Florida boy killed by Neighborhood Watch (1 Viewer)

[Carolina Hustler]

Hey guys, I was one of the people that dismissed Chaos Commish's theories, because I didn't think he could possibly know anything more about what happened than the rest of us do, but the more I have tried to understand what he is saying, the more it actually makes sense to me.

until the wind changes direction....

Winning tim over isn't impressive, but it's a start.

What I'm trying to explain in no way exonerates Zimmerman. It just refutes the accepted story. My guess is Trayvon did go back to see what was up with this little dude stalking him and a fight broke out. For all I know Zimmerman pulled his gun and shot a screaming kid in cold blood. I just don't see how anyone can claim that kid was trying to get home minding his own business. Had George minded his that is probably what Tray would have done, but the sad story is otherwise.

Does it really matter? It's just your theory.

I think it matters not because I have a speculative theory that could be right or wrong, but that the story in the affidavit is, in fact, dead wrong. If he was trying to go home, as the affidavit claims based on Dee Dee's testimony, he would have made it easily. Why he was back down that sidewalk in a fight several minutes later seems to matter. It is part of why he's dead.

The problem is see with your theory is that you keep using the word 'home'. Trayvon did not live here and it wasn't his home. Given that, it is possible he didn't know exactly where he was in relation to where he wanted to go so it's plausible he headed back where he came from to get his bearings. Or it is also possible he was hiding when Zimmerman walked through the cut through and was within a few yards of Trayvon and Trayvon thought he might as well ask this guy why he was following him. Both of those possibilities I see as more probable than doubling back just to confront a strange man who was following him.

He had visited many times and according to one report was loved by some of the younger kids in the complex because he played football with them on that same grass. He was heading straight for his temporary residence. He was there for a ten day suspension from school.Link

Trayvon Martin lived with his dad, who resides in the Miami area, and had visited his dad's girlfriend at the Retreat several times before. The kids in the neighborhood always looked forward to playing football with him. But to George Zimmerman, he was a stranger.

I'm not digging and linking to everything. Before speculating you should do that. I do. He had been there several days already. He had walked to the 7-11 and back a few times, the Wal-mart and back, and even to a cousins in the area many times. That's where his dad figured he was and why he wasn't concerned that night. Tray knew his way around. Like I said before, the idea he was lost is out there, but it's a little silly to me. He ran up the sidewalk to the temporary residence across a stretch of grass he played football on and had just walked down less than an hour before.

Its not out of the realm of possibilities for someone to lose their sense of direction when they're being followed and are frightened. Plus, this was at night and it isn't likely he was playing hoops or football at night (thus, potentially limiting his familiarity of the area in a night-time setting.

Sure, theirs a chance Trayvon was just lost (not a strong likelihood in my opinion) and there's also a chance he was tired of being followed and was going to do something about it.

 

[pantherclub]

Carolina Hustler has made an absolute fool out of himself in this thread.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

If a dispatcher tells someone not to do something, the average person would think they should not do it, whether there is legal authority or not. If that is the best argument the defense can come up with, Zimmerman is in trouble.

I doubt Zimmerman had an internal conversation with himself about the merits, authority and protocol of a 911 dispatcher

Insert "Hero" argument here. I've made the argument several times, so I'll be quick. We are creatures of habit. Zimmerman has called this number 40ish times over the course of 14 months. We know of at least one occasion where he detained a suspicious person (physically, or just followed him is uncertain). That detainment led to an arrest. If he was thought of as a hero and was not told by police at that time that following a suspicious person was wrong, then why would he not follow a suspicious person again?

He seems to follow this neighborhood watch program of Sanford to the "T". He was elected captain. However, no where in on the Sanford Neighborhood Watch site does it say not to follow suspicious people or don't carry a weapon.

Sorry for those who keep reading this.

You keep trotting this out like it means something. The fact that there is no specific prohibition is not going to make much of an impression with a jury.As has been noted in several articles about Neighborhood Watch: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-24/news/os-trayvon-martin-neighborhood-watch-20120321_1_zimmerman-community-ties-neighborhood-watch

Chris Tutko, director of Neighborhood Watch for the National Sheriffs' Association, said Zimmerman broke some cardinal rules.

First, he approached a stranger he suspected of wrongdoing.

"If you see something suspicious, you report it, you step aside and you let law enforcement do their job," Tutko said. "This guy went way beyond the call of duty. At the least, he's overzealous."

Second, Zimmerman carried a handgun. Police departments and sheriff's offices that train volunteers advise them never to carry weapons — though Zimmerman broke no laws by doing so because he has a concealed-weapons permit.

"There's no reason to carry a gun," Tutko said.

He broke no laws in doing so. The jury prosecution may say he was told not to do so. If I was the defense, I would bring up that he broke no laws by carrying or following. In fact he is considered a hero by the neighborhood.

And if I was on the prosecution I would hope the defense lawyer makes those arguments. Jurors try to reach verdicts based on the court's instructions, but common sense comes into play. As noted above, irrelevant he broke no laws, as the sheriff said "There's no reason to carry a gun."

Sheriff said there is no reason to carry a gun.. Now everyone who carries a gun is guilty.. Case Closed!

 

[Fennis]

Jon Stewart

Zimdecision 2012

After doing due diligence, the state of Florida charges George Zimmerman with second-degree murder in the Trayvon Martin case, thus sparking a media frenzy

My link

 

[Carolina Hustler]

It's a tiny neighborhood, and Trayvon had been there more than long enough to know his way around. Saying "he might have been lost" is one of the biggest stretches in this thread... bigger even than "Trayvon attacked Zimmerman and Zimmerman was in fear of his life".

It's not impossible, but it's certainly not likely either. Far more likely Trayvon decided to backtrack and check out Zimmerman once he realized he wasn't so big/scary.

Its a stretch to say he could have been under duress and lost track of his location but not that he backtracked to case out someone he was frightened of a minute prior? Plus, assuming the gf isn't lying through her teeth, why wouldn't he have told his gf that he was going to go back and check out the "stalker"?

We don't know he was frightened

 

[jomar]

I like your timeline and agree T could have made it home in the timeframe he had, but can't buy the backtracking theory.

Here's the 70 yard pic someone requested. Can you explain how he ran down this sidewalk in the direction of his temporary residence yet died by the first tree to the right without backtracking? No one argues that Tray was not between those units at 7:12 PM and headed towards his house. Explain the location of the crime scene without backtracking. I'm open minded to suggestions, but so far none make much sense.

I don't believe that to be the sidewalk he ran down. He ran on the sidewalk that intersected that one, the sidewalk that went to streets on either end of it. Granted, he still could've made it home but Z never saw him running down that particular sidewalk, at least from what I've been able to gather. I don't think we know exactly where T started running but I'm assuming it was the cut through that led to the sidewalk you linked. It could've been sooner.

Great, so he had to double back to be at the crime scene. Either way, up the sidewalk, his dad, Sharpton, the police and George said he went up, or up the street you believe he went up, he had to double back to die where he did.

