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

[suzihawk]

Seminole State also offers an associate's program in criminal justice... It doesn't seem that an associate's is necessary to take any of the classes or pursue that as a course of study.

I'm more interested in Chief Bill Lee's (SPD) affiliation to the Safety Department at the same college during the time Zimmerman attended.

 

[csziggy]

There was Christine Grace, who was arrested, charged with second degree murder, and then convicted of manslaughter after stabbing her abusive boyfriend as he was beating her senseless in her kitchen, inviting friends to come join him. This was in '89.

There's Marissa Alexander that's currently being prosecuted by Angela Corey when all signs point to her having had immunity under the SYG law. She's been in jail since the alleged crime took place (and she never even injured anyone).

You also have this woman:

http://www.wctv.tv/home/headlines/80750267.html

Who was arrested, charged with second degree murder, and held in jail on a $50,000 bond... Only for a judge to have the charges dropped because he ruled she acted in self defense.

Here's a more recent case that occurred while SYG was even in effect. The man was incarcerated for two years (before he was even tried) before he was finally able to reach an appellate court, who found that he was immune per the law.

http://opinions.1dca.org/written/opinions2009/08-19-2009/09-2501.pdf

It's odd how you claim that the law grants immunity unfairly, but it seems that victims are still capable of getting wrung through the system with the new law in place. As I stated before, if the police are corrupt... they're corrupt. No amount of legislation will change that. It's ultimately their decision to arrest someone or not, or to carry out an investigation. As you can see, that option still clearly exists and is exercised.

Do you have a link for the Christine Grace case? It's so old I couldn't find information on it.

I agree with you on the Marissa Alexander and the Ernestine Broxsie cases - both of those were clearly self defense cases and should never have been charged even without Stand Your Ground provisions.

The Jimmy Hair case is a little more complicated:

The court has even ruled that the statute can protect someone who shoots a retreating person. In overturning a ruling against Jimmy Hair, who shot a man who was retreating from a fight, a judge in Tallahassee wrote that the statute "makes no exception from the immunity when the victim is in retreat at the time the defensive force is employed."
http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/article1222930.ece

The same as the Trayvon Martin case, I believe it was correct that this one went through more process than a simple acceptance of self defense.

I didn't find a picture of Jimmy Hair, but the two women who were/are being run through the wringer have something very obvious in common with Trayvon Martin. I wonder in how many cases where SYG is NOT accepted that is true?

We can agree that if the police - and I would add, the rest of the system - are corrupt, it doesn't matter what the laws are. But the SYG law as it is currently written leaves too much discretion to the police and the state attorneys. When a violent death occurs, it should be the norm to fully investigate, and too often the police are using the excuse of SYG to avoid this.

As we see in the Martin case, if the investigation is not done, that leaves too many questions. If the police did not do a thorough investigation, we may never know what happened. Even if Zimmerman was justified in killing Martin he may not be able to clear his name.

The original 'castle' and self defense laws were sufficient to protect people in most cases - law enforcement and legal authorities said so when Stand Your Ground was being discussed in the Florida Legislature. The only entities pushing for its passage were the NRA, ALEC, and legislators who had gotten big donations from those organizations.

Now it's being abused and not even enforced. How is this a good thing and why should a poorly written law that does not even do what it was purported to do stay on the books?

 

[LolaMoon08]

It is not obvious to me that GZ was looking for a fight, either; I have no knowledge that he was seeking a physical confrontation, much less plotting and strategizing how to murder a "kid" in cold blood as some have asserted.

The disconnection of the call with the GF was being discussed, specifically that it could have been disconnected if TM were attacked by GZ. I was simply pointing out that the phone connection could have been dislodged in an altercation regardless of who made the first move. GF says she heard TM confront GZ verbally. GZ says TM confronted him physically. I don't know what actually happened b/c I wasn't there. JMO

I wasn't there either, but I do look at what George's frame of mind was the minute he stepped out of that vehicle to follow Trayvon. We know George was following Trayvon because he admitted to it... we also know that Trayvon was running away from George because he told LE that in his call.

