Trayvon Martin and "Stand Your Ground" in FL

[carlfense]

"Alan Dershowitz told the BBC that the verdict was "right" and that there was "reasonable doubt" as to Zimmerman's guilt.[246] In regards to the prosecution, he said "She (State Attorney Angela Corey) submitted an affidavit that was, if not perjurious, completely misleading. She violated all kinds of rules of the profession, and her conduct bordered on criminal conduct. [...] Halfway through the trial she realized she wasn't going to get a second degree murder verdict, so she asked for a compromised verdict, for manslaughter. And then, she went even further and said that she was going to charge him with child abuse and felony murder. That was such a stretch that it goes beyond anything professionally responsible. She was among the most irresponsible prosecutors I've seen in 50 years of litigating cases, and believe me, I've seen good prosecutors, bad prosecutors, but rarely have I seen one as bad as this prosecutor."[247][248]"

She didn't violate any rules of her profession and her conduct didn't border on criminal.

 

That's crazy talk.

[Junior]

http://abcnews.go.co...ory?id=15977847

 

The Martin family also criticized the Sanford police department for failing to identify their son more quickly. Martin's body was left in the morgue for three days, classified as a "John Doe." The family charges that officers didn't bother to ask neighbors if they recognized Martin, who had been staying with his father in the neighborhood.

 

Maybe you aren't quite as versed in the case as you think you are... or you just ignore information that doesn't fit with your narrative.

Those who live in glass houses, shouldn't throw stones. Or something like that.

For how long?

 

Does it matter? His father was staying there... so that's his home. Maybe it's one of two or three places he can call home. If I move to a new house, and on the first night I call it home... am I wrong? I still call my father's house my home, even though I own a house. Is that wrong?

 

My buddy is divorced with a kid, and his son stays with him for varying lengths of time. Would his son not be in the right to be walking in my buddy's neighborhood and say "Well, time to head home" and mean his father's house?.

 

The fact that you've gone to this length to attempt to prove that Martin shouldn't have been walking in this neighborhood is just... mind numbing.

[SECHusker]

Ah, but you failed to answer the crucial question: Where, at that moment, should Trayvon Martin have been going?

So he was the guest of someone who lived in the community, and that warrants being followed? I see that you are bringing the kids history into the equation, how that is relevant to how he got shot I have no clue, and will let you explain.

 

If your argument is that he was troubled, ok still not relevant, and still does not show a dangerous demenaor or history.

I only quoted the part about his history because that was the first article that came up when I Googled trying to find a link for Junior that no one seems to believe existed.

 

I didn't make any statements that Martin shouldn't have been there. I was originally responding to carlfense's comment that if Zimmerman wouldn't have followed him nothing would have happened. Saying if Martin wouldn't have been walking there it wouldn't have happened is just as valid and, in fact, Zimmerman had more right to be there than Martin did as that's where he lived. Anything else implies the assumption that Zimmerman was the attacker which is speculation at best and a lie at worst.

 

I've asked before and no one seemed to have an answer so I'll ask again. Zimmerman had a long history of investigating suspicious activity in that neighborhood. Had he ever confronted any of his suspects before? I don't know the answer to that question but it would seem to give some insight into if Zimmerman was telling the truth or not. If he had never confronted anyone else, it would seem fairly unlikely that this would be the first time. If he had a history of confronting people, it would make his story harder to believe.

 

I'm not sure if this is law, but I would imagine that if you are a guest of someone who lives in a commmunity, you similar/same rights of access to the community as the homeowner that invited you. That maybe wrong, and maybe the State or HOA at the community have that something different.

 

I don't know the answer to that question, I wish I did and I hope the prosecution brought that up pre-trial or during trial.

[Mavric]

http://abcnews.go.co...ory?id=15977847

 

The Martin family also criticized the Sanford police department for failing to identify their son more quickly. Martin's body was left in the morgue for three days, classified as a "John Doe." The family charges that officers didn't bother to ask neighbors if they recognized Martin, who had been staying with his father in the neighborhood.

 

Maybe you aren't quite as versed in the case as you think you are... or you just ignore information that doesn't fit with your narrative.

Those who live in glass houses, shouldn't throw stones. Or something like that.

For how long?

 

Does it matter? His father was staying there... so that's his home. Maybe it's one of two or three places he can call home. If I move to a new house, and on the first night I call it home... am I wrong? I still call my father's house my home, even though I own a house. Is that wrong?

 

My buddy is divorced with a kid, and his son stays with him for varying lengths of time. Would his son not be in the right to be walking in my buddy's neighborhood and say "Well, time to head home" and mean his father's house?.

 

The fact that you've gone to this length to attempt to prove that Martin shouldn't have been walking in this neighborhood is just... mind numbing.

It absolutely matters. Has directly to do with the bolded and underline part you quoted. If he had been there one night, how could they have expected anyone to recognize him?

[Mavric]

I didn't make any statements that Martin shouldn't have been there.

The fact that you've gone to this length to attempt to prove that Martin shouldn't have been walking in this neighborhood is just... mind numbing.

Mind numbing indeed.

