Unarmed black 17 year old shot by Neighborhood watch captain in gated community...

Page 100 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

CLite

Golden Member
Dec 6, 2005
1,726
7
76
How about the one witness that actually saw it? He states zimmerman on his back, being beaten by martin, zimmerman crying for help.

One news article (myfoxorlanod.com) mentions this without giving any indication as to the source of the quote. Did this witness independently contact myfoxorlando? did the police leak this one tidbit of information but then completely fail to ever bring it up again?

I will take that one non-cited reference and then line it up against the mountain of circumstantial evidence and still have no logical reason to believe Zimmerman had reasonable justification to use lethal force.
 

nonlnear

Platinum Member
Jan 31, 2008
2,497
0
76
Doesn't look like it. I just read the FL statute regarding stalking, and none of this even comes close to a stalking charge.
Malicious would be the hardest point to establish IMHO, but other than that what doesn't fit? I do agree that aggravated stalking would be a moonshot given what little I have read.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
One news article (myfoxorlanod.com) mentions this without giving any indication as to the source of the quote. Did this witness independently contact myfoxorlando? did the police leak this one tidbit of information but then completely fail to ever bring it up again?

I will take that one non-cited reference and then line it up against the mountain of circumstantial evidence and still have no logical reason to believe Zimmerman had reasonable justification to use lethal force.

If zimmerman was on his back, being beaten and crying for help would that be self defense to you? Because legally it opens up a whole lot of options for use of force.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
I will take that one non-cited reference and then line it up against the mountain of circumstantial evidence and still have no logical reason to believe Zimmerman had reasonable justification to use lethal force.

If the witness provided that story to the police (ie, a documented account), it's going to carry a lot of weight since it's the ONLY account of what was actually happening when Martin was shot.
 

NeoV

Diamond Member
Apr 18, 2000
9,504
2
81
so spidey - a 250lb man follows a 140lb teenager in his car...for some period of time - said teen flees...man follows, loses sight of him - at some point they encounter each other - said teen apparently gets the best of the situation (not saying this happened btw, just in theory here)....to you it's ok that the man shoots the teen?

Let's try situation #2. I go to a bar. This is a bar where a lot of people have been pushed around. A guy - more than 100lbs larger than me, is giving me weird looks. Everywhere I go, he goes. He even follows me into the bathroom. Spooked out, I leave - and sure enough, he's following me again. I run a few blocks, circle back, thinking I lost him, but then, he's right in front of me as I turn a corner. I'm like "WTF is your problem", and give him a shove - he shoves me back, and we end up wrestling a bit. I get on top of him (how exactly does someone with a 100lb weight advantage stay pinned down, btw?) - it's ok now if he shoots me?
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
Malicious would be the hardest point to establish IMHO, but other than that what doesn't fit? I do agree that aggravated stalking would be a moonshot given what little I have read.

No, the statute makes it clear that it only applies to someone who's activities serve no legitimate purpose, and that the actions of the person have to be qualified as malicious. Someone in a neighborhood watch trying to investigate someone suspicious (and keeping an eye on them) is a legitimate purpose, and you'd have a hard time arguing that the action was malicious with Zimmerman calling 911 before anything actually happened. That's why no stalking charges have been filed (and I don't think any will be).
 

brandonb

Diamond Member
Oct 17, 2006
3,731
2
0
Let's try situation #2. I go to a bar. This is a bar where a lot of people have been pushed around. A guy - more than 100lbs larger than me, is giving me weird looks. Everywhere I go, he goes. He even follows me into the bathroom. Spooked out, I leave - and sure enough, he's following me again. I run a few blocks, circle back, thinking I lost him, but then, he's right in front of me as I turn a corner. I'm like "WTF is your problem", and give him a shove - he shoves me back, and we end up wrestling a bit. I get on top of him (how exactly does someone with a 100lb weight advantage stay pinned down, btw?) - it's ok now if he shoots me?

I'm not spidey but I'd say that the dude has every single right to shoot you if you shove him and get into a wrestling match with him.

If he believes his life is in danger from you, then he is justified in shooting.

Am I allowed to "scuffle" with anybody because they look at me cross eyed? I can claim "self defense"? Doesn't work that way. When things get physical, thats when the line is drawn. If you initiated the physical part, then the other guy is self-defending.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
so spidey - a 250lb man follows a 140lb teenager in his car...for some period of time - said teen flees...man follows, loses sight of him - at some point they encounter each other - said teen apparently gets the best of the situation (not saying this happened btw, just in theory here)....to you it's ok that the man shoots the teen?

