Subscribe
Notify of
706 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Wicked, evil DrJohn.
Who do you think you are, confusing us with facts?
The facts don’t matter.
What matters is that we heart Trayvon.
And we despise Zimmerman (secret Zionist).
The case is a sad commentary on the inability of the Yesterday Media to actually report on WWWWW, which is what I was taught, years ago, was the function of journalism.
Journalism now has nothing to do with facts. Journalism now is the effort to shape the story, in order to fit a template. And the template is that Zippy is the wave of the future. Don’t forget it.

I am not saying Zimmerman is guilty of murder and I sure as hell don’t stand with Jesse Jackass and Al Simpleton, but these two statements are salient:

“Zimmerman begins to chase …”

“Martin apparently escaped.”

Zimmerman has no right to “chase” a free citizen, unless the kid is running off with his baby or brandishing a knife and lunging towards someone.

A free citizen has every right to “escape” when being chased by a stranger. A free citizen also has the right to turn around a deliver a beatdown to his pursuer.

I am a strong gun rights advocate as well as a firm believer in our natural rights to life, liberty and property. It appears Zimmerman got overzealous when performing the legitimate activity of doing neighborhood watch duty. His actions have harmed the cause of self-defense and gun rights.

@Silverfiddle:

Zimmerman has no right to “chase” a free citizen, unless the kid is running off with his baby or brandishing a knife and lunging towards someone.

Really? Is that so? A local watchman, a free citizen, has no “right” to chase a suspicious character in a neighborhood that has experience over 200 hundred break-ins and burglaries?

A local watchman, a free citizen, has no “right” …

Hmmm, one might think it could be unwise to chase a suspicious character, but where does this “no right to “chase”” come from? Please tell.

.

@Silverfiddle:

A free citizen also has the right to turn around a deliver a beatdown to his pursuer.

Actually a free citizen has no such right. The “deliver a beatdown” part would most likely be a felony.

@Silverfiddle:

Zimmerman has no right to “chase” a free citizen, unless the kid is running off with his baby or brandishing a knife and lunging towards someone.

Actually, as Neighborhood Watch, he does, as long as it’s “non-contact surveillance.” But then he stopped when asked to do so. The audio indicates it.

@Silverfiddle:

A free citizen has every right to “escape” when being chased by a stranger.

So why didn’t he? Why didn’t Martin call 911 and say he was being followed instead of calling his girlfriend?

@Mike O’Malley:

Actually a free citizen has no such right. The “deliver a beatdown” part would most likely be a felony.

Familiar at all with “Stand Your Ground” or “Line in the Sand” or “No Duty to Retreat” laws? No?

Didn’t think so.

I’ve come to the conclusion—after years of blogging—that concentrating on entertaining stories like this one (where we may never know the truth) serve as a distraction form the real issues in this country.

“Familiar at all with “Stand Your Ground” or “Line in the Sand” or “No Duty to Retreat” laws? No?”

What is the applicability of any of these concepts to Dr John’s scenario ? Any evidence that Zimmerman’s “chasing” of Martin resulted in a confrontation, initiated by Zimmerman, that required Martin to invoke any of these? I believe that the application of any of these requires a credible belief of greivous physical harm.

Being followed or surveilled doesn’t justify a “beatdown.”

@The Strategic MC: SYG does not apply here, nor is it needed.

@Liberal1 (objectivity): Not to worry. We’ll get back to Obama being a threat to this republic soon.

In the text scenario, the question is raised “Why did Martin run?”

No one knows why Martin ran. They just have Zimmerman’s account of Martin’s activity. First we have to fill in some blanks of that night. Zimmerman tells the 911 dispatcher he has spotted an individual who is acting suspiciously (just walking around, looking at residences, etc.) Upon the dispatcher’s request to describe Martin, Zimmerman says he has on a dark shirt, pants that might be blue jeans and light/white shoes. He also points out that Martin has something in his hands. He doesn’t know what it is… he also points out Martin has his hand in the area of the front of his waist. The dispatcher asks if Martin is white or black and Zimmerman tells him Martin looks like he is black. Further in his converstion, Zimmerman voluntarialy reiterates Martin is black.

Analyze that part of Zimmerman’s conversation with the dispatcher. He says Martin is acting suspiciously… walking along looking at the residences. That can indicate Zimmerman suspected Martin of casing the residences. It can also indicate that Martin is walking through a maze of streets casually looking back and forth like many pedestrians do. Most pedestrians do observe things while walking to their destinations.

