Family of Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch seeks arrest

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't think the problem is that the man is still free pending investigation so much as that were the shooter and deceased reversed, there is no doubt the young, black shooter would have been arrested, charged, and bail set excessively high. In other words, this man is getting due process (which is good), but he is the exception in this country that receives it (bad). And the reasons he is receiving it are, in large part, race-based, which is obviously problematic. But the criminal justice system is nothing if not blatantly racist. Nobody seems to really care, though.
 
It seems incomprehensible that he would approach the teen and effectively execute him randomly, without provocation or sense of danger. One witness testifies to seeing a brawl between the two with the man calling for help. An altercation would have been likely considering the original confrontation and ending result, so a scuffle is believable and so if there was perhaps that situation led to the eventual discharge of the weapon.

empty vessel said:
I don't think the problem is that the man is still free pending investigation so much as that were the shooter and deceased reversed, there is no doubt the young, black shooter would have been arrested, charged, and bail set excessively high
Click to expand...

Probably true
 
He has a ton of weird police photos in his facebook album

D51uN.png
 
Some people seem to be under the mistaken impression that deadly armed Vs. unarmed cases should always result in an immediate arrest and conviction--no they shouldn't.
Click to expand...

Deadly armed vs. unarmed cases should always result in an immediate arrest when there is no doubt the shooter killed the unarmed person.

You don't let a killer go around free while you investigate his excuse for shooting someone in the chest.
 
Kettch said:
Deadly armed vs. unarmed cases should always result in an immediate arrest when there is no doubt the shooter killed the unarmed person.

You don't let a killer go around free while you investigate his excuse for shooting someone in the chest.
Click to expand...

Not to mention he approached the unarmed civilian with a weapon. Oh excuse me even that is an assumption on my behalf since you know the kid could have ran up on him after he got out of the car he'd been stalking the teen with for blocks.
 
empty vessel said:
I don't think the problem is that the man is still free pending investigation so much as that were the shooter and deceased reversed, there is no doubt the young, black shooter would have been arrested, charged, and bail set excessively high. In other words, this man is getting due process (which is good), but he is the exception in this country that receives it (bad). And the reasons he is receiving it are, in large part, race-based, which is obviously problematic. But the criminal justice system is nothing if not blatantly racist. Nobody seems to really care, though.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, your post will get lost among hundreds of posts by people who either A) think Zimmerman should be executed by midnight, or B) want to emphasize that the only fact we can be sure of in this whole situation is that Florida is, indeed, one of the fifty states of America.
 
Roger Danish said:
Unfortunately, your post will get lost among hundreds of posts by people who either A) think Zimmerman should be executed by midnight, or B) want to emphasize that the only fact we can be sure of in this whole situation is that Florida is, indeed, one of the fifty states of America.
Click to expand...

Meanwhile most of us are just wondering why there was no arrest and still isn't based on what's been provided.
 
oh wtf the case got dismissed? even though Zimmerman has a record for battery on a law enforcement officer and resisting arrest with violence?
 
bigboss370 said:
oh wtf the case got dismissed? even though Zimmerman has a record for battery on a law enforcement officer and resisting arrest with violence?
Click to expand...

I think it's referring to the other older case.
 
Devolution said:
Meanwhile most of us are just wondering why there was no arrest and still isn't based on what's been provided.
Click to expand...

And rightfully so. It'll be interesting to see what, if any, effect the public outcry will have on the resolution of this investigation. Perhaps the state's attorney will feel pressured to bring a case even if they feel they don't have enough evidence to convict. Not sure how I feel about that. Either way, pretty much the last thing I'm worried about is the potential for an upper-middle class white male living in the deep South being unfairly prosecuted/convicted.
 
Roger Danish said:
And rightfully so. It'll be interesting to see what, if any, effect the public outcry will have on the resolution of this investigation. Perhaps the state's attorney will feel pressured to bring a case even if they feel they don't have enough evidence to convict. Not sure how I feel about that. Either way, pretty much the last thing I'm worried about is the potential for an upper-middle class white male living in the deep South being unfairly prosecuted/convicted.
Click to expand...

At this point I would prefer to see an investigation into the department that doesn't feel shooting and killing someone is grounds to be arrested. Imagine if this was applied elsewhere.

"Yeah, I shot my wife because she was coming at me all crazy eyed, those nails can hurt like hell."
"OK sir, we just need to ask you a few questions as we take the body, and then you can head back home while we double check whether she was in fact crazy."
 
