Page 108 of 226

Re: 17y/o Killed By Neighborhood Watch/CHL

Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2012 2:22 pm
by ScooterSissy
BKRushing wrote: ...
My point is an LEO would not be alone, would have at least been readily identifiable as an LEO and most likely would have his/her lights flashing on their cruiser. Provided Martin was not breaking the law, he would have had nothing to fear from a police officer questioning him. As I have said in previous posts, this is a case of two people making poor choices. Martin for trying to confront Zimmerman about why he was following him and Zimmerman for getting out of his car to follow him which as far as I know all neighborhood watch volunteers are told not to do. It is not a clear cut instance of racial profiling, but rather an instance two people making some poor choices with a tragic outcome.
Unfortunately, "poor choice" is the appropriate term for part of this, and way too mild for other parts.

Martin confronting Zimmerman, and Zimmerman choosing to follow might both be "poor choices".

Martin attacking Zimmerman may have been a "poor choice", but it was much more than that, and much more than either of the other two "poor choices". It was illegal. And that was what got Martin killed.

Re: 17y/o Killed By Neighborhood Watch/CHL

Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2012 2:33 pm
by WildBill
Dave2 wrote:
anygunanywhere wrote:
WildBill wrote:This is getting more bizarre by the minute. It's hard for me to believe that this is happening in our "justice sytem." :mad5
Bizarre has been around a long time. Think Simpson trial.

Anygunanywhere
Yeah, but the half weirdness in that trial was from the media foaming at the mouth over... you know, I'm really not sure what they were all up about. Anyway, my point is that most of that trial's weirdness wasn't coming from the legal system... IIRC... which I might not because it was a long time ago.
You must have forgotten about Judge Ito and the Dream Team of OJ's lawyers. Marcia Clark and Christopher Darden. As officers of the court, they are part of the legal system. ;-)

Re: 17y/o Killed By Neighborhood Watch/CHL

Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:36 pm
by BKRushing
ScooterSissy wrote:
BKRushing wrote: ...
My point is an LEO would not be alone, would have at least been readily identifiable as an LEO and most likely would have his/her lights flashing on their cruiser. Provided Martin was not breaking the law, he would have had nothing to fear from a police officer questioning him. As I have said in previous posts, this is a case of two people making poor choices. Martin for trying to confront Zimmerman about why he was following him and Zimmerman for getting out of his car to follow him which as far as I know all neighborhood watch volunteers are told not to do. It is not a clear cut instance of racial profiling, but rather an instance two people making some poor choices with a tragic outcome.
Unfortunately, "poor choice" is the appropriate term for part of this, and way too mild for other parts.

Martin confronting Zimmerman, and Zimmerman choosing to follow might both be "poor choices".

Martin attacking Zimmerman may have been a "poor choice", but it was much more than that, and much more than either of the other two "poor choices". It was illegal. And that was what got Martin killed.

Excellent point you make about the illegality of Martin beating up Zimmerman. No one is even bringing that up.

Re: 17y/o Killed By Neighborhood Watch/CHL

Posted: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:49 pm
by sjfcontrol
It's been brought up many times, but has been shouted down by those that believe the problem was Z getting out of the truck.

Re: 17y/o Killed By Neighborhood Watch/CHL

Posted: Wed Jul 18, 2012 12:09 pm
by The Annoyed Man
http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/han ... an_b138015
FOX NEWS
Hannity Gets First Interview with George Zimmerman
By Merrill Knox on July 18, 2012 12:25 PM
Sean Hannity has secured the first interview with George Zimmerman, the man accused of killing Florida teenager Trayvon Martin. The hour-long exclusive will air on Hannity’s Fox News Channel program tonight at 9pmET.

Zimmerman will discuss what happened on the night of Martin’s death. His attorney, Mark O’Mara, will also participate in the interview and will address rumors circulating about bail donations and hidden money, FNC says.

Re: 17y/o Killed By Neighborhood Watch/CHL

Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 6:55 am
by WildBill
I didn't get to see the interview last night, but here's a link to on of the stories.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/1 ... 84878.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Re: 17y/o Killed By Neighborhood Watch/CHL

Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 9:23 am
by The Annoyed Man
WildBill wrote:I didn't get to see the interview last night, but here's a link to on of the stories.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/1 ... 84878.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I saw snippets of it on Fox & Friends this morning while getting dressed. They also had the Martins and attorney Crump on in the following segment, and asked what their responses were to the various parts of the Zimmerman interview.

They were not gracious. It would not have mattered what Zimmerman said, they would have been less than gracious.

My reaction is that Zimmerman made a huge strategic error by apologizing to the Martins for the the loss of their son. I understand what motivated him to say it, but I am very surprised that his attorney let him say it, and it makes me wonder a bit about his attorney's competence. By apologizing, Zimmerman has just established that, even if he is acquitted in the criminal trial, his supposed guilt in the civil wrongful death trial that will almost certainly follow will be that much easier to prove.

When he was asked if he regretted what he had done, he said he had no regrets. MY reaction would have been to say that I very much regretted that Trayvon Martin, a young man who was bigger, stronger, and faster than me had assaulted me, beat the snot out of me, tried to smother me, called me a dirty name describing oedipal lust and told me I was going to die tonight, and then tried to grab for my gun, forcing me to grab it first and use deadly force to save my own life. I would say that since the Martin family have spent so much time, effort, and money to try me outside of the courtroom, I very MUCH regretted Treyvon's actions, but not my own. My right to life was greater than his right to kill me, and he would still be alive today had he not done those things to me.