It is important and seldom pointed out that Martin noticed a STRANGER following him. Any individual who notices a stranger is following them tense up and wonder if the follower intends to do them harm. Surely, Martin began to fear Zimmerman. Martin had no clue that Zimmerman was a volunteer block watcher. On the other side of the coin, Zimmerman did not know that Martin was temporarily living at the Twin Lakes Community with his father’s girlfriend. So, now we have two people who have no idea of who each other are. Martin is struck with fear. Zimmerman thinks Martin could be part of recent break-ins in the Community and calls 911. Both Zimmerman and Martin are distrustful of each other. It sounds as if both Martin and Zimmerman acted on their mistaken assumptions. But where Zimmerman’s assumptions were wrong, Martin’s life was ended. Black teens are within their rights to fear mixed white strangers mysteriously following them. That was evidenced by Martin calling his girlfriend on his cell phone to tell her about it. Why did Martin run? Martin ran because he feared for his life. Where Zimmerman’s assumptions were wrong, Martin’s assumptions were dead right.

SYG does not apply here, nor is it needed.

The point that I was, perhaps inarticulately, trying to make.

@c. lindy:

Martin is struck with fear. Zimmerman thinks Martin could be part of recent break-ins in the Community and calls 911. Both Zimmerman and Martin are distrustful of each other. It sounds as if both Martin and Zimmerman acted on their mistaken assumptions. But where Zimmerman’s assumptions were wrong, Martin’s life was ended. Black teens are within their rights to fear mixed white strangers mysteriously following them. That was evidenced by Martin calling his girlfriend on his cell phone to tell her about it. Why did Martin run? Martin ran because he feared for his life. Where Zimmerman’s assumptions were wrong, Martin’s assumptions were dead right.

Martin had nothing to fear until he tried to take the gun. If Martin was in fear, why call his girlfriend and not 911?

“Mixed white strangers”

Zimmerman does not look like a “mixed white.” He looks Hispanic. When are getting off that sad meme?

@c. lindy:

The dispatcher asks if Martin is white or black and Zimmerman tells him Martin looks like he is black. Further in his converstion, Zimmerman voluntarialy reiterates Martin is black.

He was clarifying once he was certain. He didn’t bring it up at all at first.

@drjohn:

SYG does not apply here, nor is it needed.

Then why, pray tell, was SYG used as the basis for not charging Zimmerman?

@Aye: Next post, Aye. It was not specifically used. It was part of the overall law.

@drjohn:

Please cite a credible source that says Martin tried to take Zimmerman’s gun.

@c. lindy: Is it natural to slowly walk around in the rain looking at houses without rain gear unless you are Gene Kelly? I do not think so!

These blog stories are not just distractions from obama destroying the republic. They serve as a palate cleansing from the rancid taste obama’s regine stuffs down our throats each and every day.

@drjohn:

It was not specifically used. It was part of the overall law.

Baloney.

The section of the SYG law which establishes immunity from prosecution was directly cited as the reason Zimmerman was not arrested:

According to Florida Statute 776.032 :

Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.— 776.032

A person who uses force as permitted in s. (1) 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force

::snip::

As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful. (2)

You should know this. You cited the press release yourself.

There’s no need to wait for the “next post”.

You should be willing and able to defend your contention right here, right now.

@Aye:

Media coverage of Florida’s self-defense laws in recent weeks has often been very inaccurate. While some persons, particularly from the gun prohibition lobbies, have claimed that the Martin/Zimmerman case shows the danger of Florida’s “Stand your ground” law, that law is legally irrelevant to case. So let’s take a look at what the Florida laws actually say.

Fla. Stat. § 776.012. Use of force in defense of person

A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:

(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or

So the general rule is that deadly force may be used only to “imminent death or great bodily harm,” or “the imminent commission of a forcible felony.” A person may only use deadly force if he “reasonably believes” that the aforesaid factual conditions exist. These standards are the norm throughout the United States.

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/politics/florida%E2%80%99s-self-defense-laws

Like I said- the whole thing was cited.

@c. lindy:

Please cite a credible source that says Martin tried to take Zimmerman’s gun.

Now we have a problem. I have a feeling that no one is going to be credible enough. Yet the police report says the gun was fired and the magazine was still full.

@drjohn: And Kopel concludes:

In sum: there is not a shred of support for the claim that Florida law protects, or has protected Zimmerman, if he unlawfully attacked Martin. If Zimmerman’s story is true (Martin attacked him, putting him in imminent peril of grave bodily injury, with no opportunity to retreat), then Zimmerman’s self-defense claim would be valid under the laws of Florida, New York, or any other Anglo-American jurisdiction. The particular legal changes resulting from Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” and “Castle Doctrine” laws (deadly force in the home/automobile; no duty to retreat in public places; Fourth Amendment arrest standard affirmation; protection from civil suits) simply have nothing to do with whether Zimmerman’s actions were or were not lawful.

Ibid.