I think you misunderstood what I said. From the map that was linked earlier with the red and blue circles, the sidewalks formed a T. The side walk you showed is the I portion of the T, and it is the sidewalk Trayvon died on or near. The sidewalk that I believe Trayvon ran down was the top line of the T. It is very probable that he took a right down that sidewalk to stay off of the streets, where the car could be. So he ran down the top of the T, took a right down the I portion, and thought the car was no longer a threat so he's still on the phone, meandering around when George shows up next to him a few minutes later.We have no idea how they ended up where they did, but you seem to be stuck on this backtracking scenario. So tell me, does it make any sense to double back to a stranger following you while you're still on the phone with your GF? You find that believable over the other scenarios? Because to me, it's ridiculous. Yes, there was some reason Trayvon was still 70 yards from home, but it makes no sense that he made it 20 yards from his house then went back to confront the strange man following him, all the while on the phone. Not to mention that Trayvon probably wouldn't even have known the stranger wasn't in his car anymore and wouldn't have expected to find him where he did.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

From the City Manager explaining why Zimmerman was not arrested on that night.

Why did Mr. Zimmerman have a firearm in his possession while acting in therole of a neighborhood watch member?Mr. Zimmerman holds a concealed weapon permit issued from the State of Florida.He is authorized to carry the weapon in a concealed manner wherever FloridaStatute dictates. Neighborhood Watch programs are designed for members of aneighborhood to be “eyes and ears” for police and to watch out for their neighbors.They are not members of the Police Department nor are they vigilantes. Trainingprovided by law enforcement agencies to Neighborhood Watch organizationsstresses non-contact surveillance of suspicious situations and notifying police ofthose situations so that law enforcement can respond and take control of thesituation.Mr. Zimmerman was not acting outside the legal boundaries of Florida Statute bycarrying his weapon when this incident occurred. He was in fact on a personalerrand in his vehicle when he observed Mr. Martin in the community and called theSanford Police Department.If Zimmerman was told not to continue to follow Trayvon, can that beconsidered in this investigation?Yes it will; however, the telecommunications call taker asked Zimmerman “are youfollowing him”. Zimmerman replied, “yes”. The call taker stated “you don’t need to dothat”. The call taker’s suggestion is not a lawful order that Mr. Zimmerman would berequired to follow. Zimmerman’s statement was that he had lost sight of Trayvon andwas returning to his truck to meet the police officer when he says he was attacked byTrayvon.

 

[jomar]

Carolina Hustler has made an absolute fool out of himself in this thread.

Almost makes me wish I didn't have him on ignore

 

[timschochet]

She didn't tell him not to follow. She told him they didn't need him to follow. Basically leaving the liability on Zimmerman if he followed. Because if he does follow based on any interpretation of the dispatchers instruction, the police department is partially liable for what may happen..

Stop already!This doesn't matter. It's a terrible argument.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Being that he was on the phone until the incident took place, I would think he took his time going home or meandered a bit just to stay on the phone with his GF before getting back to his dad's GF's place with his younger brother. The kid was kicking game and needed privacy.

If that was the case, it doesn't sound like he was very scared.

 

[Chaos Commish]

Being that he was on the phone until the incident took place, I would think he took his time going home or meandered a bit just to stay on the phone with his GF before getting back to his dad's GF's place with his younger brother. The kid was kicking game and needed privacy.

Sounds good but doesn't fit with the phone call. He ran... up that sidewalk... and died at the beginning of it.

Chaos, still wondering about the idea that he died at the beginning of the sidewalk, and not more towards the center?I did some searching on Google Maps, and the start of the sidewalk, from the approximate location of his temporary residence is a lot more than 70 yards.

Not sure how accurate the "70 yards" claim is.

ETA: Link

I can make no claims to the accuracy of that map.

Just as a follow up, plug these cordinates into Google Earth:

28°47'31.29"N 81°19'46.06"W

That is the building of Trayvon's temporary residence. Then go out to the sidewalk, and use the ruler in Google Earth to measure 70 yards. From that spot what can you see? Corners of buildings?

Does that mean anything? Probably not. I don't know that we know if the 70 yards was acurate. And I don't think it disputes the doubling-back theory.

Here's a decent satellite image with 1/10th of a mile scale, half of which would be 88 yards. Half of that connects the dots. The 70 yards claim is widely accepted but it was just an estimate from Trayvon's dad in an early interview where he retraced Tray's steps. 88 maybe 100 yards, none of it matters with the time he had. Everyone runs with the 70 yards, even Wikipedia, which has a great site growing daily, but yeah, 70 is a little short. Still he was shot 5 minutes after heading up that sidewalk, or the next street if Jomar is right. How he ended up where he did doesn't change over 50 yards if that was the error.

If you click through all the images in my fist link, you'll get to the 'approximate' location of the body. That spot is closer to Trayvon's temporary residence by a good 10 to 15 yards,than the spot near the corner of the bldg where the body was seen in pictures.
. The mysterious John making his infamous statement and at the 54 second mark the body in the grass near the corner of the building. It's possible that's not the body, but it corresponds with where his dad is standing, near the corner of the building. Here's Trayvon's dad saying "not even a football field, 70 yards at best."

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Being that he was on the phone until the incident took place, I would think he took his time going home or meandered a bit just to stay on the phone with his GF before getting back to his dad's GF's place with his younger brother. The kid was kicking game and needed privacy.

Sounds good but doesn't fit with the phone call. He ran... up that sidewalk... and died at the beginning of it.

Chaos, still wondering about the idea that he died at the beginning of the sidewalk, and not more towards the center?I did some searching on Google Maps, and the start of the sidewalk, from the approximate location of his temporary residence is a lot more than 70 yards.

Not sure how accurate the "70 yards" claim is.

ETA: Link

I can make no claims to the accuracy of that map.

Even if it was 140 yards, he still didn't travel very far in the 2 mins he had..Maybe he stopped, maybe he back tracked, but he wasn't intent on getting home unless he was just lost, which I doubt.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Being that he was on the phone until the incident took place, I would think he took his time going home or meandered a bit just to stay on the phone with his GF before getting back to his dad's GF's place with his younger brother. The kid was kicking game and needed privacy.

Sounds good but doesn't fit with the phone call. He ran... up that sidewalk... and died at the beginning of it.

A lot of people pace back and forth when they are on the phone and are killing time.

So now hes not scared, but killing time?

 

[Carolina Hustler]

I like your timeline and agree T could have made it home in the timeframe he had, but can't buy the backtracking theory.

Here's the 70 yard pic someone requested. Can you explain how he ran down this sidewalk in the direction of his temporary residence yet died by the first tree to the right without backtracking? No one argues that Tray was not between those units at 7:12 PM and headed towards his house. Explain the location of the crime scene without backtracking. I'm open minded to suggestions, but so far none make much sense.

I don't believe that to be the sidewalk he ran down. He ran on the sidewalk that intersected that one, the sidewalk that went to streets on either end of it. Granted, he still could've made it home but Z never saw him running down that particular sidewalk, at least from what I've been able to gather. I don't think we know exactly where T started running but I'm assuming it was the cut through that led to the sidewalk you linked. It could've been sooner.

