Originally Posted By SpokkerJones Did Zimmerman attack the guy or was the guy offended by being watched and then attacked Zimmerman? I haven't been able to get a straight answer on that.
Originally Posted By dshyates By the way, I am so glad I work the morning shift. We did our morning live shots in front of the church where Rev. Sharpton was supposed to have his Rally tonight. Then We moved over to the park where they have moved it to. By the time I left at 3:00pm Al Jazeera and the BBC were setting up. This thing is going to get crazy. There are busses of people coming from Atlanta and Savannah.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<There is evidence consistent with being attacked.>> BS. There is no evidence to suggest that Zimmerman's story is true. Zimmerman claimed that after he called dispatch, he got out of his truck to look at the street sign to see where he was (even though he lives in this small townhome community and patrols it regularly) and was jumped by Trayvor when he turned around to walk back to his truck. I've already stated several reasons why that's unlikely in a previous post. Zimmerman is lying through his teeth. The man needs to be arrested and charged in the shooting of this kid.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper To your second point skinner...the law doesn't just apply to one feeling that their life is in imminent danger, it also applies if there is a reasonable fear that another person may be in imminent danger. That is where this really gets tricky because he can claim he was continuing to follow him (against the wishes of the 911 dispatcher) because he felt like someone else might be in danger. Does that sound preposterous in this case? I will grant you that it does. But, that is the "out" if you will and is yet another reason why this is bad legislation. Nobody has answered the question. Doesn't a jump from 40 some justifiable homicides to over 100 some justifiable homicides a year suggest that there is an inherent problem with Florida law?
Originally Posted By mele If they think it's a hate crime due to possible race issues, can he be tried federally? (sorry if this has been discussed) Would the feds even bother?
Originally Posted By wahooskipper And, I don't want anything to imply I'm defending Zimmerman but I've lived in a small townhome community for 14 years and there is one street that at this moment I couldn't tell you the name of it. It isn't something I pay attention to.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Doesn't a jump from 40 some justifiable homicides to over 100 some justifiable homicides a year suggest that there is an inherent problem with Florida law?> I'll answer. Yes, it most definitely does suggest that. But that, and the fact that the Sanford PD performed shamefully are not mutually exclusive. Both can be (and I believe, are) true. And SB - just as point of fact: you keep typing "Trayvor" - it's "Trayvon."
Originally Posted By TomSawyer Spokker, there is already a lot of chatter in security and law enforcement circles about potential riots because of this situation. If Zimmerman isn't even charged with anything there are going to be some problems. The scary thing is that the story is teaching everyone how to get away with killing someone in Florida without getting anything other than a pat on the back and a "That's okay" from the police.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer Mele, if the kid was targeted because he was black then they can look at charging Zimmerman for that. If Florida law doesn't let Zimmerman be charged, I'm sure the DoJ is going to want to find something to charge him with because letting him go scot free is pretty much a guarantee of riots bigger than the Rodney King riots and a bunch more killings in Florida.
Originally Posted By SpokkerJones "I'm sure the DoJ is going to want to find something to charge him with because letting him go scot free is pretty much a guarantee of riots bigger than the Rodney King riots and a bunch more killings in Florida." The cognitive dissonance here is amazing. No Justice, No Peace, indeed.
Originally Posted By wahooskipper Tom...the story isn't teaching people how to get away with murder..the legislation is. If we don't focus on the legislation that really is at the heart of why he hasn't been arrested yet then this is going to happen again to another black kid, or hispanic kid, or white kid for that matter.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I agree with you Wahoo that the legislation sucks. Of course that should be dealt with before the next innocent person is murdered in a similar circumstance. But I hope to hell that Zimmerman doesn't get away with this crime. He was told not to pursue, the handbook this local neighborhood watch in BOLD PRINT says not to do that, and yet, here we are. Right now, every teenager in Florida can say they feel threatened. Because they are when sloppily written legislation, backed by pandering politicians, paranoids, and gun-toting idiots who have watched "Death Wish" too many times, remains on the books.
Originally Posted By tiggertoo <<If Zimm was walking back to his car and Travon jumped Zimm (which is a possibility) then that would change my mind on the whole situation.>> Oh...I so understand. And OJ Simpson found a knife on the floor and went to place in on the counter (you know, for safety reasons) when ex-wife tripped impaling herself upon the blade. Goldman, overcome with grief, used the same blade to do himself in. Yeah, there was so much silly speculation that he murdered those two. Not a far leap from where you are Donny.