When he stepped out of that vehicle his mindframe was that "these *advertiser censored**holes always get away" and that Trayvon was a "*advertiser censored**ing punk." That's some pretty aggressive language to have about someone walking down the street? Don't you think?

MOO

ETA: I don't think he was plotting to murder Trayvon... I do believe he was going after Trayvon to make sure he didn't get away?

 

[Etilema]

I do have a question, when the earphones are plugged into the phone, if the earphones come disconnected, does that end the call? Or does a button have to be pushed to end the call?

Great question. But where did we derive the info about what kind of earphone he had (or that he was using an earphone at all)? If it was a BlueTooth headset, it could have either hit the disconnect button when it fell, or even if the call continued, the girlfriend probably wouldn't hear much if it fell somewhere in the grass or whatever. I think we need more info!

JMO


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[LolaMoon08]

Another thing that is completely --- IMO --- impossible is that when George was walking over to the next street, he had to pass that sidewalk and there is no mention that he seen Trayvon in between the buildings (so I would assume we are to believe that Trayvon was hiding somewhere?) so he continued to walk and check the address and then began walking back and when he came back to the area between the buildings, Trayvon jumped him?

It makes no sense because Trayvon was running away ---

What makes sense is that George was never going to check an address, but decided to continue following Trayvon so that he didn't get away. When he got to the sidewalk, he sees Trayvon and is approaching him from behind and that is when Trayvon tells his girlfriend "He's behind me again" (something like that) and Trayvon asks George "Why are you following me?" and George replies "What are you doing here?"

What happens after that... is up to whatever we believe is the most reasonable thing to have happened without any supporting evidence other than what led up to that moment.

MOO

 

[LolaMoon08]

Great question. But where did we derive the info about what kind of earphone he had (or that he was using an earphone at all)? If it was a BlueTooth headset, it could have either hit the disconnect button when it fell, or even if the call continued, the girlfriend probably wouldn't hear much if it fell somewhere in the grass or whatever. I think we need more info!

JMO


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I have no idea if it was earphones or a blue tooth? I have friends who use both and I don't have a cell phone (by choice) so I don't know how all these gadgets work?

 

[mommakk51]

We would have known if George was in a marked neighborhood watch vehicle. Daddy, Brother, and heck, even Police Chief Bill Lee would have screamed that from the rooftops if that were true.

MOO

So far, all we have been told is of the actual incident and the subsequent investigation. We have not been given any info other than witness statements, to verify GZ's side of the story.

 

[LolaMoon08]

So far, all we have been told is of the actual incident and the subsequent investigation. We have not been given any info other than witness statements, to verify GZ's side of the story.

Do you honestly think that Frank could keep his mouth shut about George's car being clearly marked a "Neighborhood Watch" vehicle if that were true?

MOO

 

[HiHater]

Do you have a link for the Christine Grace case? It's so old I couldn't find information on it.

I agree with you on the Marissa Alexander and the Ernestine Broxsie cases - both of those were clearly self defense cases and should never have been charged even without Stand Your Ground provisions.

The Jimmy Hair case is a little more complicated:


The same as the Trayvon Martin case, I believe it was correct that this one went through more process than a simple acceptance of self defense.

I didn't find a picture of Jimmy Hair, but the two women who were/are being run through the wringer have something very obvious in common with Trayvon Martin. I wonder in how many cases where SYG is NOT accepted that is true?

We can agree that if the police - and I would add, the rest of the system - are corrupt, it doesn't matter what the laws are. But the SYG law as it is currently written leaves too much discretion to the police and the state attorneys. When a violent death occurs, it should be the norm to fully investigate, and too often the police are using the excuse of SYG to avoid this.

As we see in the Martin case, if the investigation is not done, that leaves too many questions. If the police did not do a thorough investigation, we may never know what happened. Even if Zimmerman was justified in killing Martin he may not be able to clear his name.

The original 'castle' and self defense laws were sufficient to protect people in most cases - law enforcement and legal authorities said so when Stand Your Ground was being discussed in the Florida Legislature. The only entities pushing for its passage were the NRA, ALEC, and legislators who had gotten big donations from those organizations.

