Skip to main content

View Diary: Zimmerman - "Stand Your Ground" Pretrial Immunity Hearing? (161 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Backwards bizarro world (16+ / 0-)

    The moment the police dispatcher told Zimmerman to NOT FOLLOW Martin, and Zimmerman proceeded to pursue Martin and corner him, Zimmerman abandoned all claim to the stand your ground defense.

    That law does not say, OK, go and pick a fight, and if the person responds and defends themself, then it is OK to shoot them. And I suspect that is why the charge is second degree homicide, and not manslaughter.

    "You've got to be very careful if you don't know where you are going, because you might not get there." “When you come to the fork in the road, take it.” --Yogi Berra

    by HeartlandLiberal on Sat Apr 14, 2012 at 07:07:34 AM PDT

    •  what Corey needs to establish as well, (9+ / 0-)

      is that even though Zimmerman was trained by the SPD for the crime-watch program, he was operating as a civilian only, and still had ZERO authority over any other civilians.

      The gun didn't make him a cop.  Zimmerman thought it did.

      Fatal mistake.

      may we not be strangers in the lush province of joy - Charles Wright

      by AlyoshaKaramazov on Sat Apr 14, 2012 at 07:11:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  i'll wait for the evidence (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      johnny wurster, VClib

      before i conclude that Zimmerman tried to corner him.  Quite possible he was only attempting to keep him in sight until the police arrived. Nor do we know know if he picked the fight.

      We simply do not know hat happened in the 30 seconds prior to violence commencing.

      •  How close do you have to be (13+ / 0-)

        to keep someone in sight? Zimmerman's eyes must be really bad if he had to be close enough to get popped in the nose.

        Zimmerman picked the fight when he took a loaded gun out of his vehicle and pursued Martin through the complex in spite of the police dispatcher telling him not to.

        Zimmerman was the aggressor. That is indisputable.

        •  in a development (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          johnny wurster, VClib

          with houses i can get out of sight in 15 seconds. gonna be less than 50 feet. One person corners a house and stops, and if the other follows they can be face-to-face unexpectedly.

          As someone else noted, he was not told 'not to' he was told that he did not have to do it. It was optional.

          •  Given that it was evening (0+ / 0-)

            maybe even dark, those numbers get smaller.

          •  That's not what he was told (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Avila, wilderness voice, wishingwell

            The dispatcher said We don't need YOU to do that. Debatable whether it was option or not, but it wasn't in any way encouraging him to do it. The most favorable reading towards Zimmerman of the instructions was the colloquialism "we're all set" let us catch him. Don't worry we've got it covered." The dispatcher wasn't saying go get him cause we won't make it in time. It's not like the instruction was affirmative to catch Zimmerman. Personally, I thought the dispatcher was wimpy when he said we don't need you to do that. Ya think?

            •  operators weasel lawyer words to limit liability (0+ / 0-)

              "We don't need you to do that" is exactly the kid of (weasel words in common vernacular) language that these operators are taught so as not to create a situation where someone gets themselves killed or hurt, and then the cops get dragged into a lawsuit.  

              "But you TOLD me to x, y or z" is not what you want to go up against in a wrongful death suit.  

              (Nonetheless, GZ was told many times to let the cops handle it, in NW meetings, and on the phone.)  

              This is why his highly exculpatory version of events seems so coached, so implausible.  The details he inserts about "returning to his SUV" after "looking for a street sign"and being "jumped" are the verbal counterpart to these other weasel words.  In today's world, people always talk like lawyers, or corporate apologists, or that voice muttering throughout a pharmaceutical ad on tv.  (Don't take viagra if you MAY have a heart condition!)  

              He needs to convince a judge that HIS story fits the VERY  definition of the statute, in multiple ways on every point - not that he is telling the truth.  The truth seems to be the first casualty here.  That's why he insists there was a struggle for the gun, and that he was verbally threatened with death by Trayvon, and that he was on the verge of blacking out like a "shaken baby" etc.  These details to his story are a laundry list of what a defendant needs to say in order to walk on a self defense claim.  

