Why is George Zimmerman allowed to roam free tonight?

Jeff-66 wrote:

Zimmerman has an attorney now, and that attorney says Stand Your Ground does not apply in this case.

He must've hired the worst attorney possible. The "Stand Your Ground" law changed the way you could claim self-defense specifically outside the home.

LouZiffer (page 2) wrote:

Trayvon had the right to stand his ground and defend himself from his pursuer, who then shot him.

By refusing to back off as instructed by the dispatcher, Zimmerman became the instigator. His civic duty ended when he made the report but he chose to take it further. Anything that happened past that point was his responsibility. He should own up to it.

GZ is claiming that he was just casually walking back to his vehicle "to meet the police", when TM jumped him.

Another 'just after it happened' witness spoke up and said that after the gunshot, GZ failed to even roll Trayvon over and attempt to administer any first aid whatsoever. Of course, that could be due to being in shock from realizing, 'oh sh*t, these guns really do kill people'.

From the comments about how GZ had wounds on the back of his head and was seen on the ground on his back...isn't it possible that he slipped in the rain, fell on his back, and banged his head?

IMAGE(http://www.malor.com/gamerswithjobs/stand_your_ground.jpg)

Jeff-66 wrote:

What is also indisputable is that a) Trayvon Martin was unarmed, and b) he was half the size of Zimmerman. No f'ing way do I believe that deadly force was required, even if Trayvon was punching him as GZ claims.

According to wiki, Martin was 6'3" and 140 pounds. Zimmerman is 5'9" and 250 pounds. Martin was taller but lighter, and his skinniness would not have been visible when he was wearing baggy clothes. Which doesn't justify the outcome but would go to the issue of whether Zimmerman had any reasonable fear of harm.

I imagine the prosecutor is worrying right now that if you ask a Florida jury if it's reasonable to fear a tall black guy at night in your neighborhood, the answer will depend on the racial composition of the jury. Chances are there are a lot of elderly white people in that jury pool.

Zimmerman is a screwup. That much is exceedingly clear. He beat on his girlfriend, assaulted a police officer, defaulted on his credit card payments, and couldn't get it together enough to hold down a job or stay in school. It is very easy to see how someone in this sort of position and the tendency toward violent behavior would find it very tempting to grasp at the power of de facto law enforcement.

What strikes me as completely baffling is how any responsible municipality, community, or servicing law enforcement agency would see the wisdom in allowing him to do so with their knowledge and blessing.

The real story is not George Zimmerman the person. It is George Zimmerman the idea. It is the combination of the Florida Tea Party idiocy that believes that government should be so small that it fails to perform basic functions like actual policing and the Libertarian idea that every swinging phallus should have a gun.

This is the inevitable and unavoidable outcome.

I wonder how all those Fox news commenters will change their tune when they find out that GZ is hispanic.

Nevin73 wrote:

I wonder how all those Fox news commenters will change their tune when they find out that GZ is hispanic.

His mom is from Peru. What's the rule on 50/50 now? My brother married a french woman, and her kids speak french and have french and American passports, but are they french?

If Zimmerman's dad was from Peru and he had a spanish surname, it's possible Fox News people would still be sympathetic. Depends on whether they dislike young black guys more than Hispanics.

Funkenpants wrote:
Nevin73 wrote:

I wonder how all those Fox news commenters will change their tune when they find out that GZ is hispanic.

His mom is from Peru. What's the rule on 50/50 now? My brother married a french woman, and her kids speak french and have french and American passports, but are they french?

If Zimmerman's dad was from Peru and he had a spanish surname, it's possible Fox News people would still be sympathetic. Depends on whether they dislike young black guys more than Hispanics.

I think the more likely reaction is to point at him as their little pet token and say "see? everyone is afraid of black men.".

Paleocon wrote:

I think the more likely reaction is to point at him as their little pet token and say "see? everyone is afraid of black men.".

Right. The GOP has a very odd relationship with hispanics right now. The top leadership likes immigration because they want cheap workers, but the lower-middle class wingers hate the job competition and foreignness of spanish-speakers. Social conservative like that hispanics often have very traditional views of family relationships and abortion. Law-and-order types like that hispanics don't complain as loudly when they got shot by police. So....it's hard to know where they're going with this relationship.

