"If I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon."

[nathanm]

Where am I blaming the victim?

I don't know, saying the victim did something illegal when there's no evidence of that other than the testimony of the guy who shot him.

And Conan, no, I don't think demanding that Zimmerman be arrested is mob justice. I think demanding that he be convicted without a trial would be, however. Luckily, I haven't seen anyone ask for that. Only that he be treated like almost every other murder or manslaughter suspect.

[Conan71]

I don't know, saying the victim did something illegal when there's no evidence of that other than the testimony of the guy who shot him.

And Conan, no, I don't think demanding that Zimmerman be arrested is mob justice. I think demanding that he be convicted without a trial would be, however. Luckily, I haven't seen anyone ask for that. Only that he be treated like almost every other murder or manslaughter suspect.

But apparently, by Florida law, there is not enough evidence to consider him a murder or manslaughter "suspect" at this point.  Personally, I think he's a manslaughter suspect, but it's not my call and I don't have near enough evidence nor a grasp on Florida law to make such a call.

"...he be treated like almost every other murder or manslaughter suspect" Do you think every person who kills another should have to stand trial regardless of circumstances?  You said almost "every other" should there be varying treatment of suspects?

[Gaspar]

I don't know, saying the victim did something illegal when there's no evidence of that other than the testimony of the guy who shot him.

Those are your words.  My words were:

I am willing to bet that both parties engaged in activities that were not within the bounds of the law.

Perhaps you are correct and Zimmerman's broken nose and wounds were self inflicted or somehow in conspiracy with law enforcement.

The evidence seems to suggest, however, that their was a confrontation that resulted in assault, and corroborate the reported whiteness statements.  So my comment was only based on that.  My assumption may be wrong, and I am willing to accept that.

There will be a grand jury on this and I'm sure we will get a much clearer picture of the events that led up to the tragedy.

[nathanm]

But apparently, by Florida law, there is not enough evidence to consider him a murder or manslaughter "suspect" at this point.  Personally, I think he's a manslaughter suspect, but it's not my call and I don't have near enough evidence nor a grasp on Florida law to make such a call.

People are regularly arrested on less. Also, AIUI, the Florida SYG law is an affirmative defense. You must raise it in court. There is no question that Zimmerman shot and killed Martin. Zimmerman admitted it to the police officers when they arrived on scene. Hence, he should be arrested and charged with the appropriate crime. If it went down the way I think it went down, it's murder one. Premeditation only requires a few seconds. Manslaughter would be a lot easier to prove since it doesn't require criminal intent (again, AIUI).

"...he be treated like almost every other murder or manslaughter suspect" Do you think every person who kills another should have to stand trial regardless of circumstances?  You said almost "every other" should there be varying treatment of suspects?

Pretty much, yes. Anybody who kills another should probably stand trial. It's serious business. Now, I also think that the public defender's office should be far better funded so that even poor folks who kill other people can get a competent defense. (not that PDs are generally incompetent, they're just massively overworked in most places)

The almost was there to account for the relatively high frequency of people invoking SYG and never getting prosecuted even when they follow people for several blocks and gun them down. That's the sick part; this isn't even the first time this has happened in Florida since their SYG law was passed.

To reiterate, I'm strongly in favor of people being allowed to defend themselves, even with deadly force, if they are attacked by another and placed in fear of their life (or are defending another person so attacked). However, I think that any such situations should be treated very seriously and should always go to trial, barring clear and convincing evidence otherwise. (say video/audio of the entire incident that makes it perfectly clear who was the aggressor) The killing of another human being is serious business and should be treated as such no matter who the victim is and no matter who the perpetrator is.

Edited to add: Gaspar, even if Martin attacked Zimmerman, Zimmerman shot Martin when no attack was taking place, unless the witnesses are lying. Under Florida law, that invalidates the SYG defense. Also, I'm not sure how Zimmerman shot Martin while they were in mutual combat and Martin ended up face down. I'm sure stranger things have happened, though.

[Gaspar]

Edited to add: Gaspar, even if Martin attacked Zimmerman, Zimmerman shot Martin when no attack was taking place, unless the witnesses are lying. Under Florida law, that invalidates the SYG defense. Also, I'm not sure how Zimmerman shot Martin while they were in mutual combat and Martin ended up face down. I'm sure stranger things have happened, though.

You have a valid point there, and accounts of the incident reported in the papers are vague at best.  That is precisly why attempts to try this in the media or our own heads is wrong.  Zimmerman may indeed be guilty of 3rd degree murder.  Martin may be guilty of assault.  Just because we have the internets does not give us the necessary information or authority to decide the case.

[nathanm]

You have a valid point there, and accounts of the incident reported in the papers are vague at best.  That is precisly why attempts to try this in the media or our own heads is wrong.  Zimmerman may indeed be guilty of 3rd degree murder.  Martin may be guilty of assault.  Just because we have the internets does not give us the necessary information or authority to decide the case.

Nobody is saying we should be the jury, Gaspar, only that Zimmerman stand trial. And once again, the 911 tapes and witness accounts paint a complete enough picture to say that there should be a trial.

[Conan71]

Nathan, that's the point of SYG laws: you will not have the burden and expense of having to go to trial for legally defending yourself.  Why should you have to if someone jumped you and SWMBO in front of your house or walking down 15th St. with what you felt at the time was a clear intent to harm or kill one or both of you?