      •  you really should read more (6+ / 0-)

        and listen to some of the witnesses, before you make obviously erroneous statements.

        We have three witnesses stating that Zimmerman was the aggressor in the confrontation, and that Zimmerman was the one on top of Trayvon.

        may we not be strangers in the lush province of joy - Charles Wright

        by AlyoshaKaramazov on Sat Apr 14, 2012 at 07:36:55 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  who claimed this (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          johnny wurster

          got a link?

          The only witness i recall was some guy named John who had Martin on top of Zimmerman.

          "The guy on the bottom who had a red sweater on was yelling to me: 'help, help…and I told him to stop and I was calling 911," he said.

          Trayvon Martin was in a hoodie; Zimmerman was in red.

          The witness only wanted to be identified as "John," and didn't not want to be shown on camera.

          His statements to police were instrumental, because police backed up Zimmerman's claims, saying those screams on the 911 call are those of Zimmerman.

          "When I got upstairs and looked down, the guy who was on top beating up the other guy, was the one laying in the grass, and I believe he was dead at that point," John said.

          •  That's what i said. (4+ / 0-)

            Do some reading.

            Don't expect me to fill you in on the last two weeks of evidence.

            You're ignorant on some really important things.

            Do a search here at this site.  Type in "Zimmerman" in the field.


            may we not be strangers in the lush province of joy - Charles Wright

            by AlyoshaKaramazov on Sat Apr 14, 2012 at 07:47:35 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Dude, you're in over your head (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            AlyoshaKaramazov, Avila, wishingwell

            Like the diarist said, read more than one link about the story. How about spending the rest of the day catching up before commenting again. The fact that you keep doubling down when you have no clue what you are talking about is starting to piss a bunch of us off. So, what you need to do is bone up and then offer something intelligent because right now you're not cutting it or bringing anything to discussion.

          •  OK.... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Dirk McQuigley

            Supposing (a major supposition) the 'John' who claims to have 'seen' the scuffle, that Trayvon was straddling Zimmerman and beating him up.  AND supposing Zimmerman was able to get at his holstered gun in the midst of being pummeled by Trayvon, and he shot Trayvon as he was being beaten up (almost senseless - per Zimmerman's brother)....
            couple of questions....
            if Zimmerman shot Trayvon while he (Trayvon) was on top of and straddling Zimmerman while beating him up, why was there no blood spatter or ANY evidence of blood on Zimmerman a mere 30 minutes later in the police station video or why was this blood spatter not mentioned anywhere?  Zimmerman looked remarkably neat in the video as he hopped out of the police car and walked into the station, a remarkable recovery from being beaten almost senseless.
            AND if Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman when Zimmerman shot him, the blast of the shot would have sent Trayvon backwards and landed him on his back, but he was found with his hands beneath him and on his stomach.
            Something's fishy about both the 'eye-witness John' and Zimmerman's 'story'.

            I think, therefore I am........................... Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose AKA Engine Nighthawk - don't even ask!

            by Lilyvt on Sat Apr 14, 2012 at 11:48:18 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  you watch too much tv (0+ / 0-)

              bullets don't have the momentum to throw a body about. And i'm wagering the bullet made a small hole in the hoodie, and probably a shirt underneath. Don't expect much blood would come exploding back out.

              •  whatever you say.... (0+ / 0-)

                discount away.
                But, BTW, yes, bullets do have the momentum to throw a body around.
                I repeat, where was the blood?  Zimmerman was in a 'life or death' struggle, Trayvon was on top of him straddling him, beating him almost senseless, breaking his nose, banging his head against the pavement, he shot Trayvon at close range....and miraculously, just like on TV, there was no blood and no ripped clothes, no evidence on Zimmerman (in the police videos) of the vicious beating that had just taken place a short while before.
                Forget about TV, I guess I watch too much real life.
                I stand by my statement.  This whole thing stinks.