[knapplc]

I've asked before and no one seemed to have an answer so I'll ask again. Zimmerman had a long history of investigating suspicious activity in that neighborhood. Had he ever confronted any of his suspects before? I don't know the answer to that question but it would seem to give some insight into if Zimmerman was telling the truth or not. If he had never confronted anyone else, it would seem fairly unlikely that this would be the first time. If he had a history of confronting people, it would make his story harder to believe.

 

Zimmerman has had run-ins with the law, including domestic battery accusations (in which he counterfiled against his now ex-fiancee, and charges were dropped) and another charge of “resisting officer with violence” and “battery of law enforcement officer,” which were later dropped when he went to an alcohol treatment program. Those were years before this situation, and not necessarily relevant.

 

This was the first time, according to the police investigation, that Zimmerman had confronted someone - something a police trainer had warned them not to do.

 

An FBI report shows Zimmerman had a pattern of calling authorities about criminal activities and safety issues in his neighborhood. In one of the calls to Sanford police, Zimmerman complained about children playing and running in the street. Four calls were about black men he said he witnessed in the neighborhood after break-ins, according to the report, release by the state attorney's office.

 

 

 

Assistant State Attorney Richard Mantei argued Tuesday he wants the jury to hear the calls to show that Zimmerman had a growing frustration and that in the past he had not approached people. Something changed on Feb. 26, 2012, Mantei said, and the jury should hear that Zimmerman took action in a way he never had before.

 

LINK

 

 

 

 

 

Mavric, since I answered your question, will you now answer mine? Where should Trayvon Martin have been going that night? This is based off your statement that he could've chosen not to walk through that neighborhood.

[Junior]

It absolutely matters. Has directly to do with the bolded and underline part you quoted. If he had been there one night, how could they have expected anyone to recognize him?

 

No. Just no. Your quibble was with me saying he was walking home. You went so far as to say that you were convinced I didn't know what I was talking about, or had not done as much research on the topic as I wanted to make it seem. Therefore, YOU made the argument about whether or not he had the right to be walking there and if that would be considered home. Period. Now, you've been soundly shown to be incorrect in your assertions, both about me and about if Martin was walking someplace he could consider home and you want to change the question to if we could expect anyone to recognize him? Sorry, friend. That's not going to happen.

[Junior]

I didn't make any statements that Martin shouldn't have been there.

The fact that you've gone to this length to attempt to prove that Martin shouldn't have been walking in this neighborhood is just... mind numbing.

Mind numbing indeed.

 

YOU said he wasn't walking home. YOU said he could have not been walking there at all. The combination of these two statements suggests that you felt he didn't belong there. Otherwise, what was the point of making them?

[Mavric]

It absolutely matters. Has directly to do with the bolded and underline part you quoted. If he had been there one night, how could they have expected anyone to recognize him?

 

No. Just no. Your quibble was with me saying he was walking home. You went so far as to say that you were convinced I didn't know what I was talking about, or had done was much research on the topic as I wanted to make it seem. Therefore, YOU made the argument about whether or not he had the right to be walking there and if that would be considered home. Period. Now, you've been soundly shown to be incorrect in your assertions, both about me and about if Martin was walking someplace he could consider home and you want to change the question to if we could expect anyone to recognize him? Sorry, friend. That's not going to happen.

Please show me where I made this argument.

[scarletNcream]

This may answer a few questions as too "should he have been walking that neighborhood"...

http://censuschannel...n-shooting-1579

 

By the way, he was not headed towards his family residence, it was temporary housing for him.

[EZ-E]

"Alan Dershowitz told the BBC that the verdict was "right" and that there was "reasonable doubt" as to Zimmerman's guilt.[246] In regards to the prosecution, he said "She (State Attorney Angela Corey) submitted an affidavit that was, if not perjurious, completely misleading. She violated all kinds of rules of the profession, and her conduct bordered on criminal conduct. [...] Halfway through the trial she realized she wasn't going to get a second degree murder verdict, so she asked for a compromised verdict, for manslaughter. And then, she went even further and said that she was going to charge him with child abuse and felony murder. That was such a stretch that it goes beyond anything professionally responsible. She was among the most irresponsible prosecutors I've seen in 50 years of litigating cases, and believe me, I've seen good prosecutors, bad prosecutors, but rarely have I seen one as bad as this prosecutor."[247][248]"

She didn't violate any rules of her profession and her conduct didn't border on criminal.

 

That's crazy talk.

 

Have not read the affidavit, just going purely on this man's reputation.

 

For the sake of learning, what is he talking about and how would he be right or wrong??

[Mavric]

Mavric, since I answered your question, will you now answer mine? Where should Trayvon Martin have been going that night? This is based off your statement that he could've chosen not to walk through that neighborhood.

I've already answered that.

 

Ah, but you failed to answer the crucial question: Where, at that moment, should Trayvon Martin have been going?

So he was the guest of someone who lived in the community, and that warrants being followed? I see that you are bringing the kids history into the equation, how that is relevant to how he got shot I have no clue, and will let you explain.