Originally Posted By skinnerbox <<That is where this really gets tricky because he can claim he was continuing to follow him (against the wishes of the 911 dispatcher) because he felt like someone else might be in danger.>> Nope, doesn't fly for Zimmerman in this instance, because of an audio clip of Zimmerman talking with the dispatcher. He tells the dispatcher that Trayvon (thanks Dabob) was heading towards the back entrance of the community when he started to run. If Trayvon was indeed heading for the exit of the residence, how is it that someone else in the immediate vicinity would be in danger, if he's running away? Zimmerman did not have the authority to chase down Trayvon as if he were a member of law enforcement. The dispatcher told him not to do it, but he did it anyway. If Zimmerman had stayed in his truck as dispatch told him to do, none of this would have happened. Even if Zimmerman did not know which street he was on at the time, he was told to stay put. Why did he need to get out of his truck to see which street he was on? Couldn't he have done that from inside his truck? And its highly doubtful that he didn't know, since there are less than 300 townhomes in fewer than 50 buildings on 3 streets -- Retreat View Circle, Long Oak Way, and Twin Trees -- with only four intersections and two gated entrances. Four intersections in the entire complex, where the street signs would be located. Zimmerman patrols this townhome community regularly, and he can't recognize what the three streets are just by his surroundings? If you take a look at the property in Google satellite, you can see it's impossible to confuse them, given the layout. Even a rocket scientist like Zimmerman would be able to tell Retreat Circle from Twin Trees and Long Oak, just by the bends in the road. His story is pure BS and was concocted to 'justify' why he got out of his truck when Trayvon allegedly attacked him from behind. Zimmerman is lying through his teeth.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>If Zimmerman had stayed in his truck as dispatch told him to do, none of this would have happened. Even if Zimmerman did not know which street he was on at the time, he was told to stay put. Why did he need to get out of his truck to see which street he was on? Couldn't he have done that from inside his truck?<< This numbskull was such a great neighborhood watchman that he was supposedly lost and disoriented inside his own gated community! Good Lord.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder Well, as I read the Florida law and the rule about retreat and the exceptions to the rule, I'll go on record as saying I don't think he'll be charged. This case will end up highlighting what a horrible law they passed, and how it needs to be repealed. if he does get charged somehow to appease the masses, the trial will be a circus. I know this runs counter to the overwhelming board sentiment, but as wahoo has been trying to point out, at issue here really is the law itself. What Zimmerman did or didn't do is really more the mechanism that has brought it to light.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan I've lived in a small townhome community for 14 years and there is one street that at this moment I couldn't tell you the name of it. It isn't something I pay attention to.<< Right, but if you were on neighborhood watch, you'd sure need to know where you were to report suspicious activity. If this clod had simply stayed in his vehicle, police would have arrived and sorted everything out. Instead, he went in pursuit, directly against what the 911 dispatcher told him, and against the handbook of his neighborhood watch program. Yet, he knew better because he's watched a lot of crime shows and knows what to do.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Could he be charged in civil courts with wrongful death? (i.e. what they convicted OJ on?) I'm not convinced there's no criminal case here, though. Even as bad as this law is, I read it as hinging on "reasonable." Why in the world could a DA not find it unreasonable, even if the Sanford PD initially found it reasonable? And I also think the Sanford PD - assuming they are investigated - will be found to be wanting.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Interesting article about Zimmerman and his background. <a href="http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-20/news/os-trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-20120320_1_robert-zimmerman-domestic-violence-online-petition" target="_blank">http://articles.orlandosentine...petition</a>
Originally Posted By tiggertoo <<...the law doesn't just apply to one feeling that their life is in imminent danger, it also applies if there is a reasonable fear that another person may be in imminent danger.>> But he should have to prove that he or someone else was in imminent danger though---and what constitutions imminent danger anyway. This would be especially true if its used to justify deadly force. The fact is, other than his word, which is increasingly suspect considering the growing mountain of evidence that Trayvon posed no threat to anyone, this was moron vigilantism at best, nefarious excuse at worst. Neither should indemnify him from prosecution.
