Did the Trayvon Martin Case Expose Flaws in Stand Your Ground Laws?

[turbo]

"I mean, he took a man's life and he has no idea what to do about it. He's extremely remorseful about it," Oliver said, relating stories told to him by Zimmerman's mother-in-law, a close friend of Oliver's wife.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/25/joe-oliver-george-zimmerman-trayvon-martin_n_1378390.html

It's hard to believe that a man who made apparently racist comments and profiled a stranger before confronting and shooting him could be that remorseful. Perhaps he is "remorseful" after realizing that if he is arrested, all of his time in custody (all of his time!) will be spent in "protective custody" (solitary confinement and no contact with the population) lest he be brutalized or killed. IMO, he'd be better off in federal prison (with better security) for a hate crime than in a local lock-up (county or state), because he will have a target on his back the whole time. Inmates have family including children, and new inmates that have sexually or physically abused children are not too safe in custody.

 

[BobG]

If indeed Martin's father lives in the community not just the neighborhood, just saying so should have been the end of it.

How'd it get to fisticuffs ?

If Zimmerman's account is true, then perhaps the kid was ticked off that he couldn't walk through his own neighborhood without being harrassed?

Obviously, decking him wouldn't be the best response and it's also possible things started out a little slower. But teenage males have the tendency to at least be quick to smart aleck remarks when confronted with something they see as stupid and they're not all that slow to go from smart aleck comments to physical confrontation. To be honest, it's not all that uncommon for adults to retort with some inappropriate comment when someone they see as a jerk is harrassing them in their own neighborhood.

Hence the danger of running around the neighborhood accosting anyone you don't know personally. You're intruding on their personal space and should at least be aware of the possibility of bad things coming from that.

 

[turbo]

I live in a tiny town where I am well known and it wouldn't be too hard (several minutes, probably) to get a concealed-carry permit. I can't imagine going out walking Duke after dark and confronting any stranger (not that there are many strangers here walking around), but I sure wouldn't pretend that I was the "captain" of a non-certified "neighborhood watch" group. All of my neighbors are armed, and we all have each others' telephone numbers in case there are any altercations. We are at least 20 minutes away from getting a 911 response, and we'll watch each others' back. Still, we are not going to patrol this road packing. No need.

 

[wuliheron]

In this political climate, I highly doubt that. This morning I saw those Black panthers basically putting out a bounty for this zimmerman guy. Speculation should not lead to in a sense, terrorism against a country's own citizens in any decent society.

People get shot all the time without this much fuss. Some 2/3 of whites even agree the man should be arrested and a special prosecutor has been assigned to the case. Some protests might have been inevitable, but this is clearly over the top.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/26/justice/florida-teen-shooting-poll/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

 

[wuliheron]

I live in a tiny town where I am well known and it wouldn't be too hard (several minutes, probably) to get a concealed-carry permit. I can't imagine going out walking Duke after dark and confronting any stranger (not that there are many strangers here walking around), but I sure wouldn't pretend that I was the "captain" of a non-certified "neighborhood watch" group. All of my neighbors are armed, and we all have each others' telephone numbers in case there are any altercations. We are at least 20 minutes away from getting a 911 response, and we'll watch each others' back. Still, we are not going to patrol this road packing. No need.

The state I live in you can legally carry a concealed weapon if you have a special license or just wear the thing openly if you don't. Last year we had a black guy stand on a street corner wearing a gun on his hip and when the police arrested him he successfully sued the city. The same thing has already happened in small towns across the country where the locals found out the hard way they can't afford to elect the biggest ******* around Sheriff. Florida asked for this kind of nonsense by giving even idiots the right to carry firearms everywhere and now they'd better learn to deal with the mess they've created or accept the consequences.

 

[BobG]

Florida asked for this kind of nonsense by giving even idiots the right to carry firearms everywhere and now they'd better learn to deal with the mess they've created or accept the consequences.

One could argue that idiots have a right to carry firearms and that the US Constitution just puts that right in writing. Or one could argue that the US Constitution gives idiots the right to carry firearms. Either way, that right existed before Florida was even a state.

The problem with restricting gun ownership rights for idiots is who gets to decide who the idiots are - Republicans or Democrats.

 

[wuliheron]

One could argue that idiots have a right to carry firearms and that the US Constitution just puts that right in writing. Or one could argue that the US Constitution gives idiots the right to carry firearms. Either way, that right existed before Florida was even a state.

The problem with restricting gun ownership rights for idiots is who gets to decide who the idiots are - Republicans or Democrats.

