The FL law that is so "controversial" was instituted because a bunch of hyperzealous state's attorneys in certain areas of the state were prosecuting people under the old law who were very likely acting in self defense. People defending against home invaders, muggers, etc were prosecuted (sometimes successfully) for using deadly force, so the FL legislature responded.
IMO the authorities in this case have been thorough and responsible, while the media has be rash and irresponsible. A conviction under my reading of current law is highly unlikely, defending against the case, however, could cost Zimmerman his life savings (if he has any), and an indictment would destroy his life regardless. The law is the law, if you think its bad you can change it, but FL literally just changed it because the old law also sucked.
On March 26 2012 09:58 cLutZ wrote: The FL law that is so "controversial" was instituted because a bunch of hyperzealous state's attorneys in certain areas of the state were prosecuting people under the old law who were very likely acting in self defense. People defending against home invaders, muggers, etc were prosecuted (sometimes successfully) for using deadly force, so the FL legislature responded.
IMO the authorities in this case have been thorough and responsible, while the media has be rash and irresponsible. A conviction under my reading of current law is highly unlikely, defending against the case, however, could cost Zimmerman his life savings (if he has any), and an indictment would destroy his life regardless. The law is the law, if you think its bad you can change it, but FL literally just changed it because the old law also sucked.
Oooh they used deadly force against someone stealing property and got shafted for it? How unfortunate. Why of course I should shoot someone that's after my wallet. And indeed Trayvon got shot for way less.
On March 26 2012 09:58 cLutZ wrote: The FL law that is so "controversial" was instituted because a bunch of hyperzealous state's attorneys in certain areas of the state were prosecuting people under the old law who were very likely acting in self defense. People defending against home invaders, muggers, etc were prosecuted (sometimes successfully) for using deadly force, so the FL legislature responded.
IMO the authorities in this case have been thorough and responsible, while the media has be rash and irresponsible. A conviction under my reading of current law is highly unlikely, defending against the case, however, could cost Zimmerman his life savings (if he has any), and an indictment would destroy his life regardless. The law is the law, if you think its bad you can change it, but FL literally just changed it because the old law also sucked.
Oooh they used deadly force against someone stealing property and got shafted for it? How unfortunate. Why of course I should shoot someone that's after my wallet. And indeed Trayvon got shot for way less.
I think its more a long the lines of Oooh, its easy proven what happened, vs crap we dont really know what happened yet and cant solve this in less than 24 hours..
On March 26 2012 09:58 cLutZ wrote: The FL law that is so "controversial" was instituted because a bunch of hyperzealous state's attorneys in certain areas of the state were prosecuting people under the old law who were very likely acting in self defense. People defending against home invaders, muggers, etc were prosecuted (sometimes successfully) for using deadly force, so the FL legislature responded.
IMO the authorities in this case have been thorough and responsible, while the media has be rash and irresponsible. A conviction under my reading of current law is highly unlikely, defending against the case, however, could cost Zimmerman his life savings (if he has any), and an indictment would destroy his life regardless. The law is the law, if you think its bad you can change it, but FL literally just changed it because the old law also sucked.
Oooh they used deadly force against someone stealing property and got shafted for it? How unfortunate. Why of course I should shoot someone that's after my wallet. And indeed Trayvon got shot for way less.
I think its more a long the lines of Oooh, its easy proven what happened, vs crap we dont really know what happened yet and cant solve this in less than 24 hours..
As far as Trayvon goes, sure. My real point was that the old law seemed perfectly fine. Except that in the US being lawfully able to kill people seems real high on everyone's list. I have never understood why and I never will because noone has nor will they put forth a convincing argument.
Back to Trayvon. It doesn't really matter if Trayvon or Zimmerman initiated the fight. Zimmerman followed Trayvon and IF Trayvon initiated the fight he did so because he was afraid of Zimmerman, as is apparent from his conversation with his girlfriend prior to the incident. The question to me, then, isn't if Zimmerman is guilty, but exactly how guilty he is.
And @clutz, yes the US media has been as sensationalist as they always seem to be.
On March 26 2012 09:58 cLutZ wrote: The FL law that is so "controversial" was instituted because a bunch of hyperzealous state's attorneys in certain areas of the state were prosecuting people under the old law who were very likely acting in self defense. People defending against home invaders, muggers, etc were prosecuted (sometimes successfully) for using deadly force, so the FL legislature responded.
IMO the authorities in this case have been thorough and responsible, while the media has be rash and irresponsible. A conviction under my reading of current law is highly unlikely, defending against the case, however, could cost Zimmerman his life savings (if he has any), and an indictment would destroy his life regardless. The law is the law, if you think its bad you can change it, but FL literally just changed it because the old law also sucked.
Oooh they used deadly force against someone stealing property and got shafted for it? How unfortunate. Why of course I should shoot someone that's after my wallet. And indeed Trayvon got shot for way less.
I think its more a long the lines of Oooh, its easy proven what happened, vs crap we dont really know what happened yet and cant solve this in less than 24 hours..
As far as Trayvon goes, sure. My real point was that the old law seemed perfectly fine. Except that in the US being lawfully able to kill people seems real high on everyone's list. I have never understood why and I never will because noone has nor will they put forth a convincing argument.
Back to Trayvon. It doesn't really matter if Trayvon or Zimmerman initiated the fight. Zimmerman followed Trayvon and IF Trayvon initiated the fight he did so because he was afraid of Zimmerman, as is apparent from his conversation with his girlfriend prior to the incident. The question to me, then, isn't if Zimmerman is guilty, but exactly how guilty he is.
And @clutz, yes the US media has been as sensationalist as they always seem to be.
other than the lack of duty to retreat in Florida (which is not the case in my home state of California), how is swedish law any different? i googled it and it looks the same to me.
Simply put, this means that you are generally permitted to match the force with which you are attacked, and that you have a variable margin of permitted excessive violence depending on the circumstances.
On March 26 2012 09:58 cLutZ wrote: People defending against home invaders, muggers, etc were prosecuted (sometimes successfully) for using deadly force, so the FL legislature responded.
People defending against home invaders already had a castle doctrine defense. SYG is for public spaces, and basically turns everyone into a walking castle. Even without SYG, you have the right to use deadly force if you are not able to safely retreat.
Actually, it seems that SYG mostly benefits whichever guy has the itchier trigger finger. If you don't shoot first, you can't make the SYG defense claim because you're dead. If you've got a gun, you've got no reason to avoid a confrontation, or deescalate a confrontation, or withdraw from a confrontation. You do have all kinds of motivation to shoot first and claim defense later.
On March 26 2012 09:58 cLutZ wrote: People defending against home invaders, muggers, etc were prosecuted (sometimes successfully) for using deadly force, so the FL legislature responded.
People defending against home invaders already had a castle doctrine defense. SYG is for public spaces, and basically turns everyone into a walking castle. Even without SYG, you have the right to use deadly force if you are not able to safely retreat.
Actually, it seems that SYG mostly benefits whichever guy has the itchier trigger finger. If you don't shoot first, you can't make the SYG defense claim because you're dead. If you've got a gun, you've got no reason to avoid a confrontation, or deescalate a confrontation, or withdraw from a confrontation. You do have all kinds of motivation to shoot first and claim defense later.
Still not allowed to exceed the reasonably expected force of your "attacker".
You can't just shoot a small child in the face because they punched you in the balls, but a 17-year-old male (any male aged 16-40 typically) is a walking deadly weapon, and people who want to ignore that reality are naive.
Let us also not forget, that HAD Zimmerman been a cop, he would have acted no differently, and probably would have been even more of a dick to Travon Martin. Let us further not forget that just because someone has a badge does not mean they are a better person than the average gunowner, in fact the Stanford Prison Experiment, would suggest that they are far worse.
The shooting of Trayvon Martin took place on February 26, 2012, in Sanford, Florida. Trayvon Martin was an African American teenager who was shot and killed by 28-year-old George Zimmerman, a man of mixed ethnicity (Latino and white American). Martin, who was unarmed, had been walking to his father's girlfriend's home from a convenience store when Zimmerman followed him after calling the Sanford Police Department, saying he witnessed what he described as "suspicious" behavior. Soon afterward, he fatally shot Martin.
Zimmerman described the shooting to the police who arrived on the scene as self-defense. The responding officers did not arrest Zimmerman, saying on March 12 that they did not find evidence to contradict his claim of self-defense. Both Martin and Zimmerman made phone calls during the incident, some of which were recorded.
Trayvon Benjamin Martin (February 5, 1995 – February 26, 2012) was the son of Sybrina Fulton and Tracy Martin. He was 17 years old, 6' 3" and weighing 140 pounds at the time of his death. Martin lived with his mother and older brother in Miami Gardens, Florida. He had transferred from Miami Carol City High School during his sophomore year to Michael Krop Senior High, where he was a junior. His English teacher, Michelle Kypriss, reported him as being "an A and B student who majored in cheerfulness." and said that he "was not a violent or dangerous child" and "not known for misbehaving". He hoped to become an aviation mechanic. He was visiting his father and his father's fiance, Brandi Green, at her rented townhome in Sanford, Florida, on the day he was killed, after being suspended from school for 10 days. According to Kypriss, "He was suspended because he was late too many times." His father said the suspension was because he was in an unauthorized area on school property, but he declined to offer more details. Trayvon Martin had no criminal record.
Zimmerman was born in Virginia on October 5, 1983, and is the son of Gladys Zimmerman, who is from Peru, and Robert Zimmerman, Sr., who had served in the U.S. military. He lived in Manassas, Virginia until the early 2000's. He was licensed to carry a firearm, but it is unclear if he had informed the homeowner association that he would be armed as a volunteer. Zimmerman had a previous charge in 2005 of "resisting arrest with violence and battery on an officer" while interfering with the arrest of a friend. He subsequently entered a pretrial diversion program, which is not considered a conviction on his criminal record. Zimmerman had previously been accused of domestic violence by an ex-fiancee (Veronica Zuazo), who had filed for a restraining order against him. Zimmerman counter-filed for a restraining order. A judge eventually ordered them both to stay away from each other for at least one year. Zimmerman married Shellie Nicole Dean, a licensed cosmetologist, in late 2007. In 2008, Zimmerman enrolled in the Seminole County Sheriff's Office citizens' law-enforcement academy, a four-month-long, one evening a week course consisting of a total of 14 hours of classes. Zimmerman expressed ambitions of becoming a member of law enforcement, writing: "I hold law enforcement officers in the highest regard and I hope to one day become one." In 2009, Zimmerman re-enrolled in Seminole State College and was working toward an associate degree with the goal of becoming a police officer. Seminole State College withdrew Zimmerman's enrollment because of this shooting controversy "based solely on our responsibility to provide for the safety of our students on campus as well as for Mr. Zimmerman." According to Zimmerman's father, in the wake of the controversy, George Zimmerman received death threats and moved out of his home. The New Black Panther party has offered a $10,000 reward for the capture of George Zimmerman. Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee claimed that Zimmerman had cooperated with investigators, has not retained an attorney, and has disconnected his phones. Zimmerman did eventually retain an attorney by March 24.
Zimmerman was listed in the HOA newsletter as being the go-to guy for security. Wendy Dorival, who organizes Neighborhood Watch for the Sanford Police Department, told the Sentinel in a recent interview that Zimmerman was chosen as a watch coordinator by his neighbors.
Some residents of his gated townhouse community declared that Zimmerman was known for being strict and that he went door to door asking them to be on the lookout for "young black men who appear to be outsiders", while others regarded him as "normal," "helpful" and "passionate about neighborhood security", having supposedly thwarted a previous burglary attempt. The community reportedly experienced numerous instances of burglary, theft, and one shooting during the previous year, with 402 calls made to the police.
Sanford police chief Bill Lee stated, "Mr. Zimmerman was not acting outside the legal boundaries of Florida Statute by carrying his weapon when this incident occurred."
The Retreat at Twin Lakes is a recently built private community in Sanford, Florida consisting of townhouses and condominiums. Vehicular access is by gates to the north and east, which are unguarded but electronically controlled. Several 7-Eleven stores exist within from 0.7 to 1.3 miles of the property.
During a break in an NBA basketball game on TV, Martin left his father's fiance's home in the gated community of Twin Lakes to walk to a nearby 7-Eleven convenience store to buy some Skittles. While returning to the house, Trayvon was seen by George Zimmerman, who called the Sanford Police Department non-emergency number. According to phone records provided by T-Mobile, Trayvon was speaking on a cell phone at the time of the incident. Martin's girlfriend came forward, identifying herself as the other person in that conversation; she was interviewed by an attorney, who has made a statement, and her parents have requested her anonymity. The girl said that Martin expressed concern about a "strange man" following him, and she advised him to run. She claims to have heard Martin say "What are you following me for?" followed by a man's voice responding "What are you doing here?" She said that she heard the sound of pushing and that Martin's headset suddenly went silent, leading her to believe that he had been knocked down. She attempted to call him back immediately, but was unable to reach him.
Zimmerman phoned the Sanford Police Department police at the non-emergency number at approximately 7:00 p.m., February 26, 2012, to report Martin’s suspicious behavior, which he described as “just walking around looking about” in the rain. The police dispatcher tape recorded him saying, "This guy looks like he is up to no good. He is on drugs or something." He further stated that the person he was observing had his hand in his waistband, was holding something in his other hand, and was walking around slowly in the rain looking at houses.
The dispatcher recommended that he not take any action, and informed him that police were on the way. Zimmerman reported that Martin had taken off. The dispatcher asked him if he was in pursuit and he affirmed that he was. The dispatcher informed him that pursuit was not necessary, saying "We don't need you to do that."
A part of what Zimmerman said on the tape is unclear. Some have heard the disputed words as "fucking coons", an ethnic slur used against black people, while others suggest it was "clueless", "course", or "punks".
When the police arrived, they reported finding Martin face-down and unresponsive, with a gunshot wound in the chest. The police report states that they attempted CPR, paramedics arrived and continued CPR, finally declaring him dead at 7:30 p.m. Statements by the police say Zimmerman had grass on his back and his back was wet. Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose and the back of the head; subsequently his lawyer stated that Zimmerman's nose was broken. However, the police report does not indicate that Zimmerman required medical attention. Zimmerman claimed self-defense, telling police he had stepped out of his truck to check the name of the street he was on, when Martin attacked him from behind as he walked back to his truck. He said he fired the semiautomatic handgun because he feared for his life. Martin was unarmed, and was carrying a bag of Skittles candy and a can of Arizona brand iced tea.
An eyewitness to the physical altercation just prior to the shooting stated that Martin was on top of Zimmerman and beating him up, while the older man yelled for help. Another witness, Mary Cutcher, believes "there was no punching, no hitting going on at the time, no wrestling" just prior to the shooting, though she neither saw the shooting nor the preceding altercation. The police say that she gave an official account to them that agreed with Zimmerman's story. Cutcher and her roommate told CNN journalist Anderson Cooper that their own account of the incident to the police did not agree with Zimmerman's, and that they had demanded that the police retract that incorrect statement. They also said, about the police's attitude at the scene, that "they were siding with him [Zimmerman] from the start" and that they heard the pair in their backyard and a "very young voice" whining, with no sounds of a fight. They heard a gunshot; the crying stopped immediately, and they saw Zimmerman on his knees pinning Martin down on the ground. The police took Trayvon Martin's body and stored it in a morgue, calling him "John Doe". Martin's family accused the police of not asking any of the neighbors if they recognized Martin. According to David Horsey, they also did not check his cell phone to find someone he knew.
Zimmerman has not been charged with any crime, because he claimed the right of self-defense, and investigators said they could find no evidence disproving that claim. According to Martin's father, Tracy Martin, when the family asked why Zimmerman had not been arrested, the police responded that he had a "squeaky-clean record" and they respected his educational background in criminal justice. However, Tracy Martin claims that the revelation of Zimmerman's previous charge demonstrated his "propensity for violence" and that the police had lied to the family. Police ran a background check on Trayvon Martin, confirming that he had no criminal record, which caused Tracy Martin to further question why Zimmerman was not arrested after shooting and killing an unarmed teenager with no criminal history. The case has sparked national outrage and protests.
Recordings of eight calls to the police made on the night of the shooting were released by the Sanford police on March 17, 2012. Early press reports incorrectly indicated that the recordings included the sound of a single shot followed by a voice pleading or begging for help, and then a second shot is heard, after which the voice immediately stopped. Later reports indicate that gun was fired only once. Zimmerman told police at the scene that he was the one crying out for help. The statement was corroborated by an eyewitness who claimed that Martin was on top of Zimmerman, beating him, as Zimmerman called for help. One witness, who had only heard but not seen the events, believed Martin was the one calling for help, and claimed that the police tried to "correct" her into changing their assertion to Zimmerman as the one calling for help. Another witness who also heard but did not see the events, Mary Cutcher, claimed that she believed the cry was from Martin and said that she did not believe that Zimmerman acted in self-defense, contending that she and her roommate heard Martin cry out, followed by a gunshot, whereupon they saw Zimmerman standing over his body. The night of the shooting, Sanford police accepted Zimmerman's account at face value. Police Chief Lee said he did not have enough evidence to arrest Zimmerman. "In this case Mr. Zimmerman has made the statement of self-defense," Lee said. "Until we can establish probable cause to dispute that, we don't have the grounds to arrest him." In response to criticisms of the investigation, Lee responded that "We are taking a beating over this," and defended the investigation. "This is all very unsettling. I’m sure if George Zimmerman had the opportunity to relive Sunday, Feb. 26, he’d probably do things differently. I’m sure Trayvon would, too."
The morning after the incident, Tracy Martin called missing persons and the police to report his son as missing. Officers were dispatched to the home, where they showed the father a crime scene photograph of Martin for identification purposes. Martin's body had been taken to the medical examiner's office as a John Doe.
Multiple investigations are ongoing. On March 20, the FBI and the Justice Department announced that they were opening investigations into the incident. The state governor, Rick Scott, has asked the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to investigate the shooting. A Seminole County grand jury will also investigate the case, and will convene on April 10, 2012 according to State Attorney Norm Wolfinger.
Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi made a statement March 20 on the case: "I am both devastated and deeply troubled that young Trayvon Martin lost his life in a shooting. When someone loses his life at the hands of another, there cannot be any questions surrounding the circumstances of the death. ... I have spoken to FDLE Commissioner [Gerald M.] Bailey, whose agency is now involved, and I know that a complete and thorough review of the facts will be conducted. FDLE has skilled investigators of the highest caliber, and no stone will be left unturned in this investigation. While the Seminole County State Attorney’s Office has the sole authority regarding a charging decision by law, I will remain vigilant in ensuring that questions are answered."
Three out of the five members of the Sanford city commission, including the Mayor, passed a motion of no confidence in regards to the police chief Bill Lee, and his handling of the case. One member of the council, Mark McCarty, then asked for Lee to step down. The City Manager, Norton Bonaparte Jr., stated that he would not make a decision regarding Lee until more information from the investigation was available.
Self-defense laws in the United States, particularly regarding justifiable homicide, vary by state. Florida law, as of 2005, includes a "stand your ground" provision, under which a person can use deadly force if they reasonably believe it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm, in most circumstances. In many states, such laws protect people in their own homes, but Florida's version extends the no-retreat premise to vehicles and public places. Before passage of the law, Miami police chief John F. Timoney called the law unnecessary and dangerous in that "[w]hether it's trick-or-treaters or kids playing in the yard of someone who doesn't want them there or some drunk guy stumbling into the wrong house, you're encouraging people to possibly use deadly physical force where it shouldn't be used." Since its passage, shooting deaths with claims of self-defense have nearly tripled.
Durell Peaden, a member of the Florida Senate until 2010 and one of the authors of Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law, said that based upon his understanding of what happened, Zimmerman should be prosecuted. According to Peaden, the law does not say that a person has a right to confront another. “The guy lost his defense right then," said Peaden. "When [Zimmerman] said ‘I’m following him,’ he lost his defense.” Zimmerman specifically claimed that he was returning to his SUV when attacked, telling police he had stepped out of his truck to check the name of the street he was on, when Martin attacked him from behind as he walked back to his truck.
A person is justified in using deadly force if [he] [she] reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent 1. imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] or another, or 2. the imminent commission of (applicable forcible felony) against [himself] [herself] or another.
However, the use of deadly force is not justifiable if you find: 1. (Defendant) was attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of (applicable forcible felony); or 2. (Defendant) initially provoked the use of force against [himself] [herself], unless: a. The force asserted toward the defendant was so great that [he] [she] reasonably believed that [he] [she] was in imminent danger of death or great 63 bodily harm and had exhausted every reasonable means to escape the danger, other than using deadly force on (assailant). b. In good faith, the defendant withdrew from physical contact with (assailant) and clearly indicated to (assailant) that [he] [she] wanted to withdraw and stop the use of deadly force, but (assailant) continued or resumed the use of force.
