776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—
(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) 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, or 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, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or
(d) The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.
(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
(4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.
(5) As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.
(b) “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.
(c) “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.
If I’m reading this right the Florida law puts Zimmerman in the wrong.
(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:
(c) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or
--[Zimmerman wasn’t in any danger. He created the situation that placed him in danger, then used deadly force to get himself out of the situation.]
(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony
--[Trayvon had every right to be within that neighborhood and by Zimmerman’s own words, Trayvon was not committing any unlawful acts – ‘Trayvon looked suspicious’.
(4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.
--[Zimmerman’s actions clearly demonstrated that he had intent to use force or violence against Trayvon the moment he left the security of his vehicle and started pursuing Trayvon on foot.
SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
A W.M.A. was involved so it must be racist or sexist. Duh.
Zimmerman isn't white. He's latino.
Not according to media reports and the US census. Latino isn't a race, it's ethnicity. :ugeek:
On the plus side, whitey can now claim they are back on the top of the boxing circuits! And this should also put and end to a great deal of alleged racism as well.
Osaka, Japan (2/21/95), San Diego (7/10/98), Las Vegas (10/22/00), San Diego (10/25/00), Las Vegas (6/6/03), Las Vegas (7/6/06), Los Angeles (7/9/06), VH1 Rock Honors (7/12/08), Ed Solo (7/8/11), Ed Solo (11/1/12), Los Angeles (11/23/13)
i found this article to be quite partisan. i didn't understand the need for the 3rd paragraph. why didn't the article contain any examples of republican/conservative overreaction. ex:"zimmerman has a sick mind" rick santorum ect.
bill needs to not change the subject. lets stay focused on the fact that 30 some odd days after killing an innocent kid, george zimmerman still is free. thats no fucking rush to judgement. thats a free pass.
A Miami funeral director says Trayvon Martin’s body showed no signs of a violent brawl.
Richard Kurtz said his examination of the slain Florida teen’s corpse revealed no cuts, scratches or bruises, only a gunshot wound to the chest.
Kurtz’s account appears to contradict George Zimmerman’s claims that he shot Trayvon during a life-and-death struggle.
“We could see no physical signs like there had been a scuffle [or\] there had been a fight,” Kurtz told CBS News.
“The hands — I didn’t see any knuckles, bruises or what have you, and that is something we would have covered up if it would have been there.”
Trayvon “looked perfectly normal to me when he came in and the story just does not make sense that he was in this type of scuffle or fight in anything that we could see,” Kurtz added.
Kurtz’s account marked the latest twist in a case that has sparked outrage across the U.S. over the murder of an unarmed black teen.
Zimmerman killed Trayvon, 17, in a gated community in Sanford last month after calling 911 to report a suspicious person.
Zimmerman, 28, claimed self-defense and was not arrested.
Zimmerman’s father has said his son, an insurance agent who spent nights patrolling his neighborhood, suffered a broken nose and bloody gashes on his head during his fight with Trayvon.
He downplayed a video shot in the police station that shows Zimmerman apparently free of any bruises, blood or bandages.
On Friday, the Daily News obtained EMS documents suggesting Zimmerman, who an ex-colleague said was fired from a security job for being too aggressive, did not sustain serious injuries in the fatal encounter.
Paperwork detailing the EMS response to the shooting scene shows that a call for a second ambulance was canceled.
An audiotape containing the EMS communications, also obtained by The News on Friday, records unidentified workers discussing the scene.
Zimmerman’s condition is mentioned briefly in the 30-minute recording.
“Do we have a second patient?” a man asks.
“That’s affirmative. We have a second patient,” a woman replies. “The second patient is not a gunshot.”
Nothing I've seen has changed my mind about this case. Zimmerman is a guy who assaulted a cop and was forced into court ordered anger management. Trayvon was an immature kid. I'm convinced with how over zealous Zimmerman was that at some point he was going to hurt or kill someone. Unfortunately for Trayvon and his friends and family it was him.
This show, another show, a show here and a show there.
As the Trayvon Martin controversy splinters into a debate about self-defense, a central question remains: Who was heard crying for help on a 911 call in the moments before the teen was shot?
A leading expert in the field of forensic voice identification sought to answer that question by analyzing the recordings for the Orlando Sentinel.
His result: It was not George Zimmerman who called for help.