Point is, he was very close to home, and had plenty of time to make it home, but didn't. He either stopped and waited, hid, doubled back, or was lost..

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Being that he was on the phone until the incident took place, I would think he took his time going home or meandered a bit just to stay on the phone with his GF before getting back to his dad's GF's place with his younger brother. The kid was kicking game and needed privacy.

Very possible...but it kind of works against the theory that he was terrified. I don't buy that he was lost, but I don't blame anyone for failing to buy that he purposefully backtracked either.

Terrified might be a little dramatic. Freaked out, perhaps? Somebody was following him in a car so he went between the houses where the car couldn't go. He might've thought that was the end of it and continued with his conversation. He's walking around talking and eventually ends up near Z unexpectedly. He asks him why he was following him.....

I could walk slow and still walk 3 buildings down in less than a minute.

 

[SeveredHorseHeads]

Being that he was on the phone until the incident took place, I would think he took his time going home or meandered a bit just to stay on the phone with his GF before getting back to his dad's GF's place with his younger brother. The kid was kicking game and needed privacy.

Very possible...but it kind of works against the theory that he was terrified. I don't buy that he was lost, but I don't blame anyone for failing to buy that he purposefully backtracked either.

Terrified might be a little dramatic. Freaked out, perhaps? Somebody was following him in a car so he went between the houses where the car couldn't go. He might've thought that was the end of it and continued with his conversation. He's walking around talking and eventually ends up near Z unexpectedly. He asks him why he was following him.....

I could walk slow and still walk 3 buildings down in less than a minute.

Impressive.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Carolina Hustler has made an absolute fool out of himself in this thread.

City manager pretty much substantiated the recent discussion on the dispatchers instructions.. You care to make a point? Or just full of claims you won't try to back up?

 

[Carolina Hustler]

I like your timeline and agree T could have made it home in the timeframe he had, but can't buy the backtracking theory.

Here's the 70 yard pic someone requested. Can you explain how he ran down this sidewalk in the direction of his temporary residence yet died by the first tree to the right without backtracking? No one argues that Tray was not between those units at 7:12 PM and headed towards his house. Explain the location of the crime scene without backtracking. I'm open minded to suggestions, but so far none make much sense.

I don't believe that to be the sidewalk he ran down. He ran on the sidewalk that intersected that one, the sidewalk that went to streets on either end of it. Granted, he still could've made it home but Z never saw him running down that particular sidewalk, at least from what I've been able to gather. I don't think we know exactly where T started running but I'm assuming it was the cut through that led to the sidewalk you linked. It could've been sooner.

Great, so he had to double back to be at the crime scene. Either way, up the sidewalk, his dad, Sharpton, the police and George said he went up, or up the street you believe he went up, he had to double back to die where he did.

I think you misunderstood what I said. From the map that was linked earlier with the red and blue circles, the sidewalks formed a T. The side walk you showed is the I portion of the T, and it is the sidewalk Trayvon died on or near. The sidewalk that I believe Trayvon ran down was the top line of the T. It is very probable that he took a right down that sidewalk to stay off of the streets, where the car could be. So he ran down the top of the T, took a right down the I portion, and thought the car was no longer a threat so he's still on the phone, meandering around when George shows up next to him a few minutes later.We have no idea how they ended up where they did, but you seem to be stuck on this backtracking scenario. So tell me, does it make any sense to double back to a stranger following you while you're still on the phone with your GF? You find that believable over the other scenarios? Because to me, it's ridiculous. Yes, there was some reason Trayvon was still 70 yards from home, but it makes no sense that he made it 20 yards from his house then went back to confront the strange man following him, all the while on the phone. Not to mention that Trayvon probably wouldn't even have known the stranger wasn't in his car anymore and wouldn't have expected to find him where he did.

There is a lot with this case that doesn't make sense. We know Zimmermans initial motivation, but it doesn't make sense that Zimmerman would attack or shoot Trayvon without being provoked either.. Yet that could have happened.. Tough to say exactly what happened, but I think it's more likely that Trayvon wasn't afraid, and that's why he stuck around, or backtracked.. Or hid so he could get the jump on Zimmerman. What motivation did Zimmerman have to attack Tray?

 

[timschochet]

OK, I want to reintroduce a topic here which continues to baffle me: will Zimmerman take the stand in his own defense?

Christo, our resident attorney, asserts that he will. Christo says that he has to in order to assert self-defense. However, I have now watched several legal "experts" on TV, all of them attorneys, state that it is extremely unlikely that the defense attorney will ever allow Zimmerman anywhere near the stand.

I believe now that it MAY be this issue, and not new evidence, which makes Angela Corey believe that she can secure a conviction. Consider: if Zimmerman doesn't testify, then his claim of self-defense becomes weaker, and the prosecution may win simply because no real defense is offered. But if Zimmerman DOES testify, the prosecution is confident they can catch him lying on the stand. And if they can do that, Zimmerman loses his credibility and will be found guilty despite the fact that the prosecution hasn't proven its case.

This seems to be a neat little trap and I'm not sure how the defense gets out of it.

 

[jomar]

Being that he was on the phone until the incident took place, I would think he took his time going home or meandered a bit just to stay on the phone with his GF before getting back to his dad's GF's place with his younger brother. The kid was kicking game and needed privacy.

Very possible...but it kind of works against the theory that he was terrified. I don't buy that he was lost, but I don't blame anyone for failing to buy that he purposefully backtracked either.

Terrified might be a little dramatic. Freaked out, perhaps? Somebody was following him in a car so he went between the houses where the car couldn't go. He might've thought that was the end of it and continued with his conversation. He's walking around talking and eventually ends up near Z unexpectedly. He asks him why he was following him.....

I could walk slow and still walk 3 buildings down in less than a minute.

Impressive.

For hustler: walking around <> walking straight. HTHI might reply to you again if someone quotes your reply to me

 

[Carolina Hustler]

She didn't tell him not to follow. She told him they didn't need him to follow. Basically leaving the liability on Zimmerman if he followed. Because if he does follow based on any interpretation of the dispatchers instruction, the police department is partially liable for what may happen..

Stop already!

This doesn't matter. It's a terrible argument.

From the City Manager explaining why Zimmerman was not arrested on that night.

Why did Mr. Zimmerman have a firearm in his possession while acting in the

role of a neighborhood watch member?

Mr. Zimmerman holds a concealed weapon permit issued from the State of Florida.

He is authorized to carry the weapon in a concealed manner wherever Florida

Statute dictates. Neighborhood Watch programs are designed for members of a

neighborhood to be “eyes and ears” for police and to watch out for their neighbors.

They are not members of the Police Department nor are they vigilantes. Training

provided by law enforcement agencies to Neighborhood Watch organizations

stresses non-contact surveillance of suspicious situations and notifying police of

those situations so that law enforcement can respond and take control of the

situation.

Mr. Zimmerman was not acting outside the legal boundaries of Florida Statute by

carrying his weapon when this incident occurred. He was in fact on a personal

errand in his vehicle when he observed Mr. Martin in the community and called the

Sanford Police Department.

