Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[crimresearch]

You love to speculate, don't you? And who are you quoting with the hilited part, your strawman?

I love to ask inconvenient questions. And I find it amusing to debunk assertions that are neither correct nor useful.

The knee jerk speculation and fantasy fueled pontification, I'll leave to you and Bigfoot.

 

[Checkmite]

It has been reported by the media repeatedly that Zimmerman was 'self appointed' to run his own watch that was not part of the National Sheriffs Association program.
The official Neighborhood Watch program has made it clear that their people are not allowed to carry guns, the local police liason for the PD has said she told Zimmerman that NW was only to observe and report from a safe place, and the Chief of Police has said that Zimmerman was on his own personal business that night.

Now... you know the drill as well as I do. Why would the PD liason specifically remember having to tell *Zimmerman* not to be going after people?
Why would he be taking GenEd in the local 13th and 14th grade at age 28, with an application to the Academy unaccepted since 2008?
Why would he have a string of encounters in the past with a common thread? 'Working security', breaking up a fight, getting in the middle of other people's business, and even putting his hands on a cop?

I'm beginning to suspect our friend Zimmerman was what some of us here in the states call a "whacker". I'd like to have gotten a look at his vehicle.

 

[Gazpacho]

I'm just finding out about this and catching up with the thread, and it just keeps looking more rotten for SPD and for Zimmerman. As much as I want to give Florida's finest the benefit of doubt, it sounds way too much like a rerun of what has happened there in years past.

I'm beginning to suspect our friend Zimmerman was what some of us here in the states call a "whacker". I'd like to have gotten a look at his vehicle.

This stateser isn't familiar with the term. What is it, and what does his vehicle have to do with it? Are you talking about bumper stickers or something?

 

[This is The End]

I believe he or she is referring to the statement that Zimmerman's record was clean.

It was clean as far as he had no criminal convictions. His charges were dismissed before trial.

I thought the mistake by the police that was being discussed was when they say that Z did not know the race. Then it turned out he said "black" twice on the 911 call.


----

The news has mentioned the fact that this is the 47th time Zimmerman called 911 to report "suspicious activity" since January of 2011. Evidently among the things he liked to report were open windows.

Where I live he would likely have been charged with abusing the 911 system for calls like that.


----

Just an FYI. That is an Op-Ed piece, by a guy who works for the Miami Herald by the name of Leonard Pitts.

And IMO, it's a ridiculous piece.

Sorry I wasn't more clear that I found it ironic that article was on the front page of Google News.

[*]No taking him in to get his statements on tape or in writing.

I thought someone said on an earlier page that the shooter was in investigative custody for some time.

From the OP:

"At that point, Mr. Zimmerman was taken into custody, investigative detention if you will, and got to the station to conduct an interview with him to find out exactly what happened," Sanford police spokesman <snip> said.

 

[Puppycow]

I thought that this article in Mother Jones was pretty informative:

The Trayvon Martin Killing, Explained

How are Florida's self-defense and "stand your ground" laws key to this case?

Zimmerman may have benefited from some of the broadest firearms and self-defense regulations in the nation.
. . .
Florida also makes it easy to plead self-defense in a killing. Under then-Gov. Jeb Bush, the state in 2005 passed a broad "stand your ground" law, which allows Florida residents to use deadly force against a threat without attempting to back down from the situation. (More stringent self-defense laws state that gun owners have "a duty to retreat" before resorting to killing.) In championing the law, former NRA president and longtime Florida gun lobbyist Marion Hammer said: "Through time, in this country, what I like to call bleeding heart criminal coddlers want you to give a criminal an even break, so that when you're attacked, you're supposed to turn around and run, rather than standing your ground and protecting yourself and your family and your property."

Again, the Sunshine State was the trendsetter: 17 states have since passed "stand your ground" laws, which critics call a "license to kill" or a "shoot first" law. The law has been unpopular with law enforcement officers in Florida, since it makes it much more difficult to charge shooters with a crime and has regularly confounded juries in murder cases; many Orlando-area cops reportedly have given up investigating "self-defense" cases as a result, referring them to the overloaded state attorney's office for action. A 2010 study by the Tampa Bay Times found that "justifiable homicides" had tripled in the state since the law went into effect.

(A lot of links to further information in there which I didn't include in the quote. Check out the article itself. It also includes audio of each of the 911 calls.)

 

[Dancing David]

trioforcharity, sgtbaker and crimeresearch:

How does collection of evidence and best practice parse out?