In deciding whether defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you must judge [him] [her] by the circumstances by which [he] [she] was surrounded at the time the force was used. The danger facing the defendant need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, the defendant must have actually believed that the danger was real.
If the defendant [was not engaged in an unlawful activity and] was attacked in any place where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand [his] [her] ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if [he] [she] reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] [another] or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
In considering the issue of self-defense, you may take into account the relative physical abilities and capacities of the defendant and (victim).
If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether the defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you should find the defendant not guilty. However, if from the evidence you are convinced that the defendant was not justified in the use of deadly force, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved.
3.6(f) JUSTIFIABLE USE OF DEADLY FORCE Because there are many defenses applicable to self-defense, give only those parts of the instructions that are required by the evidence. Read in all cases. An issue in this case is whether the defendant acted in self-defense. It is a defense to the offense with which (defendant) is charged if the [death of] [injury to] (victim) resulted from the justifiable use of deadly force. Definition. “Deadly force” means force likely to cause death or great bodily harm. Give if applicable. § 782.02, Fla. Stat. The use of deadly force is justifiable only if the defendant reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] while resisting: 1. another’s attempt to murder [him] [her], or 2. any attempt to commit (applicable felony) upon [him] [her], or 3. any attempt to commit (applicable felony) upon or in any dwelling, residence, or vehicle occupied by [him] [her]. Insert and define applicable felony that defendant alleges victim attempted to commit. Give if applicable. §§ 776.012, 776.031, Fla. Stat. A person is justified in using deadly force if [he] [she] reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent 1. imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] or another, or 2. the imminent commission of (applicable forcible felony) against [himself] [herself] or another. Insert and define applicable forcible felony that defendant alleges victim was about to commit. Forcible felonies are listed in § 776.08, Fla. Stat. Aggressor. § 776.041, Fla. Stat. However, the use of deadly force is not justifiable if you find: Give only if the defendant is charged with an independent forcible felony. See Giles v. State, 831 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). 1. (Defendant) was attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of (applicable forcible felony); or Define applicable forcible felony. Define after paragraph 2 if both paragraphs 1 and 2 are given. Forcible felonies are listed in § 776.08, Fla. Stat. 2. (Defendant) initially provoked the use of force against [himself] [herself], unless: a. The force asserted toward the defendant was so great that [he] [she] reasonably believed that [he] [she] was in imminent danger of death or great 63 bodily harm and had exhausted every reasonable means to escape the danger, other than using deadly force on (assailant). b. In good faith, the defendant withdrew from physical contact with (assailant) and clearly indicated to (assailant) that [he] [she] wanted to withdraw and stop the use of deadly force, but (assailant) continued or resumed the use of force. Force in resisting a law enforcement officer § 776.051(1), Fla. Stat. A person is not justified in using force to resist an arrest by a law enforcement officer, or to resist a law enforcement officer who is engaged in the execution of a legal duty, if the law enforcement officer was acting in good faith and he or she is known, or reasonably appears, to be a law enforcement officer. Give if applicable. However, if an officer uses excessive force to make an arrest, then a person is justified in the use of reasonable force to defend [himself] [herself] (or another), but only to the extent [he] [she] reasonably believes such force is necessary. See § 776.012, Fla. Stat.; Ivester v. State, 398 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Jackson v. State, 463 So. 2d 372 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). In some instances, the instructions applicable to §§ 776.012, 776.031, or 776.041, Fla. Stat., may need to be given in connection with this instruction. Read in all cases. In deciding whether defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you must judge [him] [her] by the circumstances by which [he] [she] was surrounded at the time the force was used. The danger facing the defendant need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, the defendant must have actually believed that the danger was real. No duty to retreat. § 776.013(3), Fla. Stat. See Novak v. State 974 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) regarding unlawful activity. There is no duty to retreat where the defendant was not engaged in any unlawful activity other than the crime(s) for which the defendant asserts the justification. If the defendant [was not engaged in an unlawful activity and] was attacked in any place where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand [his] [her] ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if [he] [she] reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] [another] or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. Define applicable forcible felony from list in § 776.08, Fla. Stat. that defendant alleges victim was about to commit. Presumption of Fear (dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle). Give if applicable. § 776.013(2)(a)-(d), Fla. Stat. If the defendant was in a(n)[dwelling] [residence] [occupied vehicle] where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] is presumed to have had a reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] [another] if (victim) had [unlawfully and forcibly entered] [removed or attempted to remove another person against that person’s will from] that [dwelling] [residence] 64 [occupied vehicle] and the defendant had reason to believe that had occurred. The defendant had no duty to retreat under such circumstances. Exceptions to Presumption of Fear. § 776.013(2)(a)-(d), Fla. Stat. Give as applicable. The presumption of reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm does not apply if: a. the person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in [or is a lawful resident of the [dwelling] [residence]] [the vehicle], such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or b. the person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or c. the person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the [dwelling] [residence] [occupied vehicle] to further an unlawful activity; or d. the person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, who enters or attempts to enter a [dwelling] [residence] [vehicle] in the performance of [his] [her] official duties and the officer identified [himself] [herself] in accordance with any applicable law or the person using the force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer. If requested, give definition of “law enforcement officer” from § 943.10(14), Fla. Stat., § 776.013(4), Fla. Stat. A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter another’s [dwelling] [residence] [occupied vehicle] is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence. Definitions. Give if applicable. § 776.013(5), Fla. Stat. As used with regard to self defense: “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent or mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night. “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest. “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property. Prior threats. Give if applicable. If you find that the defendant who because of threats or prior difficulties with (victim) had reasonable grounds to believe that [he] [she] was in danger of death or great bodily harm at the hands of (victim), then the defendant had the right to arm [himself] [herself]. However, the defendant cannot justify the use of deadly force, if after arming [himself] [herself] [he] [she] renewed [his] [her] difficulty with (victim) when [he] [she] could have avoided the difficulty, 65 although as previously explained if the defendant was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] had no duty to retreat. Reputation of victim. Give if applicable. If you find that (victim) had a reputation of being a violent and dangerous person and that [his] [her] reputation was known to the defendant, you may consider this fact in determining whether the actions of the defendant were those of a reasonable person in dealing with an individual of that reputation. Physical abilities. Read in all cases. In considering the issue of self-defense, you may take into account the relative physical abilities and capacities of the defendant and (victim). Read in all cases. If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether the defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you should find the defendant not guilty. However, if from the evidence you are convinced that the defendant was not justified in the use of deadly force, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved. Comment
Resources
Wikipedia Article (from which I gratuitously copied), including many links:
On March 22 2012 08:50 GreenHorizons wrote: Trayvon Martin's death: the story so far
In February, an unarmed black teenager was killed by George Zimmerman, who claims he acted in self defence. Three weeks on, Zimmerman is still free, and questions remain unanswered
There is a link at the bottom of the post if your would like to sign the petition to bring justice for Trayvon Martin
The basic facts
On a rainy night in February, Trayvon Martin was returning to his father's girlfriend's house in Sanford, Florida, after a trip to the local 7-Eleven before the NBA all-star game. He carried a bag of Skittles and a can of Arizona iced tea for his little brother.
As he walked home, the unarmed 17-year-old spoke to his girlfriend in Miami via a hands-free earpiece on his cellphone he often used. He was spotted by George Zimmerman, a self-appointed neighbourhood watch volunteer, who was patrolling the gated community, the Retreat at Twin Lakes, in his vehicle.
Zimmerman called 911 to report what he described as Martin's "suspicious behaviour", telling the operator he looked like he was "up to no good, on drugs or something". Zimmerman was warned by the operator not to follow the teenager. But he did, getting out of his vehicle and taking a 9mm handgun with him.
Martin's girlfriend, who has provided her account to the family's lawyer Benjamin Crump, says Martin told her a stranger was following him. She told him to run home. Then the man reappeared behind him, she said. She then heard Martin say: "What are you following me for?" and someone else saying "What are you doing around here?". She then heard pushing, she said, because Martin's head set fell. At 7.16pm, four minutes after the call began, the phone went dead.
What happens in the last moment of Martin's life went unwitnessed by anyone other than Zimmerman.
According to neighbours, there was an altercation between the two men – Zimmerman, weighing 250lbs and armed, and Martin, weighing 140lbs and unarmed.
Witnesses and 911 calls record one of the men in great distress crying out for help.
One woman anxiously says she can hear someone calling for help while in the background, a wailing voice pleads, "No! No!"
By the time police arrive on the scene, at 7.17pm, Martin lay fatally wounded by a gunshot to the chest.
Zimmerman has admitted to the killing but told police he fired in self-defence.
Three and a half weeks later, Zimmerman is still free.
The police chief has said that, because Zimmerman has made a statement of self-defence, and there is no evidence to dispute that, he has not been arrested.
On Monday, following a national outcry over the case, the US justice department announced that it would investigate the case, along with the FBI. What the tapes reveal
The 911 tapes, made public on Friday by police after Martin's family sued to have them released, include Zimmerman's initial call to emergency services, and provide a chilling account of what was in his mind as he followed Martin and, ultimately, shot and killed him.
Zimmerman, who called 911 from his truck, tells the dispatcher there's been a spate of burglaries and says: "There's a real suspicious guy. This guy looks like he's up to no good, on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around looking about."
(Videos suggested by Omnipresent)- TY
Zimmerman's 911 call:
A witness's call: (you can hear the confrontation and the shot)
Zimmerman then tried to explain where he was.
"Now he's coming towards me. He's got his hand in his waistband. And he's a black male … Something's wrong with him. Yup, he's coming to check me out. He's got something in his hands. I don't know what his deal is … These assholes, they always get away."
Zimmerman then said: "Shit, he's running," and the sound changes, suggesting he has left his vehicle to run after Martin.
Dispatcher: "He's running? Which way is he running?"
Zimmerman: "Down towards the other entrance to the neighbourhood."
Dispatcher: "Which entrance is that that he's heading towards?"
Zimmerman: "The back entrance … fucking [unintelligible]"
"Are you following him?" the dispatcher asked. Zimmerman replied: "Yep."
"OK, we don't need you to do that," the dispatcher warned.
In one of the 911 calls from neighbours, a woman tells operators: "There's someone screaming outside. I think they're yelling help, but I don't know. Just send someone, quick."
Anguished cries can be heard and then a single gunshot. She said: "There's gunshots. Just one". The operator says: "I can't hear any more yelling, can you?" and she responds "No." The law
When asked why Zimmerman had not been arrested, the police said that he had made a statement of self-defence and that they have not established a case to dispute that. A 2005 Florida state law known as the "stand your ground" law permits anyone, anywhere, to use deadly force against another person if they believe their safety or life is in danger.
The law was signed by the then governor Jeb Bush, who called it a "good, common sense anti-crime" bill, but campaign ads against the law posted billboards warning Florida's tourists to avoid fights and "keep their hands in plain sight" if they end up in a disagreement. A further 16 states now have versions of this law.
Paul A Logli, president of the National District Attorneys Association, said of such laws: "They're basically giving citizens more rights to use deadly force than we give police officers, and with less review."
A piece in Time magazine quoting a St Petersburg Times report said that claims of justifiable homicides in Florida more than tripled after the law was passed. They went from just over 30 to more than 100 in 2010.
In that time, the stand-your-ground defence was used in 93 cases involving 65 deaths — and in most cases, it was used successfully.
In January, a former Broward County sheriff's deputy shot and wounded a homeless man inside a Häagen-Dazs ice cream shop in Miami Lakes. He said the man was threatening him and his family. Police said charges were unlikely in that case.
In 2008, a 15-year-old boy was killed during a shootout between two gangs in Tallahassee. Nobody was held accountable for the murder because a judge who cited the law dismissed the charges.
In one yet-to-be decided case, an unarmed man was shot and killed at a park near Tampa in a dispute over skateboarding rules in 2010. The victim's 10-year-old daughter watched her father die. A judge is currently considering whether the shooter merely stood his ground.
One problem with "stand your ground" laws is that they eliminate the concept of a "duty to retreat" from dangerous situations outside the home. Without a duty to retreat, a citizen has no obligation to stand down in the face of a threat. This means that prosecutors can no longer consider certain factors when determining self-defence, including the extent to which a person claiming self-defence may have aggravated the threat.
Prosecutors can have a hard time making a case if there is no one else around to contradict a person who claims self-defence, David Hill, a criminal defence attorney in Orlando told the Associated Press.
"If there is nobody around and you pull a gun, you just say: 'Hey, I reasonably believed I was under imminent attack. Hey, sorry. Too bad. But you can't prosecute me,'" Hill said. Race George Zimmerman says he acted in self-defence George Zimmerman says he acted in self-defence. Photograph: AP
"Stand Your Ground" not so fast... TY for providing this
Reports of the case suggest that Zimmerman was a vigilante with a false sense of authority and a fixation with young black males. Police records show Zimmerman had called 911 a total of 46 times between 1 January this year and the day he killed Martin, according to Mother Jones. Neighbours described him to the Miami Herald as being fixated on "young black men".
At least two websites have suggested that on an enhanced version the 911 tape, Zimmerman can be heard to say "fucking coons" as he chased after Martin, though the quality of the audio is too poor to confirm this and he could equally be saying "fucking phones" or something else.
Zimmerman's family have insisted that he is not a racist.
The case has also provoked claims of racism at the heart of the investigation. The officer in charge of the crime scene has been criticised before, in 2010, when he initially failed to arrest a lieutenant's son who was videotaped attacking a homeless black man.
Police officers are also alleged to have "corrected" a key witness when she said she heard the boy cry for help, according to ABC News. The station talked to the teacher and she confirmed that the officer corrected her and told her it was Zimmerman who cried for help, even though this has not been established as fact. The unanswered questions
• Why has Zimmerman not been arrested more than three weeks after killing an unarmed teenager?
• Why did police not test Zimmerman for drugs or alcohol?
A law enforcement expert told ABC News that Zimmerman was slurring his words and sounded intoxicated on the 911 tapes, something which was also picked up by the family's lawyer. Drug and alcohol testing is standard procedure in most homicide investigations.
• Why did police tell Martin's father that they hadn't pressed charges because Zimmerman was a criminal justice student with a "squeaky clean" record? It wasn't strictly true. In 2005, Zimmerman was arrested for resisting arrest with violence and battery on a law enforcement officer, although those charges were dropped.
• Why did a police officer "correct" a witness who told him she had heard Martin scream for help and say it was Zimmerman she heard?
• What happened to Martin's cellphone? Reports abound that Martin's parents were not informed of his murder until they contacted police to report him missing, despite having his cellphone is feeding further scepticism about the police's conduct. It led New York Times columnist Charles Blow to tweet on Monday urging his followers to make his Tweet trend "Where is Trayvon Martin's cellphone?"
I was surprised that this hadn't come up on the forums so far as I could tell. If there is a more appropriate place for this I am sorry but I just thought it was important.
I also want to be clear, regardless of the race of anyone who was involved this is ridiculous we can't have people chasing down kids shooting them to death, claiming self defense, then going home and being able to clean their gun and do it again uninterrupted.
If you want to sign a petition to bring justice for Trayvon Martin you can go here to do so
Looks like a way more informative post than the horrendously biased OP.
I would suggest including a section on media bias. It bears mentioning the role that media misinformation played in hyping this case up. Without the misinformation and biased reporting many people would not have been so quick to rush to judgment.
Key points would be:
Most media outlets have failed to mention that the police report said Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose and back of his head, and his back was wet and had grass on it suggesting he was on the ground on his back.
Most have failed to mention anything about the eyewitness John who saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman beating him up and also corroborated Zimmerman's story that it was him shouting for help.
Zimmerman was for a long time inaccurately called White with no mention of him being mixed race.
Zimmerman's photograph has been manipulated to make his skin look lighter.
Using outdated photos of Trayvon. Sometimes cropping out dates to conceal that they are outdated.
The media bias has been so bad that Fox recently re-reported John's testimony as though it were breaking news, because so many people hadn't even heard it:
Witness: Martin attacked Zimmerman A witness we haven't heard from before paints a much different picture than we've seen so far of what happened the night 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was shot and killed.
It shows more now about why police believed that night that George Zimmerman shouldn't have gone to jail.
His statements to police were instrumental, because police backed up Zimmerman's claims, saying those screams on the 911 call are those of Zimmerman.
They say "a witness we haven't heard from before" despite this interview being done the day after the shooting. It's pretty huge that this went unpublicized for so long considering the testimony of this witness played such a key role in the case.
The shooting of Trayvon Martin took place on February 26, 2012, in Sanford, Florida. Trayvon Martin was an African American teenager who was shot and killed by 28-year-old George Zimmerman, a man of mixed ethnicity (Latino and white American). Martin, who was unarmed, had been walking to his father's girlfriend's home from a convenience store when Zimmerman followed him after calling the Sanford Police Department, saying he witnessed what he described as "suspicious" behavior. Soon afterward, he fatally shot Martin.
Zimmerman described the shooting to the police who arrived on the scene as self-defense. The responding officers did not arrest Zimmerman, saying on March 12 that they did not find evidence to contradict his claim of self-defense. Both Martin and Zimmerman made phone calls during the incident, some of which were recorded.
Trayvon Benjamin Martin (February 5, 1995 – February 26, 2012) was the son of Sybrina Fulton and Tracy Martin. He was 17 years old, 6' 3" and weighing 140 pounds at the time of his death. Martin lived with his mother and older brother in Miami Gardens, Florida. He had transferred from Miami Carol City High School during his sophomore year to Michael Krop Senior High, where he was a junior. His English teacher, Michelle Kypriss, reported him as being "an A and B student who majored in cheerfulness." and said that he "was not a violent or dangerous child" and "not known for misbehaving". He hoped to become an aviation mechanic. He was visiting his father and his father's fiance, Brandi Green, at her rented townhome in Sanford, Florida, on the day he was killed, after being suspended from school for 10 days. According to Kypriss, "He was suspended because he was late too many times." His father said the suspension was because he was in an unauthorized area on school property, but he declined to offer more details. Trayvon Martin had no criminal record.
Zimmerman was born in Virginia on October 5, 1983, and is the son of Gladys Zimmerman, who is from Peru, and Robert Zimmerman, Sr., who had served in the U.S. military. He lived in Manassas, Virginia until the early 2000's. He was licensed to carry a firearm, but it is unclear if he had informed the homeowner association that he would be armed as a volunteer. Zimmerman had a previous charge in 2005 of "resisting arrest with violence and battery on an officer" while interfering with the arrest of a friend. He subsequently entered a pretrial diversion program, which is not considered a conviction on his criminal record. Zimmerman had previously been accused of domestic violence by an ex-fiancee (Veronica Zuazo), who had filed for a restraining order against him. Zimmerman counter-filed for a restraining order. A judge eventually ordered them both to stay away from each other for at least one year. Zimmerman married Shellie Nicole Dean, a licensed cosmetologist, in late 2007. In 2008, Zimmerman enrolled in the Seminole County Sheriff's Office citizens' law-enforcement academy, a four-month-long, one evening a week course consisting of a total of 14 hours of classes. Zimmerman expressed ambitions of becoming a member of law enforcement, writing: "I hold law enforcement officers in the highest regard and I hope to one day become one." In 2009, Zimmerman re-enrolled in Seminole State College and was working toward an associate degree with the goal of becoming a police officer. Seminole State College withdrew Zimmerman's enrollment because of this shooting controversy "based solely on our responsibility to provide for the safety of our students on campus as well as for Mr. Zimmerman." According to Zimmerman's father, in the wake of the controversy, George Zimmerman received death threats and moved out of his home. The New Black Panther party has offered a $10,000 reward for the capture of George Zimmerman. Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee claimed that Zimmerman had cooperated with investigators, has not retained an attorney, and has disconnected his phones. Zimmerman did eventually retain an attorney by March 24.
Zimmerman was listed in the HOA newsletter as being the go-to guy for security. Wendy Dorival, who organizes Neighborhood Watch for the Sanford Police Department, told the Sentinel in a recent interview that Zimmerman was chosen as a watch coordinator by his neighbors.
Some residents of his gated townhouse community declared that Zimmerman was known for being strict and that he went door to door asking them to be on the lookout for "young black men who appear to be outsiders", while others regarded him as "normal," "helpful" and "passionate about neighborhood security", having supposedly thwarted a previous burglary attempt. The community reportedly experienced numerous instances of burglary, theft, and one shooting during the previous year, with 402 calls made to the police.
Sanford police chief Bill Lee stated, "Mr. Zimmerman was not acting outside the legal boundaries of Florida Statute by carrying his weapon when this incident occurred."