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.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

but I think it's more likely that Trayvon wasn't afraid,

Yeah, he inst even human.

 

[Christo]

Jon Stewart

Zimdecision 2012

After doing due diligence, the state of Florida charges George Zimmerman with second-degree murder in the Trayvon Martin case, thus sparking a media frenzy

My link

 

[Carolina Hustler]

Being that he was on the phone until the incident took place, I would think he took his time going home or meandered a bit just to stay on the phone with his GF before getting back to his dad's GF's place with his younger brother. The kid was kicking game and needed privacy.

Very possible...but it kind of works against the theory that he was terrified. I don't buy that he was lost, but I don't blame anyone for failing to buy that he purposefully backtracked either.

Terrified might be a little dramatic. Freaked out, perhaps? Somebody was following him in a car so he went between the houses where the car couldn't go. He might've thought that was the end of it and continued with his conversation. He's walking around talking and eventually ends up near Z unexpectedly. He asks him why he was following him.....

I could walk slow and still walk 3 buildings down in less than a minute.

Impressive.

Yea, You should see my trot!

 

[squistion]

If a dispatcher tells someone not to do something, the average person would think they should not do it, whether there is legal authority or not. If that is the best argument the defense can come up with, Zimmerman is in trouble.

I doubt Zimmerman had an internal conversation with himself about the merits, authority and protocol of a 911 dispatcher

Insert "Hero" argument here. I've made the argument several times, so I'll be quick. We are creatures of habit. Zimmerman has called this number 40ish times over the course of 14 months. We know of at least one occasion where he detained a suspicious person (physically, or just followed him is uncertain). That detainment led to an arrest. If he was thought of as a hero and was not told by police at that time that following a suspicious person was wrong, then why would he not follow a suspicious person again?

He seems to follow this neighborhood watch program of Sanford to the "T". He was elected captain. However, no where in on the Sanford Neighborhood Watch site does it say not to follow suspicious people or don't carry a weapon.

Sorry for those who keep reading this.

You keep trotting this out like it means something. The fact that there is no specific prohibition is not going to make much of an impression with a jury.As has been noted in several articles about Neighborhood Watch: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-24/news/os-trayvon-martin-neighborhood-watch-20120321_1_zimmerman-community-ties-neighborhood-watch

Chris Tutko, director of Neighborhood Watch for the National Sheriffs' Association, said Zimmerman broke some cardinal rules.

First, he approached a stranger he suspected of wrongdoing.

"If you see something suspicious, you report it, you step aside and you let law enforcement do their job," Tutko said. "This guy went way beyond the call of duty. At the least, he's overzealous."

Second, Zimmerman carried a handgun. Police departments and sheriff's offices that train volunteers advise them never to carry weapons — though Zimmerman broke no laws by doing so because he has a concealed-weapons permit.

"There's no reason to carry a gun," Tutko said.

He broke no laws in doing so. The jury prosecution may say he was told not to do so. If I was the defense, I would bring up that he broke no laws by carrying or following. In fact he is considered a hero by the neighborhood.

And if I was on the prosecution I would hope the defense lawyer makes those arguments. Jurors try to reach verdicts based on the court's instructions, but common sense comes into play. As noted above, irrelevant he broke no laws, as the sheriff said "There's no reason to carry a gun."

Sheriff said there is no reason to carry a gun.. Now everyone who carries a gun is guilty.. Case Closed!

Straw man argument that neither I nor anyone else was making

 

[timschochet]

She didn't tell him not to follow. She told him they didn't need him to follow. Basically leaving the liability on Zimmerman if he followed. Because if he does follow based on any interpretation of the dispatchers instruction, the police department is partially liable for what may happen..

Stop already!

This doesn't matter. It's a terrible argument.

From the City Manager explaining why Zimmerman was not arrested on that night.

Why did Mr. Zimmerman have a firearm in his possession while acting in the

role of a neighborhood watch member?

Mr. Zimmerman holds a concealed weapon permit issued from the State of Florida.

He is authorized to carry the weapon in a concealed manner wherever Florida

Statute dictates. Neighborhood Watch programs are designed for members of a

neighborhood to be "eyes and ears" for police and to watch out for their neighbors.

They are not members of the Police Department nor are they vigilantes. Training

provided by law enforcement agencies to Neighborhood Watch organizations

stresses non-contact surveillance of suspicious situations and notifying police of

those situations so that law enforcement can respond and take control of the

situation.

Mr. Zimmerman was not acting outside the legal boundaries of Florida Statute by

carrying his weapon when this incident occurred. He was in fact on a personal

errand in his vehicle when he observed Mr. Martin in the community and called the

Sanford Police Department.

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.

I read that. I don't care. I'm sure they say that to cover themselves legally. But IT WONT MATTER IN COURT!!!!Believe me when I say this. The jury won't give a crap that "you don't need to do this" is not the same as "don't do this". I seriously doubt the defense attorney is going to make this argument, but if he does he will be laughed out of court.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

but I think it's more likely that Trayvon wasn't afraid,

Yeah, he inst even human.

Why was he in the area Zimmerman first saw him in? Did Zimmerman drag him back up there? If you were afraid, wouldn't you run away?

 

[Guest]

Being that he was on the phone until the incident took place, I would think he took his time going home or meandered a bit just to stay on the phone with his GF before getting back to his dad's GF's place with his younger brother. The kid was kicking game and needed privacy.

Sounds good but doesn't fit with the phone call. He ran... up that sidewalk... and died at the beginning of it.

Chaos, still wondering about the idea that he died at the beginning of the sidewalk, and not more towards the center?I did some searching on Google Maps, and the start of the sidewalk, from the approximate location of his temporary residence is a lot more than 70 yards.

Not sure how accurate the "70 yards" claim is.

ETA: Link

I can make no claims to the accuracy of that map.

Just as a follow up, plug these cordinates into Google Earth:

28°47'31.29"N 81°19'46.06"W

That is the building of Trayvon's temporary residence. Then go out to the sidewalk, and use the ruler in Google Earth to measure 70 yards. From that spot what can you see? Corners of buildings?

Does that mean anything? Probably not. I don't know that we know if the 70 yards was acurate. And I don't think it disputes the doubling-back theory.

Here's a decent satellite image with 1/10th of a mile scale, half of which would be 88 yards. Half of that connects the dots. The 70 yards claim is widely accepted but it was just an estimate from Trayvon's dad in an early interview where he retraced Tray's steps. 88 maybe 100 yards, none of it matters with the time he had. Everyone runs with the 70 yards, even Wikipedia, which has a great site growing daily, but yeah, 70 is a little short. Still he was shot 5 minutes after heading up that sidewalk, or the next street if Jomar is right. How he ended up where he did doesn't change over 50 yards if that was the error.

I don't disagree, but am still wondering where you are getting that Trayvon died at the end of the sidewalk.

