That witnesses name is Zimmerman.
He's not a witness, he's an alleged victim / alleged criminal.
That witnesses name is Zimmerman.
Other witnesses saw how the fight began? Please, repost the link.
The best account of what happened came from Zimmerman, Serino said. Other witnesses who saw or heard parts of what happened corroborate his version of events, the investigator said.
He's not a witness, he's an alleged victim / alleged criminal.
He's not an alleged criminal. Alleged suggest that there's a possibility he's not. He's got felony assault on a police officer charges an article said were expunged... meaning he likely completed deferred adjudication probation.
There are plenty of felons who don't commit crimes for plenty of years after they're convicted and they're not allowed to own guns.
He's not an alleged criminal. Alleged suggest that there's a possibility he's not. He's got felony assault on a police officer charges an article said were expunged... meaning he likely completed deferred adjudication probation.
You quoted my question, yet this article does not answer my question.
That was not the original question.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=33152055&postcount=1892
Yes he didHe's not an alleged criminal. Alleged suggest that there's a possibility he's not. He's got felony assault on a police officer charges an article said were expunged... meaning he likely completed deferred adjudication probation.
Convicted felons are not allowed to own guns unless they have their conviction expunged which can't be even requested until at least 10 years after they've been released from prison, and then it's only a maybe.There are plenty of felons who don't commit crimes for plenty of years after they're convicted and they're not allowed to own guns.
I actually agree that it's likely the 911 calls are either exculpatory or add nothing to the case. Anytime a public agency releases news on a Friday afternoon it's because they hope it will be buried. I imagine the police department is hoping to reduce the chances of rioting.
I don't know at this point whether what happened provides Zimmerman the protection of the "stand your ground" law, but based on the police's actions I suspect it does. Unfortunately the mishandling of the initial interview of Zimmerman has probably irreparably damaged the fact-finding process.
I do know, however, that the law is stupidly broad in its protections, and essentially motivates anyone involved in a casual scuffle to kill his opponent to avoid culpability. I guess Florida gets the laws it deserves.
There is no question in my mind - not one scintilla - that Zimmerman is the person primarily responsible for the death of Trayvon Martin, and if he is never charged due to the stupidity of Florida's wild-west legislature, it will be a miscarriage of justice in my opinion. That doesn't mean there is, under the existing law, necessarily a basis for charging him, in any case.
I still believe Mr. Martin's family can and will bring a civil suit, and I hope the fallout from this case includes a rethinking of the wisdom of "stand your ground."
I don't know at this point whether what happened provides Zimmerman the protection of the "stand your ground" law, but based on the police's actions I suspect it does. Unfortunately the mishandling of the initial interview of Zimmerman has probably irreparably damaged the fact-finding process, casting doubt on the validity of the information gathered.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/neighborho...eleased/story?id=15937881&page=2#.T2Oy1YHe6uIBut after the shooting, a source inside the police department told ABC News that a narcotics detective and not a homicide detective first approached Zimmerman. The detective peppered Zimmerman with questions, the source said, rather than allow Zimmerman to tell his story. Questions can lead a witness, the source said.
I still believe Mr. Martin's family can and will bring a civil suit, and I hope the fallout from this case includes a rethinking of the wisdom of "stand your ground."
The article has witnesses supporting bits and pieces of Zimmerman's account of the situation. Not entire recounts.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=33151899&postcount=1864
^^ The investigators are at the end of the rope, not much to go on, and the story is one sided.
I agree that it may never go to court. I also agree that Zimmerman should keep that gun on him.
I will continue to stand by gun ownership and the ability of a person to defend themselves/family/property. Even though I have a CCW license I don't carry unless I'm carrying a large sum of money going to and from auctions/the bank. I keep my guns locked up in a safe in my garage and the combination is in a lock box at the bank (no one other than me knows it)
I agree with that completely...this is not anything to be celebrated by anyone...there was nothing "good" about itYou will never hear me say this was a "Good Shoot" as it or any other shooting should never been looked upon in the manner. This event is tragic that resulted in a young man that hadn't had a chance to fulfill his dreams being dead.
I agree with that completely...this is not anything to be celebrated by anyone...there was nothing "good" about it
WFTV learned that the first Sanford officer in charge of the scene that Sunday night when Martin was killed was also involved in another controversial case.
In 2010, a Sanford police officer's son punched a man, but he was not arrested. Only after WFTV broke the story and asked questions was Justin Collison arrested.
WFTV learned that the patrol sergeant in charge the night of Collison's attack, Anthony Raimondo, was also the patrol sergeant who initially supervised Martin's shooting scene.
Raimondo has three validated complaints and another one pending.
I can guarantee anyone that's says it's a "Good Shoot" has never been in a position where they had to shoot or kill someone to protect their life or anyone else. Shooting and killing someone will change you forever. Just ask a member of the armed forces or law enforcement that has had to do so.
Please post the link for this.
The two got into a fight, and Zimmerman wound up on the ground, he told police. Trayvon hit him in the face, and Zimmerman yelled for help.
Several witnesses heard the fight, including a 13-year-old boy out walking his dog, but there have been different accounts of who was crying for help.
Zimmerman told police that Trayvon was the aggressor. Police have found no credible evidence, Serino said, to contradict that.
"Everything we have is adding up to what he says," said Serino.
A hearing was planned Monday to discuss the legal issues related to the 911 calls, but it will likely be canceled.
The police have not said what time the calls will be made available. There are eight calls to be released — seven emergency calls and one non-emergency call, police said.
The family of Trayvon Martin, the teen who was shot and killed by a self-appointed neighborhood watch leader, has told Local 6 they are going to the Sanford Police Department listen to the 911 calls made by the watch leader.
The family says they are going to the police department for the calls Friday night.
It's not clear when exactly the calls will be released to the public. Mayor Jeff Triplett said the city will be releasing the 911 tapes in a written statement.
"good shoot" is only slang for "lawful use lethal force in self defense". There is nothing good about this story except for zimmerman protecting himself from grave bodily harm or death.
There are 8 calls that were recorded in relation this case
http://www.clickorlando.com/news/Sa...older/-/1637132/9378580/-/w7u0s1/-/index.htmlU.S Representative Corrine Brown and Sanford Mayor Jeff Triplett will request an immediate review by the U.S. Attorney General's office in the shooting death of a Sanford teen.
How come Martin didn't have "no duty to retreat" when a large man got out of his car and started following him at night? Is it because it's black? What if it was a 17 year old white girl instead? Would she have a right to defend herself against a large black man following her?
We've been over this time and time again.
Your hypothetical the white girl would have no duty to retreat against FORCE or aggression via FORCE, a forcible felony where she is in a place she is lawfully allowed to be.
The moment she turns aggressive in behavior and physical contact provides the other guy use of self defense provided all the other aspects or reasonable fear for life exist.
Learn the law, read the law, understand the law in most states.
