Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[LTC8K6]

Do self-defense laws in Florida mean anyone claiming self-defense will not be detained in case of a murder? And is there no proportionality built into the self-defense laws?

Well, the evidence would have to support your self defense claim. If it does, then the police have to proceed differently.

Since FL law says you can't be detained or arrested in a self defense case, the police pretty much have to make the decision there on the scene. They cannot detain or arrest you first, and then investigate to see if you ought to be arrested for murder.

Basically in FL, claiming self defense starts a process that you would not have in other death cases.

This is only FL law though. Other states vary, or have no such law.

There's no proportionality rule at all if you could reasonably say you were in fear for your life and the prosecutor agrees.

A woman can shoot a man attempting to rape her, even if he has no weapon at all. He is a threat to her life. She has no duty to wait and see if he will stop at the rape.

 

[LTC8K6]

Well, no. I doubt very much there were no grounds to detain Zimmerman under FL law. Maybe there are no grounds to convict him of a crime, but that's a different matter.

That's what the statute appears to say. Assuming we agree that these laws apply.

776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—
(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.
(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).
History.—s. 4, ch. 2005-27.

 

[RandFan]

Well, the evidence would have to support your self defense claim. If it does, then the police have to proceed differently.

Since FL law says you can't be detained or arrested in a self defense case, the police pretty much have to make the decision there on the scene. They cannot detain or arrest you first, and then investigate to see if you ought to be arrested for murder.

Basically in FL, claiming self defense starts a process that you would not have in other death cases.

This is only FL law though. Other states vary, or have no such law.

If true then I have a lot of problems with this. Now, generally police are called on to use their discretion and to make judgements every day and it is vitally important we give them discretion. Otherwise little would get done as they would become bogged down with cases. But we are talking about the death of a human being in this case. Thing are not always as they appear. Perceptions and bias can skew how the officers judge the data and whether or not they even seriously make an attempt to analyze the evidence.

I'm sorry but there should be little latitude for discretion in a case where someone dies. Otherwise, why bother with an autopsy? The police know the truth, right?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

OK, putting confirmation bias aside.... can't.. it's Fox News.

So there's a pro-gun ownership piece on Fox New right now and some guy is claiming there were witnesses that Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman whaling away at him. OMFSM! Are they serious? The racist faction of the right wing extreme is going to side with Zimmerman here and claim that a teenager weighing 80 pounds less than Zimmerman who was armed got the better of Zimmerman in a fight?

I'm blown away by this. The premise would have to be that the rest of the news media is ignoring these "witnesses". Of course no one on Fox challenged the pro-gun guy to as how he knew this and why these witnesses were not giving their stories in interviews, on Fox or elsewhere. There were no questions asked why these witnesses' accounts were not in the police report.

Fox News disregards the damage they might be doing to Trayvon's family with this kind of propaganda. They disregard the consequences.

I have not disregarded the comments in this thread, especially WildCat's caution to look for the evidence not the news reports. If it turns out there are these "4-5 witnesses" claimed by the Fox News interviewee it will be an interesting twist in the case. But it is highly unlikely given no evidence of said witnesses and given the unlikely scenario that Trayvon could have overpowered Zimmerman.

The more likely case here is that Fox News is willing to be that reckless with the facts all in the name of promoting the causes of the extreme right wing gun fanatics. Words fail me and reckless is an understatement.

 

[tyr_13]

OK, putting confirmation bias aside.... can't.. it's Fox News.

So there's a pro-gun ownership piece on Fox New right now and some guy is claiming there were witnesses that Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman whaling away at him. OMFSM! Are they serious? The racist faction of the right wing extreme is going to side with Zimmerman here and claim that a teenager weighing 80 pounds less than Zimmerman who was armed got the better of Zimmerman in a fight?

Um, there is a discussion of that witness and what the testimony means on the last two pages I believe.

And yes, it's entirely possible that a teenage weighing 80 lbs less (a 6'3" teenager apparently) got the better of Zimmerman in a fight. I don't know how many of these assault stories we have to go through before people stop believing that being 'smaller' means being no threat.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Here's an actual witness interview on Anderson Cooper:

“So you saw Mr. Zimmerman on top of Trayvon Martin?” Cooper questioned.