@Aye:

I am quite familiar with stand your ground laws, and have read the Florida statute. Nowhere does it authorize someone to attack someone and “beat them down.” Martin had no duty to retreat, but he had no right to attack.

I will not comment on who had the right to do what. There are entirely too many shades of grey there.

However, I want to ask a question – if Martin had gone out to buy a bag of skittles for his friend where did he purchase it? I did a quick look for a store where the average Joe could walk in and make such a purchase and didn’t see one. There was a SAMs club nearby but i wouldn’t go there to buy a bag of Skittles for a friend – the large jumbo economy size isa little much.

The next question I want to ask was why did his father drive the two of them up from Miami to visit the father’s girl friend? The round trip drive represents four hours.

Oh, that’s right I am thinking about the background and asking logical questions instead of letting my emotions run away with me. But, aren’t these the kind of things that police officers on the spot might ask?

@Mannie: You presume he attacked. He had a gun. He did not need to attack. Attacking someone physically while in possession of a gun is foolhardy and makes no sense.

Now we have a problem. I have a feeling that no one is going to be credible enough. Yet the police report says the gun was fired and the magazine was still full.

And the casing from the discharged round failed to eject from the chamber.

@drjohn:

the police report says the gun was fired and the magazine was still full.

This, coupled with Zimmerman’s report that Martin grabbed for his gun, is evidence that there was such a struggle. The action failed to cycle, as it might if someone was grasping the slide. The strength of that evidence is up to the Trier of Fact to evaluate in view of the totality of the evidence. But it sounds a helluva lot like it establishes reasonable doubt that Zimmerman acted illegally.

I am George Zimmerman.

@The Strategic MC: There are very few ways that can happen.

@drjohn:

You appear to be arguing two different points.

First, you claim that the SYG law is not applicable in this particular case. On that point we agree at least as far as it being applied to protect Zimmerman. Zimmerman lost the SYG protections when he left his vehicle and initiated contact by pursuing Martin.

Had Martin survived he, instead, would have been entitled to the protections of SYG.

Second, you claim that the STG law was not applied to the Zimmerman case. That is completely, and undeniably incorrect as I cited above. The immunity provisions of the SYG law were clearly applied to Zimmerman and given as a reason for him not being arrested in this case.

You’ve got to pick a horse and ride it here.

Either SYG applies, and was applied correctly. Or, SYG doesn’t apply and was applied incorrectly.

You cannot have it both ways so which horse do you want?

@drjohn:

There are very few ways that can happen.

Like, for instance, the gun was jammed/wedged between Zimmerman and Martin when the trigger was pulled or, Martin had his hand on/around the gun when it discharged? Maybe both?

Am I missing something?

@Mannie:

I am quite familiar with stand your ground laws, and have read the Florida statute.

Well, if that were true you wouldn’t have followed on with:

Nowhere does it authorize someone to attack someone and “beat them down.”

The FL SYG statute is clear and unequivocal. 776.013(3)(2006) states:

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.

@The Strategic MC:

Am I missing something?

Yes. Weapon malfunction.

Even in the best of conditions, firearms don’t always function as intended.

We don’t know very much about this handgun. How old was it? How was it stored? How well was it maintained? When was it last serviced? When was it last fired? How old was the ammunition?

Lots of possibilities to consider as to why the firearm didn’t cycle beyond a theory that Martin had his hand around the slide.

@c. lindy:

“But where Zimmerman’s assumptions were wrong, Martin’s were dead right.”

I accept your argument that Martin might well have been afraid.
If Martin’s conduct, including approaching Zimmerman, hitting him in the face, etc., is as described in Zimmerman’s version of events (corroborated so far by the available tapes and physical evidence), Zimmerman’s suspicions seem rather accurate.

@Mannie:

But it sounds a helluva lot like it establishes reasonable doubt that Zimmerman acted illegally.

Given the physical injuries I don’t know that I agree. As I have said before, I think the very last thing Zimmerman wanted to do was shoot Martin.

@The Strategic MC:

I am thinking struggle for the weapon. If Zimmerman had intentions of shooting Martin, then he just shoots him immediately and gets it over with without hailing all the eyewitnesses, and without calling the cops first.

We are missing the big question:

Did Zimmerman enjoy the Skittles?

@drjohn:

Why didn’t Martin call 911 and say he was being followed instead of calling his girlfriend?

Another basic factual inaccuracy on your part.

Martin didn’t call his girlfriend. She called him:

Records show she called Martin at 7:12 p.m., and spoke to him for four minutes. Zimmerman’s call to police was at 7:11.

This corresponds with what Zimmerman had to say on the 911 tape when he talks about Martin having his hand in his waistband. It’s obvious that he was reaching for his ringing telephone.