The Retreat at Twin Lakes is a recently built private community in Sanford, Florida consisting of townhouses and condominiums. Vehicular access is by gates to the north and east, which are unguarded but electronically controlled. Several 7-Eleven stores exist within from 0.7 to 1.3 miles of the property.
During a break in an NBA basketball game on TV, Martin left his father's fiance's home in the gated community of Twin Lakes to walk to a nearby 7-Eleven convenience store to buy some Skittles. While returning to the house, Trayvon was seen by George Zimmerman, who called the Sanford Police Department non-emergency number. According to phone records provided by T-Mobile, Trayvon was speaking on a cell phone at the time of the incident. Martin's girlfriend came forward, identifying herself as the other person in that conversation; she was interviewed by an attorney, who has made a statement, and her parents have requested her anonymity. The girl said that Martin expressed concern about a "strange man" following him, and she advised him to run. She claims to have heard Martin say "What are you following me for?" followed by a man's voice responding "What are you doing here?" She said that she heard the sound of pushing and that Martin's headset suddenly went silent, leading her to believe that he had been knocked down. She attempted to call him back immediately, but was unable to reach him.
Zimmerman phoned the Sanford Police Department police at the non-emergency number at approximately 7:00 p.m., February 26, 2012, to report Martin’s suspicious behavior, which he described as “just walking around looking about” in the rain. The police dispatcher tape recorded him saying, "This guy looks like he is up to no good. He is on drugs or something." He further stated that the person he was observing had his hand in his waistband, was holding something in his other hand, and was walking around slowly in the rain looking at houses.
The dispatcher recommended that he not take any action, and informed him that police were on the way. Zimmerman reported that Martin had taken off. The dispatcher asked him if he was in pursuit and he affirmed that he was. The dispatcher informed him that pursuit was not necessary, saying "We don't need you to do that."
A part of what Zimmerman said on the tape is unclear. Some have heard the disputed words as "fucking coons", an ethnic slur used against black people, while others suggest it was "clueless", "course", or "punks".
When the police arrived, they reported finding Martin face-down and unresponsive, with a gunshot wound in the chest. The police report states that they attempted CPR, paramedics arrived and continued CPR, finally declaring him dead at 7:30 p.m. Statements by the police say Zimmerman had grass on his back and his back was wet. Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose and the back of the head; subsequently his lawyer stated that Zimmerman's nose was broken. However, the police report does not indicate that Zimmerman required medical attention. Zimmerman claimed self-defense, telling police he had stepped out of his truck to check the name of the street he was on, when Martin attacked him from behind as he walked back to his truck. He said he fired the semiautomatic handgun because he feared for his life. Martin was unarmed, and was carrying a bag of Skittles candy and a can of Arizona brand iced tea.
An eyewitness to the physical altercation just prior to the shooting stated that Martin was on top of Zimmerman and beating him up, while the older man yelled for help. Another witness, Mary Cutcher, believes "there was no punching, no hitting going on at the time, no wrestling" just prior to the shooting, though she neither saw the shooting nor the preceding altercation. The police say that she gave an official account to them that agreed with Zimmerman's story. Cutcher and her roommate told CNN journalist Anderson Cooper that their own account of the incident to the police did not agree with Zimmerman's, and that they had demanded that the police retract that incorrect statement. They also said, about the police's attitude at the scene, that "they were siding with him [Zimmerman] from the start" and that they heard the pair in their backyard and a "very young voice" whining, with no sounds of a fight. They heard a gunshot; the crying stopped immediately, and they saw Zimmerman on his knees pinning Martin down on the ground. The police took Trayvon Martin's body and stored it in a morgue, calling him "John Doe". Martin's family accused the police of not asking any of the neighbors if they recognized Martin. According to David Horsey, they also did not check his cell phone to find someone he knew.
Zimmerman has not been charged with any crime, because he claimed the right of self-defense, and investigators said they could find no evidence disproving that claim. According to Martin's father, Tracy Martin, when the family asked why Zimmerman had not been arrested, the police responded that he had a "squeaky-clean record" and they respected his educational background in criminal justice. However, Tracy Martin claims that the revelation of Zimmerman's previous charge demonstrated his "propensity for violence" and that the police had lied to the family. Police ran a background check on Trayvon Martin, confirming that he had no criminal record, which caused Tracy Martin to further question why Zimmerman was not arrested after shooting and killing an unarmed teenager with no criminal history. The case has sparked national outrage and protests.
Recordings of eight calls to the police made on the night of the shooting were released by the Sanford police on March 17, 2012. Early press reports incorrectly indicated that the recordings included the sound of a single shot followed by a voice pleading or begging for help, and then a second shot is heard, after which the voice immediately stopped. Later reports indicate that gun was fired only once. Zimmerman told police at the scene that he was the one crying out for help. The statement was corroborated by an eyewitness who claimed that Martin was on top of Zimmerman, beating him, as Zimmerman called for help. One witness, who had only heard but not seen the events, believed Martin was the one calling for help, and claimed that the police tried to "correct" her into changing their assertion to Zimmerman as the one calling for help. Another witness who also heard but did not see the events, Mary Cutcher, claimed that she believed the cry was from Martin and said that she did not believe that Zimmerman acted in self-defense, contending that she and her roommate heard Martin cry out, followed by a gunshot, whereupon they saw Zimmerman standing over his body. The night of the shooting, Sanford police accepted Zimmerman's account at face value. Police Chief Lee said he did not have enough evidence to arrest Zimmerman. "In this case Mr. Zimmerman has made the statement of self-defense," Lee said. "Until we can establish probable cause to dispute that, we don't have the grounds to arrest him." In response to criticisms of the investigation, Lee responded that "We are taking a beating over this," and defended the investigation. "This is all very unsettling. I’m sure if George Zimmerman had the opportunity to relive Sunday, Feb. 26, he’d probably do things differently. I’m sure Trayvon would, too."
The morning after the incident, Tracy Martin called missing persons and the police to report his son as missing. Officers were dispatched to the home, where they showed the father a crime scene photograph of Martin for identification purposes. Martin's body had been taken to the medical examiner's office as a John Doe.
Multiple investigations are ongoing. On March 20, the FBI and the Justice Department announced that they were opening investigations into the incident. The state governor, Rick Scott, has asked the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to investigate the shooting. A Seminole County grand jury will also investigate the case, and will convene on April 10, 2012 according to State Attorney Norm Wolfinger.
Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi made a statement March 20 on the case: "I am both devastated and deeply troubled that young Trayvon Martin lost his life in a shooting. When someone loses his life at the hands of another, there cannot be any questions surrounding the circumstances of the death. ... I have spoken to FDLE Commissioner [Gerald M.] Bailey, whose agency is now involved, and I know that a complete and thorough review of the facts will be conducted. FDLE has skilled investigators of the highest caliber, and no stone will be left unturned in this investigation. While the Seminole County State Attorney’s Office has the sole authority regarding a charging decision by law, I will remain vigilant in ensuring that questions are answered."
Three out of the five members of the Sanford city commission, including the Mayor, passed a motion of no confidence in regards to the police chief Bill Lee, and his handling of the case. One member of the council, Mark McCarty, then asked for Lee to step down. The City Manager, Norton Bonaparte Jr., stated that he would not make a decision regarding Lee until more information from the investigation was available.
Self-defense laws in the United States, particularly regarding justifiable homicide, vary by state. Florida law, as of 2005, includes a "stand your ground" provision, under which a person can use deadly force if they reasonably believe it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm, in most circumstances. In many states, such laws protect people in their own homes, but Florida's version extends the no-retreat premise to vehicles and public places. Before passage of the law, Miami police chief John F. Timoney called the law unnecessary and dangerous in that "[w]hether it's trick-or-treaters or kids playing in the yard of someone who doesn't want them there or some drunk guy stumbling into the wrong house, you're encouraging people to possibly use deadly physical force where it shouldn't be used." Since its passage, shooting deaths with claims of self-defense have nearly tripled.
Durell Peaden, a member of the Florida Senate until 2010 and one of the authors of Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law, said that based upon his understanding of what happened, Zimmerman should be prosecuted. According to Peaden, the law does not say that a person has a right to confront another. “The guy lost his defense right then," said Peaden. "When [Zimmerman] said ‘I’m following him,’ he lost his defense.” Zimmerman specifically claimed that he was returning to his SUV when attacked, telling police he had stepped out of his truck to check the name of the street he was on, when Martin attacked him from behind as he walked back to his truck.
A person is justified in using deadly force if [he] [she] reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent 1. imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] or another, or 2. the imminent commission of (applicable forcible felony) against [himself] [herself] or another.
However, the use of deadly force is not justifiable if you find: 1. (Defendant) was attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of (applicable forcible felony); or 2. (Defendant) initially provoked the use of force against [himself] [herself], unless: a. The force asserted toward the defendant was so great that [he] [she] reasonably believed that [he] [she] was in imminent danger of death or great 63 bodily harm and had exhausted every reasonable means to escape the danger, other than using deadly force on (assailant). b. In good faith, the defendant withdrew from physical contact with (assailant) and clearly indicated to (assailant) that [he] [she] wanted to withdraw and stop the use of deadly force, but (assailant) continued or resumed the use of force.
In deciding whether defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you must judge [him] [her] by the circumstances by which [he] [she] was surrounded at the time the force was used. The danger facing the defendant need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, the defendant must have actually believed that the danger was real.
If the defendant [was not engaged in an unlawful activity and] was attacked in any place where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand [his] [her] ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if [he] [she] reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] [another] or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
In considering the issue of self-defense, you may take into account the relative physical abilities and capacities of the defendant and (victim).
If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether the defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you should find the defendant not guilty. However, if from the evidence you are convinced that the defendant was not justified in the use of deadly force, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved.
3.6(f) JUSTIFIABLE USE OF DEADLY FORCE Because there are many defenses applicable to self-defense, give only those parts of the instructions that are required by the evidence. Read in all cases. An issue in this case is whether the defendant acted in self-defense. It is a defense to the offense with which (defendant) is charged if the [death of] [injury to] (victim) resulted from the justifiable use of deadly force. Definition. “Deadly force” means force likely to cause death or great bodily harm. Give if applicable. § 782.02, Fla. Stat. The use of deadly force is justifiable only if the defendant reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] while resisting: 1. another’s attempt to murder [him] [her], or 2. any attempt to commit (applicable felony) upon [him] [her], or 3. any attempt to commit (applicable felony) upon or in any dwelling, residence, or vehicle occupied by [him] [her]. Insert and define applicable felony that defendant alleges victim attempted to commit. Give if applicable. §§ 776.012, 776.031, Fla. Stat. A person is justified in using deadly force if [he] [she] reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent 1. imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] or another, or 2. the imminent commission of (applicable forcible felony) against [himself] [herself] or another. Insert and define applicable forcible felony that defendant alleges victim was about to commit. Forcible felonies are listed in § 776.08, Fla. Stat. Aggressor. § 776.041, Fla. Stat. However, the use of deadly force is not justifiable if you find: Give only if the defendant is charged with an independent forcible felony. See Giles v. State, 831 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). 1. (Defendant) was attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of (applicable forcible felony); or Define applicable forcible felony. Define after paragraph 2 if both paragraphs 1 and 2 are given. Forcible felonies are listed in § 776.08, Fla. Stat. 2. (Defendant) initially provoked the use of force against [himself] [herself], unless: a. The force asserted toward the defendant was so great that [he] [she] reasonably believed that [he] [she] was in imminent danger of death or great 63 bodily harm and had exhausted every reasonable means to escape the danger, other than using deadly force on (assailant). b. In good faith, the defendant withdrew from physical contact with (assailant) and clearly indicated to (assailant) that [he] [she] wanted to withdraw and stop the use of deadly force, but (assailant) continued or resumed the use of force. Force in resisting a law enforcement officer § 776.051(1), Fla. Stat. A person is not justified in using force to resist an arrest by a law enforcement officer, or to resist a law enforcement officer who is engaged in the execution of a legal duty, if the law enforcement officer was acting in good faith and he or she is known, or reasonably appears, to be a law enforcement officer. Give if applicable. However, if an officer uses excessive force to make an arrest, then a person is justified in the use of reasonable force to defend [himself] [herself] (or another), but only to the extent [he] [she] reasonably believes such force is necessary. See § 776.012, Fla. Stat.; Ivester v. State, 398 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Jackson v. State, 463 So. 2d 372 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). In some instances, the instructions applicable to §§ 776.012, 776.031, or 776.041, Fla. Stat., may need to be given in connection with this instruction. Read in all cases. In deciding whether defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you must judge [him] [her] by the circumstances by which [he] [she] was surrounded at the time the force was used. The danger facing the defendant need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, the defendant must have actually believed that the danger was real. No duty to retreat. § 776.013(3), Fla. Stat. See Novak v. State 974 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) regarding unlawful activity. There is no duty to retreat where the defendant was not engaged in any unlawful activity other than the crime(s) for which the defendant asserts the justification. If the defendant [was not engaged in an unlawful activity and] was attacked in any place where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand [his] [her] ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if [he] [she] reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] [another] or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. Define applicable forcible felony from list in § 776.08, Fla. Stat. that defendant alleges victim was about to commit. Presumption of Fear (dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle). Give if applicable. § 776.013(2)(a)-(d), Fla. Stat. If the defendant was in a(n)[dwelling] [residence] [occupied vehicle] where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] is presumed to have had a reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] [another] if (victim) had [unlawfully and forcibly entered] [removed or attempted to remove another person against that person’s will from] that [dwelling] [residence] 64 [occupied vehicle] and the defendant had reason to believe that had occurred. The defendant had no duty to retreat under such circumstances. Exceptions to Presumption of Fear. § 776.013(2)(a)-(d), Fla. Stat. Give as applicable. The presumption of reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm does not apply if: a. the person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in [or is a lawful resident of the [dwelling] [residence]] [the vehicle], such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or b. the person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or c. the person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the [dwelling] [residence] [occupied vehicle] to further an unlawful activity; or d. the person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, who enters or attempts to enter a [dwelling] [residence] [vehicle] in the performance of [his] [her] official duties and the officer identified [himself] [herself] in accordance with any applicable law or the person using the force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer. If requested, give definition of “law enforcement officer” from § 943.10(14), Fla. Stat., § 776.013(4), Fla. Stat. A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter another’s [dwelling] [residence] [occupied vehicle] is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence. Definitions. Give if applicable. § 776.013(5), Fla. Stat. As used with regard to self defense: “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent or mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night. “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest. “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property. Prior threats. Give if applicable. If you find that the defendant who because of threats or prior difficulties with (victim) had reasonable grounds to believe that [he] [she] was in danger of death or great bodily harm at the hands of (victim), then the defendant had the right to arm [himself] [herself]. However, the defendant cannot justify the use of deadly force, if after arming [himself] [herself] [he] [she] renewed [his] [her] difficulty with (victim) when [he] [she] could have avoided the difficulty, 65 although as previously explained if the defendant was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] had no duty to retreat. Reputation of victim. Give if applicable. If you find that (victim) had a reputation of being a violent and dangerous person and that [his] [her] reputation was known to the defendant, you may consider this fact in determining whether the actions of the defendant were those of a reasonable person in dealing with an individual of that reputation. Physical abilities. Read in all cases. In considering the issue of self-defense, you may take into account the relative physical abilities and capacities of the defendant and (victim). Read in all cases. If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether the defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you should find the defendant not guilty. However, if from the evidence you are convinced that the defendant was not justified in the use of deadly force, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved. Comment
Resources
Wikipedia Article (from which I gratuitously copied), including many links:
On March 22 2012 08:50 GreenHorizons wrote: Trayvon Martin's death: the story so far
In February, an unarmed black teenager was killed by George Zimmerman, who claims he acted in self defence. Three weeks on, Zimmerman is still free, and questions remain unanswered
There is a link at the bottom of the post if your would like to sign the petition to bring justice for Trayvon Martin
The basic facts
On a rainy night in February, Trayvon Martin was returning to his father's girlfriend's house in Sanford, Florida, after a trip to the local 7-Eleven before the NBA all-star game. He carried a bag of Skittles and a can of Arizona iced tea for his little brother.
As he walked home, the unarmed 17-year-old spoke to his girlfriend in Miami via a hands-free earpiece on his cellphone he often used. He was spotted by George Zimmerman, a self-appointed neighbourhood watch volunteer, who was patrolling the gated community, the Retreat at Twin Lakes, in his vehicle.
Zimmerman called 911 to report what he described as Martin's "suspicious behaviour", telling the operator he looked like he was "up to no good, on drugs or something". Zimmerman was warned by the operator not to follow the teenager. But he did, getting out of his vehicle and taking a 9mm handgun with him.
Martin's girlfriend, who has provided her account to the family's lawyer Benjamin Crump, says Martin told her a stranger was following him. She told him to run home. Then the man reappeared behind him, she said. She then heard Martin say: "What are you following me for?" and someone else saying "What are you doing around here?". She then heard pushing, she said, because Martin's head set fell. At 7.16pm, four minutes after the call began, the phone went dead.
What happens in the last moment of Martin's life went unwitnessed by anyone other than Zimmerman.
According to neighbours, there was an altercation between the two men – Zimmerman, weighing 250lbs and armed, and Martin, weighing 140lbs and unarmed.
Witnesses and 911 calls record one of the men in great distress crying out for help.
One woman anxiously says she can hear someone calling for help while in the background, a wailing voice pleads, "No! No!"
By the time police arrive on the scene, at 7.17pm, Martin lay fatally wounded by a gunshot to the chest.
Zimmerman has admitted to the killing but told police he fired in self-defence.
Three and a half weeks later, Zimmerman is still free.
The police chief has said that, because Zimmerman has made a statement of self-defence, and there is no evidence to dispute that, he has not been arrested.
On Monday, following a national outcry over the case, the US justice department announced that it would investigate the case, along with the FBI. What the tapes reveal
The 911 tapes, made public on Friday by police after Martin's family sued to have them released, include Zimmerman's initial call to emergency services, and provide a chilling account of what was in his mind as he followed Martin and, ultimately, shot and killed him.
Zimmerman, who called 911 from his truck, tells the dispatcher there's been a spate of burglaries and says: "There's a real suspicious guy. This guy looks like he's up to no good, on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around looking about."
"Now he's coming towards me. He's got his hand in his waistband. And he's a black male … Something's wrong with him. Yup, he's coming to check me out. He's got something in his hands. I don't know what his deal is … These assholes, they always get away."
Zimmerman then said: "Shit, he's running," and the sound changes, suggesting he has left his vehicle to run after Martin.
Dispatcher: "He's running? Which way is he running?"
Zimmerman: "Down towards the other entrance to the neighbourhood."
Dispatcher: "Which entrance is that that he's heading towards?"
Zimmerman: "The back entrance … fucking [unintelligible]"
"Are you following him?" the dispatcher asked. Zimmerman replied: "Yep."
"OK, we don't need you to do that," the dispatcher warned.
In one of the 911 calls from neighbours, a woman tells operators: "There's someone screaming outside. I think they're yelling help, but I don't know. Just send someone, quick."
Anguished cries can be heard and then a single gunshot. She said: "There's gunshots. Just one". The operator says: "I can't hear any more yelling, can you?" and she responds "No." The law
When asked why Zimmerman had not been arrested, the police said that he had made a statement of self-defence and that they have not established a case to dispute that. A 2005 Florida state law known as the "stand your ground" law permits anyone, anywhere, to use deadly force against another person if they believe their safety or life is in danger.
The law was signed by the then governor Jeb Bush, who called it a "good, common sense anti-crime" bill, but campaign ads against the law posted billboards warning Florida's tourists to avoid fights and "keep their hands in plain sight" if they end up in a disagreement. A further 16 states now have versions of this law.
Paul A Logli, president of the National District Attorneys Association, said of such laws: "They're basically giving citizens more rights to use deadly force than we give police officers, and with less review."
A piece in Time magazine quoting a St Petersburg Times report said that claims of justifiable homicides in Florida more than tripled after the law was passed. They went from just over 30 to more than 100 in 2010.
In that time, the stand-your-ground defence was used in 93 cases involving 65 deaths — and in most cases, it was used successfully.
In January, a former Broward County sheriff's deputy shot and wounded a homeless man inside a Häagen-Dazs ice cream shop in Miami Lakes. He said the man was threatening him and his family. Police said charges were unlikely in that case.
In 2008, a 15-year-old boy was killed during a shootout between two gangs in Tallahassee. Nobody was held accountable for the murder because a judge who cited the law dismissed the charges.
In one yet-to-be decided case, an unarmed man was shot and killed at a park near Tampa in a dispute over skateboarding rules in 2010. The victim's 10-year-old daughter watched her father die. A judge is currently considering whether the shooter merely stood his ground.
