Trayvon Martin

[GJZ]

I broke my leg on a trip back fom the Pacific Northwest many years ago. I lost one of my headlights on an 11 month old truck and didn't want to drive the rest of the night through an ice storm with limited visability. It was a grand slam break. Tore the ligaments, broke the bone and dislocated my ankle. I was younger and wearing a black hoodie as I crawled through the parking lot in an attempt to use a phone or find someone who could call the hospital for me. It was cold night and extremely windy. It was easy to see the reaction from people who didn't want to help a person wearing a black hoodie crawling on their hands an knees across a log dark parking lot. I guess to them I looked like a drunken person or trouble instead of someone in need of medical attention. And this was in the "heartland" of America. After a very long and cold experience a very nice middle-aged couple came to my help. I will never forget them and their kindness. I've seen a few things in my life. I've seen and been to the good side of town and I've been to the worst. So, that said, I get the hoodie part.

[JAK]

I remember when I was about 12 delivering morning papers for a friend, and I came across a house that had money in a jar, so being the awkward geek that I was, proceeded to count it to see if it was the right amount for the newspaper. Just as it occured to me that it was for the milkman I saw the lady glaring at me through the window, so I awkwardly put the money and the jar down and carried on, blushing. Later that day relatives of the lady were accusing my friend of being a theif, and I had to go to his defence. Never contronted the lady though. Glad she didn`t shoot me.

[Big Dipper]

...So, that said, I get the hoodie part.

Interestingly enough, this quote has not been mentioned much. Per his girl friend in the "discussion" with the family lawyer that an ABC reporter listened in on.

"He said this man was watching him, so he put his hoodie on. He said he lost the man," Martin's friend said.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-mar...ry?id=15959017

Although it was (I have read) raining that night, why would someone pull up his hood only after being observed by someone in the neighborhood??

[JAK]

Interesting point. The answer might not be what we think. Definitely worthy of discussion to gain some insight. Clearly there is a lack of trust on both sides, but not neccessarily mischief or bad intentions on either side. In my view, the onus should be on both parties to avoid confrontation and mistaken identity. Would it have helped if Zimmerman had better identified himself and his intentions? How was the seventeen year old to know what Zimmerman's intentions were? There is alot of focus on the younger appearing suspicisious, but in retrospect didn't they both appear to be suspicious. I think the primary onus was on Zimmerman, because even if we take his word that he was not aggressive, he was still clearly active on patrol, and he should have been better trained if he was acting in the capacity that he was. Plus he was older, so he should have known better. Not saying it was criminal negligence, because that is a matter of state law, but there should be laws requiring people on active patrol while armed to be better trained.

[GJZ]

Correction:

My hoodie was a Carhartt.

black, zipper, hooded sweatshirt/jacket.

Not sure if there is difference?

Hmmmmm????

[JAK]

All hoodies look alike to me. ;-)

[58Pan]

Zimmerman isn't the main concern here, the failure to arrest him is.

I would like to respond to your premise sir. With all due respect, under what exact charge should the police have arrested Zimmerman? Many are calling for an arrest for "murder". However, the shooting doesn't meet the legal definition of murder (start here http://thelawdictionary.org/murder/ ) and for this reason Zimmerman wasn't arrested for "murder". The Sanford PD, the original District Attorney (since replaced) and the current State Attorney General all know the shoot doesn't rise to the level of murder; however they may change their beliefs under continued public pressure by special interest groups (NAACP, etc).

If you'll take a few moments to read it, you'll see that Florida's Stand Your Ground (SYG) law allows deadly force if a person "reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself". The key words in this law are "reasonably believes". Here is a link to the relevant sections of the law http://articles.businessinsider.com/...ent-commission

Zimmerman claims self defense and at this point the police have no evidence to disprove his claim. Though it happens every day in our country, police aren't supposed to make arrests on mere speculation, suspicion, or emotion. Arrests are supposed to be made upon "evidence". Because there's no evidence at this time to disprove Zimmerman's claim of self defense and fear of imminent death or great bodily harm, there's no legal justification for Zimmerman's arrest.

What's reputed as an original "preliminary police report" appears to support Zimmerman's claim of self defense: http://media.myfoxchicago.com/pdf/zimmerman-report.pdf

You may find it interesting, sir, to know that Section 776.041 of FL's SYG law eliminates protection from prosecution of those who act as the aggressor, and this may well be what prosecutors hang their hats on. If however, Zimmerman was attacked by Martin (Martin is alleged in several accounts to have thrown the first punch) then it's Martin who meets the legal definition of "aggressor".

Whichever way this turns, it's a mess for all involved; and Zimmerman's actions ought to be reviewed by all who carry firearms for the lessons to learn about how to not create bad impressions of gun owners and for lessons to learn about how to not demonize other gun owners.

Thank you, sir, for allowing me to respond.

[Big Dipper]

If you are not yet entirely tired of this topic, this blog highlights some interesting corrections to the "facts" presented thus far by the media.

http://theconservativetreehouse.com/...-teen-worsens/

One particularly interesting point (in my mind) that he brings up is this:

The shooting happened at approximately 7:15pm on 2/26. Trayvon’s parents were tracked down and notified on 2/28. Between those times, no-one in the Martin family has described making any effort to locate Trayvon. Nor has any Martin family member described themselves filing a missing person report.

That also includes his girlfriend who was on the phone with him at the time this all happened. Hmmmm.

[Ralph]

This report seems to be both factual, accurate and verified. It has the ring of authenticity.

[JAK]

Please tell me that the police took some pictures of Zimmerman's injuries other than that video. Even if they didn't arrest him, they better have collected some evidence about the extent of his injuries. Angela Corey stated, before she went underground, that they may not have arrested Zimmerman in order to give them more time to gather enough evidence to convict, and not just enough evidence to make an arrest. It will be interesting to see what evidence they actually bothered to collect other that the 911 calls and video recording, and police statement shows no evidence at all other than Zimmerman's statement. So far the only 'evidence' we have seen against Zimmerman was collected by accident. There doesn't seem to be any evidence that they tried to investigate Zimmerman at all. Now the Feds have been asked to look into whether there was any interference from above. So far they have only been doing a parallel investigation of Zimmerman, not of the police and state attorneys.

It's a rather comical situation now, where the State of Florida is going to have to show that they are doing what they can to arrest and convict this guy, while at the same time trying to demonstrate that they never had a chance from the beginning, and so they never even tried. Does anyone else see the humour in this, and the horror.