Don't think this is how the "stand your ground law" works

[Guest peacexxl]

One more trouble maker, giving the rest of us a bad image?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/03/19/department-justice-opens-investigation-into-case-black-teenager-killed-by/

http://www.foxnews.c...n-self-defense/

I think we would all be better served if they would lock this guy up and get this thing to trial.

Edited March 20, 2012 by peacexxl

[Mike.357]

It appears to me that the only person who knows what happened was the shooter.

And certainly there is real possibilty the kid was up to no good.

[1gewehr]

I think it likely that the fellow did use poor judgement. But I saw one report that the deceased had a knife. Was that true? What facts are NOT being told us? If they are not charging Zimmerman, then they must have some reason for believing that he DID act in self-defense.

Call me a skeptic, but I don't believe that the news reports are either fair, balanced, or complete. I could be wrong, though.

[mikegideon]

It appears to me that the only person who knows what happened was the shooter.

And certainly there is real possibilty the kid was up to no good.

He had skittles... and a hoodie. The shooter was injured. Of course, there are a bunch of Libs that want to hang the guy. Gonna be interesting to see how this one plays out.

[RobertNashville]

The "little kid's" folks will always try to paint the kid as a good kid who was doing nothing wrong; the reality is very often much different than that. A 17 year old, armed or not, can be a dangerous animal if he want's to be.

As has been said, what truly happened here is known to two people, only one of which is alive and in absence of real evidence to the contrary, I tend to side with the person who is still alive to relate the story.

[Jonnin]

lack of facts of course, but captain crimestopper sounds like the agressor. Why was he out of his car? What was the kid doing to deserve being accosted by this guy? What life threatening event caused the gun to be drawn? Unless he has some hard facts, he is going to come out of this sounding like a redneck with a gun who was out looking for a chance to use it, and found just such a chance. The race card is coming too.... a nonwhite kid in a nice area? No wai, must be up to something! He better have a very, very good story to tell about what was suspect about the teen (apart from his race) and why he was out of that car, doing what 911 told him to NOT do. Getting out of your car, hassleing someone & starting a fight, then shooting the other guy.... is NOT self defense. Stand your ground law might allow for it, but this really sounds bad even with that flimsy excuse. The only thing the shooter has that sounds remotely reasonable is he was apparently knocked down, back was dirty and his head was cut a little. Which is no more than many would do if some idiot gets out of his car and starts crap.

[RobertNashville]

lack of facts of course, but captain crimestopper sounds like the agressor. Why was he out of his car? What was the kid doing to deserve being accosted by this guy? What life threatening event caused the gun to be drawn? Unless he has some hard facts, he is going to come out of this sounding like a redneck with a gun who was out looking for a chance to use it, and found just such a chance. The race card is coming too.... a nonwhite kid in a nice area? No wai, must be up to something! He better have a very, very good story to tell about what was suspect about the teen (apart from his race) and why he was out of that car, doing what 911 told him to NOT do. Getting out of your car, hassleing someone & starting a fight, then shooting the other guy.... is NOT self defense. Stand your ground law might allow for it, but this really sounds bad even with that flimsy excuse. The only thing the shooter has that sounds remotely reasonable is he was apparently knocked down, back was dirty and his head was cut a little. Which is no more than many would do if some idiot gets out of his car and starts crap.

Those are all good questions and good points but don't you think the investigating officers and/or the DA asked similar questions?

I suspect that if the DA really thought there was a case here they would proceed with one...since they didn't; I tend to think the shooter was, at least "legally', in the right.

I'm NOT saying the shooter handled things the way he should or how I would...I tend to believe that drawing a weapon, much less discharging it is something we should actively seek to avoid...that that the armed citizen has a greater obligation to avoid such conflicts than a citizen who isn't armed. However, just because I think that doesn't mean this shooter was legally in the wrong.

[Oh Shoot]

Y'all heard the 911 tape, right?

Guy was tailing the kid on foot by then, 911 guy said "so you're following him?" and "we don't want you to do that" or words pretty close to that. Didn't even shoot him on his own property, right? No mention of weapon on the kid.

I don't guess you have to retreat in FL either, but that doesn't mean you can advance to stir something up.

I mean, just that much seems like he'd be charged here with something anyway. Just sounds like some fix was in. If the fed's looksee into it doesn't crank something up then maybe not, we'll see.