One problem with "stand your ground" laws is that they eliminate the concept of a "duty to retreat" from dangerous situations outside the home. Without a duty to retreat, a citizen has no obligation to stand down in the face of a threat. This means that prosecutors can no longer consider certain factors when determining self-defence, including the extent to which a person claiming self-defence may have aggravated the threat.
Prosecutors can have a hard time making a case if there is no one else around to contradict a person who claims self-defence, David Hill, a criminal defence attorney in Orlando told the Associated Press.
"If there is nobody around and you pull a gun, you just say: 'Hey, I reasonably believed I was under imminent attack. Hey, sorry. Too bad. But you can't prosecute me,'" Hill said. Race George Zimmerman says he acted in self-defence George Zimmerman says he acted in self-defence. Photograph: AP
"Stand Your Ground" not so fast... TY for providing this
Reports of the case suggest that Zimmerman was a vigilante with a false sense of authority and a fixation with young black males. Police records show Zimmerman had called 911 a total of 46 times between 1 January this year and the day he killed Martin, according to Mother Jones. Neighbours described him to the Miami Herald as being fixated on "young black men".
At least two websites have suggested that on an enhanced version the 911 tape, Zimmerman can be heard to say "fucking coons" as he chased after Martin, though the quality of the audio is too poor to confirm this and he could equally be saying "fucking phones" or something else.
Zimmerman's family have insisted that he is not a racist.
The case has also provoked claims of racism at the heart of the investigation. The officer in charge of the crime scene has been criticised before, in 2010, when he initially failed to arrest a lieutenant's son who was videotaped attacking a homeless black man.
Police officers are also alleged to have "corrected" a key witness when she said she heard the boy cry for help, according to ABC News. The station talked to the teacher and she confirmed that the officer corrected her and told her it was Zimmerman who cried for help, even though this has not been established as fact. The unanswered questions
• Why has Zimmerman not been arrested more than three weeks after killing an unarmed teenager?
• Why did police not test Zimmerman for drugs or alcohol?
A law enforcement expert told ABC News that Zimmerman was slurring his words and sounded intoxicated on the 911 tapes, something which was also picked up by the family's lawyer. Drug and alcohol testing is standard procedure in most homicide investigations.
• Why did police tell Martin's father that they hadn't pressed charges because Zimmerman was a criminal justice student with a "squeaky clean" record? It wasn't strictly true. In 2005, Zimmerman was arrested for resisting arrest with violence and battery on a law enforcement officer, although those charges were dropped.
• Why did a police officer "correct" a witness who told him she had heard Martin scream for help and say it was Zimmerman she heard?
• What happened to Martin's cellphone? Reports abound that Martin's parents were not informed of his murder until they contacted police to report him missing, despite having his cellphone is feeding further scepticism about the police's conduct. It led New York Times columnist Charles Blow to tweet on Monday urging his followers to make his Tweet trend "Where is Trayvon Martin's cellphone?"
I was surprised that this hadn't come up on the forums so far as I could tell. If there is a more appropriate place for this I am sorry but I just thought it was important.
I also want to be clear, regardless of the race of anyone who was involved this is ridiculous we can't have people chasing down kids shooting them to death, claiming self defense, then going home and being able to clean their gun and do it again uninterrupted.
If you want to sign a petition to bring justice for Trayvon Martin you can go here to do so
Looks like a way more informative post than the horrendously biased OP.
I would suggest including a section on media bias. It bears mentioning the role that media misinformation played in hyping this case up. Without the misinformation and biased reporting many people would not have been so quick to rush to judgment.
Key points would be:
Most media outlets have failed to mention that the police report said Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose and back of his head, and his back was wet and had grass on it suggesting he was on the ground on his back.
Most have failed to mention anything about the eyewitness John who saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman beating him up and also corroborated Zimmerman's story that it was him shouting for help.
Zimmerman was for a long time inaccurately called White with no mention of him being mixed race.
Zimmerman's photograph has been manipulated to make his skin look lighter.
Using outdated photos of Trayvon. Sometimes cropping out dates to conceal that they are outdated.
The media bias has been so bad that Fox recently re-reported John's testimony as though it were breaking news, because so many people hadn't even heard it:
Witness: Martin attacked Zimmerman A witness we haven't heard from before paints a much different picture than we've seen so far of what happened the night 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was shot and killed.
It shows more now about why police believed that night that George Zimmerman shouldn't have gone to jail.
His statements to police were instrumental, because police backed up Zimmerman's claims, saying those screams on the 911 call are those of Zimmerman.
They say "a witness we haven't heard from before" despite this interview being done the day after the shooting. It's pretty huge that this went unpublicized for so long considering the testimony of this witness played such a key role in the case.
tl's mods have already graciously incorporated my post into the OP. i don't have the ability to edit the op to include anything else. i also tried to keep the updated OP as objective as possible so that people can come to their own conclusion; hopefully, i succeeded. if you want to make edits, my suggestion would be to message a mod and ask for permission. the original author may have the ability to edit as well.
The shooting of Trayvon Martin took place on February 26, 2012, in Sanford, Florida. Trayvon Martin was an African American teenager who was shot and killed by 28-year-old George Zimmerman, a man of mixed ethnicity (Latino and white American). Martin, who was unarmed, had been walking to his father's girlfriend's home from a convenience store when Zimmerman followed him after calling the Sanford Police Department, saying he witnessed what he described as "suspicious" behavior. Soon afterward, he fatally shot Martin.
Zimmerman described the shooting to the police who arrived on the scene as self-defense. The responding officers did not arrest Zimmerman, saying on March 12 that they did not find evidence to contradict his claim of self-defense. Both Martin and Zimmerman made phone calls during the incident, some of which were recorded.
Trayvon Benjamin Martin (February 5, 1995 – February 26, 2012) was the son of Sybrina Fulton and Tracy Martin. He was 17 years old, 6' 3" and weighing 140 pounds at the time of his death. Martin lived with his mother and older brother in Miami Gardens, Florida. He had transferred from Miami Carol City High School during his sophomore year to Michael Krop Senior High, where he was a junior. His English teacher, Michelle Kypriss, reported him as being "an A and B student who majored in cheerfulness." and said that he "was not a violent or dangerous child" and "not known for misbehaving". He hoped to become an aviation mechanic. He was visiting his father and his father's fiance, Brandi Green, at her rented townhome in Sanford, Florida, on the day he was killed, after being suspended from school for 10 days. According to Kypriss, "He was suspended because he was late too many times." His father said the suspension was because he was in an unauthorized area on school property, but he declined to offer more details. Trayvon Martin had no criminal record.
Zimmerman was born in Virginia on October 5, 1983, and is the son of Gladys Zimmerman, who is from Peru, and Robert Zimmerman, Sr., who had served in the U.S. military. He lived in Manassas, Virginia until the early 2000's. He was licensed to carry a firearm, but it is unclear if he had informed the homeowner association that he would be armed as a volunteer. Zimmerman had a previous charge in 2005 of "resisting arrest with violence and battery on an officer" while interfering with the arrest of a friend. He subsequently entered a pretrial diversion program, which is not considered a conviction on his criminal record. Zimmerman had previously been accused of domestic violence by an ex-fiancee (Veronica Zuazo), who had filed for a restraining order against him. Zimmerman counter-filed for a restraining order. A judge eventually ordered them both to stay away from each other for at least one year. Zimmerman married Shellie Nicole Dean, a licensed cosmetologist, in late 2007. In 2008, Zimmerman enrolled in the Seminole County Sheriff's Office citizens' law-enforcement academy, a four-month-long, one evening a week course consisting of a total of 14 hours of classes. Zimmerman expressed ambitions of becoming a member of law enforcement, writing: "I hold law enforcement officers in the highest regard and I hope to one day become one." In 2009, Zimmerman re-enrolled in Seminole State College and was working toward an associate degree with the goal of becoming a police officer. Seminole State College withdrew Zimmerman's enrollment because of this shooting controversy "based solely on our responsibility to provide for the safety of our students on campus as well as for Mr. Zimmerman." According to Zimmerman's father, in the wake of the controversy, George Zimmerman received death threats and moved out of his home. The New Black Panther party has offered a $10,000 reward for the capture of George Zimmerman. Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee claimed that Zimmerman had cooperated with investigators, has not retained an attorney, and has disconnected his phones. Zimmerman did eventually retain an attorney by March 24.
Zimmerman was listed in the HOA newsletter as being the go-to guy for security. Wendy Dorival, who organizes Neighborhood Watch for the Sanford Police Department, told the Sentinel in a recent interview that Zimmerman was chosen as a watch coordinator by his neighbors.
Some residents of his gated townhouse community declared that Zimmerman was known for being strict and that he went door to door asking them to be on the lookout for "young black men who appear to be outsiders", while others regarded him as "normal," "helpful" and "passionate about neighborhood security", having supposedly thwarted a previous burglary attempt. The community reportedly experienced numerous instances of burglary, theft, and one shooting during the previous year, with 402 calls made to the police.
Sanford police chief Bill Lee stated, "Mr. Zimmerman was not acting outside the legal boundaries of Florida Statute by carrying his weapon when this incident occurred."
The Retreat at Twin Lakes is a recently built private community in Sanford, Florida consisting of townhouses and condominiums. Vehicular access is by gates to the north and east, which are unguarded but electronically controlled. Several 7-Eleven stores exist within from 0.7 to 1.3 miles of the property.
During a break in an NBA basketball game on TV, Martin left his father's fiance's home in the gated community of Twin Lakes to walk to a nearby 7-Eleven convenience store to buy some Skittles. While returning to the house, Trayvon was seen by George Zimmerman, who called the Sanford Police Department non-emergency number. According to phone records provided by T-Mobile, Trayvon was speaking on a cell phone at the time of the incident. Martin's girlfriend came forward, identifying herself as the other person in that conversation; she was interviewed by an attorney, who has made a statement, and her parents have requested her anonymity. The girl said that Martin expressed concern about a "strange man" following him, and she advised him to run. She claims to have heard Martin say "What are you following me for?" followed by a man's voice responding "What are you doing here?" She said that she heard the sound of pushing and that Martin's headset suddenly went silent, leading her to believe that he had been knocked down. She attempted to call him back immediately, but was unable to reach him.
Zimmerman phoned the Sanford Police Department police at the non-emergency number at approximately 7:00 p.m., February 26, 2012, to report Martin’s suspicious behavior, which he described as “just walking around looking about” in the rain. The police dispatcher tape recorded him saying, "This guy looks like he is up to no good. He is on drugs or something." He further stated that the person he was observing had his hand in his waistband, was holding something in his other hand, and was walking around slowly in the rain looking at houses.
The dispatcher recommended that he not take any action, and informed him that police were on the way. Zimmerman reported that Martin had taken off. The dispatcher asked him if he was in pursuit and he affirmed that he was. The dispatcher informed him that pursuit was not necessary, saying "We don't need you to do that."
A part of what Zimmerman said on the tape is unclear. Some have heard the disputed words as "fucking coons", an ethnic slur used against black people, while others suggest it was "clueless", "course", or "punks".
When the police arrived, they reported finding Martin face-down and unresponsive, with a gunshot wound in the chest. The police report states that they attempted CPR, paramedics arrived and continued CPR, finally declaring him dead at 7:30 p.m. Statements by the police say Zimmerman had grass on his back and his back was wet. Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose and the back of the head; subsequently his lawyer stated that Zimmerman's nose was broken. However, the police report does not indicate that Zimmerman required medical attention. Zimmerman claimed self-defense, telling police he had stepped out of his truck to check the name of the street he was on, when Martin attacked him from behind as he walked back to his truck. He said he fired the semiautomatic handgun because he feared for his life. Martin was unarmed, and was carrying a bag of Skittles candy and a can of Arizona brand iced tea.
An eyewitness to the physical altercation just prior to the shooting stated that Martin was on top of Zimmerman and beating him up, while the older man yelled for help. Another witness, Mary Cutcher, believes "there was no punching, no hitting going on at the time, no wrestling" just prior to the shooting, though she neither saw the shooting nor the preceding altercation. The police say that she gave an official account to them that agreed with Zimmerman's story. Cutcher and her roommate told CNN journalist Anderson Cooper that their own account of the incident to the police did not agree with Zimmerman's, and that they had demanded that the police retract that incorrect statement. They also said, about the police's attitude at the scene, that "they were siding with him [Zimmerman] from the start" and that they heard the pair in their backyard and a "very young voice" whining, with no sounds of a fight. They heard a gunshot; the crying stopped immediately, and they saw Zimmerman on his knees pinning Martin down on the ground. The police took Trayvon Martin's body and stored it in a morgue, calling him "John Doe". Martin's family accused the police of not asking any of the neighbors if they recognized Martin. According to David Horsey, they also did not check his cell phone to find someone he knew.
Zimmerman has not been charged with any crime, because he claimed the right of self-defense, and investigators said they could find no evidence disproving that claim. According to Martin's father, Tracy Martin, when the family asked why Zimmerman had not been arrested, the police responded that he had a "squeaky-clean record" and they respected his educational background in criminal justice. However, Tracy Martin claims that the revelation of Zimmerman's previous charge demonstrated his "propensity for violence" and that the police had lied to the family. Police ran a background check on Trayvon Martin, confirming that he had no criminal record, which caused Tracy Martin to further question why Zimmerman was not arrested after shooting and killing an unarmed teenager with no criminal history. The case has sparked national outrage and protests.
Recordings of eight calls to the police made on the night of the shooting were released by the Sanford police on March 17, 2012. Early press reports incorrectly indicated that the recordings included the sound of a single shot followed by a voice pleading or begging for help, and then a second shot is heard, after which the voice immediately stopped. Later reports indicate that gun was fired only once. Zimmerman told police at the scene that he was the one crying out for help. The statement was corroborated by an eyewitness who claimed that Martin was on top of Zimmerman, beating him, as Zimmerman called for help. One witness, who had only heard but not seen the events, believed Martin was the one calling for help, and claimed that the police tried to "correct" her into changing their assertion to Zimmerman as the one calling for help. Another witness who also heard but did not see the events, Mary Cutcher, claimed that she believed the cry was from Martin and said that she did not believe that Zimmerman acted in self-defense, contending that she and her roommate heard Martin cry out, followed by a gunshot, whereupon they saw Zimmerman standing over his body. The night of the shooting, Sanford police accepted Zimmerman's account at face value. Police Chief Lee said he did not have enough evidence to arrest Zimmerman. "In this case Mr. Zimmerman has made the statement of self-defense," Lee said. "Until we can establish probable cause to dispute that, we don't have the grounds to arrest him." In response to criticisms of the investigation, Lee responded that "We are taking a beating over this," and defended the investigation. "This is all very unsettling. I’m sure if George Zimmerman had the opportunity to relive Sunday, Feb. 26, he’d probably do things differently. I’m sure Trayvon would, too."
The morning after the incident, Tracy Martin called missing persons and the police to report his son as missing. Officers were dispatched to the home, where they showed the father a crime scene photograph of Martin for identification purposes. Martin's body had been taken to the medical examiner's office as a John Doe.
Multiple investigations are ongoing. On March 20, the FBI and the Justice Department announced that they were opening investigations into the incident. The state governor, Rick Scott, has asked the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to investigate the shooting. A Seminole County grand jury will also investigate the case, and will convene on April 10, 2012 according to State Attorney Norm Wolfinger.
Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi made a statement March 20 on the case: "I am both devastated and deeply troubled that young Trayvon Martin lost his life in a shooting. When someone loses his life at the hands of another, there cannot be any questions surrounding the circumstances of the death. ... I have spoken to FDLE Commissioner [Gerald M.] Bailey, whose agency is now involved, and I know that a complete and thorough review of the facts will be conducted. FDLE has skilled investigators of the highest caliber, and no stone will be left unturned in this investigation. While the Seminole County State Attorney’s Office has the sole authority regarding a charging decision by law, I will remain vigilant in ensuring that questions are answered."
Three out of the five members of the Sanford city commission, including the Mayor, passed a motion of no confidence in regards to the police chief Bill Lee, and his handling of the case. One member of the council, Mark McCarty, then asked for Lee to step down. The City Manager, Norton Bonaparte Jr., stated that he would not make a decision regarding Lee until more information from the investigation was available.
Self-defense laws in the United States, particularly regarding justifiable homicide, vary by state. Florida law, as of 2005, includes a "stand your ground" provision, under which a person can use deadly force if they reasonably believe it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm, in most circumstances. In many states, such laws protect people in their own homes, but Florida's version extends the no-retreat premise to vehicles and public places. Before passage of the law, Miami police chief John F. Timoney called the law unnecessary and dangerous in that "[w]hether it's trick-or-treaters or kids playing in the yard of someone who doesn't want them there or some drunk guy stumbling into the wrong house, you're encouraging people to possibly use deadly physical force where it shouldn't be used." Since its passage, shooting deaths with claims of self-defense have nearly tripled.
Durell Peaden, a member of the Florida Senate until 2010 and one of the authors of Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law, said that based upon his understanding of what happened, Zimmerman should be prosecuted. According to Peaden, the law does not say that a person has a right to confront another. “The guy lost his defense right then," said Peaden. "When [Zimmerman] said ‘I’m following him,’ he lost his defense.” Zimmerman specifically claimed that he was returning to his SUV when attacked, telling police he had stepped out of his truck to check the name of the street he was on, when Martin attacked him from behind as he walked back to his truck.
A person is justified in using deadly force if [he] [she] reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent 1. imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] or another, or 2. the imminent commission of (applicable forcible felony) against [himself] [herself] or another.
However, the use of deadly force is not justifiable if you find: 1. (Defendant) was attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of (applicable forcible felony); or 2. (Defendant) initially provoked the use of force against [himself] [herself], unless: a. The force asserted toward the defendant was so great that [he] [she] reasonably believed that [he] [she] was in imminent danger of death or great 63 bodily harm and had exhausted every reasonable means to escape the danger, other than using deadly force on (assailant). b. In good faith, the defendant withdrew from physical contact with (assailant) and clearly indicated to (assailant) that [he] [she] wanted to withdraw and stop the use of deadly force, but (assailant) continued or resumed the use of force.
In deciding whether defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you must judge [him] [her] by the circumstances by which [he] [she] was surrounded at the time the force was used. The danger facing the defendant need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, the defendant must have actually believed that the danger was real.
If the defendant [was not engaged in an unlawful activity and] was attacked in any place where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand [his] [her] ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if [he] [she] reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] [another] or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
In considering the issue of self-defense, you may take into account the relative physical abilities and capacities of the defendant and (victim).
If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether the defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you should find the defendant not guilty. However, if from the evidence you are convinced that the defendant was not justified in the use of deadly force, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved.
