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

[mikegideon]

http://articles.orla...ffice-petitions

Someone please tell me. I am aching to know.

i want me a Trayvon koozie and hat.

[BryanP]

I'm not sure where the idea that Zimmerman pursued Trayvon comes from after listening to this 911 audio

http://www.stormfron.../forum/t875029/

The dispatcher asks him to stop and he says "OK" It would appear at that time he has lost sight of Martin. If we are to believe Zimmerman's statement it is after he hangs up the phone that Martin reappears and some kind of confrontation starts and Martin punches him in the nose knocking him to the ground. Where did the pursuit idea come from? Granted I may have missed something here....

Yeah ... I'm not going to click on any link that leads to stormfront. I wouldn't go near the scum that hangs out there without a hazmat suit and a mix of napalm and lysol.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Here is the Florida State Statute that contains "stand your ground". Pay particular attention to section 3.

[snip]

(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

I don't claim knowledge of the particulars or knowledge of law, and the stand yer ground statute is likely irrelevant to the case. On the other hand, mere speculation on possibilities, I reiterate that stand your ground MAY apply better to Martin than Zimmerman. If you were walking unfamiliar territory, unarmed, having been stalked for quite awhile by a suspicous-looking stranger having unknown motivations-- It might perfectly conform to "stand your ground" to apply whatever force you have, when you see an opening, to take the character out of action before he has a chance to cause you harm.

One of the dubious reports alleged that Martin was aware of Zimmerman's pistol. Being threatened by a suspicious armed stranger-- That is the same thing that got the white man shot in the Dooley case. Old man Dooley was packing and the younger man interpreted it as a threat. And so the younger veteran jumped the old man and wrestled the old man on the ground in order to disarm the old man, and got shot and killed for his trouble. Both of those guys seemed to conform to the wording of the law, from their own points of view. Dooley saw evidence of threat from the younger man, and the younger man saw what seemed evidence of threat from Dooley.

There is nothing in FSS 775 thru 896 (FL criminal statutes) that make pursue/intervene unlawful. There is also nothing that says anything about "starting a situation" that leads to anything. These issues are best addressed in civil court not criminal. What EXACTLY would you charge Zimmerman with?

Depending on what is learned of the "legality" of the shoot itself-- Mere ignorant speculation on some possibilities-- Intimidation, Stalking, or Reckless Endangerment. Possibly even Aggravated Assault if zimmerman had been following Martin in a creepy fashion and then made it "too easy" for Martin to become aware that not only was Martin being stalked by a creepy dude, but also aware of being stalked by a creepy dude with a pistol.

[RobertNashville]

Not to get of topic, but I watched a Black Panther representative put a bounty out for the capture of Zimmerman on CNN this morning. Could the legal eagles out there explain to me why this person isn't in custody? Isn't this conspiracy to commit kidnapping or something like that? If I was to do the same thing only change "Zimmerman" to "Jesse Jackson" wouldn't I be enjoying the view from the inside of a jail cell?

The person placing the bounty is black...that's why.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

I finally listened to the audios, anyway, and I'm beginning to think Zimmerman is innocent. Unless what I

heard is something different from earlier audios, I don't understand where some people around here

drew their conclusions, unless they just flat out trusted the media. But I still want to see the process

done properly, if that hasn't been done.

If I'm right, we won't see the two Reverends in Florida for a long time after this. I'm still cynical about

justice being done with this.

[QuietDan]

Is "you don't need to do that" a directive or a suggestion?

I've read a report that an extended 911 recording demonstrates that Zimmerman did in fact back off after the dispatcher said "you don't need to do that" . . . . all of which will be presented to the Grand Jury, which may call for an indictment or not. There is a process for dealing with all this information, much of which conflicts with itself. This is what happens when protests and race-mongers front load the process.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

That audio link on Stormfront.org claimed to not be redacted. That's the one I heard. I imagine

there were earlier versions that might have been snippets and not in full context.

[Mr. Brooks]

http://gma.yahoo.com/trayvon-martin-shooter-told-cops-teenager-went-gun-030349812--abc-news.html

Apparently now there is a second witness that backs up Zimmerman.

Interesting stuff here.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

George Steph-a rest of his name couldn't get his angle in with that black man. He was frustrated.

The 13 yo kid is another witness. Keep it coming.

This will end up a huge can of worms for the media. They deserve it, too.

[Mr. Brooks]

I'm worried that they listed the 13 year olds name. I'm waiting for him to be "encouraged" to change his statement.