I look at it this way: if I catch someone lurking around outside my house or my neighbor's house after dark, looking in windows, etc. I ask what they are doing, and they charge at me, I'm sure as hell within my right to defend myself.  The law is on my side in a case like that. 

I really don't have a problem with the apparent aftermath of this case- as far as it being claimed as self-defense based on the physical evidence on Zimmerman.  Where I'm murky on this is whether or not Zimmerman instigated physical contact with Martin.  If it is as Zimmerman says: he was attacked while trying to re-enter his vehicle and he'd not laid a hand on Martin, then I can see where this is justified.  If he laid first fist on Martin, or collared him, he's screwed.

And, no not really a mystery at all how Martin wound up face down if, in fact, he was shot while he was on top of Zimmerman pounding his head into the pavement.

IMO, Gaspar has made the first sensible comment I've heard since this story broke: let the grand jury do what it's supposed to do.  Sounds as if both men may have made a grave mistake that night.

[nathanm]

Nathan, that's the point of SYG laws: you will not have the burden and expense of having to go to trial for legally defending yourself.  Why should you have to if someone jumped you and SWMBO in front of your house or walking down 15th St. with what you felt at the time was a clear intent to harm or kill one or both of you?

I look at it this way: if I catch someone lurking around outside my house or my neighbor's house after dark, looking in windows, etc. I ask what they are doing, and they charge at me, I'm sure as hell within my right to defend myself.  The law is on my side in a case like that.  

The law is on your side even without SYG in your second hypothetical. The castle doctrine covers the situation just fine.

As I said earlier, I think that if you kill someone, you should stand trial. I don't think that laws that make it less of a hassle to kill other human beings are really the right way to go. As I said earlier, I'm also strongly in favor of better funding for PDs offices so that it isn't in fact an expensive proposition. Moreover, the hassle factor will hopefully cause some people to choose to retreat instead of killing others. I think that's an unmitigated good thing. Yeah, it sucks, but at least you're alive to tell your tale, no?

Oh, and again, unless the witnesses are lying, Martin was absolutely not on top of Zimmerman at the time he was shot. In fact, the witnesses stated that Zimmerman was on top of (the face down) Martin within a few seconds of the gunshot.

[heironymouspasparagus]

The cops operate within the bounds of the law, whatever they may be.

Short side-track here...

You really believe that?

[heironymouspasparagus]

Don't trust law enforcement....there's no benefit of the doubt for them because they work for the public good (supposedly)that's the reason the right wingnuts/NRA came up with these new wave laws....

Wow!  What a shame...you got SO close with the first part of that sentence, then just after the parenthesis, completely went off the tracks and down the path of the crazy train.  So sad.

Cops have no obligation to 'protect' anyone - that is not the major component of their job.  And like the old saying goes about police 'protection'...only minutes away, when seconds count.

[heironymouspasparagus]

I am willing to bet that both parties engaged in activities that were not within the bounds of the law.  Like most, this is not a black & white issue (no pun).  

There is indeed an interesting case study on racism here though.  Taking sides in this case without adequate information indicates a belief that inherent traits in a racial group justifies discrimination for or against that group.  In this case we see a large group of people immediately siding with one group regardless of contrary information or due process of law. For them, this case has already been decided on the basis of race, and no evidence to the contrary will change that.  

Possibly.  But it was not an issue that was any business of Zimmerman's to address beyond calling 911.  Another thing my concealed carry class taught was that the actions of another who is not directly affecting me, as in physical threat, is no business of mine.  Even if someone else was being threatened with deadly force, it becomes a potentially very questionable thing to react with deadly force.  (Example was if you came around a corner and saw someone getting ready to stab another...which one was on offense and which on defense?)

Adequate information for at least one conclusion is more than adequately available from the 911 call.  The 911 operator specifically told Zimmerman to stop following the kid.  Anything he did beyond that put him in the wrong.  By definition.  Didn't matter who was White, Hispanic, or Black.  And ALL the actions from that point on, followed from that first wrong act.


And the suspension was not for finding grass, it was for a baggy that had contained grass.  Splitting hairs, but that is what we do in this country to assign relative culpability.

[Teatownclown]

Wow!  What a shame...you got SO close with the first part of that sentence, then just after the parenthesis, completely went off the tracks and down the path of the crazy train.  So sad.

Cops have no obligation to 'protect' anyone - that is not the major component of their job.  And like the old saying goes about police 'protection'...only minutes away, when seconds count.

Serve and protect. I guess you don't recall just last week when a cell phone call at 36th and Riverside may have saved a woman. Yes, the police got there in time.

So, you don't believe the NRA has been the force behind SYG?

[heironymouspasparagus]

And, no not really a mystery at all how Martin wound up face down if, in fact, he was shot while he was on top of Zimmerman pounding his head into the pavement.

Wonder where all the blood is that would have drenched Zimmerman if Martin was on top of him when shot.  Chest shot makes a gawd-awful mess most of the time - on both sides of the shootee.

[heironymouspasparagus]

As I said earlier, I think that if you kill someone, you should stand trial.

I would certainly want some type of formal court finding for myself, if for no other reason than to get the 'double jeopardy' situation out of the way. 

[nathanm]

I would certainly want some type of formal court finding for myself, if for no other reason than to get the 'double jeopardy' situation out of the way. 

Good point. There is no statute of limitations on murder in at least some states. What would be worse than standing trial for manslaughter or murder after killing your assailant? Standing trial 15 years later when a new prosecuting attorney gets a wild hair.