The Glade 4.0

Seems to me the whole thing could have been solved by identifying himself as neighborhood watch. I have a hard time believing he would have been attacked then. It just really seems like Zimmerman was focused on catching someone (police work) instead of preventing crime (neighborhood watch).

That could be, but is that criminal to the point of murder, manslaughter or negligent homicide? Or getting gunned down by a swarm of black panthers?

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

Whoa, Neighborhood Watch is not intended to prevent crime. They are to report activities to the police who prevent crime/catch criminals. You can make the argument that their little signs around the neighborhood is a deterrant but only because of the implication that you will be spotted and your criminal activity reported.

_________________

No clue, and frankly no one here has access to the information needed to make that call.

Sorry, my wording wasn't very clear. Neighborhood Watch prevents crime, from the standpoint that the neighbors are involved, watch what happens and calls the police who then come and deal with the situation.

While possible, this is highly speculative. Neighborhood watch has no power to do anything. We also don't know how much opportunity he actually had to do so. The exact circumstances of between when he got out of his vehicle and when the shot was fired are murky.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Indeed.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

Zimmerman's legal team has quit.

They seem to be holding a press conference at the moment stating that they have lost contact with their client. He hasn't been returning calls, so they decided that they no longer can go in front of the media stating that they are speaking with him every day.

More to come, I'm sure.

EDIT - Maybe not quit, but they are putting it out there that he needs to contact them if he still wants them to represent him. Listening to the stream right now.

_________________
This must be Thursday. I could never get the hang of Thursdays.

Diamondye, could I get a clarification on moving beyond self defense into assault. Assuming for the sake of argument that Trayvon was provoked by Zimmerman and thus immune from prosecution for using deadly force thanks to the Stand Your Ground law, what is the difference between shooting and beating? Shooting is instantaneous for the most part, while beating takes longer, yes, but obviously Zimmerman was not yet incapacitated when he shot Trayvon according to Zimmerman's story. Wouldn't Trayvon have to continue hitting Zimmerman after Zimmerman has lost consciousness for it to become criminal battery?

I'm also curious as to how people have come to the conclusion that Trayvon instigated the confrontation. Honestly, I don't know what happened there. I can see scenarios where either one of the two involved was the aggressor. Is it gut feeling, or based upon the news you have seen?

I'd also like to know what, if any, kind of training or instruction Zimmerman received as part of the Neighborhood Watch program. Had he been instructed to just observe and report, to not be armed, and to not confront a suspect?

No matter what the outcome of the current investigation is, Zimmerman is virtually certain to be found liable for a wrongful death civil suit from the Martin family.

_________________
Women are from Hoboken, men are from Trenton. ~ Jimmy Kimmel

Colphax:

Short answer (posting from iPod) Amongst the many sources I have read, it seems that the evidence points toward Zimmerman's story. He turned to return to his truck and Trayvon came back because he wasn't going to let Zimmerman follow him and get away w/o a confrontation.

I make no claim to this being right. Just seems much more likely based on what I have read.

_________________
This must be Thursday. I could never get the hang of Thursdays.

Foamy:

But the only "evidence" to that effect is Zimmerman's account, is it not? Why is that more credible to you than Trayvon's girlfriend's story how Zimmerman confronted Trayvon before the line went dead?

It's literally he said/she said. I haven't seen enough either way for me to make a definitive opinion, other than Zimmerman is a man who made a monumentally poor decision to get out of his car.

_________________
Women are from Hoboken, men are from Trenton. ~ Jimmy Kimmel

Incapacitation has nothing to do with self defense versus assault.

What must be understood is that self defense (or defense of another) allows you to use the amount of force necessary to stop the attack. In other words you A) must not use an amount of force that is greater than necessary (although there is some leeway since there is no way to measure force applied with exact precision) and B) you must not continue to apply force after the threat has been neutralized. If you are threatened with deadly force (or the threat of loss of limb, eyesight, or rape), you may use deadly force in defense.

Stand Your Ground does not suddenly allow you to escalate to deadly force in any confrontation; even under stand your ground you could still only use lesser force against an assault not committed itself with deadly force.

So, presuming that Zimmerman was the first person to take some aggressive action, Martin would have been within his rights to defend himself. However, once he got Zimmerman down on his back and was in his mount, he was in a position of overwhelming advantage where Zimmerman could no longer effectively assault him. Because of that, if he continued hitting Zimmerman in the head, he was going beyond what was needed to defend himself and into deadly force. At that point Zimmerman would be justified in using deadly force to defend against Martin; even if he could still be charged for provoking the fight in the first place the fact that Martin escalated the confrontation to deadly force would still protect him from a charge of murder.