In an interview with HuffPost on Thursday, Tracy Martin said that when he asked police why Zimmerman hadn't been charged, officers told him "they respected [Zimmerman's] background, that he studied criminal justice for four years and that he was squeaky clean."
Click to expand...

George Zimmerman was arrested in 2005 for battery on a law enforcement officer. He's accused of shooting and killing 17-year-old Trayvon Martin on Feb. 26, but hasn't been arrested.

His family only learned about Zimmerman's criminal past when we told them. This news came as quite a shock for Martin's mother. They said Sanford Police never gave them any indication of this.
Click to expand...

So basically the police lied? I have no faith that this police department is doing this investigation right.

How obvious is this case? Studying criminal justice in college? Self-appointed captain of the neighborhood watch? This dude is some sort of wannabe playing cop on his free time. Like Dwight Schrute except racist and violent.
 
Kettch said:
Deadly armed vs. unarmed cases should always result in an immediate arrest when there is no doubt the shooter killed the unarmed person.

You don't let a killer go around free while you investigate his excuse for shooting someone in the chest.
Click to expand...

You realize you're basically arguing for guilty until proven innocent, you realize that right? Unarmed 300lbs guy smacks your ass to the ground in one blow breaking your jaw or nose and says he's going to curb stomp your head into a pancake. So you shoot and kill him and think you should immediately be arrested and charged, no doubt or excuse about it? Amazing.
 
Reallink said:
You realize you're basically arguing for guilty until proven innocent, you realize that right?
Click to expand...

If he does "realize" that, then he would be mistaken. Merely being arrested and charged does NOT make you "guilty" of anything. You're not "guilty" until you accept a guilty plea or get convicted by a jury.
 
He killed the dude. We don't know the complete set of circumstances but he shot and killed him unless the kid managed to pull the trigger on himself but come on.
 
DY_nasty said:
?

Yes. Yes, you were. I don't even... like, why should that even come up? Did you read the articles? Look at the many pictures of this kid?
You know for a fact you're smaller than the national average right? Why put that forward to topple someone else's weak argument?

Any rational person would say that the minor here was clearly not the one who created or escalated this entire situation. What you are doing is reaching. Well he MIGHT be a freak athlete. PLENTY of kids his age run in gangs. This kid could've been HUGE - When the much more likely , the kid probably was scared shitless when a car rolled up on him and a guy with a bulky object around his waist hopped out to approach him like a man on a mission. Not everyone goes fetal when they get scared. Some people fight hard as hell when they feel their life is on the line. The guy approaching the kid doesn't even have to say anything other racial at all. The only obvious racially related thing in the entire situation is the profiling. Its extremely hard to say that this guy wasn't threatening. But again, you have to go far, far out of your way to say that a 26 yr old man wasn't the aggressor here.
Click to expand...

The problem is we're both reaching, that's the whole point. As far as I know none of the details from this hypothetical situation you're presenting are confirmed or in the public record. Another issue is we have no idea whether this was a case profiling or not. A responsible community watch member would have been just as likely to trail and approach an unrecognized white boy (or anyone for that matter)-that is kind of why he's out there in the first place. Personally, if I was in a "good" neighborhood on a "good" side of town, my first thought in such a situation would be that the guy was a police officer.
 
Reallink said:
The problem is we're both reaching, that's the whole point. As far as I know none of the details from this hypothetical situation you're presenting are confirmed or in the public record. Another issue is we have no idea whether this was a case profiling or not. A responsible community watch member would have been just as likely to trail and approach an unrecognized white boy (or anyone for that matter)-that is kind of why he's out there in the first place. Personally, if I was in a "good" neighborhood on a "good" side of town, my first thought in such a situation would be that the guy was a police officer.
Click to expand...

Can you explain to me why he wasn't arrested when a 17 year old ended up shot in the chest and died? Please. Thanks.
 
Devolution said:
Can you explain to me why he wasn't arrested when a 17 year old ended up shot in the chest and died? Please. Thanks.
Click to expand...

A lot of the posters in this thread would probably tell you "because the police were white and racist." The reality is he probably had a believable, logical, and convincing story--backed up by evidence (signs of a physical altercation on both parties) and possibly eye witness reports and/or surveillance footage.
 
That poor kid had his life snuffed out before he could really live a full life. Talk about depressing...

I hope that bastard gets full punishment.
 
Reallink said:
A lot of the posters in this thread would probably tell you "because the police were white and racist." The reality is he probably had a believable, logical, and convincing story--backed up by evidence (signs of a physical altercation on both parties) and possibly eye witness reports and/or surveillance footage.
Click to expand...