Tom Owen, forensic consultant for Owen Forensic Services LLC and chair emeritus for the American Board of Recorded Evidence, used voice identification software to rule out Zimmerman. Another expert contacted by the Sentinel, utilizing different techniques, came to the same conclusion.
Zimmerman claims self-defense in the shooting and told police he was the one screaming for help. But these experts say the evidence tells a different story.
'Scientific certainty'
On a rainy night in late February, a woman called 911 to report someone crying out for help in her gated Sanford community, Retreat at Twin Lakes.
Though several of her neighbors eventually called authorities, she phoned early enough for dispatchers to hear the panicked cries and the gunshot that took Trayvon Martin's life.
George Zimmerman, a Neighborhood Watch volunteer, shot Trayvon, an unarmed 17-year-old, during a one-on-one confrontation Feb. 26.
Before the shot, one of them can be heard screaming for help.
Owen, a court-qualified expert witness and former chief engineer for the New York Public Library's Rodgers and Hammerstein Archives of Recorded Sound, is an authority on biometric voice analysis — a computerized process comparing attributes of voices to determine whether they match.
After the Sentinel contacted Owen, he used software called Easy Voice Biometrics to compare Zimmerman's voice to the 911 call screams.
"I took all of the screams and put those together, and cut out everything else," Owen says.
The software compared that audio to Zimmerman's voice. It returned a 48 percent match. Owen said to reach a positive match with audio of this quality, he'd expect higher than 90 percent.
"As a result of that, you can say with reasonable scientific certainty that it's not Zimmerman," Owen says, stressing that he cannot confirm the voice as Trayvon's, because he didn't have a sample of the teen's voice to compare.
Forensic voice identification is not a new or novel concept; in fact, a recent U.S. Department of Justice committee report notes that federal interest in the technology "has a history of nearly 70 years."
In the post 9-11 world, Owen says, voice identification is "the main biometric tool" used to track international criminals, as well as terrorists.
"These people don't leave fingerprints, but they do still need to talk to one another," he says.
'The home run'
Though the term "biometric analysis" may sound futuristic, it basically just means using personal characteristics for identification. A fingerprint scanner is an example of a biometric device.
Much as the ridges of a human hand produce a fingerprint, each human voice has unique, distinguishable traits, Owen says. "They're all particular to the individual."
The technology Owen used to analyze the Zimmerman tape has a wide range of applications, including national security and international policing, he said. A recently as January, Owen used the same technology to identify accused murderer Sheila Davalloo in a 911 call made almost a decade ago.
Owen testified that it was Davalloo, accused of stabbing another woman nine times in a condo in Shippan, Conn., who reported the killing to police from a pay phone in November 2002.
Davalloo was convicted, according to news reports.
Owen says the audio from Zimmerman's call is much better quality than the 911 call in the Davalloo case. Voice identification experts judge the quality based on a signal-to-noise ratio; in other words, comparing the usable audio in a clip to the environmental noises that make a match difficult.
And the call on which the screams are heard is better quality than is necessary, Owen says.
"In our world, that's the home run," he says.
Not all experts rely on biometrics. Ed Primeau, a Michigan-based audio engineer and forensics expert, is not a believer in the technology's use in courtroom settings.
He relies instead on audio enhancement and human analysis based on forensic experience. After listening closely to the 911 tape on which the screams are heard, Primeau also has a strong opinion.
"I believe that's Trayvon Martin in the background, without a doubt," Primeau says, stressing that the tone of the voice is a giveaway. "That's a young man screaming."
Zimmerman's call to authorities minutes before the shooting provides a good standard for comparison, Primeau says, because it captures his voice both at rest and in an agitated state.
'CSI' effect
Only one person alive knows exactly what transpired in the moments immediately before Trayvon was fatally shot: Zimmerman, who has claimed he fired in self-defense.
Zimmerman told police he was walking back to his SUV after a brief foot pursuit of Martin, and the teen confronted and attacked him, punching him and slamming his head into the pavement.
Arriving police said Zimmerman was bloodied. One officer wrote in a police report that he overheard Zimmerman telling a paramedic, "I was yelling for someone to help me, but no one would help me."
Angela Corey, the special prosecutor assigned to the case, has yet to decide whether to charge Zimmerman, send the case to a grand jury or decide against charging.
If Zimmerman's self-defense claim is tested at trial, legal experts say a forensic identification of the voice in the 911 audio could be key evidence, either in Zimmerman's favor or to his detriment.