What a joke. My constitutional rights have been indefinitely suspended by congress, in Arizona the cops can now legally bust down your door without a warrant if they just say they smell pot, last year congress seriously debated allowing the military to suspend habeas corpus altogether and round people up into make-shift camps, and these hypocritical idiots who support these politicians are arguing they should have the right to carry firearms in public because the constitution give them that right.

As for who decides who the idiots are that can't carry guns in public, the same people who decide who the idiots are that can't drive a car in public, practice medicine, or cut hair for that matter. The majority.

 

[jim hardy]

Martin's father lives there.

Well, now it's his father's girlfriend who lives there.

Trayvon was visiting his father's fiancée, who lived there.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-26/news/os-trayvon-martin-zimmerman-account-20120326_1_miami-schools-punch-unarmed-black-teenager

better wait and see what comes out on this one.

Being young and black does not make Martin right or wrong. Neither does his being dead.

"Just the facts, please."

 

[checkitagain]

Because of contradicting information, new information/details,
and the sources of those, I see that the whole case is relatively
more complicated then as it was first presented.

Therefore, I change my assessment of the situation to
"I need more relevant information."

I must have a wait-and-see attitude about this.

 

[SHISHKABOB]

Because of contradicting information, new information/details,
and the sources of those, I see that the whole case is relatively
more complicated then as it was first presented.

Therefore, I change my assessment of the situation to
"I need more relevant information."

I must have a wait-and-see attitude about this.

I concur 100%, mostly because the case does not affect me very much, other than another reason to laugh at states like Florida who introduce such laws.

 

[DragonPetter]

I think the law stands on shakey grounds to begin with. Look at cases of police officers who have abused their authority, and then they think they will give similar immunity to every person regardless of their mental and personality condition? There has to be some middle ground of reason when you make laws like this.

I have a hard time feeling bad for this guy even if he was provoked to use his gun. Put yourself in his shoes, and then try to feel sorry for him . . he was carrying a gun! and found himself in an altercation with a minor while carrying a gun! Would you ever find yourself confronting a teenager, no matter how suspicious he looked, while carrying a gun? That is just ridiculous and irresponsible, regardless of what the law says he can do. This guy was looking for trouble, and that was intentional. Should you go to jail for intentional irresponsible behavior that results in someone's death? I think most people do go to jail for that. What would happen if the same altercation happened, and he wasn't carrying a gun? He might have been assaulted, although he put himself in that position, and then the kid would be in the police station . . that seems like how it should have resulted.

I like the idea of personal freedom and the right to defend yourself, and I hope this guy didn't ruin it for everyone else.

 

[phoenix:\\]

Well, now it's his father's girlfriend who lives there.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-26/news/os-trayvon-martin-zimmerman-account-20120326_1_miami-schools-punch-unarmed-black-teenager

better wait and see what comes out on this one.

Being young and black does not make Martin right or wrong. Neither does his being dead.

"Just the facts, please."

I thought the authorities just let him go? If he was that bloody and beaten, where is the evidence of it? The doctors report of the broken nose? We have none of that so far. It says in the article, he was severely beaten, but the EMTs patched him up on the scene.

then Trayvon climbed on top of George Zimmerman and slammed his head into the sidewalk, leaving him bloody and battered, law-enforcement authorities told the Orlando Sentinel.

That is the account Zimmerman gave police, and much of it has been corroborated by witnesses, authorities say. There have been no reports that a witness saw the initial punch Zimmerman told police about.

When police arrived less than two minutes later, Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose, had a swollen lip and had bloody lacerations to the back of his head.

Paramedics gave him first aid but he said he did not need to go to the hospital. He got medical care the next day.

I did look for the doctor's report online to back the claims asserted in the article but found none, and so far, there are no pictures detailing Zimmerman's injuries.

In this political climate, I highly doubt that.

I highly doubt your assertion.

 

[jim hardy]

If he was that bloody and beaten, where is the evidence of it?

in the police report i linked a page or two ago in post #43.

http://www.sanfordfl.gov/investigati...l%20Report.pdf

 

[OCR]

I did look for the doctor's report online to back the claims asserted in the article but found none, and so far, there are no pictures detailing Zimmerman's injuries.

but found none

Well, that's very odd, very odd indeed...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_health_information

http://www.hipaa.com/2009/09/hipaa-protected-health-information-what-does-phi-include/



OCR

 

[phoenix:\\]

in the police report i linked a page or two ago in post #43.

http://www.sanfordfl.gov/investigati...l%20Report.pdf

Hardly evidence to the questions:

http://www.sanfordfl.gov/investigation/docs/Twin%20Lakes%20Shooting%20Initial%20Report.pdf

Paramedic records? You call that evidence yet stand firmly by your stance of, "just the facts please"? Those aren't facts just what one has stated. People do lie and police reports are only as good as the officer wants them to be, in that, he can forget crucial details or lie. That report must be corroborated by doctors/physicians and eye-witnesses, to which the ones coming forward are anonymous so they won't be of much help to Zimmerman's case.