3.6(f) JUSTIFIABLE USE OF DEADLY FORCE Because there are many defenses applicable to self-defense, give only those parts of the instructions that are required by the evidence. Read in all cases. An issue in this case is whether the defendant acted in self-defense. It is a defense to the offense with which (defendant) is charged if the [death of] [injury to] (victim) resulted from the justifiable use of deadly force. Definition. “Deadly force” means force likely to cause death or great bodily harm. Give if applicable. § 782.02, Fla. Stat. The use of deadly force is justifiable only if the defendant reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] while resisting: 1. another’s attempt to murder [him] [her], or 2. any attempt to commit (applicable felony) upon [him] [her], or 3. any attempt to commit (applicable felony) upon or in any dwelling, residence, or vehicle occupied by [him] [her]. Insert and define applicable felony that defendant alleges victim attempted to commit. Give if applicable. §§ 776.012, 776.031, Fla. Stat. A person is justified in using deadly force if [he] [she] reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent 1. imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] or another, or 2. the imminent commission of (applicable forcible felony) against [himself] [herself] or another. Insert and define applicable forcible felony that defendant alleges victim was about to commit. Forcible felonies are listed in § 776.08, Fla. Stat. Aggressor. § 776.041, Fla. Stat. However, the use of deadly force is not justifiable if you find: Give only if the defendant is charged with an independent forcible felony. See Giles v. State, 831 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). 1. (Defendant) was attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of (applicable forcible felony); or Define applicable forcible felony. Define after paragraph 2 if both paragraphs 1 and 2 are given. Forcible felonies are listed in § 776.08, Fla. Stat. 2. (Defendant) initially provoked the use of force against [himself] [herself], unless: a. The force asserted toward the defendant was so great that [he] [she] reasonably believed that [he] [she] was in imminent danger of death or great 63 bodily harm and had exhausted every reasonable means to escape the danger, other than using deadly force on (assailant). b. In good faith, the defendant withdrew from physical contact with (assailant) and clearly indicated to (assailant) that [he] [she] wanted to withdraw and stop the use of deadly force, but (assailant) continued or resumed the use of force. Force in resisting a law enforcement officer § 776.051(1), Fla. Stat. A person is not justified in using force to resist an arrest by a law enforcement officer, or to resist a law enforcement officer who is engaged in the execution of a legal duty, if the law enforcement officer was acting in good faith and he or she is known, or reasonably appears, to be a law enforcement officer. Give if applicable. However, if an officer uses excessive force to make an arrest, then a person is justified in the use of reasonable force to defend [himself] [herself] (or another), but only to the extent [he] [she] reasonably believes such force is necessary. See § 776.012, Fla. Stat.; Ivester v. State, 398 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Jackson v. State, 463 So. 2d 372 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). In some instances, the instructions applicable to §§ 776.012, 776.031, or 776.041, Fla. Stat., may need to be given in connection with this instruction. Read in all cases. In deciding whether defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you must judge [him] [her] by the circumstances by which [he] [she] was surrounded at the time the force was used. The danger facing the defendant need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, the defendant must have actually believed that the danger was real. No duty to retreat. § 776.013(3), Fla. Stat. See Novak v. State 974 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) regarding unlawful activity. There is no duty to retreat where the defendant was not engaged in any unlawful activity other than the crime(s) for which the defendant asserts the justification. If the defendant [was not engaged in an unlawful activity and] was attacked in any place where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand [his] [her] ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if [he] [she] reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] [another] or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. Define applicable forcible felony from list in § 776.08, Fla. Stat. that defendant alleges victim was about to commit. Presumption of Fear (dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle). Give if applicable. § 776.013(2)(a)-(d), Fla. Stat. If the defendant was in a(n)[dwelling] [residence] [occupied vehicle] where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] is presumed to have had a reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] [another] if (victim) had [unlawfully and forcibly entered] [removed or attempted to remove another person against that person’s will from] that [dwelling] [residence] 64 [occupied vehicle] and the defendant had reason to believe that had occurred. The defendant had no duty to retreat under such circumstances. Exceptions to Presumption of Fear. § 776.013(2)(a)-(d), Fla. Stat. Give as applicable. The presumption of reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm does not apply if: a. the person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in [or is a lawful resident of the [dwelling] [residence]] [the vehicle], such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or b. the person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or c. the person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the [dwelling] [residence] [occupied vehicle] to further an unlawful activity; or d. the person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, who enters or attempts to enter a [dwelling] [residence] [vehicle] in the performance of [his] [her] official duties and the officer identified [himself] [herself] in accordance with any applicable law or the person using the force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer. If requested, give definition of “law enforcement officer” from § 943.10(14), Fla. Stat., § 776.013(4), Fla. Stat. A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter another’s [dwelling] [residence] [occupied vehicle] is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence. Definitions. Give if applicable. § 776.013(5), Fla. Stat. As used with regard to self defense: “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent or mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night. “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest. “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property. Prior threats. Give if applicable. If you find that the defendant who because of threats or prior difficulties with (victim) had reasonable grounds to believe that [he] [she] was in danger of death or great bodily harm at the hands of (victim), then the defendant had the right to arm [himself] [herself]. However, the defendant cannot justify the use of deadly force, if after arming [himself] [herself] [he] [she] renewed [his] [her] difficulty with (victim) when [he] [she] could have avoided the difficulty, 65 although as previously explained if the defendant was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] had no duty to retreat. Reputation of victim. Give if applicable. If you find that (victim) had a reputation of being a violent and dangerous person and that [his] [her] reputation was known to the defendant, you may consider this fact in determining whether the actions of the defendant were those of a reasonable person in dealing with an individual of that reputation. Physical abilities. Read in all cases. In considering the issue of self-defense, you may take into account the relative physical abilities and capacities of the defendant and (victim). Read in all cases. If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether the defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you should find the defendant not guilty. However, if from the evidence you are convinced that the defendant was not justified in the use of deadly force, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved. Comment
Resources
Wikipedia Article (from which I gratuitously copied), including many links:
On March 22 2012 08:50 GreenHorizons wrote: Trayvon Martin's death: the story so far
In February, an unarmed black teenager was killed by George Zimmerman, who claims he acted in self defence. Three weeks on, Zimmerman is still free, and questions remain unanswered
There is a link at the bottom of the post if your would like to sign the petition to bring justice for Trayvon Martin
The basic facts
On a rainy night in February, Trayvon Martin was returning to his father's girlfriend's house in Sanford, Florida, after a trip to the local 7-Eleven before the NBA all-star game. He carried a bag of Skittles and a can of Arizona iced tea for his little brother.
As he walked home, the unarmed 17-year-old spoke to his girlfriend in Miami via a hands-free earpiece on his cellphone he often used. He was spotted by George Zimmerman, a self-appointed neighbourhood watch volunteer, who was patrolling the gated community, the Retreat at Twin Lakes, in his vehicle.
Zimmerman called 911 to report what he described as Martin's "suspicious behaviour", telling the operator he looked like he was "up to no good, on drugs or something". Zimmerman was warned by the operator not to follow the teenager. But he did, getting out of his vehicle and taking a 9mm handgun with him.
Martin's girlfriend, who has provided her account to the family's lawyer Benjamin Crump, says Martin told her a stranger was following him. She told him to run home. Then the man reappeared behind him, she said. She then heard Martin say: "What are you following me for?" and someone else saying "What are you doing around here?". She then heard pushing, she said, because Martin's head set fell. At 7.16pm, four minutes after the call began, the phone went dead.
What happens in the last moment of Martin's life went unwitnessed by anyone other than Zimmerman.
According to neighbours, there was an altercation between the two men – Zimmerman, weighing 250lbs and armed, and Martin, weighing 140lbs and unarmed.
Witnesses and 911 calls record one of the men in great distress crying out for help.
One woman anxiously says she can hear someone calling for help while in the background, a wailing voice pleads, "No! No!"
By the time police arrive on the scene, at 7.17pm, Martin lay fatally wounded by a gunshot to the chest.
Zimmerman has admitted to the killing but told police he fired in self-defence.
Three and a half weeks later, Zimmerman is still free.
The police chief has said that, because Zimmerman has made a statement of self-defence, and there is no evidence to dispute that, he has not been arrested.
On Monday, following a national outcry over the case, the US justice department announced that it would investigate the case, along with the FBI. What the tapes reveal
The 911 tapes, made public on Friday by police after Martin's family sued to have them released, include Zimmerman's initial call to emergency services, and provide a chilling account of what was in his mind as he followed Martin and, ultimately, shot and killed him.
Zimmerman, who called 911 from his truck, tells the dispatcher there's been a spate of burglaries and says: "There's a real suspicious guy. This guy looks like he's up to no good, on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around looking about."
"Now he's coming towards me. He's got his hand in his waistband. And he's a black male … Something's wrong with him. Yup, he's coming to check me out. He's got something in his hands. I don't know what his deal is … These assholes, they always get away."
Zimmerman then said: "Shit, he's running," and the sound changes, suggesting he has left his vehicle to run after Martin.
Dispatcher: "He's running? Which way is he running?"
Zimmerman: "Down towards the other entrance to the neighbourhood."
Dispatcher: "Which entrance is that that he's heading towards?"
Zimmerman: "The back entrance … fucking [unintelligible]"
"Are you following him?" the dispatcher asked. Zimmerman replied: "Yep."
"OK, we don't need you to do that," the dispatcher warned.
In one of the 911 calls from neighbours, a woman tells operators: "There's someone screaming outside. I think they're yelling help, but I don't know. Just send someone, quick."
Anguished cries can be heard and then a single gunshot. She said: "There's gunshots. Just one". The operator says: "I can't hear any more yelling, can you?" and she responds "No." The law
When asked why Zimmerman had not been arrested, the police said that he had made a statement of self-defence and that they have not established a case to dispute that. A 2005 Florida state law known as the "stand your ground" law permits anyone, anywhere, to use deadly force against another person if they believe their safety or life is in danger.
The law was signed by the then governor Jeb Bush, who called it a "good, common sense anti-crime" bill, but campaign ads against the law posted billboards warning Florida's tourists to avoid fights and "keep their hands in plain sight" if they end up in a disagreement. A further 16 states now have versions of this law.
Paul A Logli, president of the National District Attorneys Association, said of such laws: "They're basically giving citizens more rights to use deadly force than we give police officers, and with less review."
A piece in Time magazine quoting a St Petersburg Times report said that claims of justifiable homicides in Florida more than tripled after the law was passed. They went from just over 30 to more than 100 in 2010.
In that time, the stand-your-ground defence was used in 93 cases involving 65 deaths — and in most cases, it was used successfully.
In January, a former Broward County sheriff's deputy shot and wounded a homeless man inside a Häagen-Dazs ice cream shop in Miami Lakes. He said the man was threatening him and his family. Police said charges were unlikely in that case.
In 2008, a 15-year-old boy was killed during a shootout between two gangs in Tallahassee. Nobody was held accountable for the murder because a judge who cited the law dismissed the charges.
In one yet-to-be decided case, an unarmed man was shot and killed at a park near Tampa in a dispute over skateboarding rules in 2010. The victim's 10-year-old daughter watched her father die. A judge is currently considering whether the shooter merely stood his ground.
One problem with "stand your ground" laws is that they eliminate the concept of a "duty to retreat" from dangerous situations outside the home. Without a duty to retreat, a citizen has no obligation to stand down in the face of a threat. This means that prosecutors can no longer consider certain factors when determining self-defence, including the extent to which a person claiming self-defence may have aggravated the threat.
Prosecutors can have a hard time making a case if there is no one else around to contradict a person who claims self-defence, David Hill, a criminal defence attorney in Orlando told the Associated Press.
"If there is nobody around and you pull a gun, you just say: 'Hey, I reasonably believed I was under imminent attack. Hey, sorry. Too bad. But you can't prosecute me,'" Hill said. Race George Zimmerman says he acted in self-defence George Zimmerman says he acted in self-defence. Photograph: AP
"Stand Your Ground" not so fast... TY for providing this
Reports of the case suggest that Zimmerman was a vigilante with a false sense of authority and a fixation with young black males. Police records show Zimmerman had called 911 a total of 46 times between 1 January this year and the day he killed Martin, according to Mother Jones. Neighbours described him to the Miami Herald as being fixated on "young black men".
At least two websites have suggested that on an enhanced version the 911 tape, Zimmerman can be heard to say "fucking coons" as he chased after Martin, though the quality of the audio is too poor to confirm this and he could equally be saying "fucking phones" or something else.
Zimmerman's family have insisted that he is not a racist.
The case has also provoked claims of racism at the heart of the investigation. The officer in charge of the crime scene has been criticised before, in 2010, when he initially failed to arrest a lieutenant's son who was videotaped attacking a homeless black man.
Police officers are also alleged to have "corrected" a key witness when she said she heard the boy cry for help, according to ABC News. The station talked to the teacher and she confirmed that the officer corrected her and told her it was Zimmerman who cried for help, even though this has not been established as fact. The unanswered questions
• Why has Zimmerman not been arrested more than three weeks after killing an unarmed teenager?
• Why did police not test Zimmerman for drugs or alcohol?
A law enforcement expert told ABC News that Zimmerman was slurring his words and sounded intoxicated on the 911 tapes, something which was also picked up by the family's lawyer. Drug and alcohol testing is standard procedure in most homicide investigations.
• Why did police tell Martin's father that they hadn't pressed charges because Zimmerman was a criminal justice student with a "squeaky clean" record? It wasn't strictly true. In 2005, Zimmerman was arrested for resisting arrest with violence and battery on a law enforcement officer, although those charges were dropped.
• Why did a police officer "correct" a witness who told him she had heard Martin scream for help and say it was Zimmerman she heard?
• What happened to Martin's cellphone? Reports abound that Martin's parents were not informed of his murder until they contacted police to report him missing, despite having his cellphone is feeding further scepticism about the police's conduct. It led New York Times columnist Charles Blow to tweet on Monday urging his followers to make his Tweet trend "Where is Trayvon Martin's cellphone?"
I was surprised that this hadn't come up on the forums so far as I could tell. If there is a more appropriate place for this I am sorry but I just thought it was important.
I also want to be clear, regardless of the race of anyone who was involved this is ridiculous we can't have people chasing down kids shooting them to death, claiming self defense, then going home and being able to clean their gun and do it again uninterrupted.
If you want to sign a petition to bring justice for Trayvon Martin you can go here to do so
Looks like a way more informative post than the horrendously biased OP.
I would suggest including a section on media bias. It bears mentioning the role that media misinformation played in hyping this case up. Without the misinformation and biased reporting many people would not have been so quick to rush to judgment.
Key points would be:
Most media outlets have failed to mention that the police report said Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose and back of his head, and his back was wet and had grass on it suggesting he was on the ground on his back.
Most have failed to mention anything about the eyewitness John who saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman beating him up and also corroborated Zimmerman's story that it was him shouting for help.
Zimmerman was for a long time inaccurately called White with no mention of him being mixed race.
Zimmerman's photograph has been manipulated to make his skin look lighter.
Using outdated photos of Trayvon. Sometimes cropping out dates to conceal that they are outdated.
The media bias has been so bad that Fox recently re-reported John's testimony as though it were breaking news, because so many people hadn't even heard it:
Witness: Martin attacked Zimmerman A witness we haven't heard from before paints a much different picture than we've seen so far of what happened the night 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was shot and killed.
It shows more now about why police believed that night that George Zimmerman shouldn't have gone to jail.
His statements to police were instrumental, because police backed up Zimmerman's claims, saying those screams on the 911 call are those of Zimmerman.
They say "a witness we haven't heard from before" despite this interview being done the day after the shooting. It's pretty huge that this went unpublicized for so long considering the testimony of this witness played such a key role in the case.
Not disagreeing, but the real and perceived media bias results from the situation outlined in the OP and should be part of the discussion.
As for Zimmerman's skin appearing lighter, I don't think you can attribute that to any malicious or conscious manipulation by the media. Mugshots are often over-lit.
The shooting of Trayvon Martin took place on February 26, 2012, in Sanford, Florida. Trayvon Martin was an African American teenager who was shot and killed by 28-year-old George Zimmerman, a man of mixed ethnicity (Latino and white American). Martin, who was unarmed, had been walking to his father's girlfriend's home from a convenience store when Zimmerman followed him after calling the Sanford Police Department, saying he witnessed what he described as "suspicious" behavior. Soon afterward, he fatally shot Martin.
Zimmerman described the shooting to the police who arrived on the scene as self-defense. The responding officers did not arrest Zimmerman, saying on March 12 that they did not find evidence to contradict his claim of self-defense. Both Martin and Zimmerman made phone calls during the incident, some of which were recorded.
Trayvon Benjamin Martin (February 5, 1995 – February 26, 2012) was the son of Sybrina Fulton and Tracy Martin. He was 17 years old, 6' 3" and weighing 140 pounds at the time of his death. Martin lived with his mother and older brother in Miami Gardens, Florida. He had transferred from Miami Carol City High School during his sophomore year to Michael Krop Senior High, where he was a junior. His English teacher, Michelle Kypriss, reported him as being "an A and B student who majored in cheerfulness." and said that he "was not a violent or dangerous child" and "not known for misbehaving". He hoped to become an aviation mechanic. He was visiting his father and his father's fiance, Brandi Green, at her rented townhome in Sanford, Florida, on the day he was killed, after being suspended from school for 10 days. According to Kypriss, "He was suspended because he was late too many times." His father said the suspension was because he was in an unauthorized area on school property, but he declined to offer more details. Trayvon Martin had no criminal record.
Zimmerman was born in Virginia on October 5, 1983, and is the son of Gladys Zimmerman, who is from Peru, and Robert Zimmerman, Sr., who had served in the U.S. military. He lived in Manassas, Virginia until the early 2000's. He was licensed to carry a firearm, but it is unclear if he had informed the homeowner association that he would be armed as a volunteer. Zimmerman had a previous charge in 2005 of "resisting arrest with violence and battery on an officer" while interfering with the arrest of a friend. He subsequently entered a pretrial diversion program, which is not considered a conviction on his criminal record. Zimmerman had previously been accused of domestic violence by an ex-fiancee (Veronica Zuazo), who had filed for a restraining order against him. Zimmerman counter-filed for a restraining order. A judge eventually ordered them both to stay away from each other for at least one year. Zimmerman married Shellie Nicole Dean, a licensed cosmetologist, in late 2007. In 2008, Zimmerman enrolled in the Seminole County Sheriff's Office citizens' law-enforcement academy, a four-month-long, one evening a week course consisting of a total of 14 hours of classes. Zimmerman expressed ambitions of becoming a member of law enforcement, writing: "I hold law enforcement officers in the highest regard and I hope to one day become one." In 2009, Zimmerman re-enrolled in Seminole State College and was working toward an associate degree with the goal of becoming a police officer. Seminole State College withdrew Zimmerman's enrollment because of this shooting controversy "based solely on our responsibility to provide for the safety of our students on campus as well as for Mr. Zimmerman." According to Zimmerman's father, in the wake of the controversy, George Zimmerman received death threats and moved out of his home. The New Black Panther party has offered a $10,000 reward for the capture of George Zimmerman. Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee claimed that Zimmerman had cooperated with investigators, has not retained an attorney, and has disconnected his phones. Zimmerman did eventually retain an attorney by March 24.
Zimmerman was listed in the HOA newsletter as being the go-to guy for security. Wendy Dorival, who organizes Neighborhood Watch for the Sanford Police Department, told the Sentinel in a recent interview that Zimmerman was chosen as a watch coordinator by his neighbors.
Some residents of his gated townhouse community declared that Zimmerman was known for being strict and that he went door to door asking them to be on the lookout for "young black men who appear to be outsiders", while others regarded him as "normal," "helpful" and "passionate about neighborhood security", having supposedly thwarted a previous burglary attempt. The community reportedly experienced numerous instances of burglary, theft, and one shooting during the previous year, with 402 calls made to the police.
Sanford police chief Bill Lee stated, "Mr. Zimmerman was not acting outside the legal boundaries of Florida Statute by carrying his weapon when this incident occurred."
The Retreat at Twin Lakes is a recently built private community in Sanford, Florida consisting of townhouses and condominiums. Vehicular access is by gates to the north and east, which are unguarded but electronically controlled. Several 7-Eleven stores exist within from 0.7 to 1.3 miles of the property.
During a break in an NBA basketball game on TV, Martin left his father's fiance's home in the gated community of Twin Lakes to walk to a nearby 7-Eleven convenience store to buy some Skittles. While returning to the house, Trayvon was seen by George Zimmerman, who called the Sanford Police Department non-emergency number. According to phone records provided by T-Mobile, Trayvon was speaking on a cell phone at the time of the incident. Martin's girlfriend came forward, identifying herself as the other person in that conversation; she was interviewed by an attorney, who has made a statement, and her parents have requested her anonymity. The girl said that Martin expressed concern about a "strange man" following him, and she advised him to run. She claims to have heard Martin say "What are you following me for?" followed by a man's voice responding "What are you doing here?" She said that she heard the sound of pushing and that Martin's headset suddenly went silent, leading her to believe that he had been knocked down. She attempted to call him back immediately, but was unable to reach him.
Zimmerman phoned the Sanford Police Department police at the non-emergency number at approximately 7:00 p.m., February 26, 2012, to report Martin’s suspicious behavior, which he described as “just walking around looking about” in the rain. The police dispatcher tape recorded him saying, "This guy looks like he is up to no good. He is on drugs or something." He further stated that the person he was observing had his hand in his waistband, was holding something in his other hand, and was walking around slowly in the rain looking at houses.
The dispatcher recommended that he not take any action, and informed him that police were on the way. Zimmerman reported that Martin had taken off. The dispatcher asked him if he was in pursuit and he affirmed that he was. The dispatcher informed him that pursuit was not necessary, saying "We don't need you to do that."
A part of what Zimmerman said on the tape is unclear. Some have heard the disputed words as "fucking coons", an ethnic slur used against black people, while others suggest it was "clueless", "course", or "punks".
When the police arrived, they reported finding Martin face-down and unresponsive, with a gunshot wound in the chest. The police report states that they attempted CPR, paramedics arrived and continued CPR, finally declaring him dead at 7:30 p.m. Statements by the police say Zimmerman had grass on his back and his back was wet. Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose and the back of the head; subsequently his lawyer stated that Zimmerman's nose was broken. However, the police report does not indicate that Zimmerman required medical attention. Zimmerman claimed self-defense, telling police he had stepped out of his truck to check the name of the street he was on, when Martin attacked him from behind as he walked back to his truck. He said he fired the semiautomatic handgun because he feared for his life. Martin was unarmed, and was carrying a bag of Skittles candy and a can of Arizona brand iced tea.