Still, Maine-based audio enhancement expert Arlo West says that today's juries sometimes seem reluctant to accept evidence that's any less conclusive than what they're used to seeing on television.
"I call it the 'CSI' effect," he says, referring to "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation," the popular — if not always realistic — forensics-based TV drama. "You get in front of a jury, and they expect a miracle."
Rushing to judgement really has nothing to do with the facts of the case. The facts say Zimmerman should be in jail.
None of us know all the facts. It seems as if we learn something new every day or there is more insight to things that may still not be clear. Both Martin's family and Zimmerman are due the respect of the legal process and I sincerely hope justice is served. The way people have lodged themselves into camps on this issue at such an early stage of the investigative process is depressing.
Rushing to judgement really has nothing to do with the facts of the case. The facts say Zimmerman should be in jail.
None of us know all the facts. It seems as if we learn something new every day or there is more insight to things that may still not be clear. Both Martin's family and Zimmerman are due the respect of the legal process and I sincerely hope justice is served. The way people have lodged themselves into camps on this issue at such an early stage of the investigative process is depressing.
The point is the legal process is doing nothing. The cops let Zimmerman go hours after killing a kid. This case would be dead if it weren't for the media and the justice department getting involved.
This show, another show, a show here and a show there.
I just had a great weekend and have a fresh thought about this whole mess... it was a tragic loss of a young life and no matter what we or anybody else thinks happend all the hate and media mambo jambo will not make things better,all we can do is wait for the law to deside what will happen.
Rushing to judgement really has nothing to do with the facts of the case. The facts say Zimmerman should be in jail.
None of us know all the facts. It seems as if we learn something new every day or there is more insight to things that may still not be clear. Both Martin's family and Zimmerman are due the respect of the legal process and I sincerely hope justice is served. The way people have lodged themselves into camps on this issue at such an early stage of the investigative process is depressing.
The point is the legal process is doing nothing. The cops let Zimmerman go hours after killing a kid. This case would be dead if it weren't for the media and the justice department getting involved.
There is a wide chasm between the "case being dead" and not arresting/detaining someone. The investigation is still ongoing and (based on much what I've read) could easily lead to arrest. Don't mistake being cynical about the process with objective analysis.
I heard about that this morning. I'm not the least bit shocked by it, sadly. I'd already heard the 911 tape edited in other news broadcasts to cut out the part where Zimmerman says, "Ok," after the dispatcher asks him not to follow Martin. This example by NBC is at least as bad because it could only have been edited in that way in order to make it sound like one continuous thought by Zimmerman as if the dispatcher never spoke to him in between. They fan the flames and subtly (or not-so-subtly) encourage people to assume Zimmerman's guilty and a racist. People can say whatever they want about Fox News but they should at least acknowledge that the other news networks are just as bad.
People can say whatever they want about Fox News but they should at least acknowledge that the other news networks are just as bad.
in the romney thread - you will see that i suggest people turn off "cnn, fox and all that shit" ... really ... much of it is making people dumber ... and in my opinion ... that's on purpose ...
I think another fact that might be important is heard on the call that Zimmerman made to the police. At the end of the call, the operator tells Zimmerman to wait by the community mailboxes for the police to arrive. Zimmerman answers, "Yes, that's fine."
Then he changes his mind and suggests that the police call him when they arrive.
He changed his mind (and didnt listen to the operators suggestions a second time) because he didnt want to stay in one place. Maybe he wanted to pursue Martin. He only wanted to do what fit his agenda.
I heard about that this morning. I'm not the least bit shocked by it, sadly. I'd already heard the 911 tape edited in other news broadcasts to cut out the part where Zimmerman says, "Ok," after the dispatcher asks him not to follow Martin. This example by NBC is at least as bad because it could only have been edited in that way in order to make it sound like one continuous thought by Zimmerman as if the dispatcher never spoke to him in between. They fan the flames and subtly (or not-so-subtly) encourage people to assume Zimmerman's guilty and a racist. People can say whatever they want about Fox News but they should at least acknowledge that the other news networks are just as bad.
The national media are savages.
I heard a great comparison of them today.
The media is like a fire bug. They set a fire, call it in and sit back and watch as people are running around trying to put it out.
I heard about this through the PBP paper also, there was reporting of this tragic crime on our local news . Some horrific crimes catch on with the media and are reported on many times over this one appears not to one of them.