Well, that's very odd, very odd indeed...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect...th_information

http://www.hipaa.com/2009/09/hipaa-p...s-phi-include/

Not odd as medical records are released to the public when one wants them released on his/her volition. Releasing the medical records would only bolster his side of the story more than it takes away from his defense. Of course, he is the one saying he was severely beaten which is why he shot Martin.

 

[jim hardy]

Well if you're going to impugn sources you don't like

dont try to make me believe Daily Kos.

I'll stick with the police report for two reasons:

1. It's an official report not a reporter's interpretation
2. It's the account from the person closest to the events that we have.

People do lie and police reports are only as good as the officer wants them to be, in that, he can forget crucial details or lie.

Are you serious, sir?

 

[phoenix:\\]

Don't make this into something that I hadn't asked for in the first place. The burden of actual proof is on you now, not me, as you are the one claiming that is evidence, when in fact, it is just a police report. I am referring to actual evidence that corroborates the injuries, i.e. pictures, paramedic report, and doctors report, all to which that police report states the injuries Zimmerman had on scene(Zimmerman claims to have went to the hospital the next day).

It is a fact that a medical report that actually defends Zimmerman's account doesn't exist as of yet. That is a fact. A police report is only an account of what happened and is only good as evidence if it is stood by other parties, i.e. the list above of medical records, paramedic, and eye-witnesses accounts. Those are facts.

Are you serious, sir?

Humans lie, exaggerate, and/or tell half-truths. Police aren't exactly righteous through and through. One of the reasons I state the previous is because of internal affair reports, police brutality, and yes, police flat-out lying and exaggerating reports to which they've been sued of because of the actual evidence contradicting what they have reported.

 

[OCR]

Not odd as medical records are released to the public when one wants them released

I did look for the doctor's report online but found none

Oh wait... did you check Facebook?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook

As of February 2012, Facebook has more than 845 million active users.

OCR... lol

 

[jim hardy]

I am referring to actual evidence that corroborates the injuries, i.e. pictures, paramedic report, and doctors report, all to which that police report states the injuries Zimmerman had on scene(Zimmerman claims to have went to the hospital the next day).

and as I've said all along, we'll just have to wait.

EDIT:

never mind, moved down a couple posts

 

[Dale]

. The burden of actual proof is on you now, not me, as you are the one claiming that is evidence, when in fact, it is just a police report.

Police reports are evidence, and admissible in court as evidence. No piece of evidence is perfect nor 100% reliable, but that doesn't make it not evidence. Your assertion is absurd.

 

[phoenix:\\]

@OCR:

The general rule regarding release of a patient's medical record is that information contained in a patient's medical record may be released to third parties only if the patient has consented to such disclosure. The patient's express authorization is required before the medical records can be released to the following parties: patient's attorney or insurance company; patient's employer, unless a worker's compensation claim is involved; member of the patient's family, except where the family member has been appointed the the patient's attorney under a durable power of attorney for health care; government agencies; and other third parties.

Bold-faced for your education.

Police reports are evidence, and admissible in court as evidence. No piece of evidence is perfect nor 100% reliable, but that doesn't make it not evidence. Your assertion is absurd.

Like I said before, they are usually backed by supporting evidence. A police report alone is not sufficient evidence. My assertion is not absurd as it is the process of the legal system. In cases, such as this one (or other cases that involves death), a police report alone is not sufficient evidence to compel a jury to not to convict or not to convict or a judge to base his/her decision on.

 

[jim hardy]

From your post 41,

I can see how Martin was seen on his back if Zimmerman shot him from the ground and the kid was bent attacking him. But I am still reserving judgement on this case.

If that was your point, the facts aren't all in yet, then we don't disagree.

it's a point of law you can't claim self defense in an altercation you started.
So Zimmerman's defense will of course portray Martin as having thrown the first punch.
Martin's side will portay the opposite.

I'm still waiting with open mind trying to stay above the media noise.

 

[Evo]

I read that Zimmerman was punched in the nose and he fell backward, hitting his head resulting in a minor abrasion. He had no serious injuries. IMO

 

[phoenix:\\]

and as I've said all along, we'll just have to wait.