So you believe, without any other info provided that it was probably justified?
 
Devolution said:
Can you explain to me why he wasn't arrested when a 17 year old ended up shot in the chest and died? Please. Thanks.
Click to expand...

Perhaps because of Florida law? Nah, gotta be racism.

http://www.ericmathenylaw.com/Crimi...ur-Ground-An-Absolute-Defense-in-the-Sta.aspx

In either case, a person using any force permitted by the law is immune from criminal prosecution or civil action and cannot be arrested unless a law enforcement agency determines there is probable cause that the force used was unlawful.
Click to expand...

So, you are given the benefit of the doubt UNLESS the police find you in the wrong (hence their current investigation).

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/07/us/07shoot.html?pagewanted=all

In addition, the law does away with an earlier requirement that a person attacked in a public place must retreat if possible. Now, that same person, in the law’s words, “has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force.” The law also forbids the arrest, detention or prosecution of the people covered by the law, and it prohibits civil suits against them.
Click to expand...

This has already been pointed out numerous times before in the thread. I don't understand why it's still being brought up as police "negligence".
 
So I can stalk somebody, start a confrontation, kill them and not be arrested, pending further investigation, if I don't have a criminal record and claim self defense? Sweet. Florida here I come.
 
How is there no probable cause? Dude approached after he was told not to and the deceased had Skittles. How can someone argue against probable cause here?
 
Reallink said:
You realize you're basically arguing for guilty until proven innocent, you realize that right? Unarmed 300lbs guy smacks your ass to the ground in one blow breaking your jaw or nose and says he's going to curb stomp your head into a pancake. So you shoot and kill him and think you should immediately be arrested and charged, no doubt or excuse about it? Amazing.
Click to expand...

He's absolutely guilty of shooting and killing a 17 year old. Considering that the police say he was fully cooperative, and the police say he shot the kid, I assume even he is admitting that he shot him. This does not seem to be in doubt at all. That is more than enough to arrest someone.

And yes, if I were to kill someone, I would expect to be arrested. I would also expect my defense to then be heard and later cleared of wrongdoing. Having an excuse for killing someone doesn't mean you get to go free until that excuse is disproved. That's absolutely insane.
 
Dreams-Visions said:
and such can happen in a fist fight. any fist fight. YOU drawing a gun in a 1v1 fist fight that YOU provoked will usually mean YOU going to jail.

Unless you want to argue that the use of deadly weapons should be acceptable in any and every fight that may happen based on the premise that there is a slim possibility that you could have a bone broken. I admit, that would be an interesting argument for you to make.
Click to expand...

You said something wrong and I corrected you. There are 1v1 situations where use of deadly force in self defense would be justifiable. If one guy is winning and pounding the shit out of the other guy on the ground, or kicking him in the head, for two examples. I'm not talking about who provoked who -I'm not Kharveying, it seems most likely that Zimmerman instigated it - just pointing out that 1 on 1 = no GBH is incorrect.
 
onemic said:
So you believe, without any other info provided that it was probably justified?
Click to expand...

Without any other info, I would probably lean toward it being more of a wrong place at the wrong time type of situation rather than blatant self defense or blatant racism. I suspect the guy really was just trying to do his job in approaching suspicious individuals--and it probably wouldn't have mattered what color they were. Racist or not, common sense dictates he's going to be just as likely to approach a white punk looking kid as a black kid. Otherwise, why the fuck would he be out there wasting his time? It makes no sense. Was he out there looking for minorities to shoot? I don't think color had anything to do with it at that point. Maybe he was a hateful smart ass about it, maybe he approached him in the wrong way, maybe the black kid became enraged at the thought of a white guy deeming him unworthy of his streets. We just don't know unfortunately and there is not enough evidence or information for me to lean one way or the other.
 
Reallink said:
Without any other info, I would probably lean toward it being more of a wrong place at the wrong time type of situation rather than blatant self defense or blatant racism. I suspect the guy really was just trying to do his job in approaching suspicious individuals--and it probably wouldn't have mattered what color they were. Racist or not, he's going to be just as likely to approach a white punk looking kid as a black kid. Otherwise, why the fuck would he be out there wasting his time? It makes no sense? Was he out there looking for minorities to shoot? I don't think color had anything to do with it at that point. Maybe he was a hateful smart ass about it, maybe he approached him in the wrong way, maybe the black kid became enraged at the thought of a white guy deeming him unworthy of his streets. We just don't know unfortunately.
Click to expand...

Joke post?
 