                I think, therefore I am........................... Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose AKA Engine Nighthawk - don't even ask!

                by Lilyvt on Sat Apr 14, 2012 at 07:15:36 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

      •  Once again you dispute the indisputable (5+ / 0-)

        It is entirely impossible that Mr Zimmerman merely attempted to keep Mr Martin "within sight". We know this is impossible, because Mr Zimmerman initiated the confrontation within speaking distance. This too is on the 911 recordings.

        You will have to do better in your disingenuity.

    •  HeartlandLiberal - except that the 911 dispatcher (6+ / 0-)

      never told Zimmerman not to follow Martin. What he said was "we don't need you to do that" which law enforcement has clearly stated was not an order and Zimmerman had no legal duty to stay in his car.

      Fortunately in court they will at least have the facts right.

      "let's talk about that"

      by VClib on Sat Apr 14, 2012 at 07:13:56 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  i disagree ... (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        doroma, petesmom, Lilyvt, Avila, sukeyna

        the instructions of the dispatcher was clear and irrefutable - WE don't NEED you to do that. If Zimmerman had stayed inside his car and Trayvon knocked on his window and broke his nose - Zimmerman would have a chance of the Stand Your Ground law

        When he left his property - his car and ran after Trayvon, doesn't he violate the rules of neighborhood watch and try to track Trayvon down? How can he reasonably claim Stand Your Ground?

        Let us say that he didn't have a gun on him. How would he have dealt with the situation?

        •  Sanford Police have a statement (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          wilderness voice, Lilyvt

          up at their website, concerning this:

          If Zimmerman was told not to continue to follow Trayvon, can that be considered in this investigation?
          Yes it will; however, the telecommunications call taker asked Zimmerman “are you following him”. Zimmerman replied, "yes”. The call taker stated “you don’t need to do that”. The call taker’s suggestion is not a lawful order that Mr. Zimmerman would be required to follow. Zimmerman’s statement was that he had lost sight of Trayvon and was returning to his truck to meet the police officer when he says he was attacked by Trayvon.
          They're really trying to cover their asses, and George's on this.

          may we not be strangers in the lush province of joy - Charles Wright

          by AlyoshaKaramazov on Sat Apr 14, 2012 at 09:28:00 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  If you're right, then you at least (5+ / 0-)

        must agree that at that point, both Zimmerman AND Trayvon were on equal footing of authority.  meaning that neither had authority over the other, right?

        Trayvon was being pursued.  Even if he DID stop and pop Zimmerman on the nose, he had FULL RIGHT to do so.  He was breaking NO laws to do that.

        Zimmerman's mistake was that he thought he was a cop and HAD Authority.  He had none.

        He was the aggressor.  He has NO claim on self-defense.

        may we not be strangers in the lush province of joy - Charles Wright

        by AlyoshaKaramazov on Sat Apr 14, 2012 at 07:46:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  "Law enforcement" said this? (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Avila, wilderness voice, wishingwell

        How is Law Enforcement's bum knee? When did you last see ol' Law?

        No one has a "legal duty" to remain in one's car. That is as meaningless a statement as I have every seen made in a debate. Congrats on the new nadir.

        The issue at hand, instead, is this: Mr Zimmerman had no legal right to assault Mr Martin.

    •  That makes sense to me. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Gooserock, Quicklund, wishingwell

      However, the SYG law seems to change things. It seems to say that even if you're the aggressor, if at some point you "feel" threatened, you have the right to use deadly force. Bizarro is right.

      Your left is my right---Mort Sahl

      by HappyinNM on Sat Apr 14, 2012 at 07:14:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I Read It and I as a Layman Saw That Very Clear- (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        ly. So if I were involved in any such case I'd ask my attorney about that very early in the process if he didn't start off by mentioning it.

        We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

        by Gooserock on Sat Apr 14, 2012 at 07:35:31 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  no. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      AlyoshaKaramazov, Samulayo, VClib

      It wasn't an order and it wasn't from a police officer.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site