Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[Ausmerican]

Martin: "Whay are you following me, dude?"
Zimmerman: "OH MY GOD HE'S COMING RIGHT AT ME!"

 

[Giz]

Martin: "Whay are you following me, dude?"
Zimmerman: "OH MY GOD HE'S COMING RIGHT AT ME!"

Many a true word spoken in jest:

The report said that Zimmerman’s back was wet and he was covered in grass as if he had been on the ground. He was bleeding from his nose and the back of the head, the report said.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...watch-leader/2012/03/08/gIQAPkJSzR_story.html


It does sound like there may be witnesses and a 911 recording that aren't in the public domain yet. Might be worth withholding judgement for now.

 

[Moss]

The daily fail article mentions Zimmermann being hurt and that his wounds were treated by a medic. Though that does by no means explains how Trayvon got into a confrontation with Zimmermann. I honestly fails to come up with any scenario for that except maybe the one Ausmerican parodied.
What I'm also curious about is the fact that for some reason Zimmermann had a covered carry permit despite having committed battery against a police officer a few years ago. That seems a strange policy to me.

 

[WildCat]

What I'm also curious about is the fact that for some reason Zimmermann had a covered carry permit despite having committed battery against a police officer a few years ago. That seems a strange policy to me.

The battery charges were dismissed, he was never convicted.

 

[This is The End]

Not taken, zero

OK, OK, I understand the OP article used the word custody incorrectly. I get it.

"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 Sgt. David Zimmerman said.

So, can anyone tell me how long the shooter was in "investigative detention" at the station, the first time?

Also my other question is still open as well:

I note that the Police Sgt has the same last name as the shooter.

Are they closely related or is it a coincidence?

 

[Moss]

The battery charges were dismissed, he was never convicted.

Ah, rereading the article again it was only stated that he was arrested for that, not convicted. Apologies.

 

[RobRoy]

The daily fail article mentions Zimmermann being hurt and that his wounds were treated by a medic. Though that does by no means explains how Trayvon got into a confrontation with Zimmermann. I honestly fails to come up with any scenario for that except maybe the one Ausmerican parodied.

The only details we have is that he was following Martin, I assume as part of his "duties" of Neighborhood Watch member. The likely scenario then (though not necessarily the correct one) is that Martin took umbrage at being followed and turned to confront Zimmermann, and that's when things got out of hand. I would guess there was some level of ego and machismo involved as well.

 

[Dancing David]

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...martin-shooting-case-20120312,0,3967780.story

Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee said this afternoon that his investigators don't have probable cause to arrest the man who shot 17-year-old Trayvon Martin to death inside a gated Sanford community last month.

"In this case, Mr. Zimmerman has made the statement of self- defense," Lee told a crowd of reporters and Trayvon's family members and thier supporters. "Until we can establish probable cause to dispute that, we don't have the grounds to arrest him."

Lee said the department's investigation would wrap up Monday afternoon, and the findings would be sent to the State Attorney's Office Tuesday, where prosecutors will decide whether to file criminal charges against George Zimmerman, a 28-year-old volunteer crime watch captain.

 

[Checkmite]

So basically in Sanford, the police are okay with it if you get shot because somebody decides you look "suspicious", whatever that means. Good to know.

 

[Giz]

So basically in Sanford, the police are okay with it if you get shot because somebody decides you look "suspicious", whatever that means. Good to know.

Or maybe the witness statements and the recording of the 911 call all appear to back up Zimmerman's self defense plea... so the police haven't arrested him (yet). (I imagine he's been told not to leave town).

Probably best to wait until the investigation finishes up and more details become public before judging.

 

[Checkmite]

The article says the investigation ended today. This is evidently that police department's last word on the matter.

 

[sgtbaker]

The article says the investigation ended today. This is evidently that police department's last word on the matter.

It bothers me, too, but I am trying to keep in mind that from the very beginning of this story, the media picked their angle. Before an investigation even started it was, 'big bad white man shoots unarmed black teenager.' That may be the case, I don't know. I do seriously want to know what the boy was doing that was so "suspicious," that Zimmerman called the police and eventually engaged. There is evidence of a struggle and we have no idea what started that struggle. Unarmed does not mean zero threat and if the boy attacked him, he could be justified in using lethal force. The only thing I do know is, at this point, someone, somewhere is being rather tightlipped about the actual facts about the case. The police are not saying that he is innocent, though, they are stating that there is not enough evidence to counter Zimmerman's version of events. I consider it the lesser of two evils that a guilty man might get away due to lack of evidence, rather than an innocent man pay the price of a heated plea. I doubt the Martin family feels that way and my heart goes out to them. They have my deepest sympathies.

