Twin Lakes Retreat-Neigborhood Watch Program

[LambChop]

I am not sure why "Neighborhood Watch" is such a big deal. George was not on some patrol, he was going to Target and saw something suspicious, so he stopped and called police. That said, what does neighborhood watch or their guidelines have to do with the price of tea in China?

Not sure what it is like in Florida, but here neighborhood watch is an informal group of folks who offer to report suspicious activity, that is it. It sounds like George was working hard to make his community a safer place by working with police to educate residents on the crimes that are occurring. See the letters in the document release.

Should George have left his firearm in the vehicle? Should folks volunteering for neighborhood watch not have the right to defend themselves? It is quite possible that had George not have had a firearm on him, he would be dead . It is just me, but had he been "on patrol," which he was not, would that not be a time when one would be most likely to need to carry a firearm?

GZ should have left George in the vehicle then everyone would have been safe. jmo

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

National Sheriff’s Association Releases Statement on Florida Neighborhood Watch Tragedy
NSA has no information indicating the community has ever even registered with the program
National Sheriff’s Association | Wednesday, March 21, 2012

Alexandria, VA – For nearly four decades, the Neighborhood Watch Program (housed within the National Sheriffs’ Association (NSA)) has worked to unite law enforcement agencies, private organizations, and individual citizens in a nation-wide effort to reduce crime and improve local communities.

The purpose of the Neighborhood Watch Program is to enable citizens to act as the “eyes and ears” within their community and alert law enforcement immediately when they notice suspicious activity. However, the Neighborhood Watch Program does not in any way, shape, or form advocate citizens to take the law in their own hands. The success of the program has established Neighborhood Watch as the nation’s premier crime prevention and community mobilization program. Visible signs of the program are seen throughout America on street signs, window decals, community block parties and service projects.

"The alleged action of a “self-appointed neighborhood watchman” last month in Sanford, FL significantly contradicts the principles of the Neighborhood Watch Program,” stated NSA Executive Director Aaron D. Kennard, Sheriff (ret.). “NSA has no information indicating the community where the incident occurred has ever even registered with the NSA Neighborhood Watch program.”


more
http://www.lawofficer.com/article/news/national-sheriff-s-association-0


I believe this is where and why GZ went wrong...In his mind, he is LE, he acted out on this role within a crime watch group..he took it too seriously...most groups do not want you on patrol with a gun...so, was he on patrol? Is he like LE always on duty? Most groups insist you patrol with a partner but it appears GZ was a lone wolf hunting down some suspicous guy when in fact he made an egregious error in judgement. Why is his judgement so clouded? Over zealous? Fed up? Personal vendetta? Only GZ could answer but I fear he'd not be telling the truth...

This shouldn't be a black mark for all neighborhood watch programs but should serve as a lesson to not do what GZ did...do not take the law into your own hands. You are not LE, are not trained as LE for this will appear to be vigilante justice...and is what it appears to have happened this fateful night...

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

(Regarding a potential civil lawsuit against the homeowners association.)

Thanks for your question. (Sorry for the length of this-- it's a hot issue for me!)

I am very bothered by any suggestion that a civil suit may be pursued against the Retreat Lakes HOA. To me, this makes as much sense as suing the manufacturer of the handgun, or the manufacturer of the ammunition. That would be like suing a diabetes educator for the complications suffered by a diabetic. GZ was acting as a private citizen during the night of Feb 26. NW volunteer members have no special "status" elevating them above private citizens. The HOA has no control or jurisdiction over the actions of private citizens. They are not an employer.

Remember-- NW is an educational outreach program, not a "security guard" service. The HOA did not "hire" a security service; the NW observations were conducted by private residents-- not paid professionals. I am aware that they CAN be sued civilly (anyone can be sued!)-- but I believe it would demonstrate enormous bad judgment if they were sued by TM's parents, and would be a very socially provocative move. It would smack of misdirected retaliation, imo. It would also be subject to interpretation that money ALONE was the end result for the plaintiffs, because there would be no other purpose to gain by a lawsuit. Nothing was done wrong, and nothing was manufactured incorrectly, etc. What is the lesson?? Where is the negligence? Whose "job" was it to control or babysit the actions of GZ? Is it the job of a HOA to do background checks on all of the residents? Is it the job of the HOA to supercede FL law in regard to concealed carry laws? Is it the job of the HOA to tell a resident they cannot observe their surroundings and call the police if they suspect something is wrong? I just don't see how the HOA has any legitimate responsibility in this situation. Should the HOA stand by idly and watch crimes escalate in their neighborhood? SYG or no SYG, racism or no racism, IMO, the HOA bears absolutely no responsibility for TM's death or GZ's actions.