Peace
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
I think another fact that might be important is heard on the call that Zimmerman made to the police. At the end of the call, the operator tells Zimmerman to wait by the community mailboxes for the police to arrive. Zimmerman answers, "Yes, that's fine."
Then he changes his mind and suggests that the police call him when they arrive.
He changed his mind (and didnt listen to the operators suggestions a second time) because he didnt want to stay in one place. Maybe he wanted to pursue Martin. He only wanted to do what fit his agenda.
If you read earlier in the trasncript, he says that the police will see his truck if they go past the mailboxes. At that point he had already left his truck and had followed Martin before being asked to stop, so he wasn't actually at the mailboxes at the time of the call. Just because he didn't go back to the mailboxes doesn't mean that he kept following Martin, especially since he said right before that that he didn't want to say his address because he didn't know where Martin was. If he didn't know where Martin was, how could he be following him a mere 9 seconds later (which is what would have to have happened in order for him to change his mind by that point in the call)? Not wanting to meet at the mailboxes could simply mean that he didn't want to leave the spot where he last saw Martin so he could show them where he last saw him without having to go back and forth. Since we really have no idea how much time passed between the end of the call and the start of the fight, there's no way anyone can say with any degree of certainty whether or not Zimmerman decided to keep following Martin after saying he was going to stop. You don't know where he was standing in relation to the mailboxes--just that you had to go past them to find his truck. That could be 50 feet or 500 feet.
I think another fact that might be important is heard on the call that Zimmerman made to the police. At the end of the call, the operator tells Zimmerman to wait by the community mailboxes for the police to arrive. Zimmerman answers, "Yes, that's fine."
Then he changes his mind and suggests that the police call him when they arrive.
He changed his mind (and didnt listen to the operators suggestions a second time) because he didnt want to stay in one place. Maybe he wanted to pursue Martin. He only wanted to do what fit his agenda.
If you read earlier in the trasncript, he says that the police will see his truck if they go past the mailboxes. At that point he had already left his truck and had followed Martin before being asked to stop, so he wasn't actually at the mailboxes at the time of the call. Just because he didn't go back to the mailboxes doesn't mean that he kept following Martin, especially since he said right before that that he didn't want to say his address because he didn't know where Martin was. If he didn't know where Martin was, how could he be following him a mere 9 seconds later (which is what would have to have happened in order for him to change his mind by that point in the call)? Not wanting to meet at the mailboxes could simply mean that he didn't want to leave the spot where he last saw Martin so he could show them where he last saw him without having to go back and forth.
Thats definitely a possibility. Obviously nobody is certain of what happened after that call. My point was that the operator told him to do something twice, to which Zimmerman was opposed. The operator was obviously trying to keep him from getting into a predicament. If his truck was by the mailboxes, he couldve still met police there and accompanied them to the last spot that he saw Martin. I just thought it was odd, thats all. If I was in his position, and the operator told me to go to my truck by the mailboxes, I wouldve went to my truck by the mailboxes, not said -- "call me when you arrive." (obviously suggesting that he doesnt know where he'll be)..maybe its just me, but that's another reflection of his attitude -- he wanted to be the guy to bust Martin. he said obviously annoyed, "they always get away."
Since we really have no idea how much time passed between the end of the call and the start of the fight, there's no way anyone can say with any degree of certainty whether or not Zimmerman decided to keep following Martin after saying he was going to stop. You don't know where he was standing in relation to the mailboxes--just that you had to go past them to find his truck. That could be 50 feet or 500 feet.
Well, basically, we know he went pretty far from his truck to pursue MArtin -- we don't know if it was before or after the call though -- Either way, if he was told to go back to his car, if he was close when they suggested that, he couldve easily just agreed and waited for police to arrive at his car. But he didnt want to agree to waiting by the mailboxes, so maybe he was far from his truck. Either way, its not like he couldnt lead the police back to where he last saw Martin. it actually wasnt far. I saw the map of the area, the entrance, and the spot where Martin was killed. He had his own plan, the way I see it.
to answer the completely fair question black-on-black crime has been protested but the white media does not care because it doesn't move the needle. most of us can't imagine this sadness and i hope we never do.
to answer the completely fair question black-on-black crime has been protested but the white media does not care because it doesn't move the needle. most of us can't imagine this sadness and i hope we never do.
the "white media" ???? you my friend are a perfect example of why racism is alive and well in America...the white media ? you are lost in your own cause so much you can't see beyond "black and white" the 60's are over my friend, just try and get along with your fellow man and stop pushing your agenda on people.
to answer the completely fair question black-on-black crime has been protested but the white media does not care because it doesn't move the needle. most of us can't imagine this sadness and i hope we never do.