 

[Checkmite]

It is not in dispute that Zimmerman exited his vehicle with a gun and confronted Martin after 911 instructed him not to. The circumstances of the "struggle" may be nebulous, but it seems blatant to me that Zimmerman deliberately escalated the situation.

 

[sgtbaker]

It is not in dispute that Zimmerman exited his vehicle with a gun and confronted Martin after 911 instructed him not to. The circumstances of the "struggle" may be nebulous, but it seems blatant to me that Zimmerman deliberately escalated the situation.

There are also reports that Zimmerman argued, "I am not letting this one get away. They always get away.." in the 911 exchange. I don't think that is in question but I also don't know if that is actually illegal. They may be suggesting that for the caller's protection. The only thing I do know is there are not a whole lot of actual facts about the confrontation being made public. I don't even know if the report will be public, although I sure hope it does. Please, keep in mind that I am not defending Zimmerman and it doesn't sound like the police are, either, they are merely stating that they do not have enough facts about the altercation to counter Zimmerman's version of events. If he did, in fact, use excessive force (which in Florida is it perfectly legal to use lethal force in self defense), it is utterly tragic that he might get away with it. However, far worse would be the legal system assuming guilt when there is simply not enough evidence.

 

[ponderingturtle]

There are also reports that Zimmerman argued, "I am not letting this one get away. They always get away.." in the 911 exchange. I don't think that is in question but I also don't know if that is actually illegal. They may be suggesting that for the caller's protection. The only thing I do know is there are not a whole lot of actual facts about the confrontation being made public. I don't even know if the report will be public, although I sure hope it does. Please, keep in mind that I am not defending Zimmerman and it doesn't sound like the police are, either, they are merely stating that they do not have enough facts about the altercation to counter Zimmerman's version of events. If he did, in fact, use excessive force (which in Florida is it perfectly legal to use lethal force in self defense), it is utterly tragic that he might get away with it. However, far worse would be the legal system assuming guilt when there is simply not enough evidence.

The thing is it is likely neither of them did anything wrong. Someone follows you around in a car and then gets out to confront you is a threatening situation. Good thing they both stood their ground and acted like true men. They are really both heroes to true american masculinity.

 

[sgtbaker]

The thing is it is likely neither of them did anything wrong. Someone follows you around in a car and then gets out to confront you is a threatening situation. Good thing they both stood their ground and acted like true men. They are really both heroes to true american masculinity.

You actually have a very good point but it seems that in our society, no matter the cause, someone always must be blamed and something always needs to be done about it.

 

[RobRoy]

You actually have a very good point but it seems that in our society, no matter the cause, someone always must be blamed and something always needs to be done about it.

Not always. Just mostly, and mostly by conservatives. In an election year.

 

[ponderingturtle]

You actually have a very good point but it seems that in our society, no matter the cause, someone always must be blamed and something always needs to be done about it.

The thing is that I am against that as a matter of law. He escalated the situation by starting a confrontation. He bears responsibility for the results of that confrontation.

 

[sgtbaker]

The thing is that I am against that as a matter of law. He escalated the situation by starting a confrontation. He bears responsibility for the results of that confrontation.

Here's where I get stuck, though, all we know is that he initiated contact. Seriously, if there is something that I missed, I would unreluctantly agree with you. So far, all we know is that he initiated contact. That does not automatically equate to escalating the situation. Emotionally, I do agree that he bears responsibility but legally, I am not so sure.

 

[Giz]

The thing is that I am against that as a matter of law. He escalated the situation by starting a confrontation. He bears responsibility for the results of that confrontation.

Even if he just got out of his car, gun hidden, and said: "Excuse me my good sir but, as part of the neighborhood watch, might I ask where you are going?" and was attacked for his pains?

We don't know what happened. We really need to hear the 911 tapes and get witness statements to get a clearer idea...