IMO- the HOA did absolutely nothing wrong, and exerted no control over the actions of GZ. They neither condoned, nor condemned his actions the night of Feb 26. They were under no obligation to "ensure" GZ did not carry a concealed weapon-- because they had no authority to prevent him from doing so, legally. The "loose" arrangement they seem to have at Retreat Lakes is that GZ, and whoever else is an official "volunteer," are on alert whenever they choose to be-- no scheduled patrols. Because of that, there is no way the HOA can exert ANY influence or control over the "work product" of the volunteers. For that reason, I believe they should not be held accountable for any actions of GZ. Merely organizing a NW educational partnership is not reason enough to me that they should be held accountable for anything that happened Feb 26. They did the right thing, imo, by trying to facilitate some citizen education that might decrease the wave of crimes that was occurring in their community.

As many have pointed out, the HOA is composed of owners of the condos, and GZ was a renter. The HOA potentially does not have insurance for these kind of lawsuits-- many don't. Which means, innocent homeowners who had absolutely nothing to do with this situation could end up owing thousands of dollars out of their own pockets, if a civil suit was brought and they lost. That is extremely distressing to me. It smacks of unfocused, irrational, illogical financial "retaliation" against anyone that is a potential target, whether they had anything to do with the situation or not.

These homeowners are not wealthy people-- this is a very middle class neighborhood. A major judgment could crush these innocent people financially-- for no discernible reason. They did nothing wrong. It would set a TERRIBLE precedent for NW programs nationwide, and be an enormous disincentive for people to participate in community crime prevention educational outreach programs. A lawsuit against the HOA would serve no REAL purpose, send no REAL message, and very unfairly penalize innocent homeowners. It would be simply misdirected anger and anguish, imo, and be very inflammatory. A civil lawsuit, imo, would be an opportunistic manuver designed to further manipulate the public response to this tragedy. I hope it doesn't happen. The situation is really bad enough already.

If this should happen then the HOA has the option of recouping this from GZ...they can take him to civil court and recoup their damages..this is all his own doing and whatever happens, it's all on GZ...epecially since they appear to have given him this huge ego, if you are a victim of a burlary, after you call LE, call GZ....they shouldn't have given him that responsiblity but I don't believe they had any idea he used a weapon when out on patrol...and it appears the officers feel he was on patrol this fateful night...the beginning of his calls are always the same...we've had some breakins...there's a suspicous guy...all called to the NEN...I now wonder if that number was the designated number to call in for NW's....hmmmm, more food for thought...

 

[LambChop]

I wish ya'll could see our neighborhood "watchers". It's like a group of 12 or so "retired" peeps. They have one of those magnetic signs that says "Neighborhood Watch" and they take turns putting it on their vehicles and driving around. They are experts at finding lost pets, letting you know if one of your children are down at the boat dock unsupervised and delevering fresh garden veggies from each others gardens. lol. I'm blessed to live in a low crime rate area.

IMO they also do "wellness watches" on some of their elderly neighbors, too. We have something similar here but no one patrols, we have regular security that does that. But there is a neighborhood coordinator who we check with if we are going away for any length of time and also we tell security. Difference between what GZ was doing and a NWP is that GZ was looking for trouble while NWP is seeing trouble and reporting it. jmo

 

[sleonardelli]

GZ should have left George in the vehicle then everyone would have been safe. jmo

Maybe if they follow the guidelines and not pursue "suspicious persons" they'd be safe inside their vehicles and wouldn't have to worry about criminal or civil action.

 

[AJ Noiter]

Maybe if they follow the guidelines and not pursue "suspicious persons" they'd be safe inside their vehicles and wouldn't have to worry about criminal or civil action.

I wonder where you get this. The only manual I've seen is this one:
https://www.bja.gov/Publications/NSA_NW_Manual.pdf

And on page 17 it states:

Members should never confront suspicious persons who could be armed and dangerous.

The only thing it says to not pursue is vehicles a couple sentences above. If they meant for it to be pursue I believe they would've used the word pursue, as they did in the sentence about vehicles.