 

[timschochet]

Hey Christo, I'm thinking I can use the legal experts on TV against your knowledge and judgment to make myself some money:

I will wager you $50 that if this goes to trial, Zimmerman does not take the stand and testify.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

If a dispatcher tells someone not to do something, the average person would think they should not do it, whether there is legal authority or not. If that is the best argument the defense can come up with, Zimmerman is in trouble.

I doubt Zimmerman had an internal conversation with himself about the merits, authority and protocol of a 911 dispatcher

Insert "Hero" argument here. I've made the argument several times, so I'll be quick. We are creatures of habit. Zimmerman has called this number 40ish times over the course of 14 months. We know of at least one occasion where he detained a suspicious person (physically, or just followed him is uncertain). That detainment led to an arrest. If he was thought of as a hero and was not told by police at that time that following a suspicious person was wrong, then why would he not follow a suspicious person again?

He seems to follow this neighborhood watch program of Sanford to the "T". He was elected captain. However, no where in on the Sanford Neighborhood Watch site does it say not to follow suspicious people or don't carry a weapon.

Sorry for those who keep reading this.

You keep trotting this out like it means something. The fact that there is no specific prohibition is not going to make much of an impression with a jury.As has been noted in several articles about Neighborhood Watch: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-24/news/os-trayvon-martin-neighborhood-watch-20120321_1_zimmerman-community-ties-neighborhood-watch

Chris Tutko, director of Neighborhood Watch for the National Sheriffs' Association, said Zimmerman broke some cardinal rules.

First, he approached a stranger he suspected of wrongdoing.

"If you see something suspicious, you report it, you step aside and you let law enforcement do their job," Tutko said. "This guy went way beyond the call of duty. At the least, he's overzealous."

Second, Zimmerman carried a handgun. Police departments and sheriff's offices that train volunteers advise them never to carry weapons — though Zimmerman broke no laws by doing so because he has a concealed-weapons permit.

"There's no reason to carry a gun," Tutko said.

He broke no laws in doing so. The jury prosecution may say he was told not to do so. If I was the defense, I would bring up that he broke no laws by carrying or following. In fact he is considered a hero by the neighborhood.

And if I was on the prosecution I would hope the defense lawyer makes those arguments. Jurors try to reach verdicts based on the court's instructions, but common sense comes into play. As noted above, irrelevant he broke no laws, as the sheriff said "There's no reason to carry a gun."

Sheriff said there is no reason to carry a gun.. Now everyone who carries a gun is guilty.. Case Closed!

Straw man argument that neither I nor anyone else was making

Sheriffs statement that no one needs to carry a gun, doesn't make Zimmerman guilty.. Unless everyone carrying a gun is guilty, simply for carrying a gun.Having the gun is not the crime, the sheriffs statement has no barring on the case.. It's already been explained that he was carrying legally..

 

[squistion]

If a dispatcher tells someone not to do something, the average person would think they should not do it, whether there is legal authority or not. If that is the best argument the defense can come up with, Zimmerman is in trouble.

I doubt Zimmerman had an internal conversation with himself about the merits, authority and protocol of a 911 dispatcher

Insert "Hero" argument here. I've made the argument several times, so I'll be quick. We are creatures of habit. Zimmerman has called this number 40ish times over the course of 14 months. We know of at least one occasion where he detained a suspicious person (physically, or just followed him is uncertain). That detainment led to an arrest. If he was thought of as a hero and was not told by police at that time that following a suspicious person was wrong, then why would he not follow a suspicious person again?

He seems to follow this neighborhood watch program of Sanford to the "T". He was elected captain. However, no where in on the Sanford Neighborhood Watch site does it say not to follow suspicious people or don't carry a weapon.

Sorry for those who keep reading this.

You keep trotting this out like it means something. The fact that there is no specific prohibition is not going to make much of an impression with a jury.As has been noted in several articles about Neighborhood Watch: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-24/news/os-trayvon-martin-neighborhood-watch-20120321_1_zimmerman-community-ties-neighborhood-watch

Chris Tutko, director of Neighborhood Watch for the National Sheriffs' Association, said Zimmerman broke some cardinal rules.

First, he approached a stranger he suspected of wrongdoing.

"If you see something suspicious, you report it, you step aside and you let law enforcement do their job," Tutko said. "This guy went way beyond the call of duty. At the least, he's overzealous."

Second, Zimmerman carried a handgun. Police departments and sheriff's offices that train volunteers advise them never to carry weapons — though Zimmerman broke no laws by doing so because he has a concealed-weapons permit.

"There's no reason to carry a gun," Tutko said.

He broke no laws in doing so. The jury prosecution may say he was told not to do so. If I was the defense, I would bring up that he broke no laws by carrying or following. In fact he is considered a hero by the neighborhood.

And if I was on the prosecution I would hope the defense lawyer makes those arguments. Jurors try to reach verdicts based on the court's instructions, but common sense comes into play. As noted above, irrelevant he broke no laws, as the sheriff said "There's no reason to carry a gun."

Sheriff said there is no reason to carry a gun.. Now everyone who carries a gun is guilty.. Case Closed!

Straw man argument that neither I nor anyone else was making

Sheriffs statement that no one needs to carry a gun, doesn't make Zimmerman guilty.. Unless everyone carrying a gun is guilty, simply for carrying a gun.Having the gun is not the crime, the sheriffs statement has no barring on the case.. It's already been explained that he was carrying legally..

Again mischaracterizing the argument. Sheriff was talking about in this instance not in all cases. Another straw man knocked down.

 

[TexanFan02]

Jon Stewart

Zimdecision 2012

After doing due diligence, the state of Florida charges George Zimmerman with second-degree murder in the Trayvon Martin case, thus sparking a media frenzy

My link

A "Tot Mom" referemce.

 

[Gigantomachia]

Yes Tim, in the real world pressures (political or otherwise) do sway individuals.

Listen, I've said several times that based on what we know, I would vote to acquit. But I don't think we know everything. So far as I can see, there are only two alternatives regarding this point:1. We pretty much know all of the important evidence, in which case this guy never should have been charged, and was only charged because of political pressure. If this is the case I find it a disgusting result. 2. The prosecutor has more evidence of a compelling nature which we're not aware of, and that evidence will be presented at the prelim or discovery or at trial. It seems as if the political divide has affected this case, with those who are generally polically conservative believing in #1, and those who are generally politically liberal believing in #2. I myself believe in #2 partly because I don't WANT to believe in #1. But if #1 turns out to be the case I will acknowledge it. Guess we'll find out one way or the other.

So get off the fence son and make a prediction.

 

[identikit]

Jon Stewart

Zimdecision 2012

After doing due diligence, the state of Florida charges George Zimmerman with second-degree murder in the Trayvon Martin case, thus sparking a media frenzy

My link

X 2Especially the last part with the media merely reporting the news.

 

[timschochet]

Yes Tim, in the real world pressures (political or otherwise) do sway individuals.

