, she asked why wasn't he arrested,and then brought to trial where he could then prove his innocence. She want's this guy thrown in jail until he can prove that he's innocent. Sorry Mary, it doesn't work that way in America.

http://www.wftv.com/videos/news/interview-with-witness-of-sanford-teen-shooting/vGYPW/

Actually, it does. When the claim is self-defense, the burden of proof shifts to to the defense.

http://www.rbs2.com/cc.htm

burden of proof​

criminal law
In criminal litigation, the burden of proof is always on the state. The state must prove that the defendant is guilty. The defendant is assumed to be innocent; the defendant needs to prove nothing. (There are exceptions. If the defendant wishes to claim that he/she is insane, and therefore not guilty, the defendant bears the burden of proving his/her insanity. Other exceptions include defendants who claim self-defense or duress.)

 

[ScubaTwinn]

If it truly is self-defense, why is Zimmerman not talking to the public? If I were ever in the same position, I'd be screaming and crying to the world what happened and how sorry I was. Even if he didn't want to get into the details of exactly what happened because of an ongoing investigation, I'd still be crying I'm sorry to the family. MOO but his silence isn't helping him.

 

[jjenny]

If it truly is self-defense, why is Zimmerman not talking to the public? If I were ever in the same position, I'd be screaming and crying to the world what happened and how sorry I was. Even if he didn't want to get into the details of exactly what happened because of an ongoing investigation, I'd still be crying I'm sorry to the family. MOO but his silence isn't helping him.

Considering anything you say "can and will be used against you in the court of law" there is no way he should be talking to the public right now. And if he is claiming self-defense, what in the world should he be sorry about? Being sorry implies guilt.

 

[Velouria]

I think that this interview with a women named Mary C. is the the one your talking about. I'm not sure about what she knows. One thing that bothered me was at the very end of this long interview, she asked why wasn't he arrested,and then brought to trial where he could then prove his innocence. She want's this guy thrown in jail until he can prove that he's innocent. Sorry Mary, it doesn't work that way in America.

http://www.wftv.com/videos/news/interview-with-witness-of-sanford-teen-shooting/vGYPW/

Actually it DOES work that way in most jurisdictions, as self-defense is an affirmative defense, meaning the burden is on the defendant to prove his innocence.

In this case, the SPD appears to be interpreting the "Stand Your Ground" statute to mean that GZ is free and clear as long as he claims self-defense. Never mind the fact that HE initiated a confrontation with an unarmed teenager who was lawfully walking down the street. Again, that wouldn't fly in most jurisdictions.

Sanford Police stated the 911 calls could not be released while the investigation was underway. Well, it's been over two days now since the investigation was concluded and turned over to the SA, and yet they still haven't released them. What's their excuse now?

 

[jjenny]

Actually it DOES work that way in most jurisdictions, as self-defense is an affirmative defense, meaning the burden is on the defendant to prove his innocence.

In this case, the SPD appears to be interpreting the "Stand Your Ground" statute to mean that GZ is free and clear as long as he claims self-defense. Never mind the fact that HE initiated a confrontation with an unarmed teenager who was lawfully walking down the street. Again, that wouldn't fly in most jurisdictions.

Sanford Police stated the 911 calls could not be released while the investigation was underway. Well, it's been over two days now since the investigation was concluded and turned over to the SA, and yet they still haven't released them. What's their excuse now?

I presume once it gets to court police will be ordered to release the 911 tapes because of sunshine laws.

 

[jjenny]

Actually it DOES work that way in most jurisdictions, as self-defense is an affirmative defense, meaning the burden is on the defendant to prove his innocence.

In this case, the SPD appears to be interpreting the "Stand Your Ground" statute to mean that GZ is free and clear as long as he claims self-defense. Never mind the fact that HE initiated a confrontation with an unarmed teenager who was lawfully walking down the street. Again, that wouldn't fly in most jurisdictions.

Sanford Police stated the 911 calls could not be released while the investigation was underway. Well, it's been over two days now since the investigation was concluded and turned over to the SA, and yet they still haven't released them. What's their excuse now?

There were a case in TX where a guy was repeatedly told by 911 operator not to go out there and confront the men who were allegedly burglarizing his neighbor's property. He got out there and shot and killed them (and grand jury refused to indict him). Once he got out there he claimed he felt threatened because they were running in his direction (or something to that effect). I think in any other state except TX (and potentially FL) he would have been put on trial. TX has very strong self-defense laws (and while I very much support self-defense laws that might be going too far).