You say that as if I should have already known that? You are the one, when I asked for evidence of his injuries, posting a police report as critical evidence. And now you say (or insinuate) I am silly for not heeding your words you claim to have been making all along?

If that was your point, the facts aren't all in yet, then we don't disagree.

I think it's a point of law you can't claim self defense in an altercation you started.
So Zimmerman's defense will of course portray Martin as having thrown the first punch.
Martin's side will portay the opposite.

I'm still waiting with open mind trying to stay above the media noise.

We can assume all we want but our assumptions aren't evidence and I don't believe a police report is credible evidence if it's all the evidence one has. I am contesting the case w/in the article you posted.

I read that Zimmerman was punched in the nose and he fell backward, hitting his head resulting in a minor abrasion. He had no serious injuries. IMO

Just b/c he refused further medical treatment doesn't mean the injuries weren't/aren't serious. Hitting your head (like Zimmerman claims), in my opinion, is serious as it can render certain faculties of reasoning impaired or eventually cause death like in the case of the high school football player that was tackled, and still played the game, but in the 3rd quarter collapsed and died. He died from a bleeding in the brain. But, in Zimmerman's case, his position that he had a broken nose, etc..., is not confirmed.

 

[jim hardy]

You say that as if I should have already known that? You are the one, when I asked for evidence of his injuries, posting a police report as critical evidence. And now you say (or insinuate) I am silly for not heeding your words you claim to have been making all along?

i did review the thread from page 1 and i think i have been consistent since first post in #43.

If you have better 'evidence', let's have it.

 

[OCR]

Bold-faced for your education.

Thank you... every little bit helps...

The general rule regarding release of a patient's medical record is that information contained in a patient's medical record may be released to third parties only if the patient has consented to such disclosure. The patient's express authorization is required before the medical records can be released to the following parties: patient's attorney or insurance company; patient's employer, unless a worker's compensation claim is involved; member of the patient's family, except where the family member has been appointed the the patient's attorney under a durable power of attorney for health care; government agencies; and other third parties.

I really do believe the above quote, that is bold-faced for my education, is the point I was trying to make in post #84.



OCR

 

[phoenix:\\]

@OCR: Your point wasn't a point of, "trying to make a sound case", rather point of attempting to make a person look ridiculous with snide remarks. And, you failed to see the point I was actually trying to make without any form of deliberate attempt of making another look foolish.

i did review the thread from page 1 and i think i have been consistent since first post in #43.

If you have better 'evidence', let's have it.

I asked for credible evidence, you provided a police report that didn't have the evidence I had asked for. That is taking a side and not allowing the facts to arrive at a reasonable judgement, you then questioned my reasoning by saying, "are you serious, sir?" in reference to my statement about police lying in their reports. That lead me to a rather logical conclusion that you are sure that the police report is credible and Zimmerman was severely beaten. Your words are inconsistent with what you stated previously is what I am saying now. You didn't allow for facts (which are truths to claims) to surface if there are any.

Also "better evidence"? You aren't remaining impartial as you said you were. That report isn't good enough evidence proving Zimmerman's claim. Bolstered evidence from his medical reports, even the EMT reports, would be sufficient as I have been saying all along. And it isn't a matter of me saying that Zimmerman was in the wrong, rather Zimmerman is failing to prove his innocence.

 

[jim hardy]

i have no emotional need to win.

"We accept certain unlovely things about ourselves and manage to live with them. The atonement for such an acceptance is that we make allowances for others - that we cleanse ourselves of the sin of self-righteousness." eric hoffer

go your own way.

 

[phoenix:\\]

I do not believe you are following me right now. Must follow the opposite road in order to know where I am going, you are currently on the blue road, whereas I am on the rainbow road? May not be the rainbow road, but it sure does look as such.

@Jim: I still haven't quite understood your line of reasoning when you made your claims, and was hoping to get it before you conceded. I am sorry you did that, but I cannot go any other way as I have no where to go?

Back on topic, Zimmerman has gone into hiding because of the shakiness of an emotional society we live in today that would rather shoot before proving. Looks as if peng. was right, $10k is being offered by a racist party known as, The Black Panthers, to find Zimmerman and bring him to justice.

 

[mheslep]

... $10k is being offered by a racist party known as, The Black Panthers, to find Zimmerman and bring him to justice.

The Panther's of course are in the way of justice.

 

[jim hardy]

@Jim: I still haven't quite understood your line of reasoning when you made your claims, and was hoping to get it before you conceded. I am sorry you did that, but I cannot go any other way as I have no where to go?

Correction : I disengaged .