Kettch said:
He's absolutely guilty of shooting and killing a 17 year old. Considering that the police say he was fully cooperative, and the police say he shot the kid, I assume even he is admitting that he shot him. This does not seem to be in doubt at all. That is more than enough to arrest someone.

And yes, if I were to kill someone, I would expect to be arrested. I would also expect my defense to then be heard and later cleared of wrongdoing. Having an excuse for killing someone doesn't mean you get to go free until that excuse is disproved. That's absolutely insane.
Click to expand...

There is no "guilt" in a legitimate self defense case according to the law. You don't agree, and that's fine, but it has already been explained to you that there are situations where bringing a gun to a 1v1 fist fight is 150% justified and acceptable to any rational human being--which is why the law is the way it is.
 
Reallink said:
There is no "guilt" in a legitimate self defense case according to the law. You don't agree, and that's fine, but it has already been explained to you that there are situations where bringing a gun to a 1v1 fist fight is 150% justified and acceptable to any rational human being.
Click to expand...

Being arrested does not make you guilty. How hard is this to understand?

Maybe my wording is causing you problems. Change "He's absolutely guilty of shooting and killing a 17 year old" to "He absolutely shot and killed a 17 year old".
 
Reallink said:
Without any other info, I would probably lean toward it being more of a wrong place at the wrong time type of situation rather than blatant self defense or blatant racism. I suspect the guy really was just trying to do his job in approaching suspicious individuals--and it probably wouldn't have mattered what color they were. Racist or not, he's going to be just as likely to approach a white punk looking kid as a black kid. Otherwise, why the fuck would he be out there wasting his time? It makes no sense? Was he out there looking for minorities to shoot? I don't think color had anything to do with it at that point. Maybe he was a hateful smart ass about it, maybe he approached him in the wrong way, maybe the black kid became enraged at the thought of a white guy deeming him unworthy of his streets. We just don't know unfortunately and there is no enough evidence or information for me to lean one way or the other.
Click to expand...

It's not his job to approach suspicious individuals. It's explicitly not his job. The broad outlines of the two competing scenarios here are (1) Zimmerman approaches innocuously, kid flies off the handle, attacks him, is beating the shit out of him or about to, Zimmerman shoots in self defense; or (2) Zimmerman is playing Batman, is aggressive toward the kid, fight ensues, Zimmerman shoots. Based on what we know about the situation and the participants, 2 seems a lot more likely.
 
Reallink said:
If this is no guilt, there is no crime, and you can't be arrested and detained. How hard is this to understand?
Click to expand...

Are you seriously advocating that we be allowed to kill someone, claim self defense and then be allowed to go free until it's proven that our claim is false? Has there ever been another example of this happening?

Guilt is decided at the trial, not the arrest. Killing someone should always be probable cause that a crime has occurred.
 
Reallink said:
Without any other info, I would probably lean toward it being more of a wrong place at the wrong time type of situation rather than blatant self defense or blatant racism. I suspect the guy really was just trying to do his job in approaching suspicious individuals--and it probably wouldn't have mattered what color they were. Racist or not, common sense dictates he's going to be just as likely to approach a white punk looking kid as a black kid. Otherwise, why the fuck would he be out there wasting his time. It makes no sense? Was he out there looking for minorities to shoot? I don't think color had anything to do with it at that point. Maybe he was a hateful smart ass about it, maybe he approached him in the wrong way, maybe the black kid became enraged at the thought of a white guy deeming him unworthy of his streets. We just don't know unfortunately and there is no enough evidence or information for me to lean one way or the other.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if you understand what a Neighborhood Watch is or what's expected of people who participate. It's not exactly a patrol job, and the guy isn't a cop. The guy was in his own neighborhood and spotted someone he perceived to be an outsider. I'm pretty sure when dispatch told him not to persue (or otherwise confront the individual), they were asserting to him his position as a civilian, not a cop. Whether or not he's crazy and thinks he's a badass crimebustin' cop is yet to be seen, but the guy's Facebook seems to point in that direction.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Florida Gators 2025 national champions in Basketball.
19
657
HoodWinked replied
What kind of videos you watch while eating?
2
67
183
Dr. Suchong replied
Marvel Animation’s Your Friendly Neighborhood Spider-Man | Official Trailer | Disney+
28
2K
Soapbox Killer replied
One of the greatest actors ever, fellow Southern boy, Walton Goggins. The esteemed
2
60
867
Gp1 replied
Florida could let homeowners shoot down drones over their property
35
539
DeepEnigma replied
Top Bottom