17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #10

[Isabelle]

Maybe we need to ask the question of how people would feel about shooting someone caught in the act of burglary. If someone sees a guy trying to break into a neighbor's home, and it's clear and obvious that it is a burglary in progress, would it be ok to shoot that guy? I know it's not legal, but I suspect that a lot of people feel like it's right to do, anyway, that maybe it should be legal, or at least it should be dealt with leniently.

Because otherwise the only reason it would matter whether Trayvon were a criminal is if it means you believe he would proactively attack someone watching him. Indeed, if there is proof that it is likely Travyon would or did deliberately attack GZ (came up behind him, or ran at him and began beating him), then it is relevant in determining whether GZ was in the right. Even if GZ was following him, deliberately attacking GZ would not be called for and GZ would be in the right to shoot in self-defense, IMO.

But unless Trayvon did deliberately attack him, as opposed to responding to a verbal or physical threat by GZ, it does not matter if he had done 100 burglaries before that night. We don't have the "he needed killin" defense.

All JMO.

I don't think anyone has a right to shoot someone breaking into another's home. Not sure if there are laws that allow this. That wouldn't make sense.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

Should have been investigated ON THE SCENE starting from when LE first arrived. Where are the clothes from GZ? Where is the gunpowder evidence? Where is the uncleaned gun with prints? Where is there ANY evidence that this situation was investigated WITHOUT bias by the police department, from the very MOMENT it happened? Day 2 is already TOO LATE, opportunity gone for much evidence. Thank heavens for the 911 calls, especially fro
the shooter's own mouth. After hearing THAT, I would have gotten an attorney ASAP.

Doesn't LE present what evidence they have and the SA or DA tells them if it's enough to arrest or even hold a suspect?
That's how I thought i worked.

No need to arrest if there is not enough evidence to get a conviction.

Maybe I misunderstood that part.

That's how I thought it works.

 

[m00c0w]

To clarify my AC360 post:




http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1203/29/acd.01.html

heh...:fence:

COOPER: But it's not clear to you whether he was on top and got up after shooting Trayvon Martin, or if he was on the bottom of the struggle and shot and Trayvon Martin fell or slid off him or he slid out from Trayvon Martin? You're not clear?

UNIDENTIFIED EYEWITNESS: I did not see any of that, like, who slid. Just kind of from watching as they're both down there and hearing, watching the shot, and then, you know, reminded me of the darkness (INAUDIBLE), because there were roof lights on. I would just say a little bit of that time from the time he got up which isn't very much time, probably a couple of seconds.

You know, then I saw him walking, saw it was a Hispanic man. I mean, I'm just saying, you only think, OK, the boy, in my mind, I think that the boy's laying down, dead on the ground, face down. And the other person got up. You know, I'm kind of thinking that it would be, you know, (INAUDIBLE), but I can't say for sure, because I didn't actually watch him get up.

BBM

So, how could they make that determination?

 

[tehcloser]

So, your post that implied the SPD told TM's father that the case was closed was just a guess?
Or did you see that somewhere?

Because even if GZ was not arrested THAT NIGHT, why would the family think the investigation was closed if LE didn't tell them that?

They might not have been told it was CLOSED, but chances are they were told GZ was saying it was self defense, now I think they could know from that they were going to need a lawyer.

 

[pkz]

So, your post that implied the SPD told TM's father that the case was closed was just a guess?
Or did you see that somewhere?

Because even if GZ was not arrested THAT NIGHT, why would the family think the investigation was closed if LE didn't tell them that?

an informed guess I would say, they decided that very night they did not have enough evidence to chg Zimmerman...I am looking for a newslink too.

 

[Wise Old Owl]

BBM-
Was he told the next morning that the case was closed?
Or was he told they were still investigating?

Have you seen that info anywhere?

I think it makes a difference. To me anyway.

I haven't seen anywhere where it specifically states the family was told the case was closed the next day. BUT, since Wolfinger met with Lee and O'Connor the night of the shooting and emerged from that office to say "cut him loose, we don't have enough to charge him - case closed", then I'm sure by the next day that would be the official position. Meaning, when TM's dad was found, notified, told about the incident - I'm quite sure TM's dad asked if they had "the other guy" in custody. I would have - DID YA CATCH THE GUY? Well, right then LE would have to say "nope, we don't have enough to charge him".