It is possible that Martin in some way became aware that Zimmerman was armed and thought he was defending himself against deadly force, in which case he would be justified in beating Zimmerman unless Zimmerman surrendered his ability to use the gun somehow. The problem, however, is that there's little actual evidence of that portion of the events, and because of that, all available information must be interpreted in the light most favorable to Zimmerman because he is the one whose guilt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.



No one has come to the conclusion that Martin instigated the confrontation. The conclusion has been that there is not enough evidence (as in, practically none) that Zimmerman started it. Because any action taken against Zimmerman would hinge on him having started it, we would need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did.



That might be interesting, but for the most part a neighborhood watch program means people keep an eye on things and call the cops. I never heard of one having a "captain" before and I suspect it's either Zimmerman's self-appointed title or something the news invented. As for not being armed or confronting a suspect, the fact is that the neighborhood watch would have no power to enforce any such rules because citizens in Florida have the right to carry arms if they are properly licensed and anyone can go up to another person on the street and verbally confront them at any time, perfectly legally. The way in which you confront them might be illegal, but you can go up to anyone on the street at any time and tell them you don't like what they're doing, or demand an explanation for their actions or identification. They're free to ignore you.



That's far from certain as well. That would come down to which side can stack the jury more effectively. Frankly, I think wrongful death lawsuits should be banned in any case involving confrontation between two people where the surviving person has not already been convicted of murder or manslaughter.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Probably because she was not actually at the scene.



If it's he said, she said, then Zimmerman wins. He is the would-be defendant. Furthermore, the simple fact that he was present and she was not makes his story overwhelmingly more credible in the absence of additional evidence.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

See, that's where it gets murky for me. If her account is credible, it's evidence that Zimmerman initiated contact with Trayvon. I think its entirely possible that Zimmerman backed Trayvon into a corner and got more than he bargained for. If that's the case, Zimmerman provoked the encounter and thus severely weakens his capability to claim immunity from prosecution based upon Stand Your Ground.

The problem with the Stand Your Ground law is that it doesn't fully define what constitutes a "provocation". Both Trayvon and Zimmerman could potentially be found to be the provacateur. Should it get to trial, a judge is going to have to make that determination, and that that decision, no matter what it is, isn't going to make everybody happy.

I'm not fully convinced that Zimmerman's life was in danger. I'd like to see more evidence that Zimmerman actually was "mounted" by Trayvon. Unfortunately, evidence either hasn't been revealed to the public or may even have been lost, and there are conflicting eyewitness reports. There has been all kinds of media "analysis" of the events, as well as some shoddy journalism that has muddied the waters. I don't like how Zimmerman's story seems to be evolving as "experts" poke at his story. Does Zimmerman still claim he was the one screaming for help, even after some "credible audiologists" have ruled him out based upon his 911 tapes? (to be fair, without a recording of Trayvon's voice, those audiologists can't say for certain that the screamer was Trayvon, either). But I also have trouble with the witnesses who say the screamer sounded "like a boy". I don't think I could tell the difference between a voices of a 17 year old and a 28 year old based upon sound alone. Zimmerman's behavior recently is puzzling too, and it certainly isn't helping his case to ignore both his legal counsel and their advice.

_________________
Women are from Hoboken, men are from Trenton. ~ Jimmy Kimmel

There was an eye witness that said Treyvon was on Zimmerman when he saw them. Also there are injuries to Zimmerman that show he was on his back. Short of someone catching it on tape, I think that's as good as it gets.

Of course none of that shows how they got into that position but that wasn't what you asked.

_________________
I prefer to think of them as "Fighting evil in another dimension"

Rori:

I'm not disputing that Zimmerman was on his back. But there are other eyewitnesses that put the Trayvon on top claim in question (the 2 women DE doesn't believe and the other woman that came later), so we have to back up the statements with physical evidence. It's possible that they rolled around, both getting wet backs before the shooting. But it's hard to verify that...Trayvon was found face down and then was rolled onto his back for CPR. The funeral director for Trayvon has said he saw no damage to Trayvon's hands consistent with a fight. So all we know for sure is that at some point, Zimmerman wound up on his back.

As to the broken nose and head injury...I have one question. Looking at the pics of Zimmerman being brought into the police station, where is the blood? There's no blood from his broken nose, that's possible. But where is the blood from the head wound, where Zimmerman says Trayvon repeatedly slammed his head against a sidewalk? Supposedly he was seen by paramedics at the scene and he was treated...but that's not going to take care of bloodstains on his clothing. So therE is a possibility that the "bleeding head wound" Zimmerman received is much more superficial than some people think it was.

