17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #26

[Adrienne37]

Apparently a motion has been filed to request a new judge; however, Judge Recksiedler has not decided if she will entertain that yet. Zimmerman's bond hearing is Friday although the issue with the judge could possibly push that back. His arraignment is May 29.

 

[RANCH]

what are the next steps in the case? there is a bail hearing in May? I can't even remember if we got a new judge....

The bail hearing was set for this Friday. If Judge Recksiedler recuses herself another Judge with have to be selected. I'm not sure if that will delay the bail hearing.

Judge overseeing Trayvon Martin case likely to recuse herself Tuesday

http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/judge-overseeing-trayvon-martin-case-likely-recuse/nMbXM/

 

[HiHater]

This is not not exactly accurate. The age of majority does vary in some states. Also, if a minor marries or joins the service, or is emancipated, they are given majority. Keep in mind that many states allow teenagers to marry at 16 (with parental consent). Further, we don't often hear the phrase "child mother" as much as "teen mother." IMO, culturally, we do differentiate between teenagers and children, there's even something called a "tween" now. We use these words to define and separate developmental stages.

And I really don't understand why some people are not horrified by the senseless death of a young man or teenager and feel the need to call TM a child. He had just turned 17. I'm pretty sure that's a fact everyone is aware of. Just as we are all aware that he had his whole life in front of him. What word we use to describe his age doesn't change that.

JMO, OMO, and :moo:

The age of majority is not below 18 in a single state. So you're right, I'm not accurate in saying it is 18 in all states, but that's kind of splitting hairs.

Trayvon was not emancipated, he hadn't joined the military or any of what we are discussing. So he was not given the age of majority. He was a a minor. Saying tween, teen, child, minor, etc. is semantics. We all know he was 17 and not yet an adult.

One last thing, we do hear the term "child bride" so we don't always distinguish between teenagers and children.

 

[suzihawk]

That will probably take about three weeks, so it will look like a well thought out decision.

:waitasec: Care to elaborate?

 

[Gin]

The age of majority is not below 18 in a single state. So you're right, I'm not accurate in saying it is 18 in all states, but that's kind of splitting hairs.

Trayvon was not emancipated, he hadn't joined the military or any of what we are discussing. So he was not given the age of majority. He was a a minor. Saying tween, teen, child, minor, etc. is semantics. We all know he was 17 and not yet an adult.

One last thing, we do hear the term "child bride" so we don't always distinguish between teenagers and children.

BBM--And I think it should be perfectly fine to use teen, minor, or child, as one prefers.

 

[Elley Mae]

:waitasec: Care to elaborate?

Nope.

 

[Elley Mae]

BBM--And I think it should be perfectly fine to use teen, minor, or child, as one prefers.

I love it when a plan comes together :fence:

 

[grammieto5]

According to GZ's story, the felony would have been the assult by TM on GZ, while TM was on top of GZ preventing him from getting help, which was wittnessed by the neighbor.

I understand it to mean Trayvon had to be in the process of commiting a forcible felony, before GZ could confront Trayvon, GZ had to believe he (GZ) was preventing the commission of a forcible felony. If GZ had not confronted Trayvon there would have been no assult from Trayvon ????

 

[AngelWings444]

Trayvon was, and will always be a child in his parents eyes. If you believe in God, Trayvon was a child of God. As far as we know, he wasn't doing a darn thing wrong at the time he was shot dead, by a man who followed him, and profiled him as a criminal. GZ was wrong in his assumption. Travyon died a minor, a child, a kid, NOT AN ADULT. Period.

If a minor commits a crime (clearly not Trayvon), they are can be CHARGED as an adult, they are still a minor, a child, somebody's child.

Trayvon is the victim, a minor, a child.

JMO

 

[cityslick]

TRUE. He was their child.

But when describing GZ and his following someone he thought was suspicious, saying he was 'hunting down a child' seems disingenuous. Because he was following a teen who was about 6 ft tall, and obviously not a little child.

BBM

It's a sensationalist statement. Because even though it is true that legally, TM was a child, it's a little over dramatizing the difference in age. Whether that's the original point of the statement, you would have to ask the person who wrote it.

News agencies do this sort of thing all the time btw. Thankfully we are not the news here.

 

[LynnM]

If I would do the same analogy I would get band
I sure can see a very different Trayvon then you all want to see.
He still deserves to be alive.
So in no way does my opinion of him negate that his parents deserve real answers.

I also can see a want to be cop, not a murderer...
Something needs to be done to curb this boy’s enthusiasm.
But I will not put him out to dry till all the facts are on the table.
I mean all the facts. Rushing to judgment is what the cops did and I did not like them doing it either.