- OS

Edited March 20, 2012 by OhShoot

[TMF]

I think due to the attention given so far to this case is why there hasn't been an arrest and the DA is making sure all ducks are in a row before committing.

Anyone wanting insight into this should read the full transcript of the 911 call from Zimmerman. It is clear that he is the aggressor and was warned not to intervene. Meanwhile, this young man has had a suspicious individual following him for several blocks. What would any of us do in that scenario? I know what I would do if some weirdo followed me as I'm just walking home and then confronted me. I would be very aggressive back and be prepared to defend myself.

The young man probably did defend himself; too bad he wasn't better armed says me. For those of you more prepared to believe that a young man walking home from the store is a bigger threat than an armed adult who shoots a 17 year old within view of his own friggin house need to look deep on why you are so predisposed to do so.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Yep it sounds at least that the "neighborhood watchman" acted with poor judgement. Regardless whether the young fella was a criminal or pure as the driven snow, if cornered then any normal fella might put up a fight. So even if the neighborhood watchman may have shot in "self defense" after getting into a scuffle, it sounds like the neighborhood watchman really pushed it in order to get into that scuffle.

The news articles blame the FL stand your ground law, but maybe the local popo and DA just didn't figure they had enough evidence to win in front of a jury? It doesn't mention how crime-ridden the neighborhood happens to be. If that neighborhood has a serious crime problem then possibly they couldn't get a conviction even if the neighborhood watchman is guilty as sin, because of jury nullification? In a high-crime neighborhood, such might be the case regardless of any stand your ground law?

[Smith]

One more trouble maker, giving the rest of us a bad image?

http://www.foxnews.c...ager-killed-by/

http://www.foxnews.c...n-self-defense/

I think we would all be better served if they would lock this guy up and get this thing to trial.

So you prefer the guilty till proven innocent system. Interesting.

Edited March 20, 2012 by Smith

[RobertNashville]

... For those of you more prepared to believe that a young man walking home from the store is a bigger threat than an armed adult who shoots a 17 year old within view of his own friggin house need to look deep on why you are so predisposed to do so.

Some 17 year old kids walking home from the store are no threat at all...some are murderers (or at least are willing to be).

I've looked "deep into myself" and I'm fine with "me". The only thing I'm "predisposed" to do is not snap to ANY judgment about anybody's guilt or innocence. You weren't there...I wasn't there...the 911 operator wasn't there but I'm fairly certain that if the DA feels he has enough evidence to get a conviction he'll proceed with charges; if he doesn't then I suppose I'm predisposed to think that the shooting was justified.

[mikegideon]

What Robert said.

[Links2k]

lack of facts of course, but captain crimestopper sounds like the agressor. Why was he out of his car? What was the kid doing to deserve being accosted by this guy? What life threatening event caused the gun to be drawn? Unless he has some hard facts, he is going to come out of this sounding like a redneck with a gun who was out looking for a chance to use it, and found just such a chance. The race card is coming too.... a nonwhite kid in a nice area? No wai, must be up to something! He better have a very, very good story to tell about what was suspect about the teen (apart from his race) and why he was out of that car, doing what 911 told him to NOT do. Getting out of your car, hassleing someone & starting a fight, then shooting the other guy.... is NOT self defense. Stand your ground law might allow for it, but this really sounds bad even with that flimsy excuse. The only thing the shooter has that sounds remotely reasonable is he was apparently knocked down, back was dirty and his head was cut a little. Which is no more than many would do if some idiot gets out of his car and starts crap.

Thank you. The jack wad was told not to follow the kid. All the dispatcher wanted was a description and direction. The shooter starts going on about how the kids kind always gets away with stuff. He never said that the kid did anything. Listen to the audio. The guy is

[Links2k]

Wanna be. He should have waited on the cops.

[Links2k]

I think due to the attention given so far to this case is why there hasn't been an arrest and the DA is making sure all ducks are in a row before committing.

Anyone wanting insight into this should read the full transcript of the 911 call from Zimmerman. It is clear that he is the aggressor and was warned not to intervene. Meanwhile, this young man has had a suspicious individual following him for several blocks. What would any of us do in that scenario? I know what I would do if some weirdo followed me as I'm just walking home and then confronted me. I would be very aggressive back and be prepared to defend myself.