 

[Velouria]

jjenny, in that case I'd say the Grand Jury no-billed him because the burglars approached him on his own property after he stepped outside to tell them to stop. You do have the right in Texas to use deadly force to defend your own property, although one could argue there would be no need for defense had he not initiated the confrontation.

Another thing that wasn't widely reported is that the burglars were here illegally from Columbia where they'd both been convicted of drug trafficking. Hardly the most sympathetic of victims given the current political climate.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Actually it DOES work that way in most jurisdictions, as self-defense is an affirmative defense, meaning the burden is on the defendant to prove his innocence.

In this case, the SPD appears to be interpreting the "Stand Your Ground" statute to mean that GZ is free and clear as long as he claims self-defense. Never mind the fact that HE initiated a confrontation with an unarmed teenager who was lawfully walking down the street. Again, that wouldn't fly in most jurisdictions.

Sanford Police stated the 911 calls could not be released while the investigation was underway. Well, it's been over two days now since the investigation was concluded and turned over to the SA, and yet they still haven't released them. What's their excuse now?

BBM
Looks like Sanford PD is using Florida statue 776.013(3) Justifiable use of force.

(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and 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 or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

Now if GZ was doing something illegal(assault?)when he confronted Trayvon, this statue would not apply.

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

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Actually it DOES work that way in most jurisdictions, as self-defense is an affirmative defense, meaning the burden is on the defendant to prove his innocence.

In this case, the SPD appears to be interpreting the "Stand Your Ground" statute to mean that GZ is free and clear as long as he claims self-defense. Never mind the fact that HE initiated a confrontation with an unarmed teenager who was lawfully walking down the street. Again, that wouldn't fly in most jurisdictions.

Sanford Police stated the 911 calls could not be released while the investigation was underway. Well, it's been over two days now since the investigation was concluded and turned over to the SA, and yet they still haven't released them. What's their excuse now?

BBM.
I agree that a defendant at trial using self-defense as a defense has the burden of proof.

But does that mean that in every case of self-defense, a person must be arrested, charged and brought to trial to prove their innocence? I don't believe that is true.

 

[Velouria]

BBM.
I agree that a defendant at trial using self-defense as a defense has the burden of proof.

But does that mean that in every case of self-defense, a person must be arrested, charged and brought to trial to prove their innocence? I don't believe that is true.

I'm sure there are clear cut cases of self-defense, RANCH, but I dare say this sure ain't one of them. :notgood:

IMO, the statute could just as easily be applied to the actions of Trayvon. If he perceived GZ as an attacker, then he also had a right to self defense.

I wonder where we'd be if Trayvon was a bit older and carrying a licensed, concealed weapon, and Mr. Zimmerman had been unarmed. Something tells me we wouldn't still be wondering why no arrest has been made.

 

[ScubaTwinn]

And if he is claiming self-defense, what in the world should he be sorry about? Being sorry implies guilt.

I would tell them I'm sorry they've lost a child. He doesn't have to say anything that implies guilt.

 

[ScubaTwinn]

"Our entire family is deeply sorry for the loss of Trayvon," Robert Zimmerman's letter says. "We pray for the Martin family daily. We also pray that the community will grieve together and not be divided by more unwarranted hate."

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...ing-zimmerman-letter-20120315,0,1160767.story

 

[jjenny]

jjenny, in that case I'd say the Grand Jury no-billed him because the burglars approached him on his own property after he stepped outside to tell them to stop. You do have the right in Texas to use deadly force to defend your own property, although one could argue there would be no need for defense had he not initiated the confrontation.

...
But he was told by 911 operator to not go outside so they wouldn't be approaching him if he followed directions. Those 911 calls were released and he is told not to do anything himself (which he disregards). Also it was not his property that was burglarized but his neighbors. If this was not in TX the outcome for him I believe would be quite different. I agree that the alleged burglars were not sympathetic victims.

 

[jjenny]

"Our entire family is deeply sorry for the loss of Trayvon," Robert Zimmerman's letter says. "We pray for the Martin family daily. We also pray that the community will grieve together and not be divided by more unwarranted hate."

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...ing-zimmerman-letter-20120315,0,1160767.story

His father was not an witness to anything I presume. And if GZ didn't follow or confront the teenager, how did the two of them end up fighting? Not only that, a witness claims that the fighting took place in a different location from which the teenager was shot at.