An eyewitness to the physical altercation just prior to the shooting stated that Martin was on top of Zimmerman and beating him up, while the older man yelled for help. Another witness, Mary Cutcher, believes "there was no punching, no hitting going on at the time, no wrestling" just prior to the shooting, though she neither saw the shooting nor the preceding altercation. The police say that she gave an official account to them that agreed with Zimmerman's story. Cutcher and her roommate told CNN journalist Anderson Cooper that their own account of the incident to the police did not agree with Zimmerman's, and that they had demanded that the police retract that incorrect statement. They also said, about the police's attitude at the scene, that "they were siding with him [Zimmerman] from the start" and that they heard the pair in their backyard and a "very young voice" whining, with no sounds of a fight. They heard a gunshot; the crying stopped immediately, and they saw Zimmerman on his knees pinning Martin down on the ground. The police took Trayvon Martin's body and stored it in a morgue, calling him "John Doe". Martin's family accused the police of not asking any of the neighbors if they recognized Martin. According to David Horsey, they also did not check his cell phone to find someone he knew.
Zimmerman has not been charged with any crime, because he claimed the right of self-defense, and investigators said they could find no evidence disproving that claim. According to Martin's father, Tracy Martin, when the family asked why Zimmerman had not been arrested, the police responded that he had a "squeaky-clean record" and they respected his educational background in criminal justice. However, Tracy Martin claims that the revelation of Zimmerman's previous charge demonstrated his "propensity for violence" and that the police had lied to the family. Police ran a background check on Trayvon Martin, confirming that he had no criminal record, which caused Tracy Martin to further question why Zimmerman was not arrested after shooting and killing an unarmed teenager with no criminal history. The case has sparked national outrage and protests.
Recordings of eight calls to the police made on the night of the shooting were released by the Sanford police on March 17, 2012. Early press reports incorrectly indicated that the recordings included the sound of a single shot followed by a voice pleading or begging for help, and then a second shot is heard, after which the voice immediately stopped. Later reports indicate that gun was fired only once. Zimmerman told police at the scene that he was the one crying out for help. The statement was corroborated by an eyewitness who claimed that Martin was on top of Zimmerman, beating him, as Zimmerman called for help. One witness, who had only heard but not seen the events, believed Martin was the one calling for help, and claimed that the police tried to "correct" her into changing their assertion to Zimmerman as the one calling for help. Another witness who also heard but did not see the events, Mary Cutcher, claimed that she believed the cry was from Martin and said that she did not believe that Zimmerman acted in self-defense, contending that she and her roommate heard Martin cry out, followed by a gunshot, whereupon they saw Zimmerman standing over his body. The night of the shooting, Sanford police accepted Zimmerman's account at face value. Police Chief Lee said he did not have enough evidence to arrest Zimmerman. "In this case Mr. Zimmerman has made the statement of self-defense," Lee said. "Until we can establish probable cause to dispute that, we don't have the grounds to arrest him." In response to criticisms of the investigation, Lee responded that "We are taking a beating over this," and defended the investigation. "This is all very unsettling. I’m sure if George Zimmerman had the opportunity to relive Sunday, Feb. 26, he’d probably do things differently. I’m sure Trayvon would, too."
The morning after the incident, Tracy Martin called missing persons and the police to report his son as missing. Officers were dispatched to the home, where they showed the father a crime scene photograph of Martin for identification purposes. Martin's body had been taken to the medical examiner's office as a John Doe.
Multiple investigations are ongoing. On March 20, the FBI and the Justice Department announced that they were opening investigations into the incident. The state governor, Rick Scott, has asked the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to investigate the shooting. A Seminole County grand jury will also investigate the case, and will convene on April 10, 2012 according to State Attorney Norm Wolfinger.
Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi made a statement March 20 on the case: "I am both devastated and deeply troubled that young Trayvon Martin lost his life in a shooting. When someone loses his life at the hands of another, there cannot be any questions surrounding the circumstances of the death. ... I have spoken to FDLE Commissioner [Gerald M.] Bailey, whose agency is now involved, and I know that a complete and thorough review of the facts will be conducted. FDLE has skilled investigators of the highest caliber, and no stone will be left unturned in this investigation. While the Seminole County State Attorney’s Office has the sole authority regarding a charging decision by law, I will remain vigilant in ensuring that questions are answered."
Three out of the five members of the Sanford city commission, including the Mayor, passed a motion of no confidence in regards to the police chief Bill Lee, and his handling of the case. One member of the council, Mark McCarty, then asked for Lee to step down. The City Manager, Norton Bonaparte Jr., stated that he would not make a decision regarding Lee until more information from the investigation was available.
Self-defense laws in the United States, particularly regarding justifiable homicide, vary by state. Florida law, as of 2005, includes a "stand your ground" provision, under which a person can use deadly force if they reasonably believe it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm, in most circumstances. In many states, such laws protect people in their own homes, but Florida's version extends the no-retreat premise to vehicles and public places. Before passage of the law, Miami police chief John F. Timoney called the law unnecessary and dangerous in that "[w]hether it's trick-or-treaters or kids playing in the yard of someone who doesn't want them there or some drunk guy stumbling into the wrong house, you're encouraging people to possibly use deadly physical force where it shouldn't be used." Since its passage, shooting deaths with claims of self-defense have nearly tripled.
Durell Peaden, a member of the Florida Senate until 2010 and one of the authors of Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law, said that based upon his understanding of what happened, Zimmerman should be prosecuted. According to Peaden, the law does not say that a person has a right to confront another. “The guy lost his defense right then," said Peaden. "When [Zimmerman] said ‘I’m following him,’ he lost his defense.” Zimmerman specifically claimed that he was returning to his SUV when attacked, telling police he had stepped out of his truck to check the name of the street he was on, when Martin attacked him from behind as he walked back to his truck.
A person is justified in using deadly force if [he] [she] reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent 1. imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] or another, or 2. the imminent commission of (applicable forcible felony) against [himself] [herself] or another.
However, the use of deadly force is not justifiable if you find: 1. (Defendant) was attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of (applicable forcible felony); or 2. (Defendant) initially provoked the use of force against [himself] [herself], unless: a. The force asserted toward the defendant was so great that [he] [she] reasonably believed that [he] [she] was in imminent danger of death or great 63 bodily harm and had exhausted every reasonable means to escape the danger, other than using deadly force on (assailant). b. In good faith, the defendant withdrew from physical contact with (assailant) and clearly indicated to (assailant) that [he] [she] wanted to withdraw and stop the use of deadly force, but (assailant) continued or resumed the use of force.
In deciding whether defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you must judge [him] [her] by the circumstances by which [he] [she] was surrounded at the time the force was used. The danger facing the defendant need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, the defendant must have actually believed that the danger was real.
If the defendant [was not engaged in an unlawful activity and] was attacked in any place where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand [his] [her] ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if [he] [she] reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] [another] or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
In considering the issue of self-defense, you may take into account the relative physical abilities and capacities of the defendant and (victim).
If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether the defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you should find the defendant not guilty. However, if from the evidence you are convinced that the defendant was not justified in the use of deadly force, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved.
3.6(f) JUSTIFIABLE USE OF DEADLY FORCE Because there are many defenses applicable to self-defense, give only those parts of the instructions that are required by the evidence. Read in all cases. An issue in this case is whether the defendant acted in self-defense. It is a defense to the offense with which (defendant) is charged if the [death of] [injury to] (victim) resulted from the justifiable use of deadly force. Definition. “Deadly force” means force likely to cause death or great bodily harm. Give if applicable. § 782.02, Fla. Stat. The use of deadly force is justifiable only if the defendant reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] while resisting: 1. another’s attempt to murder [him] [her], or 2. any attempt to commit (applicable felony) upon [him] [her], or 3. any attempt to commit (applicable felony) upon or in any dwelling, residence, or vehicle occupied by [him] [her]. Insert and define applicable felony that defendant alleges victim attempted to commit. Give if applicable. §§ 776.012, 776.031, Fla. Stat. A person is justified in using deadly force if [he] [she] reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent 1. imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] or another, or 2. the imminent commission of (applicable forcible felony) against [himself] [herself] or another. Insert and define applicable forcible felony that defendant alleges victim was about to commit. Forcible felonies are listed in § 776.08, Fla. Stat. Aggressor. § 776.041, Fla. Stat. However, the use of deadly force is not justifiable if you find: Give only if the defendant is charged with an independent forcible felony. See Giles v. State, 831 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). 1. (Defendant) was attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of (applicable forcible felony); or Define applicable forcible felony. Define after paragraph 2 if both paragraphs 1 and 2 are given. Forcible felonies are listed in § 776.08, Fla. Stat. 2. (Defendant) initially provoked the use of force against [himself] [herself], unless: a. The force asserted toward the defendant was so great that [he] [she] reasonably believed that [he] [she] was in imminent danger of death or great 63 bodily harm and had exhausted every reasonable means to escape the danger, other than using deadly force on (assailant). b. In good faith, the defendant withdrew from physical contact with (assailant) and clearly indicated to (assailant) that [he] [she] wanted to withdraw and stop the use of deadly force, but (assailant) continued or resumed the use of force. Force in resisting a law enforcement officer § 776.051(1), Fla. Stat. A person is not justified in using force to resist an arrest by a law enforcement officer, or to resist a law enforcement officer who is engaged in the execution of a legal duty, if the law enforcement officer was acting in good faith and he or she is known, or reasonably appears, to be a law enforcement officer. Give if applicable. However, if an officer uses excessive force to make an arrest, then a person is justified in the use of reasonable force to defend [himself] [herself] (or another), but only to the extent [he] [she] reasonably believes such force is necessary. See § 776.012, Fla. Stat.; Ivester v. State, 398 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Jackson v. State, 463 So. 2d 372 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). In some instances, the instructions applicable to §§ 776.012, 776.031, or 776.041, Fla. Stat., may need to be given in connection with this instruction. Read in all cases. In deciding whether defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you must judge [him] [her] by the circumstances by which [he] [she] was surrounded at the time the force was used. The danger facing the defendant need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, the defendant must have actually believed that the danger was real. No duty to retreat. § 776.013(3), Fla. Stat. See Novak v. State 974 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) regarding unlawful activity. There is no duty to retreat where the defendant was not engaged in any unlawful activity other than the crime(s) for which the defendant asserts the justification. If the defendant [was not engaged in an unlawful activity and] was attacked in any place where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand [his] [her] ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if [he] [she] reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] [another] or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. Define applicable forcible felony from list in § 776.08, Fla. Stat. that defendant alleges victim was about to commit. Presumption of Fear (dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle). Give if applicable. § 776.013(2)(a)-(d), Fla. Stat. If the defendant was in a(n)[dwelling] [residence] [occupied vehicle] where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] is presumed to have had a reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] [another] if (victim) had [unlawfully and forcibly entered] [removed or attempted to remove another person against that person’s will from] that [dwelling] [residence] 64 [occupied vehicle] and the defendant had reason to believe that had occurred. The defendant had no duty to retreat under such circumstances. Exceptions to Presumption of Fear. § 776.013(2)(a)-(d), Fla. Stat. Give as applicable. The presumption of reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm does not apply if: a. the person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in [or is a lawful resident of the [dwelling] [residence]] [the vehicle], such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or b. the person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or c. the person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the [dwelling] [residence] [occupied vehicle] to further an unlawful activity; or d. the person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, who enters or attempts to enter a [dwelling] [residence] [vehicle] in the performance of [his] [her] official duties and the officer identified [himself] [herself] in accordance with any applicable law or the person using the force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer. If requested, give definition of “law enforcement officer” from § 943.10(14), Fla. Stat., § 776.013(4), Fla. Stat. A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter another’s [dwelling] [residence] [occupied vehicle] is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence. Definitions. Give if applicable. § 776.013(5), Fla. Stat. As used with regard to self defense: “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent or mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night. “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest. “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property. Prior threats. Give if applicable. If you find that the defendant who because of threats or prior difficulties with (victim) had reasonable grounds to believe that [he] [she] was in danger of death or great bodily harm at the hands of (victim), then the defendant had the right to arm [himself] [herself]. However, the defendant cannot justify the use of deadly force, if after arming [himself] [herself] [he] [she] renewed [his] [her] difficulty with (victim) when [he] [she] could have avoided the difficulty, 65 although as previously explained if the defendant was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] had no duty to retreat. Reputation of victim. Give if applicable. If you find that (victim) had a reputation of being a violent and dangerous person and that [his] [her] reputation was known to the defendant, you may consider this fact in determining whether the actions of the defendant were those of a reasonable person in dealing with an individual of that reputation. Physical abilities. Read in all cases. In considering the issue of self-defense, you may take into account the relative physical abilities and capacities of the defendant and (victim). Read in all cases. If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether the defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you should find the defendant not guilty. However, if from the evidence you are convinced that the defendant was not justified in the use of deadly force, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved. Comment
Resources
Wikipedia Article (from which I gratuitously copied), including many links:
On March 22 2012 08:50 GreenHorizons wrote: Trayvon Martin's death: the story so far
In February, an unarmed black teenager was killed by George Zimmerman, who claims he acted in self defence. Three weeks on, Zimmerman is still free, and questions remain unanswered
There is a link at the bottom of the post if your would like to sign the petition to bring justice for Trayvon Martin
The basic facts
On a rainy night in February, Trayvon Martin was returning to his father's girlfriend's house in Sanford, Florida, after a trip to the local 7-Eleven before the NBA all-star game. He carried a bag of Skittles and a can of Arizona iced tea for his little brother.
As he walked home, the unarmed 17-year-old spoke to his girlfriend in Miami via a hands-free earpiece on his cellphone he often used. He was spotted by George Zimmerman, a self-appointed neighbourhood watch volunteer, who was patrolling the gated community, the Retreat at Twin Lakes, in his vehicle.
Zimmerman called 911 to report what he described as Martin's "suspicious behaviour", telling the operator he looked like he was "up to no good, on drugs or something". Zimmerman was warned by the operator not to follow the teenager. But he did, getting out of his vehicle and taking a 9mm handgun with him.
Martin's girlfriend, who has provided her account to the family's lawyer Benjamin Crump, says Martin told her a stranger was following him. She told him to run home. Then the man reappeared behind him, she said. She then heard Martin say: "What are you following me for?" and someone else saying "What are you doing around here?". She then heard pushing, she said, because Martin's head set fell. At 7.16pm, four minutes after the call began, the phone went dead.
What happens in the last moment of Martin's life went unwitnessed by anyone other than Zimmerman.
According to neighbours, there was an altercation between the two men – Zimmerman, weighing 250lbs and armed, and Martin, weighing 140lbs and unarmed.
Witnesses and 911 calls record one of the men in great distress crying out for help.
One woman anxiously says she can hear someone calling for help while in the background, a wailing voice pleads, "No! No!"
By the time police arrive on the scene, at 7.17pm, Martin lay fatally wounded by a gunshot to the chest.
Zimmerman has admitted to the killing but told police he fired in self-defence.
Three and a half weeks later, Zimmerman is still free.
The police chief has said that, because Zimmerman has made a statement of self-defence, and there is no evidence to dispute that, he has not been arrested.
On Monday, following a national outcry over the case, the US justice department announced that it would investigate the case, along with the FBI. What the tapes reveal
The 911 tapes, made public on Friday by police after Martin's family sued to have them released, include Zimmerman's initial call to emergency services, and provide a chilling account of what was in his mind as he followed Martin and, ultimately, shot and killed him.
Zimmerman, who called 911 from his truck, tells the dispatcher there's been a spate of burglaries and says: "There's a real suspicious guy. This guy looks like he's up to no good, on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around looking about."
"Now he's coming towards me. He's got his hand in his waistband. And he's a black male … Something's wrong with him. Yup, he's coming to check me out. He's got something in his hands. I don't know what his deal is … These assholes, they always get away."
Zimmerman then said: "Shit, he's running," and the sound changes, suggesting he has left his vehicle to run after Martin.
Dispatcher: "He's running? Which way is he running?"
Zimmerman: "Down towards the other entrance to the neighbourhood."
Dispatcher: "Which entrance is that that he's heading towards?"
Zimmerman: "The back entrance … fucking [unintelligible]"
"Are you following him?" the dispatcher asked. Zimmerman replied: "Yep."
"OK, we don't need you to do that," the dispatcher warned.
In one of the 911 calls from neighbours, a woman tells operators: "There's someone screaming outside. I think they're yelling help, but I don't know. Just send someone, quick."
Anguished cries can be heard and then a single gunshot. She said: "There's gunshots. Just one". The operator says: "I can't hear any more yelling, can you?" and she responds "No." The law
When asked why Zimmerman had not been arrested, the police said that he had made a statement of self-defence and that they have not established a case to dispute that. A 2005 Florida state law known as the "stand your ground" law permits anyone, anywhere, to use deadly force against another person if they believe their safety or life is in danger.
The law was signed by the then governor Jeb Bush, who called it a "good, common sense anti-crime" bill, but campaign ads against the law posted billboards warning Florida's tourists to avoid fights and "keep their hands in plain sight" if they end up in a disagreement. A further 16 states now have versions of this law.
Paul A Logli, president of the National District Attorneys Association, said of such laws: "They're basically giving citizens more rights to use deadly force than we give police officers, and with less review."
A piece in Time magazine quoting a St Petersburg Times report said that claims of justifiable homicides in Florida more than tripled after the law was passed. They went from just over 30 to more than 100 in 2010.
In that time, the stand-your-ground defence was used in 93 cases involving 65 deaths — and in most cases, it was used successfully.
In January, a former Broward County sheriff's deputy shot and wounded a homeless man inside a Häagen-Dazs ice cream shop in Miami Lakes. He said the man was threatening him and his family. Police said charges were unlikely in that case.
In 2008, a 15-year-old boy was killed during a shootout between two gangs in Tallahassee. Nobody was held accountable for the murder because a judge who cited the law dismissed the charges.
In one yet-to-be decided case, an unarmed man was shot and killed at a park near Tampa in a dispute over skateboarding rules in 2010. The victim's 10-year-old daughter watched her father die. A judge is currently considering whether the shooter merely stood his ground.
One problem with "stand your ground" laws is that they eliminate the concept of a "duty to retreat" from dangerous situations outside the home. Without a duty to retreat, a citizen has no obligation to stand down in the face of a threat. This means that prosecutors can no longer consider certain factors when determining self-defence, including the extent to which a person claiming self-defence may have aggravated the threat.
Prosecutors can have a hard time making a case if there is no one else around to contradict a person who claims self-defence, David Hill, a criminal defence attorney in Orlando told the Associated Press.
"If there is nobody around and you pull a gun, you just say: 'Hey, I reasonably believed I was under imminent attack. Hey, sorry. Too bad. But you can't prosecute me,'" Hill said. Race George Zimmerman says he acted in self-defence George Zimmerman says he acted in self-defence. Photograph: AP
"Stand Your Ground" not so fast... TY for providing this
Reports of the case suggest that Zimmerman was a vigilante with a false sense of authority and a fixation with young black males. Police records show Zimmerman had called 911 a total of 46 times between 1 January this year and the day he killed Martin, according to Mother Jones. Neighbours described him to the Miami Herald as being fixated on "young black men".
At least two websites have suggested that on an enhanced version the 911 tape, Zimmerman can be heard to say "fucking coons" as he chased after Martin, though the quality of the audio is too poor to confirm this and he could equally be saying "fucking phones" or something else.
Zimmerman's family have insisted that he is not a racist.
The case has also provoked claims of racism at the heart of the investigation. The officer in charge of the crime scene has been criticised before, in 2010, when he initially failed to arrest a lieutenant's son who was videotaped attacking a homeless black man.
Police officers are also alleged to have "corrected" a key witness when she said she heard the boy cry for help, according to ABC News. The station talked to the teacher and she confirmed that the officer corrected her and told her it was Zimmerman who cried for help, even though this has not been established as fact. The unanswered questions
• Why has Zimmerman not been arrested more than three weeks after killing an unarmed teenager?
• Why did police not test Zimmerman for drugs or alcohol?
A law enforcement expert told ABC News that Zimmerman was slurring his words and sounded intoxicated on the 911 tapes, something which was also picked up by the family's lawyer. Drug and alcohol testing is standard procedure in most homicide investigations.
• Why did police tell Martin's father that they hadn't pressed charges because Zimmerman was a criminal justice student with a "squeaky clean" record? It wasn't strictly true. In 2005, Zimmerman was arrested for resisting arrest with violence and battery on a law enforcement officer, although those charges were dropped.
• Why did a police officer "correct" a witness who told him she had heard Martin scream for help and say it was Zimmerman she heard?
• What happened to Martin's cellphone? Reports abound that Martin's parents were not informed of his murder until they contacted police to report him missing, despite having his cellphone is feeding further scepticism about the police's conduct. It led New York Times columnist Charles Blow to tweet on Monday urging his followers to make his Tweet trend "Where is Trayvon Martin's cellphone?"
I was surprised that this hadn't come up on the forums so far as I could tell. If there is a more appropriate place for this I am sorry but I just thought it was important.