Listen, I've said several times that based on what we know, I would vote to acquit. But I don't think we know everything. So far as I can see, there are only two alternatives regarding this point:1. We pretty much know all of the important evidence, in which case this guy never should have been charged, and was only charged because of political pressure. If this is the case I find it a disgusting result. 2. The prosecutor has more evidence of a compelling nature which we're not aware of, and that evidence will be presented at the prelim or discovery or at trial. It seems as if the political divide has affected this case, with those who are generally polically conservative believing in #1, and those who are generally politically liberal believing in #2. I myself believe in #2 partly because I don't WANT to believe in #1. But if #1 turns out to be the case I will acknowledge it. Guess we'll find out one way or the other.

So get off the fence son and make a prediction.

I've already done so. I think it's #2. If I'm wrong, I'll admit to it. But that's what I think. (Modified somewhat by my comments about Zimmerman taking the stand). How about you?

 

[renesauz]

She didn't tell him not to follow. She told him they didn't need him to follow. Basically leaving the liability on Zimmerman if he followed. Because if he does follow based on any interpretation of the dispatchers instruction, the police department is partially liable for what may happen..

Stop already!

This doesn't matter. It's a terrible argument.

From the City Manager explaining why Zimmerman was not arrested on that night.

Why did Mr. Zimmerman have a firearm in his possession while acting in the

role of a neighborhood watch member?

Mr. Zimmerman holds a concealed weapon permit issued from the State of Florida.

He is authorized to carry the weapon in a concealed manner wherever Florida

Statute dictates. Neighborhood Watch programs are designed for members of a

neighborhood to be "eyes and ears" for police and to watch out for their neighbors.

They are not members of the Police Department nor are they vigilantes. Training

provided by law enforcement agencies to Neighborhood Watch organizations

stresses non-contact surveillance of suspicious situations and notifying police of

those situations so that law enforcement can respond and take control of the

situation.

Mr. Zimmerman was not acting outside the legal boundaries of Florida Statute by

carrying his weapon when this incident occurred. He was in fact on a personal

errand in his vehicle when he observed Mr. Martin in the community and called the

Sanford Police Department.

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.

I read that. I don't care. I'm sure they say that to cover themselves legally. But IT WONT MATTER IN COURT!!!!Believe me when I say this. The jury won't give a crap that "you don't need to do this" is not the same as "don't do this". I seriously doubt the defense attorney is going to make this argument, but if he does he will be laughed out of court.

Wait a second....I thought Zimmerman responded with "OK...I lost him anyway". IN which case the exact wording really doesn't even matter.

 

[dparker713]

Also, you make a big deal re: the subjective standard for SYG. While this is technically true, again, whoever is making the determination as to whether or not "Zimmerman felt the threat of grievous bodily harm" is not going to take him at his word. They will have to demonstrate a set of facts to the trier of facts to show that Zimmerman actually held such belief. No, it is not a 'reasonable person' standard, but it still requires some demonstration of facts leading up to Zimmerman's frame of mind. And if Zimmerman attempts to claim he tends to be 'more likely to feel threatened' than the 'reasonable person', I presume that the prosecutor will jump all over this to at least secure a lesser conviction as someone so frail shouldn't be out patrolling the neighborhood for trouble. So while the SYG standard is subjective, it will still look and feel very much like a reasonable person standard when the presentation of the evidence occurs.

I hope the judge will understand the difference.

The judge will still need more than Zimmerman's statement.

Of course, the standard at the immunity hearing is preponderance of the evidence.

A judge (particularly in Florida) will be less likely to involve emotion than a jury (though, and I suspect this is what is bothering you, I am more than willing to bet that no judge wants to take that burden on his/her shoulders considering the politically charged nature of this case)

I bet there are plenty of judges willing to take on that burden.

but it is still not a true 'subjectivity'

No ####, we can't be sure a jury will apply beyond a reasonable doubt correctly either. But it's dumb to say the standard is not truly beyond a reasonable doubt.

This isnt a contracts case with a satisfaction clause dispute. The subjective self defense standard has limits.

It's a subjective standard. It comes down to whether the judge believes Zimmerman when he testifies that he thought it was necessary to shoot Martin. Yes, I understand we're dealing with people and they bring their experiences with them when making the determination. But it's still a subjective standard. What is so hard about this?

Its not a pure subjective standard. There is a reasonableness requirement. It is more relaxed than an objective reasonable person standard, but this is a compound test. What is so hard about that?

 

[Neofight]

Hey guys, I was one of the people that dismissed Chaos Commish's theories, because I didn't think he could possibly know anything more about what happened than the rest of us do, but the more I have tried to understand what he is saying, the more it actually makes sense to me.

until the wind changes direction....

Winning tim over isn't impressive, but it's a start.

What I'm trying to explain in no way exonerates Zimmerman. It just refutes the accepted story. My guess is Trayvon did go back to see what was up with this little dude stalking him and a fight broke out. For all I know Zimmerman pulled his gun and shot a screaming kid in cold blood. I just don't see how anyone can claim that kid was trying to get home minding his own business. Had George minded his that is probably what Tray would have done, but the sad story is otherwise.

Does it really matter? It's just your theory.

I think it matters not because I have a speculative theory that could be right or wrong, but that the story in the affidavit is, in fact, dead wrong. If he was trying to go home, as the affidavit claims based on Dee Dee's testimony, he would have made it easily. Why he was back down that sidewalk in a fight several minutes later seems to matter. It is part of why he's dead.

The problem is see with your theory is that you keep using the word 'home'. Trayvon did not live here and it wasn't his home. Given that, it is possible he didn't know exactly where he was in relation to where he wanted to go so it's plausible he headed back where he came from to get his bearings. Or it is also possible he was hiding when Zimmerman walked through the cut through and was within a few yards of Trayvon and Trayvon thought he might as well ask this guy why he was following him. Both of those possibilities I see as more probable than doubling back just to confront a strange man who was following him.

He had visited many times and according to one report was loved by some of the younger kids in the complex because he played football with them on that same grass. He was heading straight for his temporary residence. He was there for a ten day suspension from school.Link

Trayvon Martin lived with his dad, who resides in the Miami area, and had visited his dad's girlfriend at the Retreat several times before. The kids in the neighborhood always looked forward to playing football with him. But to George Zimmerman, he was a stranger.

I'm not digging and linking to everything. Before speculating you should do that. I do. He had been there several days already. He had walked to the 7-11 and back a few times, the Wal-mart and back, and even to a cousins in the area many times. That's where his dad figured he was and why he wasn't concerned that night. Tray knew his way around. Like I said before, the idea he was lost is out there, but it's a little silly to me. He ran up the sidewalk to the temporary residence across a stretch of grass he played football on and had just walked down less than an hour before.

Its not out of the realm of possibilities for someone to lose their sense of direction when they're being followed and are frightened. Plus, this was at night and it isn't likely he was playing hoops or football at night (thus, potentially limiting his familiarity of the area in a night-time setting.

Sure, theirs a chance Trayvon was just lost (not a strong likelihood in my opinion) and there's also a chance he was tired of being followed and was going to do something about it.

Interesting, I've heard this phrase used to describe one of these two. By his good friend no less.