Part of the issue is that the media tends to follow issues that are unique and rare. For instance, if a 1-year old falls in a swimming pool and drowns, it most likely will not make the 10 pm local news as more then a side note. But if a 1-year old falls in a washing machine and drowns in Oregon, it makes national headlines.
Now consider that perspective in regards to how alive racism is in the U.S. If it is as bad as everybody claims, how is it that Al Sharpton isn't on a 356 day tour from crime to crime? This case has claimed the attention of everyone in America for the alleged racial profiling that lead to the death of a young man. If racism was as rampant as claimed, why would this story be as big as it is? Especially since the shooter is of Hispanic ethnicity?
to answer the completely fair question black-on-black crime has been protested but the white media does not care because it doesn't move the needle. most of us can't imagine this sadness and i hope we never do.
Part of the issue is that the media tends to follow issues that are unique and rare. For instance, if a 1-year old falls in a swimming pool and drowns, it most likely will not make the 10 pm local news as more then a side note. But if a 1-year old falls in a washing machine and drowns in Oregon, it makes national headlines.
Now consider that perspective in regards to how alive racism is in the U.S. If it is as bad as everybody claims, how is it that Al Sharpton isn't on a 356 day tour from crime to crime? This case has claimed the attention of everyone in America for the alleged racial profiling that lead to the death of a young man. If racism was as rampant as claimed, why would this story be as big as it is? Especially since the shooter is of Hispanic ethnicity?
Posted this yesterday and will post it again.
The media is like a fire bug. They set a fire, call it in and sit back and watch as people are running around trying to put it out.
Comments
well yes there are those who are famous for being nothing other than famous who claim to want exactly what they hope never happens.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Title XLVI
CRIMES
Chapter 776
JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE
776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—
(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) 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, or 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, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or
(d) The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.
(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
(4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.
(5) As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.
(b) “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.
(c) “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.
If I’m reading this right the Florida law puts Zimmerman in the wrong.
(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:
(c) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or
--[Zimmerman wasn’t in any danger. He created the situation that placed him in danger, then used deadly force to get himself out of the situation.]
(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony
--[Trayvon had every right to be within that neighborhood and by Zimmerman’s own words, Trayvon was not committing any unlawful acts – ‘Trayvon looked suspicious’.
(4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.
--[Zimmerman’s actions clearly demonstrated that he had intent to use force or violence against Trayvon the moment he left the security of his vehicle and started pursuing Trayvon on foot.
Zimmerman isn't white. He's latino.
On the plus side, whitey can now claim they are back on the top of the boxing circuits! And this should also put and end to a great deal of alleged racism as well.
Pretty good read. Opinion piece.
Good read - thanks for sharing.
i found this article to be quite partisan. i didn't understand the need for the 3rd paragraph. why didn't the article contain any examples of republican/conservative overreaction. ex:"zimmerman has a sick mind" rick santorum ect.
bill needs to not change the subject. lets stay focused on the fact that 30 some odd days after killing an innocent kid, george zimmerman still is free. thats no fucking rush to judgement. thats a free pass.
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... z1qikJ8aVR
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/t ... man-306574
Rushing to judgement really has nothing to do with the facts of the case. The facts say Zimmerman should be in jail.
None of us know all the facts. It seems as if we learn something new every day or there is more insight to things that may still not be clear. Both Martin's family and Zimmerman are due the respect of the legal process and I sincerely hope justice is served. The way people have lodged themselves into camps on this issue at such an early stage of the investigative process is depressing.
The point is the legal process is doing nothing. The cops let Zimmerman go hours after killing a kid. This case would be dead if it weren't for the media and the justice department getting involved.
Godfather.
There is a wide chasm between the "case being dead" and not arresting/detaining someone. The investigation is still ongoing and (based on much what I've read) could easily lead to arrest. Don't mistake being cynical about the process with objective analysis.