Zimmerman's problem (other than this whole case) is that he believes himself to be a nice guy and very much wants other people to think the same of him. AND, he may well indeed be a nice guy. He seems like it to me. But in his efforts to influence people to think that he is a nice guy, he is handing ammunition to the people who are trying to destroy him, and they are not going to accept that he's a nice guy and back off their pressures on him. Frankly, they want him either dead, or in prison for life.

And beyond that, they want to crush him and his family financially. I believe that, if they thought they could get away with it, they would burn his house down and kill his dog. I believe that, A) in their grief over the loss of their son, and B) the cognitive dissonance forced upon them about their parenting skills and the kind of son they raised and their fear of what that may force them to examine within themselves, they are quite beyond the reach of reason. And at the last resort, they are completely willing to play the race card against a person of mixed-race himself, because they cannot accept that their son was living out the very stereotype which causes many people to (perhaps unjustly) view the black community in a negative light. They will never back away from the race card, because its use is the last refuge of people who have nothing valid to say.

With such an unreachable set of parents, there is only ONE tactic for Zimmerman to pursue, and that is to keep reminding them (AND the listening/viewing public) at every opportunity that the young man the Martins raised so poorly was a troubled thug who assaulted someone and tried to kill him........and got himself killed in the process.

Re: 17y/o Killed By Neighborhood Watch/CHL

Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 9:34 am
by sjfcontrol
If the "Stand your ground" defense holds, then Zimmerman is immune from civil penalties.

Re: 17y/o Killed By Neighborhood Watch/CHL

Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 10:09 am
by mamabearCali
Though I think Zimmerman is stuck with Omara, there is no way in tarnation (are we allowed to say that here?) that I would ever hire him as a lawyer. TAM you are absolutely correct. You never never apologize for your actions. For heavens sakes O'mara should know that! If he absolutely needed to express regret for the loss of their son. He could say something like this. 'I sympathize with them in their grief as they have lost a child, that is always hard." GRRRR it is so hard watching someone get such terrible counsel from someone who is supposed to be an advocate for him.

Re: 17y/o Killed By Neighborhood Watch/CHL

Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 11:03 am
by ScooterSissy
The Annoyed Man wrote: My reaction is that Zimmerman made a huge strategic error by apologizing to the Martins for the the loss of their son. I understand what motivated him to say it, but I am very surprised that his attorney let him say it, and it makes me wonder a bit about his attorney's competence. By apologizing, Zimmerman has just established that, even if he is acquitted in the criminal trial, his supposed guilt in the civil wrongful death trial that will almost certainly follow will be that much easier to prove.
If he's acquited because of self-defense, or if it's dismissed because of "stand your ground", he's immune from civil suit by Florida statues.

Re: 17y/o Killed By Neighborhood Watch/CHL

Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 11:23 am
by brainman
I don't remember where I read it (so it may be entirely untrue), but I read that he is only immune from civil action if the case doesn't make it to trial. But if it goes to trial, then he can be sued even if he is acquitted.

I'll try to remember where I saw that.

Re: 17y/o Killed By Neighborhood Watch/CHL

Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 12:28 pm
by ScooterSissy
brainman wrote:I don't remember where I read it (so it may be entirely untrue), but I read that he is only immune from civil action if the case doesn't make it to trial. But if it goes to trial, then he can be sued even if he is acquitted.

I'll try to remember where I saw that.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/ind ... /0776.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

776.032 is the portion that gives a person immunity from criminal and civil action. Doesn't say anything about it going to trial, but the "stand your ground" gives the accused that chance to prevent it from going to trial, in which case they would also be immune.

Re: 17y/o Killed By Neighborhood Watch/CHL

Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 1:45 pm
by recaffeination
I wonder how much the cousin was paid to make those accusations now.

Re: 17y/o Killed By Neighborhood Watch/CHL

Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 3:05 pm
by The Annoyed Man
ScooterSissy wrote:
brainman wrote:I don't remember where I read it (so it may be entirely untrue), but I read that he is only immune from civil action if the case doesn't make it to trial. But if it goes to trial, then he can be sued even if he is acquitted.

I'll try to remember where I saw that.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/ind ... /0776.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

776.032 is the portion that gives a person immunity from criminal and civil action. Doesn't say anything about it going to trial, but the "stand your ground" gives the accused that chance to prevent it from going to trial, in which case they would also be immune.
Well, even with immunity, it is still another $20 large in legal fees. You don't face something like that without a lawyer if you have a brain in your head, unless you're a lawyer yourself, and they do say that a lawyer that represents himself has a fool for a client.

Re: 17y/o Killed By Neighborhood Watch/CHL

Posted: Thu Jul 19, 2012 3:11 pm
by canvasbck
I watched the entire interview last nigh on Hannity. I was kind of struck by one of the (several) tactical errors that Z made. It is a good tactical lesson for everyone.

According to his story, Z had moved back to his street when M confronted him. M asked “do you have a <expletive> problem?” Z stated that he reached into his pants pocket for his cell phone to call 911 and was momentarily surprised because he forgot that he had placed the phone in his rain jacket pocket. That was when M struck him in the nose and began the physical assault. He stated that M was within arms length of him at the time that M asked the question about Z having a problem.

Basic tactical training would tell us to create distance as soon as the threat is realized. While Z was telling the story, I could see myself backpedaling as soon as M “appeared” within arms length while placing my hand on my weapon, or possibly drawing the weapon at that time. What Z did was stand flat footed and reach into his pocket for a phone. Creating distance and placing your hand on your weapon or drawing not only would have given Z a tactical advantage; it would have lessened the chance of M turning the confrontation into a physical one.

I’m not trying to condemn or condone the actions of either person here, just trying to find some of the lessons to be learned from the confrontation.