@Aye:

First, you claim that the SYG law is not applicable in this particular case. On that point we agree at least as far as it being applied to protect Zimmerman. Zimmerman lost the SYG protections when he left his vehicle and initiated contact by pursuing Martin.

Had Martin survived he, instead, would have been entitled to the protections of SYG.

Second, you claim that the STG law was not applied to the Zimmerman case. That is completely, and undeniably incorrect as I cited above. The immunity provisions of the SYG law were clearly applied to Zimmerman and given as a reason for him not being arrested in this case.

Aye, I believe I said that the entire law was presented and I think so as not to allow anyone to think something was omitted. It’s my belief that Zimmerman’s case is one of self-defense. I had my doubts initially and said little about it until the case unfolded. I don’t know why you’re trying to find hairs to split. So far, I’ve been pretty on target about this whole thing.

You assume Zimmerman to be the aggressor. As Zimmerman asked Martin why he was there in the first place without simply shooting him, I doubt Zimerman was the aggressor.

@Aye:

This corresponds with what Zimmerman had to say on the 911 tape when he talks about Martin having his hand in his waistband. It’s obvious that he was reaching for his ringing telephone.

Fantastic. So why didn’t Martin call 911 if he felt threatened?

@Aye: And you still haven’t answered why Martin did not seek refuge in Green’s home when he had more than sufficient time to do so.

@drjohn:

Fantastic. So why didn’t Martin call 911 if he felt threatened?

Obviously Zimmerman was the guy in this equation who liked to make a habit of dialing 911 as is evident through his voluminous call history.

Perhaps Martin just wasn’t the type of person who jumped at his own shadow.

Finally, you’re making an assumption that Martin felt threatened. Would you feel threatened if a stranger were following you around your neighborhood at night?

@Aye:

Obviously Zimmerman was the guy in this equation who liked to make a habit of dialing 911 as is evident through his voluminous call history.

Perhaps Martin just wasn’t the type of person who jumped at his own shadow.

So Martin wasn’t in fear. And you might want to see what many of those calls were about. Just for laughs.

@Aye:

Yes. Weapon malfunction.

After many years and thousands of rounds, I’ve neither seen nor experienced (absent a mis-fire), a total failure to cycle.
OTOH, stove pipe ejections/jams are fairly common. I’ve heard nothing of a stovepipe in this particular case.

@drjohn:

And you still ahven’t answered why Martin did not seek refuge in Green’s home when he had more than sufficient time to do so.

Because my theory is a bit different than yours and actually meshes better with the facts as we know them.

I issued a challenge to Hankster yesterday to see if he wanted to step up. I will offer the same to you:

Actually, there is another very plausible explanation. Much more plausible actually.

Just waiting patiently to see who here can study the photographs of the neighborhood, the 911 call tape, and successfully put it all together to arrive at that “other explanation”.

HanksterDr. J, are you up to the challenge? Can you put aside what you think might be true, objectively examine the evidence, and then let it lead you where it leads you?

Or are you, like so many others here, so married to your individual theories that you cannot impartially weigh and examine the evidence?

So, are you up for it?

@Aye: And as long as some demand the content of the next post, here:

The Sanford police said this is why they did not arrest Zimmerman: they did not have probable cause to believe that he had broken the law. In fact, the statute does not change the law, but it apparently is effective at reminding law enforcement officers of the standard they are required to obey. Regarding arrests, the United States Constitution requires that “The right of the people to be secure in their persons . . . against unreasonable . . . seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the . . . persons . . . to be seized.” As judicially interpreted, the Fourth Amendment does not require a warrant for some arrests, but the probable cause requirement remains enforceable. The normal rule in American law is that a police officer must have “probable cause” in order to arrest someone.

The Florida law is consistent with national standards. One may respond with deadly force if one believes one at risk of imminent death or great bodily harm. The SYG law apparently overlaps statutes regarding self-defense law. The Chief was quoting the law but the self-defense sections within it are the pertinent ones.

Ibid.

@Aye: Aye, I put up a post and you hammered away at it. So please feel free to put up your own post. You’re the author here, not me. If you don’t like people disagreeing with you, take it up with Curt and simply disallow any more reader posts.

@The Strategic MC:

After many years and thousands of rounds, I’ve neither seen nor experienced (absent a mis-fire), a total failure to cycle.

The 9mm handgun that I owned about twenty years ago was notorious for just this sort of thing. Every other, or every third shot at best.

Needless to say I didn’t own it very long.

@drjohn:

Aye, I put up a post and you hammered away at it. So please feel free to put up your own post. You’re the author here, not me.

So, you’re not up for the challenge, eh? Just what I thought.

As for hammering away at your post? Nah, not yet I haven’t.

1 2 3 14