“Trayvon, exactly,” Lamilla said.

“When you say on top of, how so?” the CNN anchor pressed.

“Straddling him,” Cutcher replied.

“His legs were straddling him?” Cooper followed up.

“One on each side, on his knees, with his hands on his back. I immediately thought, okay, obviously if it’s the shooter, he would have ran,” Cutcher detailed. “I thought he’s holding the wound, helping the guy taking a pulse, making sure he’s okay. When she called to him three times, everything okay, what’s going on? Each time he looked back, didn’t say anything and then the third time he finally said, ‘just call the police.’”

“But at that time it was so dark,” Lamilla added. “I just saw this person. When she started calling the police, I saw Zimmerman walking with — touching like his hair, like kind of like confused back and forth to the body.”

Lamilla and Cutcher described Zimmerman pacing around the body, following the shooting, and disputed that there was any indication of a fight.

I think a possible scenario is Zimmerman tackled Trayvon and the gun discharged accidentally: Negligent homicide. I also wonder if the blood on Zimmerman's nose wasn't Trayvon's.

 

[LTC8K6]

If true then I have a lot of problems with this. Now, generally police are called on to use their discretion and to make judgements every day and it is vitally important we give them discretion. Otherwise little would get done as they would become bogged down with cases. But we are talking about the death of a human being in this case. Thing are not always as they appear. Perceptions and bias can skew how the officers judge the data and whether or not they even seriously make an attempt to analyze the evidence.

I'm sorry but there should be little latitude for discretion in a case where someone dies. Otherwise, why bother with an autopsy? The police know the truth, right?

Well, the police are constrained by what the law says. The law is poorly written, imo, but the police can't go around it.

It even says there can be no civil action.

The way I read the law, once the suspect claims he acted in self defense, the police are forced to make a decision then and there, with what they have in front of them on the scene, as to whether the claim has merit.

That's silly of course, but it appears to be the law.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Um, there is a discussion of that witness and what the testimony means on the last two pages I believe.

And yes, it's entirely possible that a teenage weighing 80 lbs less (a 6'3" teenager apparently) got the better of Zimmerman in a fight. I don't know how many of these assault stories we have to go through before people stop believing that being 'smaller' means being no threat.

Here's one of the posts:

tl;dr:
Zimmerman claimed self defense, and at least one eyewitness who called 911 claimed he saw Martin on top of Zimmerman, and that Zimmerman was yelling for help. The SPD believed Zimmerman, and do not appear to have done a stellar follow up investigation that led to a reason to arrest him.

I see no evidence of this witness, only a claim. I'll keep looking.


BTW, it's still not what the gun guy on Fox was claiming: 4-5 witnesses saw Trayvon whaling on Zimmerman.

 

[LTC8K6]

Here's an actual witness interview on Anderson Cooper:

I think a possible scenario is Zimmerman tackled Trayvon and the gun discharged accidentally: Negligent homicide.

There are lots of possibilities. There's no way to know from that interview which one is correct.

A Kel-Tec PF9 is unlikely to discharge accidentally, I think. It's a double action only pistol. Not impossible mind you.

 

[ravdin]

That's what the statute appears to say. Assuming we agree that these laws apply.

776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—
(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.
(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).
History.—s. 4, ch. 2005-27.

An man armed with a gun stalks an unarmed teen. One of them has a criminal record, and the other doesn't. The one without a record ends up dead. The killer just happens to be the sole surviving witness. I'd say there's probable cause to dig a bit deeper into what's happened here.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

"There was a witness Zimmerman was the victim" is bouncing around all the right wing forums and blogs like a snowstorm.

Makes it hard to find a real link to either that specific 911 call or the person's interview. I think this is an important event. If it is a complete fabrication it will confirm my confirmation bias. If it is a distortion of the actual witness who may have said they weren't sure what they saw, it will confirm my confirmation bias. If it turns out to be a legitimate story I will be surprised.

I am not claiming the witness doesn't exist. I am claiming I doubt the story and if it is false I find it sad the right wing blogosphere would be echoing this distortion.

 

[LTC8K6]

An armed man stalks an unarmed teen with a gun. One of them has a criminal record, and the other doesn't. The one without a record ends up dead. The killer just happens to be the sole surviving witness. I'd say there's probable cause to dig a bit deeper into what's happened here.