I also want to be clear, regardless of the race of anyone who was involved this is ridiculous we can't have people chasing down kids shooting them to death, claiming self defense, then going home and being able to clean their gun and do it again uninterrupted.
If you want to sign a petition to bring justice for Trayvon Martin you can go here to do so
Looks like a way more informative post than the horrendously biased OP.
I would suggest including a section on media bias. It bears mentioning the role that media misinformation played in hyping this case up. Without the misinformation and biased reporting many people would not have been so quick to rush to judgment.
Key points would be:
Most media outlets have failed to mention that the police report said Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose and back of his head, and his back was wet and had grass on it suggesting he was on the ground on his back.
Most have failed to mention anything about the eyewitness John who saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman beating him up and also corroborated Zimmerman's story that it was him shouting for help.
Zimmerman was for a long time inaccurately called White with no mention of him being mixed race.
Zimmerman's photograph has been manipulated to make his skin look lighter.
Using outdated photos of Trayvon. Sometimes cropping out dates to conceal that they are outdated.
The media bias has been so bad that Fox recently re-reported John's testimony as though it were breaking news, because so many people hadn't even heard it:
Witness: Martin attacked Zimmerman A witness we haven't heard from before paints a much different picture than we've seen so far of what happened the night 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was shot and killed.
It shows more now about why police believed that night that George Zimmerman shouldn't have gone to jail.
His statements to police were instrumental, because police backed up Zimmerman's claims, saying those screams on the 911 call are those of Zimmerman.
They say "a witness we haven't heard from before" despite this interview being done the day after the shooting. It's pretty huge that this went unpublicized for so long considering the testimony of this witness played such a key role in the case.
Not disagreeing, but the real and perceived media bias results from the situation outlined in the OP and should be part of the discussion.
As for Zimmerman's skin appearing lighter, I don't think you can attribute that to any malicious or conscious manipulation by the media. Mugshots are often over-lit.
What I am referring to is the way Zimmerman's mugshot has been digitally manipulated to make his skin appear lighter. He seems to get lighter skinned every day.
The original mugshot makes it clear he is a visible minority. It's hard to believe this photo editing was accidental considering it fits nicely with these same news outlets reporting he is White.
On March 26 2012 09:58 cLutZ wrote: The FL law that is so "controversial" was instituted because a bunch of hyperzealous state's attorneys in certain areas of the state were prosecuting people under the old law who were very likely acting in self defense. People defending against home invaders, muggers, etc were prosecuted (sometimes successfully) for using deadly force, so the FL legislature responded.
IMO the authorities in this case have been thorough and responsible, while the media has be rash and irresponsible. A conviction under my reading of current law is highly unlikely, defending against the case, however, could cost Zimmerman his life savings (if he has any), and an indictment would destroy his life regardless. The law is the law, if you think its bad you can change it, but FL literally just changed it because the old law also sucked.
Oooh they used deadly force against someone stealing property and got shafted for it? How unfortunate. Why of course I should shoot someone that's after my wallet. And indeed Trayvon got shot for way less.
I think its more a long the lines of Oooh, its easy proven what happened, vs crap we dont really know what happened yet and cant solve this in less than 24 hours..
As far as Trayvon goes, sure. My real point was that the old law seemed perfectly fine. Except that in the US being lawfully able to kill people seems real high on everyone's list. I have never understood why and I never will because noone has nor will they put forth a convincing argument.
Back to Trayvon. It doesn't really matter if Trayvon or Zimmerman initiated the fight. Zimmerman followed Trayvon and IF Trayvon initiated the fight he did so because he was afraid of Zimmerman, as is apparent from his conversation with his girlfriend prior to the incident. The question to me, then, isn't if Zimmerman is guilty, but exactly how guilty he is.
And @clutz, yes the US media has been as sensationalist as they always seem to be.
other than the lack of duty to retreat in Florida (which is not the case in my home state of California), how is swedish law any different? i googled it and it looks the same to me.
Simply put, this means that you are generally permitted to match the force with which you are attacked, and that you have a variable margin of permitted excessive violence depending on the circumstances.
That isn't a reliable source on how the swedish self defense paragraph works. It's basically that pages interprention of it.
Also while Sweden claims that precedents don't have the same value as in for example, the US, this is a truth with modification and there are several precedents where self defense has been defined by the High Court of Sweden (Not really sure if that's a correct translation to be honest) and law students are pretty much taught what these precedents say.
The use of deadly force in Sweden is rarely, if ever, allowed in Sweden and it's basically a scenario where you've emptied ALL of your available options to you. Also, seeing how carrying weapons such as Knifes or Guns are illegal (unless you have a license) very rarely will you be able to explain to a judge that you just "happened to have" a deadly weapon on you, when you're claiming self defense. I'm not very well read within guns and knifes as of yet, although I'm pretty positive you're only granted a license if they are used in your work or if you do a hobby which requires professional training such as hunting for deer/moose etc.
We also have the duty to retreat, but you've already mentioned that. Basically this already falls on the fact that the man was carrying a gun if we're talking Swedish laws. So no, they are not same.
The shooting of Trayvon Martin took place on February 26, 2012, in Sanford, Florida. Trayvon Martin was an African American teenager who was shot and killed by 28-year-old George Zimmerman, a man of mixed ethnicity (Latino and white American). Martin, who was unarmed, had been walking to his father's girlfriend's home from a convenience store when Zimmerman followed him after calling the Sanford Police Department, saying he witnessed what he described as "suspicious" behavior. Soon afterward, he fatally shot Martin.
Zimmerman described the shooting to the police who arrived on the scene as self-defense. The responding officers did not arrest Zimmerman, saying on March 12 that they did not find evidence to contradict his claim of self-defense. Both Martin and Zimmerman made phone calls during the incident, some of which were recorded.
Trayvon Benjamin Martin (February 5, 1995 – February 26, 2012) was the son of Sybrina Fulton and Tracy Martin. He was 17 years old, 6' 3" and weighing 140 pounds at the time of his death. Martin lived with his mother and older brother in Miami Gardens, Florida. He had transferred from Miami Carol City High School during his sophomore year to Michael Krop Senior High, where he was a junior. His English teacher, Michelle Kypriss, reported him as being "an A and B student who majored in cheerfulness." and said that he "was not a violent or dangerous child" and "not known for misbehaving". He hoped to become an aviation mechanic. He was visiting his father and his father's fiance, Brandi Green, at her rented townhome in Sanford, Florida, on the day he was killed, after being suspended from school for 10 days. According to Kypriss, "He was suspended because he was late too many times." His father said the suspension was because he was in an unauthorized area on school property, but he declined to offer more details. Trayvon Martin had no criminal record.
Zimmerman was born in Virginia on October 5, 1983, and is the son of Gladys Zimmerman, who is from Peru, and Robert Zimmerman, Sr., who had served in the U.S. military. He lived in Manassas, Virginia until the early 2000's. He was licensed to carry a firearm, but it is unclear if he had informed the homeowner association that he would be armed as a volunteer. Zimmerman had a previous charge in 2005 of "resisting arrest with violence and battery on an officer" while interfering with the arrest of a friend. He subsequently entered a pretrial diversion program, which is not considered a conviction on his criminal record. Zimmerman had previously been accused of domestic violence by an ex-fiancee (Veronica Zuazo), who had filed for a restraining order against him. Zimmerman counter-filed for a restraining order. A judge eventually ordered them both to stay away from each other for at least one year. Zimmerman married Shellie Nicole Dean, a licensed cosmetologist, in late 2007. In 2008, Zimmerman enrolled in the Seminole County Sheriff's Office citizens' law-enforcement academy, a four-month-long, one evening a week course consisting of a total of 14 hours of classes. Zimmerman expressed ambitions of becoming a member of law enforcement, writing: "I hold law enforcement officers in the highest regard and I hope to one day become one." In 2009, Zimmerman re-enrolled in Seminole State College and was working toward an associate degree with the goal of becoming a police officer. Seminole State College withdrew Zimmerman's enrollment because of this shooting controversy "based solely on our responsibility to provide for the safety of our students on campus as well as for Mr. Zimmerman." According to Zimmerman's father, in the wake of the controversy, George Zimmerman received death threats and moved out of his home. The New Black Panther party has offered a $10,000 reward for the capture of George Zimmerman. Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee claimed that Zimmerman had cooperated with investigators, has not retained an attorney, and has disconnected his phones. Zimmerman did eventually retain an attorney by March 24.
Zimmerman was listed in the HOA newsletter as being the go-to guy for security. Wendy Dorival, who organizes Neighborhood Watch for the Sanford Police Department, told the Sentinel in a recent interview that Zimmerman was chosen as a watch coordinator by his neighbors.
Some residents of his gated townhouse community declared that Zimmerman was known for being strict and that he went door to door asking them to be on the lookout for "young black men who appear to be outsiders", while others regarded him as "normal," "helpful" and "passionate about neighborhood security", having supposedly thwarted a previous burglary attempt. The community reportedly experienced numerous instances of burglary, theft, and one shooting during the previous year, with 402 calls made to the police.
Sanford police chief Bill Lee stated, "Mr. Zimmerman was not acting outside the legal boundaries of Florida Statute by carrying his weapon when this incident occurred."
The Retreat at Twin Lakes is a recently built private community in Sanford, Florida consisting of townhouses and condominiums. Vehicular access is by gates to the north and east, which are unguarded but electronically controlled. Several 7-Eleven stores exist within from 0.7 to 1.3 miles of the property.
During a break in an NBA basketball game on TV, Martin left his father's fiance's home in the gated community of Twin Lakes to walk to a nearby 7-Eleven convenience store to buy some Skittles. While returning to the house, Trayvon was seen by George Zimmerman, who called the Sanford Police Department non-emergency number. According to phone records provided by T-Mobile, Trayvon was speaking on a cell phone at the time of the incident. Martin's girlfriend came forward, identifying herself as the other person in that conversation; she was interviewed by an attorney, who has made a statement, and her parents have requested her anonymity. The girl said that Martin expressed concern about a "strange man" following him, and she advised him to run. She claims to have heard Martin say "What are you following me for?" followed by a man's voice responding "What are you doing here?" She said that she heard the sound of pushing and that Martin's headset suddenly went silent, leading her to believe that he had been knocked down. She attempted to call him back immediately, but was unable to reach him.
Zimmerman phoned the Sanford Police Department police at the non-emergency number at approximately 7:00 p.m., February 26, 2012, to report Martin’s suspicious behavior, which he described as “just walking around looking about” in the rain. The police dispatcher tape recorded him saying, "This guy looks like he is up to no good. He is on drugs or something." He further stated that the person he was observing had his hand in his waistband, was holding something in his other hand, and was walking around slowly in the rain looking at houses.
The dispatcher recommended that he not take any action, and informed him that police were on the way. Zimmerman reported that Martin had taken off. The dispatcher asked him if he was in pursuit and he affirmed that he was. The dispatcher informed him that pursuit was not necessary, saying "We don't need you to do that."
A part of what Zimmerman said on the tape is unclear. Some have heard the disputed words as "fucking coons", an ethnic slur used against black people, while others suggest it was "clueless", "course", or "punks".
When the police arrived, they reported finding Martin face-down and unresponsive, with a gunshot wound in the chest. The police report states that they attempted CPR, paramedics arrived and continued CPR, finally declaring him dead at 7:30 p.m. Statements by the police say Zimmerman had grass on his back and his back was wet. Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose and the back of the head; subsequently his lawyer stated that Zimmerman's nose was broken. However, the police report does not indicate that Zimmerman required medical attention. Zimmerman claimed self-defense, telling police he had stepped out of his truck to check the name of the street he was on, when Martin attacked him from behind as he walked back to his truck. He said he fired the semiautomatic handgun because he feared for his life. Martin was unarmed, and was carrying a bag of Skittles candy and a can of Arizona brand iced tea.
An eyewitness to the physical altercation just prior to the shooting stated that Martin was on top of Zimmerman and beating him up, while the older man yelled for help. Another witness, Mary Cutcher, believes "there was no punching, no hitting going on at the time, no wrestling" just prior to the shooting, though she neither saw the shooting nor the preceding altercation. The police say that she gave an official account to them that agreed with Zimmerman's story. Cutcher and her roommate told CNN journalist Anderson Cooper that their own account of the incident to the police did not agree with Zimmerman's, and that they had demanded that the police retract that incorrect statement. They also said, about the police's attitude at the scene, that "they were siding with him [Zimmerman] from the start" and that they heard the pair in their backyard and a "very young voice" whining, with no sounds of a fight. They heard a gunshot; the crying stopped immediately, and they saw Zimmerman on his knees pinning Martin down on the ground. The police took Trayvon Martin's body and stored it in a morgue, calling him "John Doe". Martin's family accused the police of not asking any of the neighbors if they recognized Martin. According to David Horsey, they also did not check his cell phone to find someone he knew.
Zimmerman has not been charged with any crime, because he claimed the right of self-defense, and investigators said they could find no evidence disproving that claim. According to Martin's father, Tracy Martin, when the family asked why Zimmerman had not been arrested, the police responded that he had a "squeaky-clean record" and they respected his educational background in criminal justice. However, Tracy Martin claims that the revelation of Zimmerman's previous charge demonstrated his "propensity for violence" and that the police had lied to the family. Police ran a background check on Trayvon Martin, confirming that he had no criminal record, which caused Tracy Martin to further question why Zimmerman was not arrested after shooting and killing an unarmed teenager with no criminal history. The case has sparked national outrage and protests.
Recordings of eight calls to the police made on the night of the shooting were released by the Sanford police on March 17, 2012. Early press reports incorrectly indicated that the recordings included the sound of a single shot followed by a voice pleading or begging for help, and then a second shot is heard, after which the voice immediately stopped. Later reports indicate that gun was fired only once. Zimmerman told police at the scene that he was the one crying out for help. The statement was corroborated by an eyewitness who claimed that Martin was on top of Zimmerman, beating him, as Zimmerman called for help. One witness, who had only heard but not seen the events, believed Martin was the one calling for help, and claimed that the police tried to "correct" her into changing their assertion to Zimmerman as the one calling for help. Another witness who also heard but did not see the events, Mary Cutcher, claimed that she believed the cry was from Martin and said that she did not believe that Zimmerman acted in self-defense, contending that she and her roommate heard Martin cry out, followed by a gunshot, whereupon they saw Zimmerman standing over his body. The night of the shooting, Sanford police accepted Zimmerman's account at face value. Police Chief Lee said he did not have enough evidence to arrest Zimmerman. "In this case Mr. Zimmerman has made the statement of self-defense," Lee said. "Until we can establish probable cause to dispute that, we don't have the grounds to arrest him." In response to criticisms of the investigation, Lee responded that "We are taking a beating over this," and defended the investigation. "This is all very unsettling. I’m sure if George Zimmerman had the opportunity to relive Sunday, Feb. 26, he’d probably do things differently. I’m sure Trayvon would, too."
The morning after the incident, Tracy Martin called missing persons and the police to report his son as missing. Officers were dispatched to the home, where they showed the father a crime scene photograph of Martin for identification purposes. Martin's body had been taken to the medical examiner's office as a John Doe.
Multiple investigations are ongoing. On March 20, the FBI and the Justice Department announced that they were opening investigations into the incident. The state governor, Rick Scott, has asked the Florida Department of Law Enforcement to investigate the shooting. A Seminole County grand jury will also investigate the case, and will convene on April 10, 2012 according to State Attorney Norm Wolfinger.
Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi made a statement March 20 on the case: "I am both devastated and deeply troubled that young Trayvon Martin lost his life in a shooting. When someone loses his life at the hands of another, there cannot be any questions surrounding the circumstances of the death. ... I have spoken to FDLE Commissioner [Gerald M.] Bailey, whose agency is now involved, and I know that a complete and thorough review of the facts will be conducted. FDLE has skilled investigators of the highest caliber, and no stone will be left unturned in this investigation. While the Seminole County State Attorney’s Office has the sole authority regarding a charging decision by law, I will remain vigilant in ensuring that questions are answered."
Three out of the five members of the Sanford city commission, including the Mayor, passed a motion of no confidence in regards to the police chief Bill Lee, and his handling of the case. One member of the council, Mark McCarty, then asked for Lee to step down. The City Manager, Norton Bonaparte Jr., stated that he would not make a decision regarding Lee until more information from the investigation was available.
Self-defense laws in the United States, particularly regarding justifiable homicide, vary by state. Florida law, as of 2005, includes a "stand your ground" provision, under which a person can use deadly force if they reasonably believe it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm, in most circumstances. In many states, such laws protect people in their own homes, but Florida's version extends the no-retreat premise to vehicles and public places. Before passage of the law, Miami police chief John F. Timoney called the law unnecessary and dangerous in that "[w]hether it's trick-or-treaters or kids playing in the yard of someone who doesn't want them there or some drunk guy stumbling into the wrong house, you're encouraging people to possibly use deadly physical force where it shouldn't be used." Since its passage, shooting deaths with claims of self-defense have nearly tripled.
Durell Peaden, a member of the Florida Senate until 2010 and one of the authors of Florida's "Stand Your Ground" law, said that based upon his understanding of what happened, Zimmerman should be prosecuted. According to Peaden, the law does not say that a person has a right to confront another. “The guy lost his defense right then," said Peaden. "When [Zimmerman] said ‘I’m following him,’ he lost his defense.” Zimmerman specifically claimed that he was returning to his SUV when attacked, telling police he had stepped out of his truck to check the name of the street he was on, when Martin attacked him from behind as he walked back to his truck.
A person is justified in using deadly force if [he] [she] reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent 1. imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] or another, or 2. the imminent commission of (applicable forcible felony) against [himself] [herself] or another.
However, the use of deadly force is not justifiable if you find: 1. (Defendant) was attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of (applicable forcible felony); or 2. (Defendant) initially provoked the use of force against [himself] [herself], unless: a. The force asserted toward the defendant was so great that [he] [she] reasonably believed that [he] [she] was in imminent danger of death or great 63 bodily harm and had exhausted every reasonable means to escape the danger, other than using deadly force on (assailant). b. In good faith, the defendant withdrew from physical contact with (assailant) and clearly indicated to (assailant) that [he] [she] wanted to withdraw and stop the use of deadly force, but (assailant) continued or resumed the use of force.
In deciding whether defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you must judge [him] [her] by the circumstances by which [he] [she] was surrounded at the time the force was used. The danger facing the defendant need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, the defendant must have actually believed that the danger was real.
If the defendant [was not engaged in an unlawful activity and] was attacked in any place where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand [his] [her] ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if [he] [she] reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] [another] or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
In considering the issue of self-defense, you may take into account the relative physical abilities and capacities of the defendant and (victim).
If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether the defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you should find the defendant not guilty. However, if from the evidence you are convinced that the defendant was not justified in the use of deadly force, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved.