 

[dparker713]

No way is there a deal in this case. The only way this case doesnlt go to trial is if the judge throws it out based on stand your ground. Zimmerman has too good of a chance to beat the charge and the prosecution can't offer a deal without a substainial prison time or the public will not be happy. The sides are way too far apart.Zimmerman will be grented bail, imo. It could be interesting if the judge is disqualified due to a conflict of interest. I doubt it, but still possible.

You should really get a refund on your law degree.

You think there will be a plea deal where there is substainal jail time (greater than 3 year)? $100 says no way to that.

You think he's better off facing a jury if the case isn't thrown out before trial? The smart move would be to take a plea. Whether or not he or his attorney is smart, I have no idea.

 

[Carolina Hustler]

No way is there a deal in this case. The only way this case doesnlt go to trial is if the judge throws it out based on stand your ground. Zimmerman has too good of a chance to beat the charge and the prosecution can't offer a deal without a substainial prison time or the public will not be happy. The sides are way too far apart.Zimmerman will be grented bail, imo. It could be interesting if the judge is disqualified due to a conflict of interest. I doubt it, but still possible.

You should really get a refund on your law degree.

You think there will be a plea deal where there is substainal jail time (greater than 3 year)? $100 says no way to that.

You think he's better off facing a jury if the case isn't thrown out before trial? The smart move would be to take a plea. Whether or not he or his attorney is smart, I have no idea.

You assume everyone things like you do. If Zimmerman knows he's innocent based on self defense, then he'd be stupid to take a plea.

 

[jon_mx]

No way is there a deal in this case. The only way this case doesnlt go to trial is if the judge throws it out based on stand your ground. Zimmerman has too good of a chance to beat the charge and the prosecution can't offer a deal without a substainial prison time or the public will not be happy. The sides are way too far apart.Zimmerman will be grented bail, imo. It could be interesting if the judge is disqualified due to a conflict of interest. I doubt it, but still possible.

You should really get a refund on your law degree.

You think there will be a plea deal where there is substainal jail time (greater than 3 year)? $100 says no way to that.

You think he's better off facing a jury if the case isn't thrown out before trial? The smart move would be to take a plea. Whether or not he or his attorney is smart, I have no idea.

What if there is no evidence. You seem to assume there is a good case against him, I have seen nothing yet that proves it wasn't self-defense. No way do you take a plea. If Zimmerman can give a somewhat believable version of events, he is going to walk. Why plea?

 

[Apple Jack]

No way is there a deal in this case. The only way this case doesnlt go to trial is if the judge throws it out based on stand your ground. Zimmerman has too good of a chance to beat the charge and the prosecution can't offer a deal without a substainial prison time or the public will not be happy. The sides are way too far apart.Zimmerman will be grented bail, imo. It could be interesting if the judge is disqualified due to a conflict of interest. I doubt it, but still possible.

You should really get a refund on your law degree.

You think there will be a plea deal where there is substainal jail time (greater than 3 year)? $100 says no way to that.

You think he's better off facing a jury if the case isn't thrown out before trial? The smart move would be to take a plea. Whether or not he or his attorney is smart, I have no idea.

You assume everyone things like you do. If Zimmerman knows he's innocent based on self defense, then he'd be stupid to take a plea.

See: West Memphis 3

 

[jon_mx]

She didn't tell him not to follow. She told him they didn't need him to follow. Basically leaving the liability on Zimmerman if he followed. Because if he does follow based on any interpretation of the dispatchers instruction, the police department is partially liable for what may happen..

Stop already!

This doesn't matter. It's a terrible argument.

From the City Manager explaining why Zimmerman was not arrested on that night.

Why did Mr. Zimmerman have a firearm in his possession while acting in the

role of a neighborhood watch member?

Mr. Zimmerman holds a concealed weapon permit issued from the State of Florida.

He is authorized to carry the weapon in a concealed manner wherever Florida

Statute dictates. Neighborhood Watch programs are designed for members of a

neighborhood to be "eyes and ears" for police and to watch out for their neighbors.

They are not members of the Police Department nor are they vigilantes. Training

provided by law enforcement agencies to Neighborhood Watch organizations

stresses non-contact surveillance of suspicious situations and notifying police of

those situations so that law enforcement can respond and take control of the

situation.

Mr. Zimmerman was not acting outside the legal boundaries of Florida Statute by

carrying his weapon when this incident occurred. He was in fact on a personal

errand in his vehicle when he observed Mr. Martin in the community and called the

Sanford Police Department.

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.

I read that. I don't care. I'm sure they say that to cover themselves legally. But IT WONT MATTER IN COURT!!!!Believe me when I say this. The jury won't give a crap that "you don't need to do this" is not the same as "don't do this". I seriously doubt the defense attorney is going to make this argument, but if he does he will be laughed out of court.

Wait a second....I thought Zimmerman responded with "OK...I lost him anyway". IN which case the exact wording really doesn't even matter.

I have seen nothing which suggests Zimmerman continued the chase. It is just innuendo from the investigator as far as I can tell. This is the same investigator who wass going blabbing around how nothing Zimmerman says is true.

 

[Chaos Commish]

I think you misunderstood what I said. From the map that was linked earlier with the red and blue circles, the sidewalks formed a T. The side walk you showed is the I portion of the T, and it is the sidewalk Trayvon died on or near. The sidewalk that I believe Trayvon ran down was the top line of the T. It is very probable that he took a right down that sidewalk to stay off of the streets, where the car could be. So he ran down the top of the T, took a right down the I portion, and thought the car was no longer a threat so he's still on the phone, meandering around when George shows up next to him a few minutes later.

I agree with the bold, and yep, I/we misunderstood each other. By taking that right and putting any distance down that I portion, he then had to back track. Everything else is wishful thinking so far. You find that ridiculous but you're own words back you into that corner with very few options.

The last sentence is nonsense if you believe George got out of his vehicle and followed him. He would have met up with meandering Tray instantly, but he didn't, he lost him for several minutes. Sorry, swing and another miss.

We have no idea how they ended up where they did, but you seem to be stuck on this backtracking scenario.

True. On the phone call, so many of you are ignoring with silly scenarios, George was clearly out of his vehicle and in the vicinity of the crime scene (blue circle), unless you want to suggest he went the opposite direction of Trayvon. Maybe Trayvon had a cloaking app on his phone and was invisible but standing right there next to George for 3 minutes? Or better yet, he went down the sidewalk everyone agrees he went down, checked out his pursuer and went back to say what up. You cannot appear next to George in the blue circle unless you're hiding, dug a hole (I offered that before), are temporarily invisible, or you ran down the sidewalk but opted to return from whence you ran.

So tell me, does it make any sense to double back to a stranger following you while you're still on the phone with your GF? You find that believable over the other scenarios? Because to me, it's ridiculous. Yes, there was some reason Trayvon was still 70 yards from home, but it makes no sense that he made it 20 yards from his house then went back to confront the strange man following him, all the while on the phone. Not to mention that Trayvon probably wouldn't even have known the stranger wasn't in his car anymore and wouldn't have expected to find him where he did.