Zimmerman has no criminal record of shooting people. He barely has a record at all. There's nothing in his record that would cause me to think he deliberately shot Martin.

I have a friend who has been arrested for minor things. He's a bit of a hothead, which gets him into trouble. This does not mean that he is more likely to murder someone, nor would it cause me to assume he's guilty if charged with a felony.

Are the police allowed to use Zimmerman's record to detain him on an unrelated case? I don't know. I would think not.

I doubt you'd get a warrant because of someone's record on an unrelated matter, for example.

 

[WildCat]

An man armed with a gun stalks an unarmed teen. One of them has a criminal record, and the other doesn't. The one without a record ends up dead. The killer just happens to be the sole surviving witness. I'd say there's probable cause to dig a bit deeper into what's happened here.

Zimmerman did not have a criminal record.

 

[LTC8K6]

"We think we should ignore Zimmerman's self defense claim and the physical evidence in this case because his wife filed a restraining order against him a while ago, and he once pushed a cop."

Sounds a bit silly. I doubt such a request would get you a search warrant from a judge, absent other evidence, for example.

Again, this is assuming there was actually nothing at the scene that countered the self defense claim.

If there's other evidence, then obviously that would change things.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

OK, I found two more direct links:

A local Fox News station: Man shot and killed in neighborhood altercation

"The guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help! Help!' and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911," said the witness, who asked to be identified only by his first name, John.
John said he locked his patio door, ran upstairs and heard at least one gun shot.
"And then, when I got upstairs and looked down, the guy who was on the top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point."

Detective interview claims Trayvon's father said the help calls on the tape were not Trayvon's.

Surely there is a quick way to match that voice to Zimmerman. I await such confirmation.

 

[LTC8K6]

OK, I found two more direct links:

A local Fox News station: Man shot and killed in neighborhood altercation

Detective interview claims Trayvon's father said the help calls on the tape were not Trayvon's.

Surely there is a quick way to match that voice to Zimmerman. I await such confirmation.

If you follow the media reports, you will only get confused.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Zimmerman did not have a criminal record.

Yes he did.

he had a handful of run-ins with the law. In July 2005, Zimmerman was arrested after a tussle with law enforcement outside of a bar near the University of Central Florida. It was a first offense, and Zimmerman got off with a pretrial diversion program.

In August of the same year, a petition for injunction was filed against Zimmerman by a woman who cited domestic violence, and Zimmerman responded with his own petition. Both injunctions were issued.

In 2007, records show Zimmerman married Shellie Nicole Dean, a cosmetologist. The next year, he struggled with credit-card payments to Capital One, ultimately reaching a settlement for $2,135.82. Capital One later reported that Zimmerman was failing in his payments.

Nothing that says total jerk, but not "no criminal record" either.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

"There was a witness Zimmerman was the victim" is bouncing around all the right wing forums and blogs like a snowstorm.

Makes it hard to find a real link to either that specific 911 call or the person's interview. I think this is an important event. If it is a complete fabrication it will confirm my confirmation bias. If it is a distortion of the actual witness who may have said they weren't sure what they saw, it will confirm my confirmation bias. If it turns out to be a legitimate story I will be surprised.

I am not claiming the witness doesn't exist. I am claiming I doubt the story and if it is false I find it sad the right wing blogosphere would be echoing this distortion.

Try this post

it is the local news interviewing a witness the next day

ETA - Never mind, that is the video of the fox news link you found. It sounds legit to me. More legit than the' reluctant' witness going on talk shows days later....

http://www.wftv.com/news/news/witness-sanford-police-blew-us-teen-slaying/nLSqk/
Cutcher said that until now, she ignored repeated attempts by national and local media to share what she saw, partially out of fear.

 

[Giz]

Paging Tom Wolfe: is "Bonfire of the Vanities" still under copyright?

 

[lane99]

...I have a friend who has been arrested for minor things. He's a bit of a hothead, which gets him into trouble. This does not mean that he is more likely to murder someone...

More likely than...what?

Who would you rather cross paths with...a hothead with a gun, or an unarmed teenager otherwise minding his own business on a walk home from the candy store?