Funkenpants wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

I think the more likely reaction is to point at him as their little pet token and say "see? everyone is afraid of black men.".

Right. The GOP has a very odd relationship with hispanics right now. The top leadership likes immigration because they want cheap workers, but the lower-middle class wingers hate the job competition and foreignness of spanish-speakers. Social conservative like that hispanics often have very traditional views of family relationships and abortion. Law-and-order types like that hispanics don't complain as loudly when they got shot by police. So....it's hard to know where they're going with this relationship.

Maybe it'll be the abusive husband schtick. "Look, I'll marry you since you can cook and iron clothes, but I'm going to beat you down on occasion if you get out of line, or if I'm in a foul mood".

Officials say Trayvon Swung First

With a single punch, Trayvon Martin decked the Neighborhood Watch volunteer who eventually shot and killed the unarmed 17-year-old, then Trayvon climbed on top of George Zimmerman and slammed his head into the sidewalk several times, leaving him bloody and battered, authorities have revealed to the Orlando Sentinel.

That is the account Zimmerman gave police, and much of it has been corroborated by witnesses, authorities say.

Obviously, given the "investigation", this your faith in this will probably be reflected in your faith in the "authorities" in this case.

Even if true - we still need an explanation as to what provoked him.

George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch crime captain who shot dead 17-year-old Trayvon Martin, originally told police in a written statement that Martin knocked him down with a punch to the nose, repeatedly slammed his head on the ground and tried to take his gun, a police source told ABC News.

That's probably why the lawyer isn't worried about 'stand your ground.' He's going to argue that retreat wasn't an issue and that the moment that counts is when Zimmerman is on the ground. They're going to argue to a jury that the situation escalated from verbal confrontation to fight and that Zimmerman reasonably feared that he'd lose his gun and get shot. "A tragedy for all concerned, but not a crime" etc.

From that article:

One witnesses, who has since talked to local television news reporters, told police he saw Zimmerman on the ground with Trayvon on top, pounding him and was unequivocal that it was Zimmerman who was crying for help.

Zimmerman then shot Trayvon once in the chest from very close range, according to authorities.

When police arrived less than two minutes later, Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose, had a swollen lip and had bloody lacerations to the back of his head.

Paramedics gave him first aid, but he said no to going to the hospital. He got medical care the next day.

Zimmerman seems like a total POS no doubt. And there is definitely a racial profiling issue in this country (actually most countries) but if the above is true all its going to do is segregate both sides even more.

What a mess.

PAR

So if they were wrestling for the gun then that means Zim had already confronted the "suspect" after having been told not to by the police and had apparently already drawn his gun before getting the crap kicked out of him. Yeah...

Kehama wrote:

So if they were wrestling for the gun then that means Zim had already confronted the "suspect" after having been told not to by the police and had apparently already drawn his gun before getting the crap kicked out of him. Yeah...

Yeah, if nothing else it proves he had already drawn his gun...

What sucks is that GZ gets to explain his side, and TM does not. My initial understanding of this whole thing is there were no eyewitnesses.

My impression based on everything I've heard thus far, is that GZ sought out this confrontation, pursued when instructed by the 911 dispatcher not to, and brandished his weapon, probably 'challenging' TM. For all we know, TM may have simply been fighting for his life (feeling the threat of death). TM told his gf that he was being followed.

Regardless of how the event played out, it's clear the Sanford PD FUBAR'd the investigation.

I've read that the "New Black Panthers" have a $10K bounty out on GZ. I wouldn't want to be him even if he's exonerated.

If he was attacked first, could this be a situation where both people were standing their ground?

1Dgaf wrote:

If he was attacked first, could this be a situation where both people were standing their ground?

Which is why the law sucks. It "rewards" aggressive behavior.

1Dgaf wrote:

If he was attacked first, could this be a situation where both people were standing their ground?

Martin wouldn't have felt the need to protect himself if Zimmerman hadn't decided he needed to stalk him. There's a part of Zimmerman's 911 call when he says that Martin noticed Zimmerman watching and following him.

I mean how would you feel if you were walking home at night and noticed someone following you from a car and when you try to get away that person gets out and follows you on foot?

The New Black Panthers are asinine. I can't see how their input benefits this situation one iota.

OG_slinger wrote:

I mean how would you feel if you were walking home at night and noticed someone following you from a car and when you try to get away that person gets out and follows you on foot?