Or maybe the black panthers will just put a price on his head as well.

[daddyo]

I've read a report that an extended 911 recording demonstrates that Zimmerman did in fact back off after the dispatcher said "you don't need to do that" . . . . all of which will be presented to the Grand Jury, which may call for an indictment or not. There is a process for dealing with all this information, much of which conflicts with itself. This is what happens when protests and race-mongers front load the process.

Yes, something has been gnawing on me about the 911 tape, as in thinking that only a chopped up version has been released that doesn't quite tell the whole story.

[DaveTN]

What bothers me are the people that are so quick to throw Zimmerman under the bus.

Could Zimmerman be guilty as hell? It's possible. Could Zimmerman be innocent?There is evidence to support it. Whatever the case I wish people would let it ride its course and let the courts decide. I personally don't think it's ever going to trial.

That’s not what we do here. We are arm chair quarterbacks and we don’t let anything ride without giving our opinions. You are one of the most vocal when it comes to drawing conclusions and postings your opinions. So I’m a little confused as to why you don’t think we should be discussing this or giving our opinions.

I refuse to support Zimmerman simply because he is a permit holder. The problem I have is that no one has accused this kid of doing anything wrong, and now he is dead. Zimmerman single handedly orchestrated and implemented the actions that led to the death of an innocent person. And for that he should have to answer.

I put myself in Trevons position. If I was walking down the street being stalked by someone in a truck and then they got out and approached me, I would have my gun in my hand. If he pulled his one of us would be dead. Only Trevon didn’t have a gun. He didn’t have any way to protect himself other than to try to get away. Zimmernam concluded that made him guilty of something.

As I said before we don’t have a justice system, we have a legal system. Justice would be that Trevon was doing nothing wrong and was accosted on the street by a nut case with a gun, as far as I’m concerned he was justified in beating Zimmermans azz and leaving him in the street. Zimmerman should have taken his azz beating for making stupid decisions and went back home to lick his wounds. Instead an innocent person is dead.

But no, we have a legal system that will try to say that if Trevon started kicking this guys azz, Zimmerman was justified in killing him. I’ve said here many times, if you get in a fight that you instigated or were a willful participant in; the use of deadly force should not be an option. If that’s what happened (and I don’t know that it is) I hope a message is sent by sending Zimmerman to prison.

You can’t let your mouth overload your sorry azz and then back it up with a gun.

[TMF]

There is nothing in FSS 775 thru 896 (FL criminal statutes) that make pursue/intervene unlawful. There is also nothing that says anything about "starting a situation" that leads to anything. These issues are best addressed in civil court not criminal. What EXACTLY would you charge Zimmerman with?

Okay, I'll play that game... Let's say someone cuts me off in traffic and I curse and honk my horn. I follow the guy to a gas station where I get out and start cursing the guy some more.... maybe make some inflammatory insults about his momma. The guy starts beating the crap outta me, and since he's a foot taller and has 100 pounds on me I am now in fear of my life so I shoot him in self defense.

It wasn't illegal to follow him. It wasn't illegal to say something about his momma. And any reasonable person would agree that I would be in fear of my life whilst getting beat down. You think I wouldn't be charged with some sort of manslaughter??? Really? I welcome you to give that theory a shot and see how far you get.

[Guest RevScottie]

I still don't see where what Zimmerman was doing was wrong. He followed a suspicious person in his neighborhood and called police to report it, 911 kept him on the phone getting details. The suspicious person then fled on foot, Zimmerman was asked to not follow and he complied. This suspicious person then circled around, started a confrontation, sucker punched him, and proceeded to violently beat his head on the sidewalk. Zimmerman feared he would be done great bodily harm or killed (well duh) and defended himself.

IF this is the true account of events what did Zimmerman do wrong? The 911 tapes indicate he said OK when told not to follow any longer and only internet specualtion indicates that he did otherwise and he was in contact with 911 when he was following.

[QuietDan]

As all the facts start dribbling out, we're re-creating the incident in a trial in the court of public opinion. If all this gets ramped up to a grand jury indictment, then there will be a court trial where the true facts come out.

[TMF]

Zimmerman was asked to not follow and he complied. This suspicious person then circled around, started a confrontation, sucker punched him, and proceeded to violently beat his head on the sidewalk. Zimmerman feared he would be done great bodily harm or killed (well duh) and defended himself.

Or Zimmerman blew off the dispatcher and continued to stalk this kid that had done nothing wrong.