The young man probably did defend himself; too bad he wasn't better armed says me. For those of you more prepared to believe that a young man walking home from the store is a bigger threat than an armed adult who shoots a 17 year old within view of his own friggin house need to look deep on why you are so predisposed to do so.

Good post

[mikegideon]

There's a good chance that it's just how it looks. The story will have more credibility when a prosecutor gets behind it. The tape stopped before the shooting started.

[TMF]

The "little kid's" folks will always try to paint the kid as a good kid who was doing nothing wrong; the reality is very often much different than that. A 17 year old, armed or not, can be a dangerous animal if he want's to be.

.

So then why the comments on his parents? What bearing do other cases have on this one that would make you believe that this young man was anything BUT a good kid?

What could this young man be doing on a public sidewalk only yards from his house that was so criminal that Zimmerman had to intervene before the police arrived? Loitering? Jaywalking? Wearing white after labor day? If he had waited the police would have simply questioned the teen and found out his dad lives there. That would have been the end of it. Instead the young man is dead.

I don't have to worry about guilty or innocent on this guy. I'm not a representative of the government nor am I going to be sitting on a jury in Sanford. This guy took a young man's life because he was trigger happy. He will be convicted of some form of homicide and I hope some good 'ol prison justice permanently solves this problem in the end.

No kidding, read the transcript of Zimmerman's call from start to finish. It would blow my mind if someone could possibly ignore the obvious.

Edited March 20, 2012 by TMF 18B

[Links2k]

Yep it sounds at least that the "neighborhood watchman" acted with poor judgement. Regardless whether the young fella was a criminal or pure as the driven snow, if cornered then any normal fella might put up a fight. So even if the neighborhood watchman may have shot in "self defense" after getting into a scuffle, it sounds like the neighborhood watchman really pushed it in order to get into that scuffle.

The news articles blame the FL stand your ground law, but maybe the local popo and DA just didn't figure they had enough evidence to win in front of a jury? It doesn't mention how crime-ridden the neighborhood happens to be. If that neighborhood has a serious crime problem then possibly they couldn't get a conviction even if the neighborhood watchman is guilty as sin, because of jury nullification? In a high-crime neighborhood, such might be the case regardless of any stand your ground law?

They were in a gated community according to news reports.

[mikegideon]

Wanna be. He should have waited on the cops.

That's probably 100% true.

[Links2k]

So you prefer the guilty till proven innocent. Interesting.

I don't know about the shooters guilt or innocence, but that audio sure makes it sound like he was looking for trouble.

[TMF]

Some 17 year old kids walking home from the store are no threat at all...some are murderers (or at least are willing to be).

.

So then it's okay to hassle every 17 year old kid that looks suspicious and then shoot them when they fight back? Got it. So glad I was born white so good honest folks don't immediately assume I'm up to no good when they see me walkin around.

[Links2k]

So then it's okay to hassle every 17 year old kid that looks suspicious and then shoot them when they fight back? Got it. So glad I was born white so good honest folks don't immediately assume I'm up to no good when they see me walkin around.

Lucky and blessed. It's tough being a black teen eating skittles, wearing a hoodie and minding your business.

[E4 No More]

So then it's okay to hassle every 17 year old kid that looks suspicious and then shoot them when they fight back? Got it. So glad I was born white so good honest folks don't immediately assume I'm up to no good when they see me walkin around.

Personally, I think that you are out of line here. Robert said nothing about race in his comment. If one pays attention to the news they'd find that 17 year olds do murder.

[Smith]

I don't know about the shooters guilt or innocence, but that audio sure makes it sound like he was looking for trouble.

Could very well be, but when every story I've read starts off with a racial slant that is errant in the facts leads me to defer judgment till more facts are available. He wasn't charged and has only become an issue due to the ongoing erroneous claim that this was a black child shot by a white man. Zimmerman is clearly hispanic by his statements and photo from a multicultural family. While he may very well be guilty of stupidity and possibly chargeable offenses, when a story is this factually errant and emotionally driven, justice will not be the outcome as evidenced by the knee jerk condemnations in just this detached thread on a gun board in TN.

As to the directions of the 911 operator, they are also notoriously documented as recommending against any individual response, preferring only police action to self defense. They are not legal advisors nor are they informed enough to make any judgment calls or recommendations.