I heard about that this morning. I'm not the least bit shocked by it, sadly. I'd already heard the 911 tape edited in other news broadcasts to cut out the part where Zimmerman says, "Ok," after the dispatcher asks him not to follow Martin. This example by NBC is at least as bad because it could only have been edited in that way in order to make it sound like one continuous thought by Zimmerman as if the dispatcher never spoke to him in between. They fan the flames and subtly (or not-so-subtly) encourage people to assume Zimmerman's guilty and a racist. People can say whatever they want about Fox News but they should at least acknowledge that the other news networks are just as bad.
in the romney thread - you will see that i suggest people turn off "cnn, fox and all that shit" ... really ... much of it is making people dumber ... and in my opinion ... that's on purpose ...
Then he changes his mind and suggests that the police call him when they arrive.
He changed his mind (and didnt listen to the operators suggestions a second time) because he didnt want to stay in one place. Maybe he wanted to pursue Martin. He only wanted to do what fit his agenda.
I heard a great comparison of them today.
The media is like a fire bug. They set a fire, call it in and sit back and watch as people are running around trying to put it out.
Where's the outcry????
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/201 ... -zimmerman
Wonder if MSNBC will talk about this.
http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news/lo ... s-injuries
I know of several activists and leaders that could lend their national identity to help spotlight this tragedy.
I heard about this through the PBP paper also, there was reporting of this tragic crime on our local news . Some horrific crimes catch on with the media and are reported on many times over this one appears not to one of them.
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
If you read earlier in the trasncript, he says that the police will see his truck if they go past the mailboxes. At that point he had already left his truck and had followed Martin before being asked to stop, so he wasn't actually at the mailboxes at the time of the call. Just because he didn't go back to the mailboxes doesn't mean that he kept following Martin, especially since he said right before that that he didn't want to say his address because he didn't know where Martin was. If he didn't know where Martin was, how could he be following him a mere 9 seconds later (which is what would have to have happened in order for him to change his mind by that point in the call)? Not wanting to meet at the mailboxes could simply mean that he didn't want to leave the spot where he last saw Martin so he could show them where he last saw him without having to go back and forth. Since we really have no idea how much time passed between the end of the call and the start of the fight, there's no way anyone can say with any degree of certainty whether or not Zimmerman decided to keep following Martin after saying he was going to stop. You don't know where he was standing in relation to the mailboxes--just that you had to go past them to find his truck. That could be 50 feet or 500 feet.
Thats definitely a possibility. Obviously nobody is certain of what happened after that call. My point was that the operator told him to do something twice, to which Zimmerman was opposed. The operator was obviously trying to keep him from getting into a predicament. If his truck was by the mailboxes, he couldve still met police there and accompanied them to the last spot that he saw Martin. I just thought it was odd, thats all. If I was in his position, and the operator told me to go to my truck by the mailboxes, I wouldve went to my truck by the mailboxes, not said -- "call me when you arrive." (obviously suggesting that he doesnt know where he'll be)..maybe its just me, but that's another reflection of his attitude -- he wanted to be the guy to bust Martin. he said obviously annoyed, "they always get away."
Well, basically, we know he went pretty far from his truck to pursue MArtin -- we don't know if it was before or after the call though -- Either way, if he was told to go back to his car, if he was close when they suggested that, he couldve easily just agreed and waited for police to arrive at his car. But he didnt want to agree to waiting by the mailboxes, so maybe he was far from his truck. Either way, its not like he couldnt lead the police back to where he last saw Martin. it actually wasnt far. I saw the map of the area, the entrance, and the spot where Martin was killed. He had his own plan, the way I see it.
to answer the completely fair question black-on-black crime has been protested but the white media does not care because it doesn't move the needle. most of us can't imagine this sadness and i hope we never do.
the "white media" ???? you my friend are a perfect example of why racism is alive and well in America...the white media ? you are lost in your own cause so much you can't see beyond "black and white" the 60's are over my friend, just try and get along with your fellow man and stop pushing your agenda on people.
Godfather.
Now consider that perspective in regards to how alive racism is in the U.S. If it is as bad as everybody claims, how is it that Al Sharpton isn't on a 356 day tour from crime to crime? This case has claimed the attention of everyone in America for the alleged racial profiling that lead to the death of a young man. If racism was as rampant as claimed, why would this story be as big as it is? Especially since the shooter is of Hispanic ethnicity?
The media is like a fire bug. They set a fire, call it in and sit back and watch as people are running around trying to put it out.