Just because we can't find it in print - I'm pretty sure TM's dad knew there was something very wrong and sought the best legal representation he could find.




JMHO

 

[Adrienne37]

The pictures of Trayvon to me show a sweet teenager. He doesn't look like a person who would have done or said the things GZ is alleging. GZ on the other hand is a different story.

I wholeheartedly agree. The photos at his mom's birthday party show such a handsome boy who loved his family. The picture on the horse made me smile but the pictures that I liked the most were the ones where he was dressed for the prom (that's what he had labeled). He was in a tux with a light green shirt. He looked very dapper. It's very heartbreaking still for me to think how close he was to safety when he was gunned down and brutally murdered.


~jmo~

 

[LambChop]

BBM-
Was he told the next morning that the case was closed?
Or was he told they were still investigating?

Have you seen that info anywhere?

I think it makes a difference. To me anyway.

DA said no charges that night after going to the scene and Chief Lee said they would not pursue because of the SYG law. What, as a parent, would you think??? They were within their rights to call their congressman if they wanted to. It's still a free country and why would anyone care. What difference does it make. If GZ did nothing wrong this attorney will tell his clients there is nothing they can do. Why is this an issue when it is after the fact and has nothing to do with anything???? jmo

 

[Kimberlyd125]

They might not have been told it was CLOSED, but chances are they were told GZ was saying it was self defense, now I think they could know from that they were going to need a lawyer.

Ok, I get that. I would have gotten A lawyer too.
I'm just wondering why a civil rights attorney. Why not a criminal attorney?
That's my point and my question.

Was it JUST because TM was a black male and GZ wasn't?

Any guesses?

 

[beach]

No. I'm not joking.

I think it's a fair question. Why a civil rights attorney on day 2?

Last mod statement I saw was that since he info is not clear, we are not sure who the real victim is.
Something like that. Posted yesterday.

Here is a copy of my post re: "victim friendly status"

BBM

Mod note:

LinasK, I am jumping off of your post because it was convenient, but it is by no means directed toward you specifically. I have seen this comment made several times so I want to take the opportunity to clairfy WS stance on the "victim friendly" issue.


I had a discussion with the owners about how we were to deal with this. This is what I was advised:

At this point in the investigation we don't KNOW exactly who ALL the victims are now. We KNOW that Trayvon is a victim, because he is dead. However, news breaks and new leaks come forth everyday and it is still unclear whether Zimmerman was a victim of any violence. Until more verifiable FACTS are available, WS has chosen to err on the side of treating both the confirmed (Trayvon) AND potential (Zimmerman) victim, both as victims.

Like I said, that may change after we have more verifiable information.

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7735680&postcount=1255"]Link to original post.[/ame]

 

[Kimberlyd125]

an informed guess I would say, they decided that very night they did not have enough evidence to chg Zimmerman...I am looking for a newslink too.

If they didn't have enough evidence that night, they could not hold him that night could they?
Wouldn't stop them from keeping the case open and investigating it further.
Doesn't mean it was a closed case.

 

[songline]

Frankly, few kids in this country are completely "innocent" by the time they reach the age of 17. Where I live it is so conservative that almost no child, white/black/yellow/red, grows up without a drinking under age charge because the cops raid parties. And that includes parents in "good" families from gated communities. They have to go pay the bail money like everyone else. The vast majority of those charges are expunged by the time the kid is 21 and rightfully so.

I've known kids who were suspended from school for really stupid things like having a single word on their cellphone. Schools don't need a search warrant if the kid agrees to giving them their phone. Yes, principals have that kind of power, and believe me they love to use it.

But there's no law against walking from a house to a store and back again, even wearing a hoodie, even being black in a white neighborhood. That's where the whole Civil Rights Thingy kicks in.

Trayvon had a reason for being where he was, and did not owe Zimmerman an explanation. Anyone would be nervous if a guy in a van was trailing him down the street like a predator.