In this case we have an admitted shooting. Not really witnessed by anyone directly. (At least from the data at hand)

So as far as say the following evidence:
-photos of the admitted shooter
-blood samples of the admitted shooter
-physical exam of the admitted shooter
-clothing of the admitted shooter

I am assuming that there is wide latitude in what constitutes the legislative definition of 'evidence that should be obtained' and that it comes down to 'best practice'.

Are there statutes in FL that possibly say, 'in case of a death involving a firearm injury there shall be the following evidence gathered'.

Or is it more of the 'if you are investigating a suspected murder you shall gather the following', or is it all up to the discretion of the investigating officers.

 

[sgtbaker]

trioforcharity, sgtbaker and crimeresearch:

How does collection of evidence and best practice parse out?

In this case we have an admitted shooting. Not really witnessed by anyone directly. (At least from the data at hand)

So as far as say the following evidence:
-photos of the admitted shooter
-blood samples of the admitted shooter
-physical exam of the admitted shooter
-clothing of the admitted shooter

I am assuming that there is wide latitude in what constitutes the legislative definition of 'evidence that should be obtained' and that it comes down to 'best practice'.

Are there statutes in FL that possibly say, 'in case of a death involving a firearm injury there shall be the following evidence gathered'.

Or is it more of the 'if you are investigating a suspected murder you shall gather the following', or is it all up to the discretion of the investigating officers.

I don't know why you are asking me, I am not in law enforcement. I am all for an investigation into the initial investigation as well as a much more thorough investigation into the incident. The only thing I take issue with is demanding an arrest when, up until this point, with the information available to the public, there seems to be a lacking of evidence to charge Zimmerman with any type of malice or intent.

I just realized that you may be asking us, specifically because Triforcharity and I live in Florida but I am not sure about Crimeresearch.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Well, since that's off topic, I will just address one thing.

Gun laws wouldn't have stopped this shooting.

Depends. It could certainly removed any doubt about criminal action. I think it is more the loosening of restrictions on self defense though.

 

[Dancing David]

I don't know why you are asking me, I am not in law enforcement. I am all for an investigation into the initial investigation as well as a much more thorough investigation into the incident. The only thing I take issue with is demanding an arrest when, up until this point, with the information available to the public, there seems to be a lacking of evidence to charge Zimmerman with any type of malice or intent.

I just realized that you may be asking us, specifically because Triforcharity and I live in Florida but I am not sure about Crimeresearch.

You seemed to have knowledge, that is why I asked, sorry.

 

[sgtbaker]

You seemed to have knowledge, that is why I asked, sorry.

You thought I had knowledge? That's the best thing I've heard all week.

 

[crimresearch]

trioforcharity, sgtbaker and crimeresearch:

How does collection of evidence and best practice parse out?

In this case we have an admitted shooting. Not really witnessed by anyone directly. (At least from the data at hand)

So as far as say the following evidence:
-photos of the admitted shooter
-blood samples of the admitted shooter
-physical exam of the admitted shooter
-clothing of the admitted shooter

I am assuming that there is wide latitude in what constitutes the legislative definition of 'evidence that should be obtained' and that it comes down to 'best practice'.

Are there statutes in FL that possibly say, 'in case of a death involving a firearm injury there shall be the following evidence gathered'.

Or is it more of the 'if you are investigating a suspected murder you shall gather the following', or is it all up to the discretion of the investigating officers.

The Florida agency that sets standards is FDLE, but it is up to each department to have a policy in place.
I'm not aware of any laws that say 'Every firearms homicide must include a test for alcohol/drugs'.

Common sense implies that it would be a good thing to know if the shooter was impaired. And it is probably written down that the proper procedure is to test *suspects*.

But, according to the Sanford police, they decided early on that no crime had been committed. For what reasons, nobody there seems to want to say.
Maybe they've got some overwhelming piece of secret evidence that completely exonerates the shooter. Or maybe they just dropped the ball. Either way, they decided that Zimmerman was not a suspect in a crime.

And that's the problem. If they had simply held off on that declaration, they could have done a more thorough investigation.

Once they said that there wasn't enough PC to say that a crime had been committed, then there isn't enough PC to have Zimmerman tested. Free to go, means free to go.

When someone is in a car wreck, consent for a test has already been given. When a cop shoots someone, the conditions of the job allow mandatory testing.

But for an ordinary citizen, who is not a suspect in a crime, such searches aren't part of the deal.