For that matter, where is Trayvon's blood on Zimmerman, if Zimmerman's story of shooting Trayvon at close range from underneath is true? If Trayvon knew Zimmerman was armed and was trying to disarm Zimmerman (like Zimmerman's brother claims), how does Trayvon slam Zimmerman's head repeatedly into the grass or sidewalk? How does Zimmerman get out from under Trayvon after shooting him, yet Trayvon is found face down? I can see Trayvon being rolled off of Zimmerman, but he would wind up face up if he was dead weight. If he was still conscious, I can see him getting onto his side in a fetal position, but rolling himself over so that his airway is obstructed? I can't rule it out, but it's the least likely scenario, IMHO.

_________________
Women are from Hoboken, men are from Trenton. ~ Jimmy Kimmel

]

You're confusing 2 kinds of credibility here. The girlfriend is credible in the sense that she is most likely telling the truth. She is less credible in the sense that she was not present, only hearing what Martin was telling her, and it's questinable how much information or how accurately he could have relayed. It's not technically hearsay, I don't beleive, but it has any of the same problems.

Second, merely having evidence of something is not proof. The girlfriend's testimony is evidence, but Zimmerman's testimony is stronger evidence because he was physically present. I can easily turn around what you are saying and say "if Zimmerman's story is credible, then it's evidence that Martin initiated contact." We also cannot just automatically downgrade Zimmerman's credibility based on his involvement, any more than we can the girlfriend's. Had the girlfriend been physically there, then it would truly be a case of he said/she said.

I also don't believe Stand Your Ground allows immunity from prosecution, rather it's a defense against conviction. In any case, Stand Your Ground is not really relevant to the actual shooting. What Stand Your Ground did was remove a duty to retreat, but there was already no duty to retreat when a person was unable to do so in safety, and if Martin were on top of Zimmerman, he would not have been able to retreat at all.

Stand Your Ground would be more relevant to whether Martin had the right to defend himself against Zimmerman if Zimmerman initiated the confrontation, but zine Marin is obviously not in any danger of prosecution that's moot.



The Stand Your Ground law doesn't need to define a provocation because provocations have nothing to do with stand your ground. The type of provocation that is relevant to stand your ground is already well-defined elsewhere in law relating to assault: Either force used against the subject, or actions or words that would reasonably cause him to believe force against him is imminnent.



It would be nice to have more evidence, but the injuries to the back of his head and grass stains on his back are very powerful physical evidence that Martin was, in fact, on top of him at the very least.

The statute regarding the entirity of the use of force in self-defense in Florida is lengthy, but here is the relevant portion if Zimmerman was the initial aggressor:



The bottom line, however, is that if things remain murky or unclear, Zimmerman should walk. That's reasonable doubt. In point of fact, I do not think the evidence that is available even rises to the level of probable cause to make an arrest, and based on the cancellation of the grand jury by the special prosecutor, it seems that she agrees.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

No she indicated that you shouldnt take into account the decision not to use the grand jury. WaPo is reporting she will in fact charge him:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... ingtonpost

_________________
“Strong people are harder to kill than weak people, and more useful in general”. - Mark Rippetoe

This is new information.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Yes but the prosecutor said when she cancelled the grand jury that you should not take that to mean anything about charging or not.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2012/04/09/sp ... stigation/



Meanwhile Zimmermans own lawyers dont know where he is and have quit the case. Crazy case, we'll see what the charges are soon I would guess.

_________________
“Strong people are harder to kill than weak people, and more useful in general”. - Mark Rippetoe

If he is indeed charged and it goes to trial, I doubt it is now possible for him to get a fair trial.

How would a fair and impartial jury be seated for this? It has made national headlines and he is already guilty in the eyes of the public.

_________________
This must be Thursday. I could never get the hang of Thursdays.

I don't think everyone believes he is guilty. I do believe that most people have already formed their opinion one way or the other by now. So finding a jury will still be difficult.

_________________

Really? I'm pretty sure that not a single person on the forums here believes he's guilty for sure at this point. While we are perhaps not exactly like the majority of the population, I have to believe there are others out there who are able to be similarly objective.

I see that. The reports I had seen earlier this week about the Grand Jury cancellation did not include that information.

I also wonder why she does not want to use the Grand Jury. If her case is very weak she might doubt the ability to get an indictment and is simply taking it to trial so that she can say she did. A smart move, but any result other than a conviction of Zimmerman for murder is going to result in howls of outrage.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Anyone else wondering if he is dead?

_________________