Let's try situation #2. I go to a bar. This is a bar where a lot of people have been pushed around. A guy - more than 100lbs larger than me, is giving me weird looks. Everywhere I go, he goes. He even follows me into the bathroom. Spooked out, I leave - and sure enough, he's following me again. I run a few blocks, circle back, thinking I lost him, but then, he's right in front of me as I turn a corner. I'm like "WTF is your problem", and give him a shove - he shoves me back, and we end up wrestling a bit. I get on top of him (how exactly does someone with a 100lb weight advantage stay pinned down, btw?) - it's ok now if he shoots me?

Yes on both counts. This is why you don't get aggressive or physical with somebody, you may get shot.
 
Last edited:

CitizenKain

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2000
4,480
14
76
If zimmerman was on his back, being beaten and crying for help would that be self defense to you? Because legally it opens up a whole lot of options for use of force.

Except a witness said it was Zimmerman standing over Martin. Unless Martin somehow took off his hoodie before being shot, and then put it back on afterwards. Which would be hard as he was busy being shot by a crazed animal.
 

nonlnear

Platinum Member
Jan 31, 2008
2,497
0
76
No, the statute makes it clear that it only applies to someone who's activities serve no legitimate purpose, and that the actions of the person have to be qualified as malicious. Someone in a neighborhood watch trying to investigate someone suspicious (and keeping an eye on them) is a legitimate purpose,
That's debatable, to the extent that said "investigating" creates intimidation, etc. Observing the neighborhood and calling for police serves a legitimate purpose. Pursuing an individual because they "look suspicious" I would argue serves no legitimate purpose. The fact that an individual believes their actions serve a legitimate purpose does not necessarily make it true.
and you'd have a hard time arguing that the action was malicious with Zimmerman calling 911 before anything actually happened. That's why no stalking charges have been filed (and I don't think any will be).
I agree no stalking charges are likely, primarily because they probably would have been filed fairly quickly if at all. IMHO the lack of said charges has very little to do with the facts of the case.
 

brandonb

Diamond Member
Oct 17, 2006
3,731
2
0
Except a witness said it was Zimmerman standing over Martin. Unless Martin somehow took off his hoodie before being shot, and then put it back on afterwards. Which would be hard as he was busy being shot by a crazed animal.

You just lost all credibility calling someone a "crazed animal" without being there. You remind me of CNN... "He was just an innocent boy." Seriously? How did they know that? I remember when I was 17 and a criminal and "going to the store" I was actually eyeing the cars parked along side the road, seeing which cars had nice radios and which ones did not, so I could come back later at night to finish the job.

I don't think the times have changed that much in the last 20 years. That would look suspicious wouldn't it? Eyeballing the cars? You have no idea what he was doing, and you have only the media telling you he was innocent. Give it up.
 

micrometers

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2010
3,473
0
0
Except a witness said it was Zimmerman standing over Martin. Unless Martin somehow took off his hoodie before being shot, and then put it back on afterwards. Which would be hard as he was busy being shot by a crazed animal.

The witness didn't witness the act of shooting.

She witnessed the aftermath.

I believe it is likely that Zimmerman is telling the truth from his perspective. Martin might have gotten the better of him and was over him beating him. Zimmerman shot him while laying on his back. Martin falls on his face.
 

CLite

Golden Member
Dec 6, 2005
1,726
7
76
I think you may well be right, under Florida law. This is the problem with this absurd law. You, on the other hand, seem to be the only person who thinks this is a good thing.

He is not right per Florida law

Florida licensing website
http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/
http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/wea...f_defense.html

florida licensing said:
Q. When can I use my handgun to protect myself?

A. Florida law justifies use of deadly force when you are:

Trying to protect yourself or another person from death or serious bodily harm;
Trying to prevent a forcible felony, such as rape, robbery, burglary or kidnapping.
Using or displaying a handgun in any other circumstances could result in your conviction for crimes such as improper exhibition of a firearm, manslaughter, or worse.

Example of the kind of attack that will not justify defending yourself with deadly force: Two neighbors got into a fight, and one of them tried to hit the other by swinging a garden hose. The neighbor who was being attacked with the hose shot the other in the chest. The court upheld his conviction for aggravated battery with a firearm, because an attack with a garden hose is not the kind of violent assault that justifies responding with deadly force.

If attacking someone with a garden hose didn't warrant lethal force, a wrestling/fist fight sure as fuck doesn't.
 

micrometers

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2010
3,473
0
0

"The guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help! Help!' and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911," said the witness, who asked to be identified only by his first name, John.


Read more: http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/new...led-in-neighborhood-altercation#ixzz1paMNXSry

THIS IS IMPORTANT.

