Trayvon Martin

AllNiteThing wrote:

Aside from killing an intrude in your home, I would think nearly all cases should go through a court of law. Even an intruder in your home, someone could fabricate a story and who is it that makes the judgment call? Some cops? When it involves the death of another human, I don't think we can afford to make discretionary judgment calls at the scene like that.

Monster Rain wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

Im still just trying to figure out if Zimmerman is the self appointed chief of neighborhood watch, does that mean he has particular hours when he is on duty, or is he always in the neighborhood watch? Because generally, they are instructed to NEVER pursue, and NEVER be armed.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/201 ... -zimmerman

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

First, he approached a stranger he suspected of wrongdoing.

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

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

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

*****
So I guess it depends on how you take it. He was breaking protocol from the get-go. Then he was told not to follow Treyvon and to go back to his car. Then he disagreed, saying the police should call him (likely because he wont be back at his car where he was instructed to go).

I have no doubt that Zimmerman made a stupid decision when he got out of his truck. He had no way of knowing if Martin was armed at that point (and I believe he mentioned during the 911 call that Martin's hands were in his pockets at one point, which would have been enough to make me go back to my vehicle at that point whether I was armed or not). I have no way of knowing right now what happened after he hung up the phone that night, so I cannot assume anything without some sort of credible evidence. I hope that someone in that neighborhood saw what happened that night and that information just hasn't leaked yet--and by that I mean I hope someone saw who initiated the conflict, where they were when it started, which direction they were facing, etc.--because aside from a credible eyewitness account or video from someone's home security system we might not ever know how the fight began.

JonnyPistachio wrote:

Monster Rain wrote:

JonnyPistachio wrote:

Im still just trying to figure out if Zimmerman is the self appointed chief of neighborhood watch, does that mean he has particular hours when he is on duty, or is he always in the neighborhood watch? Because generally, they are instructed to NEVER pursue, and NEVER be armed.

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/201 ... -zimmerman

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

First, he approached a stranger he suspected of wrongdoing.

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

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

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

*****
So I guess it depends on how you take it. He was breaking protocol from the get-go. Then he was told not to follow Treyvon and to go back to his car. Then he disagreed, saying the police should call him (likely because he wont be back at his car where he was instructed to go).

I have no doubt that Zimmerman made a stupid decision when he got out of his truck. He had no way of knowing if Martin was armed at that point (and I believe he mentioned during the 911 call that Martin's hands were in his pockets at one point, which would have been enough to make me go back to my vehicle at that point whether I was armed or not). I have no way of knowing right now what happened after he hung up the phone that night, so I cannot assume anything without some sort of credible evidence. I hope that someone in that neighborhood saw what happened that night and that information just hasn't leaked yet--and by that I mean I hope someone saw who initiated the conflict, where they were when it started, which direction they were facing, etc.--because aside from a credible eyewitness account or video from someone's home security system we might not ever know how the fight began.

I can agree with that.
And as it stands, I think Zimmerman is 'innocent' according to our shitty laws. Even it is proven that he has a cut on his head, or if it was him screaming on the tape, I still think he was wrong for his actions. (just my opinion). If no witness can say he shot without provocation, he just has to say, in his opinion, that he felt threatened.

Also, wanna see something funny? here's the law that I found:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony;

insane if you ask me.

The special prosecutor in the Trayvon Martin case will announce criminal charges against George Zimmerman about 6 p.m. ET Wednesday, a law enforcement official told NBC News.

The nature of the charges weren't immediately known, the official told NBC News Justice Department correspondent Pete Williams, speaking on condition of anonymity. But because Angela Corey, the special prosecutor appointed by Florida Gov. Rick Scott to re-examine the case, previously announced that she wouldn't take the case to a grand jury, first-degree murder is not an option