Now it's being abused and not even enforced. How is this a good thing and why should a poorly written law that does not even do what it was purported to do stay on the books?

If this is the correct Jimmy Hair, he has something very obvious in common with Trayvon as well...

http://mugshots.com/US-Counties/Florida/Leon-County-FL/Jimmy-R-Hair-Jr.6953914.html

 

[RANCH]

Great question. But where did we derive the info about what kind of earphone he had (or that he was using an earphone at all)? If it was a BlueTooth headset, it could have either hit the disconnect button when it fell, or even if the call continued, the girlfriend probably wouldn't hear much if it fell somewhere in the grass or whatever. I think we need more info!

JMO


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Thanks for your post. Without knowing what kind of phone and accessory's Trayvon owned, it's hard to come to any kind of conclusion about what happened with it during the call with his GF. What if he owned a headset and usually used it but forgot it at home before leaving? Your right, we need more info.

 

[LolaMoon08]

Thanks for your post. Without knowing what kind of phone and accessory's Trayvon owned, it's hard to come to any kind of conclusion about what happened with it during the call with his GF. What if he owned a headset and usually used it but forgot it at home before leaving? Your right, we need more info.

I agree with this. More information would be really nice... like yesterday.

 

[nomoresorrow]

Do you honestly think that Frank could keep his mouth shut about George's car being clearly marked a "Neighborhood Watch" vehicle if that were true?

MOO

Nope, no more than I believe that if George had the injuries he claimed to have, pics would have been taken and his family would have been circulating them to every news media outlet (for a fee of course...). JMO~

 

[m00c0w]

Do you have a link for the Christine Grace case? It's so old I couldn't find information on it.

I agree with you on the Marissa Alexander and the Ernestine Broxsie cases - both of those were clearly self defense cases and should never have been charged even without Stand Your Ground provisions.

The Jimmy Hair case is a little more complicated:


The same as the Trayvon Martin case, I believe it was correct that this one went through more process than a simple acceptance of self defense.

I didn't find a picture of Jimmy Hair, but the two women who were/are being run through the wringer have something very obvious in common with Trayvon Martin. I wonder in how many cases where SYG is NOT accepted that is true?

We can agree that if the police - and I would add, the rest of the system - are corrupt, it doesn't matter what the laws are. But the SYG law as it is currently written leaves too much discretion to the police and the state attorneys. When a violent death occurs, it should be the norm to fully investigate, and too often the police are using the excuse of SYG to avoid this.

As we see in the Martin case, if the investigation is not done, that leaves too many questions. If the police did not do a thorough investigation, we may never know what happened. Even if Zimmerman was justified in killing Martin he may not be able to clear his name.

The original 'castle' and self defense laws were sufficient to protect people in most cases - law enforcement and legal authorities said so when Stand Your Ground was being discussed in the Florida Legislature. The only entities pushing for its passage were the NRA, ALEC, and legislators who had gotten big donations from those organizations.

Now it's being abused and not even enforced. How is this a good thing and why should a poorly written law that does not even do what it was purported to do stay on the books?

BBM

We're not aware of how many times it's saved a victim from arrest and prosecution, well, because they weren't arrested or prosecuted.

As for the BBM, I have to revert back to:

How many people do you know of that were never arrested when clearly guilty because of the Stand Your Ground law in place? It doesn't prohibit investigations.

The Christine Grace case was detailed in a journal article I read for part of a literary review I did for CJ... I believe it's called "Confronting Our Fear" and discusses battered woman syndrome and self-defense laws in Vermont.

Broxie was not arrested until an investigation was completed a year later. She was afforded some benefits of the SYG law. It was the lack of speedy trial that was the worst part about the case.

Hair was an example of a case that went through the works, even why SYG was on the books. It was a weird case, and the judicial process was carried out.