My Brother in-law is a lawyer in Florida - he says IF GZ did not get out of his car we would be looking at a different case. So while it was legal for him to get out of the car it was a very bad decision, because even if Tryavon hit him first.

I don't want to see Trayvon in any particular way. That implies some kind of bias on my part or on the part of others here. Where would that bias come from? I didn't know him and I don't know George Zimmerman. I became interested in the case because an unarmed teen was shot and there was no arrest and I wanted to know why. I care a lot about justice. I have listened to the non-emergency call and all the 911 tapes, tried to figure out the time line, taken into account that Trayvon WAS on the phone with his girlfriend 41 to 71 seconds before he was shot (keeping aside what she may have heard) and IMO opinion George Zimmerman's story as it appears in the Orlando Sentinel and which was confirmed by police as accurate is just plain unbelievable.

I don't know why you see Trayvon the way you do, what makes you think he must have attacked Zimmerman first. I find it very painful to read that you think "he still deserves to be alive." Still meaning 'despite what?' His English teacher said he was an A and B student who majored in cheerfulness. He was looking at colleges. His coach has talked about what a wonder kid he was. He has never been arrested. Yes, he's been suspended but so are many kids these days. Teenagers act up. They aren't adults yet and need guidance. Trayvon has a wonderful family. I am very impressed with his father, mother, and brother and I have no doubt they were providing him with that guidance. If Trayvon's suspensions are deemed important than I don't know why Zimmerman pleading guilty to assaulting a police officer at 21 means nothing.

 

[HiHater]

:waitasec: Care to elaborate?

I'm guessing that there is a MSM link, statistics, or evidence out there that would suggest that a well thought out decision takes 3 weeks. (I have no such information, though). I would further guess that the decision in this case would have to take about 3 weeks so that it falls in line with previously established standards for arriving at a well thought out decision.

Not my question, just thought I'd take a shot at it...

:moo::twocents:

 

[grammieto5]

I'm guessing aggravated assault or attempted murder.

When GZ confronted Trayvon he (Trayvon) was in the process of aggravated assault or he (Trayvon) was attempting to murder someone???? So there is a third person in this case?

 

[Isabelle]

(BBM)


:what: This is the first I'm hearing of this - Do you happen to have a link to this story? TIA. That just blows my mind, especially in light of the claim that GZ supposedly had been bleeding...

It's on the tape when they arrived at SPD.

 

[RANCH]

I understand it to mean Trayvon had to be in the process of commiting a forcible felony, before GZ could confront Trayvon, GZ had to believe he (GZ) was preventing the commission of a forcible felony. If GZ had not confronted Trayvon there would have been no assult from Trayvon ????

Here's the SYG statute.

(3) 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 last section says "or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony".

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...ng=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html

 

[HiHater]

BBM

It's a sensationalist statement. Because even though it is true that legally, TM was a child, it's a little over dramatizing the difference in age. Whether that's the original point of the statement, you would have to ask the person who wrote it.

News agencies do this sort of thing all the time btw. Thankfully we are not the news here.

11 years of an age difference...that's dramatic all on its own. IMO

 

[Isabelle]

I wouldn't be surprised that when LE arrived on the scene and made their survey, they knew there would be no charges and did minimal required investigation.

 

[Concerned Papa]

BBM--And I think it should be perfectly fine to use teen, minor, or child, as one prefers.

Na, I'll stick with kid like George said.

 

[cityslick]

11 years of an age difference...that's dramatic all on its own. IMO

No it's not because a 17 year can conceivably harm a 28 year old just like a 28 year old can conceivably harm a 39 year old.

 

[flourish]

I cannot believe that on thread 26 we're still debating TM's status as a minor, which is legally not an adult. Arguing that he would or could have been considered an adult in such and such circumstances is a straw man argument. It reminds me of the argument I've heard from "deadbeat" parents where they say "I don't pay child support because I don't get visitation," as if child support is some sort of admission fee to see one's child, (and as though said child doesn't exist and need support unless that parent actually sees them, but that's another argument). The two things are not actually related. TM's status as a minor will never change legally or on this board regardless of the ongoing perseveration about the topic. Whether or not a theoretical 17-year old would be tried as an adult or can operate machinery has NOTHING to do with the fact that TM is a minor victim.

I see that some feel that referring TM as a child, which he legally is, is an attempt to gain further sympathy for him and his family. I have to wonder then, if the arguments against his being a child is an effort to reduce the sympathy for him?

*stepping down from soapbox because it's time for me to go teach some children*

ETA: I wonder if some folks who feel so passionate about this are lobbying politically to change the laws they feel are unfair.