Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[Natural Born Skeptic]

This seems to be why the prosecutor thinks Zimmerman told at least 3 different versions of events.

Please cite.

 

[johnny karate]

There's a little bit of evidence that TM participated in fights.

The video has been taken down, but I saw it when it was still up. Trayvon appears to be refereeing a fight, and fight videos were on his youtube channel.

http://www.wagist.com/2012/dan-linehan/did-trayvon-martin-referee-school-fights

Quite compelling.

On one hand hand we have a guy with a documented history of violence killing someone, and on the other, we have a crappy Youtube video of the person he killed at one point in time being in the vicinity of a fight.

 

[Unabogie]

Quite compelling.

On one hand hand we have a guy with a documented history of violence killing someone, and on the other, we have a crappy Youtube video of the person he killed at one point in time being in the vicinity of a fight.

If that's even Trayvon. It wouldn't be the first time a bunch of racists have fabricated "evidence" of the kid's "thuggery".

They are obsessed with that picture of him flipping the bird as well. What is wrong with people that think racist websites like that are good source of information? Isn't it obvious that the only they want to do is fan racial fears by portraying Martin as something scary?

 

[TheL8Elvis]

And what scenario do you think the police were more likely going with that night, yours or mine?

I don't know. Nor do I understand the point you're trying too make.

Here's the kicker, I'm not suggesting we assume anything. Only allow for all reasonable possibilities.

I don't find your scenario to be reasonable. It would require massive incompetence, in my opinion.

And by the way, "massive"? What exactly about the initial investigation makes you think it was "massive"?

Massive = all parties involved.

 

[KatieG]

We have no idea if Martin had taken up the 52 blocks or something over the past year and was a serious fighter or not... we literally don't know that one way or the other.

On the other hand we *do* know that the claim that Zimmerman was a short fat guy, is at odds with the facts.

Wait, how is that at odds? On the night of the incident, GZ was 5'8" and about 200 pounds. Sounds like a short, fat guy to me.

 

[johnny karate]

If that's even Trayvon. It wouldn't be the first time a bunch of racists have fabricated "evidence" of the kid's "thuggery".

They are obsessed with that picture of him flipping the bird as well. What is wrong with people that think racist websites like that are good source of information? Isn't it obvious that the only they want to do is fan racial fears by portraying Martin as something scary?

Oh, but he is scary... I heard he once had a screwdriver in his possession.

But the guy who attacks a police officer and has to take court-ordered anger management classes? Not scary at all.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Quite compelling.

On one hand hand we have a guy with a documented history of violence killing someone, and on the other, we have a crappy Youtube video of the person he killed at one point in time being in the vicinity of a fight.

Appeal to emotion instead of addressing the evidence ?

 

[KatieG]

Please cite.

I will go search the transcripts but I think the SP at the bond hearing or the investigator mentioned they had more than one version of GZ's story about that night.

 

[KatieG]

If that's even Trayvon. It wouldn't be the first time a bunch of racists have fabricated "evidence" of the kid's "thuggery".

They are obsessed with that picture of him flipping the bird as well. What is wrong with people that think racist websites like that are good source of information? Isn't it obvious that the only they want to do is fan racial fears by portraying Martin as something scary?

Except that picture of a kid flipping the bird turned out to not be TM. Oops, foiled again!

 

[Freddy]

I think it may, I think it should.

Thanks. I honestly don't know.

Either I don't understand your argument or I don't understand your usage of the word "likely". Do you mean "more likely than not". A car accident isn't the "more likely than not" result of DWI/DUI. It's illegal none the less.

I don't think the evidence thus far shows us Zimmerman's intentions.

This is particularly helpful to me. Thank you. I would like to see the duty to retreat restored and expanded to duty to avoid dangerous situations. Of course, I would need to see arguments against the notion. Clearly many people think SYG important and they obviously have reasons for that (none I yet to find compelling), so wanting to go in the other direction would reasonably require me to consider opposing arguments.

Besides, there are many decades if not centuries of case law for negligence so I ought to at least know what that is.

I would have to brush up a bit to be sure, but one difference between recklessness and negligence is actual awareness of the risk. Also, there might be a different standard in a criminal vs. a civil context.

 

[Xulld]

I am aware of this. Stand Your Ground is the popular title of a FLorida Bill amending Chapter 776 of the Florida Code, which deals with the justifiable use of force. I realize that the absence of the duty to retreat is not the same thing as the limited immunity from arrest and prosecution, but they both became law as part of the same bill, which was widely called the "Stand your ground" law. Apologies for any confusion that might have caused.

That is why I was talking about the immunity from arrest, and not the duty to retreat. It was passed as part of the same bill, which in its entirety was referred to as "Stand your ground" when it was debated and passed into law.

I don't expect anyone coming to a 200 page thread to read everything that has been said so far, but I have explained this exact point in an earlier post. We are not in disagreement.

I have also said exactly this in an earlier post, not that I fault you for not having read the entire 200 page thread. I pointed out that the hurdle for overcoming the immunity is to show probable cause, and that if the prosecution can't do that then there is no way they could prove the exact same thing under the much higher "beyond reasonable doubt" standard. So the self-defense-friendly amendments to Florida law don't prevent prosecution except in cases where a conviction would not be realistic in any jurisdiction.

Well, it's sort of a different story, in that it would be a civil suit. However, it is relevant here to the extent that it explains why an arrest would not be made initially (though there are several other reasons why police would wait and gather more evidence before making an arrest).