A witness said that a man in a white or gray tshirt was on top. Well, Zimmerman was wearing a red sweater according to a witness. So Martin was in-fact on top.
 

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,708
514
126
I think you may well be right, under Florida law. This is the problem with this absurd law. You, on the other hand, seem to be the only person who thinks this is a good thing.

I agree. This tragedy (I'm sure spidey07 thinks it's anything but...) illustrates that self-defense laws have gotten too lax in terms of what can be considered self-defense.

I really hope that someone in Florida (maybe someone involved in the petition calling for Mr. Zimmerman's arrest) starts a petition that calls for the changing of this law in Florida. The law(s) in FL. that tie the hands of police and the prosecutor in cases like this, as well as similar laws in other states, encourage these types of tragedies and are unconscionable in civilized societies.

The fact that anyone can just accept these laws and impugn the motives of a minor, who any reasonable person would accept could very well be fearful and feeling like he had to defend himself, just because he wasn't the armed person in this tragedy is quite frankly baffling.
 

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,708
514
126
"The guy on the bottom, who had a red sweater on, was yelling to me, 'Help! Help!' and I told him to stop, and I was calling 911," said the witness, who asked to be identified only by his first name, John.


Read more: http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/new...led-in-neighborhood-altercation#ixzz1paMNXSry

THIS IS IMPORTANT.

A witness said that a man in a white or gray tshirt was on top. Well, Zimmerman was wearing a red sweater according to a witness. So Martin was in-fact on top.

It is important. What's also important is how the altercation started. And the fact that Mr. Zimmerman was told we don't need you to follow Trayvon Martin. It's still a tragedy that didn't need to happen and quite frankly my point still stands. Florida's law and other's like it throughout the the states need to be changed.

It also tells other people that you had better damn well better be armed. Perhaps even if you're a minor your better off carrying anyway.

What I find interesting is that this particular news source only provides sparse details (in comparison to the other sources) that don't let you know what occurred in the minutes up to the shooting.
 
Last edited:

micrometers

Diamond Member
Nov 14, 2010
3,473
0
0
It is important. What's also important is how the altercation started. And the fact that Mr. Zimmerman was told we don't need you to follow Trayvon Martin. It's still a tragedy that didn't need to happen and quite frankly my point still stands. Florida's law and other's like it throughout the the states need to be changed.

It also tells other people that you had better damn well better be armed. Perhaps even if you're a minor your better off carrying anyway.

um, no.

The fact remains that we don't have any witnesses who saw who threw the first punch, but we do have a witness who saw Martin on top of Zimmerman, and Zimmerman on the losing end.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,650
201
101
If attacking someone with a garden hose didn't warrant lethal force, a wrestling/fist fight sure as f**k doesn't.

I think you're wrong on that. The point isn't the weapon (fists versus hose), it's the total scenario of what is going on at the time. Being pinned down with no way to escape puts you in position to fear for your life.
 

CLite

Golden Member
Dec 6, 2005
1,726
7
76
I think you're wrong on that. The point isn't the weapon (fists versus hose), it's the total scenario of what is going on at the time. Being pinned down with no way to escape puts you in position to fear for your life.

If you listen to the audio the shouts move further away directly before the shot. I don't see how being pinned down for the entirety of the incident is credible, especially when coupled with the 110 pound difference between the two (and the fact that the heavier guy was trying to train to be a cop).
 

blankslate

Diamond Member
Jun 16, 2008
8,708
514
126
um, no.

The fact remains that we don't have any witnesses who saw who threw the first punch, but we do have a witness who saw Martin on top of Zimmerman, and Zimmerman on the losing end.

Um Yes.

Remember, all that had to be done by Mr. Zimmerman was wait a few minutes for the police to get there. As you said we have no idea who through the first punch. It could be anyone. The fact that this tragedy happened, regardless of who ended up on top of the other or who started it, indicates to me that the self defense laws in Fl. should be changed to discourage people who are armed from ignoring dispatchers and pursuing people who aren't obviously committing a crime.

While the law will probably exonerate Mr. Zimmerman, in my opinion it's a sign of poor laws in regards to what is considered self-defense.

I creep out a minor follow him around against the advice of a police dispatcher even though I know police are on the way. Then I get into a confrontation because I ignored good advice and because I wasn't as physically tough as I imagined I shoot someone then claim self defense...

Bad law because it encourages people to take risks they shouldn't.

Bad law because now it encourages people to be sure they get a knockout hit on the first blow if they find themselves on Trayvon Martin's end of an encounter in Florida.

The one good result that can come out of this is that Mr. Zimmerman will likely not get a job as a LEO now since this story is getting the notice of national media. No reasonable P.D. would hire him, especially not in this recession.