What I've claimed is:

(1) The facts are not all out.
(2) At this stage any reasonable person (IMHO) would accept an official police report as pretty factual statement of what was observed and not suggest the officer lied about it..
And what the officer observed was:

One guy bleeding from nose and head, grass stains on back of his shirt.
Other guy shot dead.

post 43

What other claims were you referring to ?

 

[phoenix:\\]

At this stage any reasonable person (IMHO) would accept an official police report as pretty factual statement of what was observed and not suggest the officer lied about it..

I've always disliked statements that said, "... any reasonable person would agree with...", reasonable under what position, the position you hold? That is a rather arrogant statement to make.

I was merely giving counter-examples of why not to totally trust the police report unless backed by other sources like the EMT report or Martin's medical report as he went to the doctor's office the next day from what has been claimed.

Is it scientific to trust one source of process or multiple sources claiming the same?

 

[Dale]

A police report alone is not sufficient evidence.

Not being "sufficient evidence" is a big difference from not being "evidence". A police report certainly is evidence, but whether it is "sufficient" or not depends on the purpose for which sufficiency is being judged. For example, a police report might be sufficient evidence to obtain a search warrant, but not sufficient evidence to obtain a conviction.

a police report alone is not sufficient evidence to compel a jury to not to convict or not to convict

No amount of evidence is sufficient for that, so that is an absurd standard. Try picking a more reasonable standard for judging sufficiency of evidence.

IMO, there is sufficient evidence to not assume guilt on the part of Zimmerman, but not sufficient to assume innocence. Similarly, there is sufficient evidence to not assume innocence on the part of Martin, but not sufficient to assume guilt. I will wait for more evidence, not discounting individual pieces simply because by themselves they do not meet an impossible standard.

 

[phoenix:\\]

Not being "sufficient evidence" is a big difference from not being "evidence". A police report certainly is evidence, but whether it is "sufficient" or not depends on the purpose for which sufficiency is being judged. For example, a police report might be sufficient evidence to obtain a search warrant, but not sufficient evidence to obtain a conviction.

I say "not sufficient evidence" in the sense that it is more hearsay than evidence to an actual case of events on the scene. It is more of the opinion of the officer than being something that actually details the events of a particular incident. That is what I am referring to when speaking about insufficient evidence.

In addition to the above, a police report alone isn't sufficient evidence to obtain a search warrant based on the the officers merits alone. The officer's report is usually examined and corroborated, then is his/her warrant issued. And, in cases of murder the officer is cross examined, and then his/her police report, if passable, is issued in as evidence.

No amount of evidence is sufficient for that, so that is an absurd standard. Try picking a more reasonable standard for judging sufficiency of evidence.

I'd advise you to stop saying my statements are absurd when neglecting to read the context of 'said' statements. Compelling a jury to vote a certain way happens given the evidence as compelling is a form of influencing (not exactly a form, but is the act of influencing someone to produce an outcome), so that isn't absurd. Jury's have felt that given the evidence of x, y, and z, they sentence the defendant to one or multiple outcomes.

IMO, there is sufficient evidence to not assume guilt on the part of Zimmerman, but not sufficient to assume innocence. Similarly, there is sufficient evidence to not assume innocence on the part of Martin, but not sufficient to assume guilt. I will wait for more evidence, not discounting individual pieces simply because by themselves they do not meet an impossible standard.

There isn't sufficient evidence not to assume guilt, also there hasn't been any "impossible" standards taking place. We have several facts so far:

(1) Zimmerman stereotyped the victim saying he was on drugs, up to something, etc... When an autopsy report states that the victim was not on drugs and his father's fiance lives in the neighborhood and he was visiting her residence.

(2) Zimmerman felt compelled to follow the victim under advisement not to follow the victim.

(3) Zimmerman states, "these a-holes always get away". Whether those statements are meant to be taken as Zimmerman labeling Trayvon a criminal is up to how a lawyer is able to get him to tell us what he meant by those comments. I cannot assume what he meant as people would obviously contest it and it'd digress towards opinion vs. opinion.

The evidence for Zimmerman's defense is:

(1) Mostly hearsay from police officer reports and Zimmerman himself

(2) Unidentified witnesses corroborating the police and Zimmerman's side of the story.

Whether that is sufficient evidence or not is up the grand jury to decide. In my personal opinion, it's not sufficient evidence to say Zimmerman is not guilty.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

In my personal opinion, it's not sufficient evidence to say Zimmerman is not guilty.

That's not how court works. Innocence is the default state, you don't try to prove it.

The conversation is getting a bit ahead of itself. The question at the moment is if this will even get to court.