So we don't really disagree, except that you take exception to my using the phrase "stand your ground" to refer to the entirety of the bill that eliminated the duty to retreat from Florida self-defense law. I do agree that interchangeable use of the phrase is a source of confusion, so I will try to be more precise in the future.

Cheers.

Thank you, very well said. I agree that it is worth being precise if only to help others understand the elements of the law which are cogent to any given point and how the law actually works in action.

Again thank you for the clarity! Clarity is often not sought out by those with agenda's. Much has been said about the Florida self defense laws needing revision, but no one has actually made any points, with specific revisions that would be better.

I would love to see an actual endeavor by any party to do just that, but that would take them actually reading and understanding the law as it currently exists, which seems to be a hurdle most are not willing to leap.

I really appreciate it when those with that knowledge share the precise details to help us all better understand.

Cheers!

 

[johnny karate]

I don't know. Nor do I understand the point you're trying too make.

The point I'm trying make is that between the two of us, we've posited two possible ways the police could have viewed the scenario that night:

1) Neighborhood watch captain shoots a random thug in self-defense.

2) Violent Hispanic man murders innocent boy.

Which conclusion do you think to be more likely?

I don't find your scenario to be reasonable. It would require massive incompetence, in my opinion.

Massive = all parties involved.

You might be confused as to what "massive" means. It's a descriptor of size, not numerical totality. Unless you're alleging there were more than a dozen or so people involved in the initial investigation, you're use of the term "massive" is incorrect.

 

[johnny karate]

Appeal to emotion instead of addressing the evidence ?

I specifically referred to the evidence.

Documented history of violence vs. Youtube video.

It's for each of us to decide for ourselves which of those two pieces of evidence is more compelling and useful.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

I will go search the transcripts but I think the SP at the bond hearing or the investigator mentioned they had more than one version of GZ's story about that night.

The prosecutor made mention of the fact that the police questioned him as if he had contradictions in his story. As they often do when trying to trick a defendant. This was discussed a few pages back. I'm looking for a cite that the prosecution has said that GZ provided "3 different stories", which is what Uniboogie said.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Oh, but he is scary... I heard he once had a screwdriver in his possession.

But the guy who attacks a police officer and has to take court-ordered anger management classes? Not scary at all.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/...curity-Job-Due-To-Temper-and-Being-Liability-

In 2005, the same year that Zimmerman lost his security guard job, he was also arrested for “resisting officer with violence” and “battery of law enforcement officer,” both third-degree felonies. Those charges were dropped after he agreed to enter an alcohol education program.
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2...estic-violence-fighting-with-a-police-officer

Court documents obtained by msnbc.com on Tuesday evening show that George Zimmerman, who fatally shot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, went to court in 2005 and 2006 for accusations of domestic violence, tussling with a police officer and speeding.
The three incidents took place in Orange County, Fla.
In 2005, Zimmerman, then 20, was arrested and charged with “resisting officer with violence” and “battery of law enforcement officer,” both which are third-degree felonies. The charge was reduced to “resisting officer without violence” and then waived when he entered an alcohol education program.

 

[crimresearch]

Wait, how is that at odds? On the night of the incident, GZ was 5'8" and about 200 pounds. Sounds like a short, fat guy to me.

Have you looked at the current pictures?

http://media.cleveland.com/nationworld_impact/photo/10770205-large.jpg

http://www.abc.net.au/news/image/3947476-3x2-700x467.jpg

That isn't short and fat, no matter what his old photos or his old driver's license say.
He's obviously gotten into good shape.

ETA: 5' 9-1/2 " and 190 lbs being the average, with Hispanic males a little shorter and heavier on the whole. That would make Zimmerman far from short and fat.
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/healthcare/a/tallbutfat.htm

 

[dirtywick]

My purpose was to falsify the premise.

I'm not sure if you are being tongue-in-cheek.

I understand what you were trying to do. I find it misleading.

Dominic Cruz would handle most of the world fairly easily because he dedicates his life to fighting, the level of skill, athleticism, and conditioning create a massive disparity between a regular person and him. To say that because it's possible Cruz could do that to someone, TM may have as well requires that something around the same disparity exists between him and GZ. Otherwise it's two regular guys fighting, and to say that one of them walks away with no injuries or indiciation of fighting is a lot less plausible to me.

 

[sgtbaker]

I specifically referred to the evidence.

Documented history of violence vs. Youtube video.

It's for each of us to decide for ourselves which of those two pieces of evidence is more compelling and useful.

I think it's a difficult comparison because Trayvon was so young. Had he not been in high school and actually caught by police officers rather than school security guards, he would have a criminal record; posession of drug paraphernalia and posession of stolen goods are both legitimate charges, even if he didn't steal the jewelry himself. If one person's history, going back 5-8 years is relevant to his character, than the other person's history going over the recent year is also relevant.

 

[dirtywick]

Have you looked at the current pictures?

http://media.cleveland.com/nationworld_impact/photo/10770205-large.jpg

http://www.abc.net.au/news/image/3947476-3x2-700x467.jpg

That isn't short and fat, no matter what his old photos or his old driver's license say.
He's obviously gotten into good shape.

I don't know that he's in good shape necessarily, but doesn't appear fat. Working out doesn't make you taller though.

Anyway, you only know what's reported. Media reported him that size, so my bad. I guess he's a short unremarkable guy instead of short and fat.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

I specifically referred to the evidence.

Documented history of violence vs. Youtube video.

It's for each of us to decide for ourselves which of those two pieces of evidence is more compelling and useful.

So you agree that it's evidence he participates in fights ?