3.6(f) JUSTIFIABLE USE OF DEADLY FORCE Because there are many defenses applicable to self-defense, give only those parts of the instructions that are required by the evidence. Read in all cases. An issue in this case is whether the defendant acted in self-defense. It is a defense to the offense with which (defendant) is charged if the [death of] [injury to] (victim) resulted from the justifiable use of deadly force. Definition. “Deadly force” means force likely to cause death or great bodily harm. Give if applicable. § 782.02, Fla. Stat. The use of deadly force is justifiable only if the defendant reasonably believes that the force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] while resisting: 1. another’s attempt to murder [him] [her], or 2. any attempt to commit (applicable felony) upon [him] [her], or 3. any attempt to commit (applicable felony) upon or in any dwelling, residence, or vehicle occupied by [him] [her]. Insert and define applicable felony that defendant alleges victim attempted to commit. Give if applicable. §§ 776.012, 776.031, Fla. Stat. A person is justified in using deadly force if [he] [she] reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent 1. imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] or another, or 2. the imminent commission of (applicable forcible felony) against [himself] [herself] or another. Insert and define applicable forcible felony that defendant alleges victim was about to commit. Forcible felonies are listed in § 776.08, Fla. Stat. Aggressor. § 776.041, Fla. Stat. However, the use of deadly force is not justifiable if you find: Give only if the defendant is charged with an independent forcible felony. See Giles v. State, 831 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). 1. (Defendant) was attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of (applicable forcible felony); or Define applicable forcible felony. Define after paragraph 2 if both paragraphs 1 and 2 are given. Forcible felonies are listed in § 776.08, Fla. Stat. 2. (Defendant) initially provoked the use of force against [himself] [herself], unless: a. The force asserted toward the defendant was so great that [he] [she] reasonably believed that [he] [she] was in imminent danger of death or great 63 bodily harm and had exhausted every reasonable means to escape the danger, other than using deadly force on (assailant). b. In good faith, the defendant withdrew from physical contact with (assailant) and clearly indicated to (assailant) that [he] [she] wanted to withdraw and stop the use of deadly force, but (assailant) continued or resumed the use of force. Force in resisting a law enforcement officer § 776.051(1), Fla. Stat. A person is not justified in using force to resist an arrest by a law enforcement officer, or to resist a law enforcement officer who is engaged in the execution of a legal duty, if the law enforcement officer was acting in good faith and he or she is known, or reasonably appears, to be a law enforcement officer. Give if applicable. However, if an officer uses excessive force to make an arrest, then a person is justified in the use of reasonable force to defend [himself] [herself] (or another), but only to the extent [he] [she] reasonably believes such force is necessary. See § 776.012, Fla. Stat.; Ivester v. State, 398 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Jackson v. State, 463 So. 2d 372 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). In some instances, the instructions applicable to §§ 776.012, 776.031, or 776.041, Fla. Stat., may need to be given in connection with this instruction. Read in all cases. In deciding whether defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you must judge [him] [her] by the circumstances by which [he] [she] was surrounded at the time the force was used. The danger facing the defendant need not have been actual; however, to justify the use of deadly force, the appearance of danger must have been so real that a reasonably cautious and prudent person under the same circumstances would have believed that the danger could be avoided only through the use of that force. Based upon appearances, the defendant must have actually believed that the danger was real. No duty to retreat. § 776.013(3), Fla. Stat. See Novak v. State 974 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) regarding unlawful activity. There is no duty to retreat where the defendant was not engaged in any unlawful activity other than the crime(s) for which the defendant asserts the justification. If the defendant [was not engaged in an unlawful activity and] was attacked in any place where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand [his] [her] ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if [he] [she] reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] [another] or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. Define applicable forcible felony from list in § 776.08, Fla. Stat. that defendant alleges victim was about to commit. Presumption of Fear (dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle). Give if applicable. § 776.013(2)(a)-(d), Fla. Stat. If the defendant was in a(n)[dwelling] [residence] [occupied vehicle] where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] is presumed to have had a reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm to [himself] [herself] [another] if (victim) had [unlawfully and forcibly entered] [removed or attempted to remove another person against that person’s will from] that [dwelling] [residence] 64 [occupied vehicle] and the defendant had reason to believe that had occurred. The defendant had no duty to retreat under such circumstances. Exceptions to Presumption of Fear. § 776.013(2)(a)-(d), Fla. Stat. Give as applicable. The presumption of reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm does not apply if: a. the person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in [or is a lawful resident of the [dwelling] [residence]] [the vehicle], such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or b. the person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or c. the person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the [dwelling] [residence] [occupied vehicle] to further an unlawful activity; or d. the person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, who enters or attempts to enter a [dwelling] [residence] [vehicle] in the performance of [his] [her] official duties and the officer identified [himself] [herself] in accordance with any applicable law or the person using the force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer. If requested, give definition of “law enforcement officer” from § 943.10(14), Fla. Stat., § 776.013(4), Fla. Stat. A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter another’s [dwelling] [residence] [occupied vehicle] is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence. Definitions. Give if applicable. § 776.013(5), Fla. Stat. As used with regard to self defense: “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent or mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night. “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest. “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property. Prior threats. Give if applicable. If you find that the defendant who because of threats or prior difficulties with (victim) had reasonable grounds to believe that [he] [she] was in danger of death or great bodily harm at the hands of (victim), then the defendant had the right to arm [himself] [herself]. However, the defendant cannot justify the use of deadly force, if after arming [himself] [herself] [he] [she] renewed [his] [her] difficulty with (victim) when [he] [she] could have avoided the difficulty, 65 although as previously explained if the defendant was not engaged in an unlawful activity and was attacked in any place where [he] [she] had a right to be, [he] [she] had no duty to retreat. Reputation of victim. Give if applicable. If you find that (victim) had a reputation of being a violent and dangerous person and that [his] [her] reputation was known to the defendant, you may consider this fact in determining whether the actions of the defendant were those of a reasonable person in dealing with an individual of that reputation. Physical abilities. Read in all cases. In considering the issue of self-defense, you may take into account the relative physical abilities and capacities of the defendant and (victim). Read in all cases. If in your consideration of the issue of self-defense you have a reasonable doubt on the question of whether the defendant was justified in the use of deadly force, you should find the defendant not guilty. However, if from the evidence you are convinced that the defendant was not justified in the use of deadly force, you should find [him] [her] guilty if all the elements of the charge have been proved. Comment
Resources
Wikipedia Article (from which I gratuitously copied), including many links:
On March 22 2012 08:50 GreenHorizons wrote: Trayvon Martin's death: the story so far
In February, an unarmed black teenager was killed by George Zimmerman, who claims he acted in self defence. Three weeks on, Zimmerman is still free, and questions remain unanswered
There is a link at the bottom of the post if your would like to sign the petition to bring justice for Trayvon Martin
The basic facts
On a rainy night in February, Trayvon Martin was returning to his father's girlfriend's house in Sanford, Florida, after a trip to the local 7-Eleven before the NBA all-star game. He carried a bag of Skittles and a can of Arizona iced tea for his little brother.
As he walked home, the unarmed 17-year-old spoke to his girlfriend in Miami via a hands-free earpiece on his cellphone he often used. He was spotted by George Zimmerman, a self-appointed neighbourhood watch volunteer, who was patrolling the gated community, the Retreat at Twin Lakes, in his vehicle.
Zimmerman called 911 to report what he described as Martin's "suspicious behaviour", telling the operator he looked like he was "up to no good, on drugs or something". Zimmerman was warned by the operator not to follow the teenager. But he did, getting out of his vehicle and taking a 9mm handgun with him.
Martin's girlfriend, who has provided her account to the family's lawyer Benjamin Crump, says Martin told her a stranger was following him. She told him to run home. Then the man reappeared behind him, she said. She then heard Martin say: "What are you following me for?" and someone else saying "What are you doing around here?". She then heard pushing, she said, because Martin's head set fell. At 7.16pm, four minutes after the call began, the phone went dead.
What happens in the last moment of Martin's life went unwitnessed by anyone other than Zimmerman.
According to neighbours, there was an altercation between the two men – Zimmerman, weighing 250lbs and armed, and Martin, weighing 140lbs and unarmed.
Witnesses and 911 calls record one of the men in great distress crying out for help.
One woman anxiously says she can hear someone calling for help while in the background, a wailing voice pleads, "No! No!"
By the time police arrive on the scene, at 7.17pm, Martin lay fatally wounded by a gunshot to the chest.
Zimmerman has admitted to the killing but told police he fired in self-defence.
Three and a half weeks later, Zimmerman is still free.
The police chief has said that, because Zimmerman has made a statement of self-defence, and there is no evidence to dispute that, he has not been arrested.
On Monday, following a national outcry over the case, the US justice department announced that it would investigate the case, along with the FBI. What the tapes reveal
The 911 tapes, made public on Friday by police after Martin's family sued to have them released, include Zimmerman's initial call to emergency services, and provide a chilling account of what was in his mind as he followed Martin and, ultimately, shot and killed him.
Zimmerman, who called 911 from his truck, tells the dispatcher there's been a spate of burglaries and says: "There's a real suspicious guy. This guy looks like he's up to no good, on drugs or something. It's raining and he's just walking around looking about."
"Now he's coming towards me. He's got his hand in his waistband. And he's a black male … Something's wrong with him. Yup, he's coming to check me out. He's got something in his hands. I don't know what his deal is … These assholes, they always get away."
Zimmerman then said: "Shit, he's running," and the sound changes, suggesting he has left his vehicle to run after Martin.
Dispatcher: "He's running? Which way is he running?"
Zimmerman: "Down towards the other entrance to the neighbourhood."
Dispatcher: "Which entrance is that that he's heading towards?"
Zimmerman: "The back entrance … fucking [unintelligible]"
"Are you following him?" the dispatcher asked. Zimmerman replied: "Yep."
"OK, we don't need you to do that," the dispatcher warned.
In one of the 911 calls from neighbours, a woman tells operators: "There's someone screaming outside. I think they're yelling help, but I don't know. Just send someone, quick."
Anguished cries can be heard and then a single gunshot. She said: "There's gunshots. Just one". The operator says: "I can't hear any more yelling, can you?" and she responds "No." The law
When asked why Zimmerman had not been arrested, the police said that he had made a statement of self-defence and that they have not established a case to dispute that. A 2005 Florida state law known as the "stand your ground" law permits anyone, anywhere, to use deadly force against another person if they believe their safety or life is in danger.
The law was signed by the then governor Jeb Bush, who called it a "good, common sense anti-crime" bill, but campaign ads against the law posted billboards warning Florida's tourists to avoid fights and "keep their hands in plain sight" if they end up in a disagreement. A further 16 states now have versions of this law.
Paul A Logli, president of the National District Attorneys Association, said of such laws: "They're basically giving citizens more rights to use deadly force than we give police officers, and with less review."
A piece in Time magazine quoting a St Petersburg Times report said that claims of justifiable homicides in Florida more than tripled after the law was passed. They went from just over 30 to more than 100 in 2010.
In that time, the stand-your-ground defence was used in 93 cases involving 65 deaths — and in most cases, it was used successfully.
In January, a former Broward County sheriff's deputy shot and wounded a homeless man inside a Häagen-Dazs ice cream shop in Miami Lakes. He said the man was threatening him and his family. Police said charges were unlikely in that case.
In 2008, a 15-year-old boy was killed during a shootout between two gangs in Tallahassee. Nobody was held accountable for the murder because a judge who cited the law dismissed the charges.
In one yet-to-be decided case, an unarmed man was shot and killed at a park near Tampa in a dispute over skateboarding rules in 2010. The victim's 10-year-old daughter watched her father die. A judge is currently considering whether the shooter merely stood his ground.
One problem with "stand your ground" laws is that they eliminate the concept of a "duty to retreat" from dangerous situations outside the home. Without a duty to retreat, a citizen has no obligation to stand down in the face of a threat. This means that prosecutors can no longer consider certain factors when determining self-defence, including the extent to which a person claiming self-defence may have aggravated the threat.
Prosecutors can have a hard time making a case if there is no one else around to contradict a person who claims self-defence, David Hill, a criminal defence attorney in Orlando told the Associated Press.
"If there is nobody around and you pull a gun, you just say: 'Hey, I reasonably believed I was under imminent attack. Hey, sorry. Too bad. But you can't prosecute me,'" Hill said. Race George Zimmerman says he acted in self-defence George Zimmerman says he acted in self-defence. Photograph: AP
"Stand Your Ground" not so fast... TY for providing this
Reports of the case suggest that Zimmerman was a vigilante with a false sense of authority and a fixation with young black males. Police records show Zimmerman had called 911 a total of 46 times between 1 January this year and the day he killed Martin, according to Mother Jones. Neighbours described him to the Miami Herald as being fixated on "young black men".
At least two websites have suggested that on an enhanced version the 911 tape, Zimmerman can be heard to say "fucking coons" as he chased after Martin, though the quality of the audio is too poor to confirm this and he could equally be saying "fucking phones" or something else.
Zimmerman's family have insisted that he is not a racist.
The case has also provoked claims of racism at the heart of the investigation. The officer in charge of the crime scene has been criticised before, in 2010, when he initially failed to arrest a lieutenant's son who was videotaped attacking a homeless black man.
Police officers are also alleged to have "corrected" a key witness when she said she heard the boy cry for help, according to ABC News. The station talked to the teacher and she confirmed that the officer corrected her and told her it was Zimmerman who cried for help, even though this has not been established as fact. The unanswered questions
• Why has Zimmerman not been arrested more than three weeks after killing an unarmed teenager?
• Why did police not test Zimmerman for drugs or alcohol?
A law enforcement expert told ABC News that Zimmerman was slurring his words and sounded intoxicated on the 911 tapes, something which was also picked up by the family's lawyer. Drug and alcohol testing is standard procedure in most homicide investigations.
• Why did police tell Martin's father that they hadn't pressed charges because Zimmerman was a criminal justice student with a "squeaky clean" record? It wasn't strictly true. In 2005, Zimmerman was arrested for resisting arrest with violence and battery on a law enforcement officer, although those charges were dropped.
• Why did a police officer "correct" a witness who told him she had heard Martin scream for help and say it was Zimmerman she heard?
• What happened to Martin's cellphone? Reports abound that Martin's parents were not informed of his murder until they contacted police to report him missing, despite having his cellphone is feeding further scepticism about the police's conduct. It led New York Times columnist Charles Blow to tweet on Monday urging his followers to make his Tweet trend "Where is Trayvon Martin's cellphone?"
I was surprised that this hadn't come up on the forums so far as I could tell. If there is a more appropriate place for this I am sorry but I just thought it was important.
I also want to be clear, regardless of the race of anyone who was involved this is ridiculous we can't have people chasing down kids shooting them to death, claiming self defense, then going home and being able to clean their gun and do it again uninterrupted.
If you want to sign a petition to bring justice for Trayvon Martin you can go here to do so
Looks like a way more informative post than the horrendously biased OP.
I would suggest including a section on media bias. It bears mentioning the role that media misinformation played in hyping this case up. Without the misinformation and biased reporting many people would not have been so quick to rush to judgment.
Key points would be:
Most media outlets have failed to mention that the police report said Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose and back of his head, and his back was wet and had grass on it suggesting he was on the ground on his back.
Most have failed to mention anything about the eyewitness John who saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman beating him up and also corroborated Zimmerman's story that it was him shouting for help.
Zimmerman was for a long time inaccurately called White with no mention of him being mixed race.
Zimmerman's photograph has been manipulated to make his skin look lighter.
Using outdated photos of Trayvon. Sometimes cropping out dates to conceal that they are outdated.
The media bias has been so bad that Fox recently re-reported John's testimony as though it were breaking news, because so many people hadn't even heard it:
Witness: Martin attacked Zimmerman A witness we haven't heard from before paints a much different picture than we've seen so far of what happened the night 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was shot and killed.
It shows more now about why police believed that night that George Zimmerman shouldn't have gone to jail.
His statements to police were instrumental, because police backed up Zimmerman's claims, saying those screams on the 911 call are those of Zimmerman.
They say "a witness we haven't heard from before" despite this interview being done the day after the shooting. It's pretty huge that this went unpublicized for so long considering the testimony of this witness played such a key role in the case.
Not disagreeing, but the real and perceived media bias results from the situation outlined in the OP and should be part of the discussion.
As for Zimmerman's skin appearing lighter, I don't think you can attribute that to any malicious or conscious manipulation by the media. Mugshots are often over-lit.
What I am referring to is the way Zimmerman's mugshot has been digitally manipulated to make his skin appear lighter. He seems to get lighter skinned every day.
The original mugshot makes it clear he is a visible minority. It's hard to believe this photo editing was accidental considering it fits nicely with these same news outlets reporting he is White.
I'm a graphic designer, and I think you're reading too much into it. The original photo does have incandescent or yellow cast. Some graphic design intern probably thought he was making the photo look "prettier" by futzing around with the color balance.
As an aside, here's an article that reinforces my belief that this is not a 'hate crime', rather the result of buffoon -- who was fearful of young black men -- making a series of really poor and disasterous decisions.
It doesn't make the situation any less tragic or infuriating, unfortunately. I think people's overall rage/concern about racial bias and loose gun control is still justified.
On March 26 2012 09:58 cLutZ wrote: The FL law that is so "controversial" was instituted because a bunch of hyperzealous state's attorneys in certain areas of the state were prosecuting people under the old law who were very likely acting in self defense. People defending against home invaders, muggers, etc were prosecuted (sometimes successfully) for using deadly force, so the FL legislature responded.
IMO the authorities in this case have been thorough and responsible, while the media has be rash and irresponsible. A conviction under my reading of current law is highly unlikely, defending against the case, however, could cost Zimmerman his life savings (if he has any), and an indictment would destroy his life regardless. The law is the law, if you think its bad you can change it, but FL literally just changed it because the old law also sucked.
Oooh they used deadly force against someone stealing property and got shafted for it? How unfortunate. Why of course I should shoot someone that's after my wallet. And indeed Trayvon got shot for way less.
I think its more a long the lines of Oooh, its easy proven what happened, vs crap we dont really know what happened yet and cant solve this in less than 24 hours..
As far as Trayvon goes, sure. My real point was that the old law seemed perfectly fine. Except that in the US being lawfully able to kill people seems real high on everyone's list. I have never understood why and I never will because noone has nor will they put forth a convincing argument.
Back to Trayvon. It doesn't really matter if Trayvon or Zimmerman initiated the fight. Zimmerman followed Trayvon and IF Trayvon initiated the fight he did so because he was afraid of Zimmerman, as is apparent from his conversation with his girlfriend prior to the incident. The question to me, then, isn't if Zimmerman is guilty, but exactly how guilty he is.
And @clutz, yes the US media has been as sensationalist as they always seem to be.
other than the lack of duty to retreat in Florida (which is not the case in my home state of California), how is swedish law any different? i googled it and it looks the same to me.
Simply put, this means that you are generally permitted to match the force with which you are attacked, and that you have a variable margin of permitted excessive violence depending on the circumstances.
That isn't a reliable source on how the swedish self defense paragraph works. It's basically that pages interprention of it.
Also while Sweden claims that precedents don't have the same value as in for example, the US, this is a truth with modification and there are several precedents where self defense has been defined by the High Court of Sweden (Not really sure if that's a correct translation to be honest) and law students are pretty much taught what these precedents say.
The use of deadly force in Sweden is rarely, if ever, allowed in Sweden and it's basically a scenario where you've emptied ALL of your available options to you. Also, seeing how carrying weapons such as Knifes or Guns are illegal (unless you have a license) very rarely will you be able to explain to a judge that you just "happened to have" a deadly weapon on you, when you're claiming self defense. I'm not very well read within guns and knifes as of yet, although I'm pretty positive you're only granted a license if they are used in your work or if you do a hobby which requires professional training such as hunting for deer/moose etc.
We also have the duty to retreat, but you've already mentioned that. Basically this already falls on the fact that the man was carrying a gun if we're talking Swedish laws. So no, they are not same.
thanks, that makes sense. didnt know you guys couldnt even carry knives (as it should be). wish my neighborhood was as safe... alas, i live near oakland and richmond.
Police records show Zimmerman had called 911 a total of 46 times between 1 January this year and the day he killed Martin, according to Mother Jones. Neighbours described him to the Miami Herald as being fixated on "young black men".
I didn't read this entire thread, was it deemed to be false? Or are we just trading one bias for another here?
Police records show Zimmerman had called 911 a total of 46 times between 1 January this year and the day he killed Martin, according to Mother Jones. Neighbours described him to the Miami Herald as being fixated on "young black men".
I didn't read this entire thread, was it deemed to be false? Or are we just trading one bias for another here?
how about using google instead of immediately claiming bias?
On March 26 2012 11:04 cLutZ wrote: Let us also not forget, that HAD Zimmerman been a cop, he would have acted no differently, and probably would have been even more of a dick to Travon Martin. Let us further not forget that just because someone has a badge does not mean they are a better person than the average gunowner, in fact the Stanford Prison Experiment, would suggest that they are far worse.
Presumably a cop wouldn't have been stalking him without cause, and even if he had, he wouldn't have reason to fear he was about to be attacked. He'd probably expect to get harassed, because that's what cops do, but not attacked, which you might reasonably expect of a large, plain-clothed man stalking you at night in a bad neighborhood.
Here's a recent video of a Black friend of George Zimmerman defending him on ABC News. The friend says he can clearly make out from some of the audio tapes it is the voice of George screaming for help.
Trayvon Martin Shooting: Joe Oliver Discusses His Friend George Zimmerman
On March 26 2012 12:15 screamingpalm wrote: What about this from the original post?
Police records show Zimmerman had called 911 a total of 46 times between 1 January this year and the day he killed Martin, according to Mother Jones. Neighbours described him to the Miami Herald as being fixated on "young black men".
I didn't read this entire thread, was it deemed to be false? Or are we just trading one bias for another here?
how about using google instead of immediately claiming bias?
I'm not the one condemning the original post as sensationalist and then leaving out pertinent, important information. Why isn't this in the updated OP?
On March 26 2012 12:15 screamingpalm wrote: What about this from the original post?
Police records show Zimmerman had called 911 a total of 46 times between 1 January this year and the day he killed Martin, according to Mother Jones. Neighbours described him to the Miami Herald as being fixated on "young black men".
I didn't read this entire thread, was it deemed to be false? Or are we just trading one bias for another here?
how about using google instead of immediately claiming bias?
I'm not the one condemning the original post as sensationalist and then leaving out pertinent, important information. Why isn't this in the updated OP?
if you feel you can do better, why dont you write an updated op?
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Dhu1z.jpg)