It's ridiculous that people cannot accept the obvious back tracking. I don't care if they think it was a ridiculous thing to do. The whole thing is ridiculous. Kid ran down sidewalk towards home from the intersection of the T. Kid is dead at the intersection of the T five minutes later. There's little else that makes sense other than hiding, which still involves heading back to the open space of the scene.

 

[Neofight]

No way is there a deal in this case. The only way this case doesnlt go to trial is if the judge throws it out based on stand your ground. Zimmerman has too good of a chance to beat the charge and the prosecution can't offer a deal without a substainial prison time or the public will not be happy. The sides are way too far apart.Zimmerman will be grented bail, imo. It could be interesting if the judge is disqualified due to a conflict of interest. I doubt it, but still possible.

You should really get a refund on your law degree.

You think there will be a plea deal where there is substainal jail time (greater than 3 year)? $100 says no way to that.

You think he's better off facing a jury if the case isn't thrown out before trial? The smart move would be to take a plea. Whether or not he or his attorney is smart, I have no idea.

You assume everyone things like you do. If Zimmerman knows he's innocent based on self defense, then he'd be stupid to take a plea.

How can he possibly know the verdict will be innocent?

 

[Christo]

Also, you make a big deal re: the subjective standard for SYG. While this is technically true, again, whoever is making the determination as to whether or not "Zimmerman felt the threat of grievous bodily harm" is not going to take him at his word. They will have to demonstrate a set of facts to the trier of facts to show that Zimmerman actually held such belief. No, it is not a 'reasonable person' standard, but it still requires some demonstration of facts leading up to Zimmerman's frame of mind. And if Zimmerman attempts to claim he tends to be 'more likely to feel threatened' than the 'reasonable person', I presume that the prosecutor will jump all over this to at least secure a lesser conviction as someone so frail shouldn't be out patrolling the neighborhood for trouble. So while the SYG standard is subjective, it will still look and feel very much like a reasonable person standard when the presentation of the evidence occurs.

I hope the judge will understand the difference.

The judge will still need more than Zimmerman's statement.

Of course, the standard at the immunity hearing is preponderance of the evidence.

A judge (particularly in Florida) will be less likely to involve emotion than a jury (though, and I suspect this is what is bothering you, I am more than willing to bet that no judge wants to take that burden on his/her shoulders considering the politically charged nature of this case)

I bet there are plenty of judges willing to take on that burden.

but it is still not a true 'subjectivity'

No ####, we can't be sure a jury will apply beyond a reasonable doubt correctly either. But it's dumb to say the standard is not truly beyond a reasonable doubt.

This isnt a contracts case with a satisfaction clause dispute. The subjective self defense standard has limits.

It's a subjective standard. It comes down to whether the judge believes Zimmerman when he testifies that he thought it was necessary to shoot Martin. Yes, I understand we're dealing with people and they bring their experiences with them when making the determination. But it's still a subjective standard. What is so hard about this?

Its not a pure subjective standard. There is a reasonableness requirement. It is more relaxed than an objective reasonable person standard, but this is a compound test. What is so hard about that?

You really don't understand the difference between subjective and objective tests do you? There's no such thing as a compound test for this crime. It's subjective. Objective reasonableness means what most people would do under the circumstances. Subjective reasonableness means what the subject thought was reasonable under the circumstances.

 

[cstu]

OK, I want to reintroduce a topic here which continues to baffle me: will Zimmerman take the stand in his own defense?Christo, our resident attorney, asserts that he will. Christo says that he has to in order to assert self-defense. However, I have now watched several legal "experts" on TV, all of them attorneys, state that it is extremely unlikely that the defense attorney will ever allow Zimmerman anywhere near the stand. I believe now that it MAY be this issue, and not new evidence, which makes Angela Corey believe that she can secure a conviction. Consider: if Zimmerman doesn't testify, then his claim of self-defense becomes weaker, and the prosecution may win simply because no real defense is offered. But if Zimmerman DOES testify, the prosecution is confident they can catch him lying on the stand. And if they can do that, Zimmerman loses his credibility and will be found guilty despite the fact that the prosecution hasn't proven its case.This seems to be a neat little trap and I'm not sure how the defense gets out of it.

He should take the stand if he was indeed defending himself. I think he could come across very sympathetic on the stand. I understand the risk that the jury may not believe him but I don't see him getting caught in a lie.

 

[jon_mx]

No way is there a deal in this case. The only way this case doesnlt go to trial is if the judge throws it out based on stand your ground. Zimmerman has too good of a chance to beat the charge and the prosecution can't offer a deal without a substainial prison time or the public will not be happy. The sides are way too far apart.Zimmerman will be grented bail, imo. It could be interesting if the judge is disqualified due to a conflict of interest. I doubt it, but still possible.

You should really get a refund on your law degree.

You think there will be a plea deal where there is substainal jail time (greater than 3 year)? $100 says no way to that.

You think he's better off facing a jury if the case isn't thrown out before trial? The smart move would be to take a plea. Whether or not he or his attorney is smart, I have no idea.

You assume everyone things like you do. If Zimmerman knows he's innocent based on self defense, then he'd be stupid to take a plea.

How can he possibly know the verdict will be innocent?

Well if you know you are innocent and know there is no evidence against you, you take your chances. What can they possibly offer him, 5 years? I would take a 10% chance of being convicted and looking at a maximum of 20 years versus taking a 100% shot at doing 5 years.

 

[BustedKnuckles]

It's more likely they somehow inadvertently ended up near each other.

I don't believe this, but I have said as much was a possibility when tracing their routes with the call. If Trayvon went straight home, he had more than enough time be making popcorn waiting for the all-star game to start instead of being 70 yards away in a fight. If Zimmerman went straight back to his car at the end of his call, then he's sitting in it waiting for the police, instead of being in a fight. They both seemed a little too interested in each other.

you mentioned 3 minutes between the time zimm exited his truck till the fight. Now if you listen to one eyewitness account of a conversation and then the fight ,the witness said he left his window to do something and when he heard the voices get louder he returned to his window, thats when he saw the fight start. If you take the time it took zimm to walk around the building and the time it took him to catch up to trey and the time that they talked, insnt it possible that it took 3 minutes for that to unfold? Why do we have to have 2 people playing hide and seek, why cant it just be one person caught up to the other and words were exchanged ,then someone touched someone?

 

[cstu]

No way is there a deal in this case. The only way this case doesnlt go to trial is if the judge throws it out based on stand your ground. Zimmerman has too good of a chance to beat the charge and the prosecution can't offer a deal without a substainial prison time or the public will not be happy. The sides are way too far apart.Zimmerman will be grented bail, imo. It could be interesting if the judge is disqualified due to a conflict of interest. I doubt it, but still possible.

You should really get a refund on your law degree.

You think there will be a plea deal where there is substainal jail time (greater than 3 year)? $100 says no way to that.

You think he's better off facing a jury if the case isn't thrown out before trial? The smart move would be to take a plea. Whether or not he or his attorney is smart, I have no idea.

No way would I can a plea for 3 years in jail if I was actually defending myself. IMO, Zimmerman should only take that deal if he's guilty and won't comes across believable if he takes the stand.