And then pulls out a 9mm.

TM had candy and a drink in hand, and was mere yards away from his father's townhouse. He had the NBA all-star game waiting for him inside. And it was raining. I seriously doubt TM, a 140 lb kid, under those circumstances went out of his way to seek out and attack a 250 lb man unprovoked.

GZ's undoing will probably be his own 911 call that illustrates he was aggressively pursuing TM.

"These assholes always get away" -- this is what he said during that 911 call.

So according to NPR, some info leaked that TM had been busted at school for having a bag with marijuana residue in his backpack.

Which is not related to this crime at all, except that it leaked. Since the police would seem the most likely source, I suspect they're actively trying to protect Zimmerman.

Malor wrote:

So according to NPR, some info leaked that TM had been busted at school for having a bag with marijuana residue in his backpack.

Which is not related to this crime at all, except that it leaked. Since the police would seem the most likely source, I suspect they're actively trying to protect Zimmerman.

If he was busted at school they probably had the info too. If that info was at the school almost anyone could have gotten it.

Malor wrote:

So according to NPR, some info leaked that TM had been busted at school for having a bag with marijuana residue in his backpack.

Which is not related to this crime at all, except that it leaked. Since the police would seem the most likely source, I suspect they're actively trying to protect Zimmerman.

Which begs the question of why, if marijuana had any relevance to this case, Martin wasn't carrying 10 bags of Skittles and six boxes of Twinkies.

Malor wrote:

So according to NPR, some info leaked that TM had been busted at school for having a bag with marijuana residue in his backpack.

Which is not related to this crime at all, except that it leaked. Since the police would seem the most likely source, I suspect they're actively trying to protect Zimmerman.

It's nothing to do with the case at all. The background of the victim has absolutely no bearing on what happened, the past of the racist murderer is fair game though.

rosenhane wrote:
Malor wrote:

So according to NPR, some info leaked that TM had been busted at school for having a bag with marijuana residue in his backpack.

Which is not related to this crime at all, except that it leaked. Since the police would seem the most likely source, I suspect they're actively trying to protect Zimmerman.

It's nothing to do with the case at all. The background of the victim has absolutely no bearing on what happened, the past of the racist murderer is fair game though.

While it's absolutely true that it has nothing to do with this case, the background of the victim can indeed have a bearing on what happened. If the victim has a history of provoking fights and deep-seated racism against the race of the person that killed them, it would support the killer's claim that they were attacked and defended themselves.

Quintin_Stone wrote:
Jeff-66 wrote:

Zimmerman has an attorney now, and that attorney says Stand Your Ground does not apply in this case.

He must've hired the worst attorney possible. The "Stand Your Ground" law changed the way you could claim self-defense specifically outside the home.

But you must specifically fear for your life before you can use lethal force.

Stand your ground laws basically say that if you are attacked at any level, you don't have to run before you can defend yourself with an appropriate level of force. To me, it's common sense that you shouldn't have to run - if you're able, you should be allowed to defend yourself from any level of attack. Nobody can defend you but you.

However, as has been stated earlier, you must reasonably perceive a threat, and your response must be appropriate. So if somebody pulls out a knife, you can use lethal force to protect yourself. If somebody is just shoving or punching, you can engage in physical force to defend yourself. If a kid is approaching you, even if he's shouting or shoving, pulling a gun probably isn't appropriate, and firing it definitely isn't.

Keep in mind as well that this doesn't apply to mutual combat, where two people essentially provoke each other until combat occurs. In Colorado, at least, that's usually considered Disorderly Conduct and not Assault. Assault is for when one party doesn't want to fight but the other party brings the aggression to them.

In summary, I think laws that require you to run from people who wish to do you harm are beyond ridiculous, they're born of cowardice. But if you intend to defend yourself under a Stand Your Ground law, you need to educate yourself on how to do so.

Laws formulated for public policy generally don't stem from any personal virtue or weakness. Requiring the defendant to retreat to the best of his ability is simply to ensure that cases like the only herein cannot happen. If you can run, you should.

FWIW, some of the most capable and dangerous men of my acquaintance tell me that fighting is for chumps. Given a choice, the first option is always to run, and the second option is always to respond with the first blow - lethal force of such power that there will not be a fight at all.