When the laws are actually applied, the victims are protected on both sides. There are methods codified in law by which victims need not be made victims any further, and there are methods by which the police can bring an individual to justice. Even before this law, it was still at the discretion of the police to arrest or not arrest, and the prosecutor to press charges or not. This law simply prohibits the mere use of force from being used as probable cause to arrest a potential victim. There has to be probable cause to believe that the use of force was also unlawful before the subject can be arrested. If the police are negligent in their investigation, that's on the police. It's not the fault of the law. Just because something has the potential to be abused does not mean that it is being abused, nor that victims should be stripped of basic rights because the law may be abused.

JMO

 

[mommakk51]

They are supposed to be the eyes and ears for the police. So what are they supposed to do, sit up and look out their windows? How is that protecting their neighborhood?

Zimmerman was not supposed to be doing patrols and he certainly didn't drive a vehicle with neighborhood watch on it. Citizens on Patrol is the group that patrols in specially marked vehicles.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/46830953/#.T44f56s1_TC



~jmo~

 

[Desdemona]

I wasn't there either, but I do look at what George's frame of mind was the minute he stepped out of that vehicle to follow Trayvon. We know George was following Trayvon because he admitted to it... we also know that Trayvon was running away from George because he told LE that in his call.

When he stepped out of that vehicle his mindframe was that "these *advertiser censored**holes always get away" and that Trayvon was a "*advertiser censored**ing punk." That's some pretty aggressive language to have about someone walking down the street? Don't you think?

MOO

ETA: I don't think he was plotting to murder Trayvon... I do believe he was going after Trayvon to make sure he didn't get away?

I don't see it the same way you do, but that is okay. I can see how you might draw those conclusions; I simply don't draw the same ones when I listen to the call. I come to this story with my own unique perspective and background, which most likely strongly affect the way I interpret the available data.

To answer your question, it sounded to me as if GZ legitimately (i.e. truthfully, not necessarily accurately) perceived TM as a suspicious person and thought he was doing the right thing by reporting him to police. It sounded to me as if the reason GZ originally got out of the vehicle was that he'd been asked for the location of the individual in question, and that person had just run away and was quickly disappearing from sight. I believe GZ may have felt self-conscious about calling in a suspicious person who might end up vanishing by the time LE showed up, hence "they always get away." I do not hear GZ running, JMO. Cautiously and nervously following on foot, yes. I hear him respond "okay" to "we don't need you to do that."

As for the rest of the call and beyond, I would rather not stir up more passion here by detailing my unpopular opinion about what may have taken place. The call itself does not seem to incriminate GZ or dispute the story GZ apparently told LE later that night from what I can tell. Nor does the alleged exchange allegedly overheard by the GF. However, I await further information.

Thank you for discussing differing viewpoints with respect; it is much appreciated. Peace.

 

[mommakk51]

Do you honestly think that Frank could keep his mouth shut about George's car being clearly marked a "Neighborhood Watch" vehicle if that were true?

MOO

Because Frank could get in a whole lot of trouble for revealing confidential information. JMO

 

[LolaMoon08]

They are supposed to be the eyes and ears for the police. So what are they supposed to do, sit up and look out their windows? How is that protecting their neighborhood?

Actually, according to a member we have here, I believe the name is Lisa??, who is a member of her neighborhood watch that is exactly what he was supposed to do. His job was not to "physically protect" anything. Eyes and ears only.

 

[suzihawk]

They are supposed to be the eyes and ears for the police. So what are they supposed to do, sit up and look out their windows? How is that protecting their neighborhood?

Exactly. They're to report anything out of the ordinary or suspicious to the proper authorities and let them do the job they're trained for. And that's it!

 

[LolaMoon08]

Because Frank could get in a whole lot of trouble for revealing confidential information. JMO

How would George's car being marked as a "Neighborhood Watch" vehicle be confidential information? I would think that George always making his rounds with a loaded gun would be a lot more "confidential" than a marked vehicle.

MOO

 

[Velouria]

So far, all we have been told is of the actual incident and the subsequent investigation. We have not been given any info other than witness statements, to verify GZ's side of the story.

What exactly are you trying to say? That you believe it's possible GZ was in a marked vehicle and we just haven't been told about it?