 

[crimresearch]

I thought that this article in Mother Jones was pretty informative:

The Trayvon Martin Killing, Explained


(A lot of links to further information in there which I didn't include in the quote. Check out the article itself. It also includes audio of each of the 911 calls.)

It repeats pretty much what has been in the media everywhere else, and then uses the dead man as fodder for political rhetoric. I was hoping we could avoid that in at least one thread.

 

[Checkmite]

I thought that this article in Mother Jones was pretty informative:

Again, the Sunshine State was the trendsetter: 17 states have since passed "stand your ground" laws, which critics call a "license to kill" or a "shoot first" law. The law has been unpopular with law enforcement officers in Florida, since it makes it much more difficult to charge shooters with a crime and has regularly confounded juries in murder cases; many Orlando-area cops reportedly have given up investigating "self-defense" cases as a result, referring them to the overloaded state attorney's office for action. A 2010 study by the Tampa Bay Times found that "justifiable homicides" had tripled in the state since the law went into effect.

So there's another explanation for the slipshod investigation - the Sanford PD deliberately threw the case as a passive-aggressive protest against the state self-defense law. Perhaps they were hoping all the heat currently directed at them would have been directed at the state law, precipitating a change.

 

[Travis]

Who in the hell would push for such a law in the first place? It's insane to create a law that allows you to assault someone because you think they don't "look right" then shoot them if they fight back.

 

[crimresearch]

There is no such state law, would you please shove the freaking off topic gun/anti-gun crap back where it belongs, and quit tap dancing on this dead man?

 

[Unabogie]

From the OP:

"At that point, Mr. Zimmerman was taken into custody, investigative detention if you will, and got to the station to conduct an interview with him to find out exactly what happened," Sanford police spokesman <snip> said.

Thanks, lots of misinformation flying around right now.

 

[Checkmite]

This stateser isn't familiar with the term. What is it, and what does his vehicle have to do with it? Are you talking about bumper stickers or something?

Whackers are basically public service fanboys that carry their fanboyism to an OCD level. A normal "volunteer" becomes a whacker when their volunteer service becomes the most important aspect of their lives; but what truly makes a whacker a whacker is 1) the invocation or suggestion of authority they don't actually have, and 2) the gear they buy and collect, which is generally inappropriate for their actual (as opposed to perceived) level of involvement. A neighborhood watch volunteer equipping himself with a gun might be merely paranoid, but a neighborhood watch volunteer conducting armed "patrols", literally pursuing "suspects", and referring to himself as a "captain" despite apparently being the only member of the neighborhood watch, are obvious symptoms of whackery.

I wish I could see his vehicle just because whackers are typically unable to resist "equipping" their vehicles with stuff - rescue equipment, first-responder jump kits, radios/scanners of various types, lightbars and/or other types of emergency lighting systems, and anything else they can buy from Galls. Allegedly the term "whacker" is derived from the sound all the antennas on their vehicles make when they drive under highway bridges.

Whackers aren't limited to law enforcement; volunteer fire and weather spotting often are infested with them.

 

[Caper]

Geeze it really sounds like this guy needs to be charged with murder. I think he thought he was doing good when he shoot the guy....... but I don't think so. Rent-a-cop mentality.

 

[Dancing David]

The Florida agency that sets standards is FDLE, but it is up to each department to have a policy in place.
I'm not aware of any laws that say 'Every firearms homicide must include a test for alcohol/drugs'.

Common sense implies that it would be a good thing to know if the shooter was impaired. And it is probably written down that the proper procedure is to test *suspects*.

But, according to the Sanford police, they decided early on that no crime had been committed. For what reasons, nobody there seems to want to say.
Maybe they've got some overwhelming piece of secret evidence that completely exonerates the shooter. Or maybe they just dropped the ball. Either way, they decided that Zimmerman was not a suspect in a crime.

And that's the problem. If they had simply held off on that declaration, they could have done a more thorough investigation.

Once they said that there wasn't enough PC to say that a crime had been committed, then there isn't enough PC to have Zimmerman tested. Free to go, means free to go.

When someone is in a car wreck, consent for a test has already been given. When a cop shoots someone, the conditions of the job allow mandatory testing.

But for an ordinary citizen, who is not a suspect in a crime, such searches aren't part of the deal.

Thanks, that is pretty much what I was thinking might be the case.

 

[Checkmite]

Sort of a vicious circle. They didn't have enough evidence because they decided not to investigate because they didn't have enough evidence.