How ironic that the police in Sandford have warned the media not to follow anyone because they won't abide "stalking." Pity they never explained that to George Z. Maybe the 911 guy should have said, "Don't stalk that boy, George." Although really I don't think it would have stopped Zimmerman. :twocents:

I am not sure all kids end up with a blemish for drinking etc...by the age of 17.
I do not live under a rock and the kids I see for the most part... have never ever been dismissed from school one day. Some have, and frankly they should have been.
While TM had a right to walk home. There is reason for GZ to wonder...
Who is this unfamiliar boy out there - in light of 8 robberies in the community.
I would also be thinking Why is anyone out there in the rain? To get an Ice tea? hmmm :moo:

Then there are - people dredging up GZs history from 2005....
FAIR GAME SAID:
Lets find out the character of this boy too:
And we find 3 suspensions one of which was finding ladies jewelry and a screw driver in his locker.
FROM THIS MY ASSESSMENT IS: :twocents:
Maybe GZ had perfect premonition? Just maybe? and maybe he did size him up right? WE DO NOT KNOW WE WILL NEVER KNOW.

The 911 guy said "We do not need you to do that" which is not an order at all. GZ was overzealous, no doubt. I am not taking a side.
I want to see a real investigation.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

I haven't seen anywhere where it specifically states the family was told the case was closed the next day. BUT, since Wolfinger met with Lee and O'Connor the night of the shooting and emerged from that office to say "cut him loose, we don't have enough to charge him - case closed", then I'm sure by the next day that would be the official position. Meaning, when TM's dad was found, notified, told about the incident - I'm quite sure TM's dad asked if they had "the other guy" in custody. I would have - DID YA CATCH THE GUY? Well, right then LE would have to say "nope, we don't have enough to charge him".

Just because we can't find it in print - I'm pretty sure TM's dad knew there was something very wrong and sought the best legal representation he could find.




JMHO

BBM - they said that?

I get the cut him loose, we don't have enough to charge him.
But was the case closed?
That makes a REALLY big difference.

 

[tehcloser]

Ok, I get that. I would have gotten A lawyer too.
I'm just wondering why a civil rights attorney. Why not a criminal attorney?
That's my point and my question.

Was it JUST because TM was a black male and GZ wasn't?

Any guesses?

Because they already knew of SPD's past? I think it's very easy to see why they chose who they did.

 

[beach]

Heads up! We're gonna be opening up a new thread in just a bit.

 

[Hopeful One]

It paints the character portrait that TM had behavior problems, had no problem breaking the law and may very well have been up to no good that night.

Actually, no it doesn't. Because he had been suspsended from school doesn't mean he is now a hardened criminal and cannot be trusted. It's proof of nothing.

And again, GZ had no way of knowing anything about his past, so it wouldn't give him any more right or reason to follow him and/or shoot him.

 

[LambChop]

an informed guess I would say, they decided that very night they did not have enough evidence to chg Zimmerman...I am looking for a newslink too.

Why is there a need to defend what this family has done after their son has died. TM is dead...no one in his family, any of his friends, his gf, no one he knew killed him? Sometimes there is a loss of focus, unless I missed something I don't know????? jmo

 

[Kimberlyd125]

DA said no charges that night after going to the scene and Chief Lee said they would not pursue because of the SYG law. What, as a parent, would you think??? They were within their rights to call their congressman if they wanted to. It's still a free country and why would anyone care. What difference does it make. If GZ did nothing wrong this attorney will tell his clients there is nothing they can do. Why is this an issue when it is after the fact and has nothing to do with anything???? jmo

I would think that I would hire an attorney. A crimnal attorney.
I don't know for sure.

 

[annalia]

Ok, I get that. I would have gotten A lawyer too.
I'm just wondering why a civil rights attorney. Why not a criminal attorney?
That's my point and my question.

Was it JUST because TM was a black male and GZ wasn't?

Any guesses?

Because they weren't the criminals that needed to be defended for committing a crime?

Criminal attorneys are criminal defense attorneys, why would a victim call a criminal attorney to help and represent "them" and their son who was the victim? :waitasec:

 

[songline]

why is there a need to defend what this family has done after their son has died. Tm is dead...no one in his family, any of his friends, his gf, no one he knew killed him? Sometimes there is a loss of focus, unless i missed something i don't know????? Jmo

excessive