Either that or this young man just spontaneously decided to commit a random felony assault against an upstanding citizen. Based on the fact that he still had a can of ice tea in his possession would tell me there wasn't a premeditated intent to do so, unless he thought the tea gave him some kind of upper hand or he thought he might be thirsty after beating up an upstanding citizen in an unprovoked attack. I guess that IS easier to believe than Zimmerman saying "okay" then continuing to do what he was doing.

[Just2Honor]

Okay, I'll play that game... Let's say someone cuts me off in traffic and I curse and honk my horn. I follow the guy to a gas station where I get out and start cursing the guy some more.... maybe make some inflammatory insults about his momma. The guy starts beating the crap outta me, and since he's a foot taller and has 100 pounds on me I am now in fear of my life so I shoot him in self defense.

It wasn't illegal to follow him. It wasn't illegal to say something about his momma. And any reasonable person would agree that I would be in fear of my life whilst getting beat down. You think I wouldn't be charged with some sort of manslaughter??? Really? I welcome you to give that theory a shot and see how far you get.

Not a lawyer so I can't speak about whether or not your actions would be legal. You are free to do whatever actions you want in an example like you used. As for me, when I decided to carry a weapon I took on the responsibility not to put myself into situations where I would provoke arguements, fights, altercations, etc. that might cause me to have to draw and use my weapon. Notice I said "provoke"--if the situation comes upon me through no actions by me then your example changes for me, too. The honk would have ended it for me. Legal or not would not be a consideration for me in following somebody after cutting me off. It was a matter of what I perceive to be my moral obligation as a weapon carrier. Not to mention the obligation I have to all the other legal carriers not to shine a bad light on them because of my actions.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

You have an audio. How does an audio "show" you what you assume happened? What's with this tea fetish?

Does that just make him a little kid to you or something? No one still knows the sequence of events except

what was stated by Zimmerman and what the witnesses have said.

[TMF]

Not a lawyer so I can't speak about whether or not your actions would be legal. You are free to do whatever actions you want in an example like you used. As for me, when I decided to carry a weapon I took on the responsibility not to put myself into situations where I would provoke arguements, fights, altercations, etc. that might cause me to have to draw and use my weapon. Notice I said "provoke"--if the situation comes upon me through no actions by me then your example changes for me, too. The honk would have ended it for me. Legal or not would not be a consideration for me in following somebody after cutting me off. It was a matter of what I perceive to be my moral obligation as a weapon carrier. Not to mention the obligation I have to all the other legal carriers not to shine a bad light on them because of my actions.

You may have missed my intent of the post. It was meant to illustrate that even if you're not doing anything illegal, you can still be charged if you instigated the incident, EVEN if you were in fear of your life.

[TMF]

You have an audio. How does an audio "show" you what you assume happened? What's with this tea fetish?

Does that just make him a little kid to you or something? No one still knows the sequence of events except

what was stated by Zimmerman and what the witnesses have said.

Just countering speculation with speculation. There are witnesses that conflict with other witness statements.

[Just2Honor]

You're right. I misread your intent. Sorry. I hope others don't take your example to heart.

[BigK]

never mind...missed a few pages

Edited March 27, 2012 by BigK

[TMF]

You're right. I misread your intent. Sorry. I hope others don't take your example to heart.

If they do then they'll likely find themselves in front of a jury. That's why I find this case so interesting in regards to where self defense ends and reckless behavior begins.

No matter how this ends up it should be a thought provoking case for the carry community, especially because there ARE those amongst us that consider themselves commissioned super heroes upon receipt of their carry permit.

[mikegideon]

If they do then they'll likely find themselves in front of a jury. That's why I find this case so interesting in regards to where self defense ends and reckless behavior begins.

No matter how this ends up it should be a thought provoking case for the carry community, especially because there ARE those amongst us that consider themselves commissioned super heroes upon receipt of their carry permit.

I guess there are a few. I'm too old to duke it out with a thugling, so I would have to shoot him. I will avoid ANY conflict when I'm armed. That subject has come up a lot on this board.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Which ones? Did Jesse and Al find them? Maybe, but I don't know. The police had witnesses before we

heard about this. I really wonder about whether any "new" witnesses are polluted, since the "enlightenment"

by Jesse and Al. I'm going to say the longer this drags out there will be witnesses found that swear they saw

bigfoot and a unicorn selling skittles and tea inside the gated community and saw the whole thing go down.

What part of what I stated was speculation?