 

If your argument is that he was troubled, ok still not relevant, and still does not show a dangerous demenaor or history.

I didn't make any statements that Martin shouldn't have been there. I was originally responding to carlfense's comment that if Zimmerman wouldn't have followed him nothing would have happened. Saying if Martin wouldn't have been walking there it wouldn't have happened is just as valid and, in fact, Zimmerman had more right to be there than Martin did as that's where he lived. Anything else implies the assumption that Zimmerman was the attacker which is speculation at best and a lie at worst.

[Mavric]

I've asked before and no one seemed to have an answer so I'll ask again. Zimmerman had a long history of investigating suspicious activity in that neighborhood. Had he ever confronted any of his suspects before? I don't know the answer to that question but it would seem to give some insight into if Zimmerman was telling the truth or not. If he had never confronted anyone else, it would seem fairly unlikely that this would be the first time. If he had a history of confronting people, it would make his story harder to believe.

 

Zimmerman has had run-ins with the law, including domestic battery accusations (in which he counterfiled against his now ex-fiancee, and charges were dropped) and another charge of “resisting officer with violence” and “battery of law enforcement officer,” which were later dropped when he went to an alcohol treatment program. Those were years before this situation, and not necessarily relevant.

 

This was the first time, according to the police investigation, that Zimmerman had confronted someone - something a police trainer had warned them not to do.

 

An FBI report shows Zimmerman had a pattern of calling authorities about criminal activities and safety issues in his neighborhood. In one of the calls to Sanford police, Zimmerman complained about children playing and running in the street. Four calls were about black men he said he witnessed in the neighborhood after break-ins, according to the report, release by the state attorney's office.

 

 

 

Assistant State Attorney Richard Mantei argued Tuesday he wants the jury to hear the calls to show that Zimmerman had a growing frustration and that in the past he had not approached people. Something changed on Feb. 26, 2012, Mantei said, and the jury should hear that Zimmerman took action in a way he never had before.

 

LINK

So he's never confronted anyone before but so many are so sure he confronted Martin this time. Even the Asst. State Attorney said he hadn't previously. Seems odd to me.

[Junior]

It absolutely matters. Has directly to do with the bolded and underline part you quoted. If he had been there one night, how could they have expected anyone to recognize him?

 

No. Just no. Your quibble was with me saying he was walking home. You went so far as to say that you were convinced I didn't know what I was talking about, or had done was much research on the topic as I wanted to make it seem. Therefore, YOU made the argument about whether or not he had the right to be walking there and if that would be considered home. Period. Now, you've been soundly shown to be incorrect in your assertions, both about me and about if Martin was walking someplace he could consider home and you want to change the question to if we could expect anyone to recognize him? Sorry, friend. That's not going to happen.

Please show me where I made this argument.

 

Here:

Zimmerman had more right to be there than Martin did as that's where he lived.

 

[knapplc]

I've asked before and no one seemed to have an answer so I'll ask again. Zimmerman had a long history of investigating suspicious activity in that neighborhood. Had he ever confronted any of his suspects before? I don't know the answer to that question but it would seem to give some insight into if Zimmerman was telling the truth or not. If he had never confronted anyone else, it would seem fairly unlikely that this would be the first time. If he had a history of confronting people, it would make his story harder to believe.

 

Zimmerman has had run-ins with the law, including domestic battery accusations (in which he counterfiled against his now ex-fiancee, and charges were dropped) and another charge of “resisting officer with violence” and “battery of law enforcement officer,” which were later dropped when he went to an alcohol treatment program. Those were years before this situation, and not necessarily relevant.

 

This was the first time, according to the police investigation, that Zimmerman had confronted someone - something a police trainer had warned them not to do.

 

An FBI report shows Zimmerman had a pattern of calling authorities about criminal activities and safety issues in his neighborhood. In one of the calls to Sanford police, Zimmerman complained about children playing and running in the street. Four calls were about black men he said he witnessed in the neighborhood after break-ins, according to the report, release by the state attorney's office.

 

 

 

Assistant State Attorney Richard Mantei argued Tuesday he wants the jury to hear the calls to show that Zimmerman had a growing frustration and that in the past he had not approached people. Something changed on Feb. 26, 2012, Mantei said, and the jury should hear that Zimmerman took action in a way he never had before.

 

LINK

So he's never confronted anyone before but so many are so sure he confronted Martin this time. Even the Asst. State Attorney said he hadn't previously. Seems odd to me.

 

"Never confronted anyone before" is one way to look at it. Assaulting a police officer while resisting arrest and smacking/shoving your fiancee around aren't exactly like pursuing an unarmed teenager while armed with a handgun, so they're not entirely the same thing, but this isn't the first time Zimmerman has done something similar.

 

In August, 2005 Zimmerman's ex-fiancee accused him of "trolling her neighborhood" in his car, then confronting her in her apartment, refusing to leave, and engaging in a shoving match with her.

 

Sound familiar? Probably just a coincidence.

 

Oddly, this bit of information never made it to trial because Zimmerman's attorney had it declared inadmissible. But the fact that Martin had been expelled from school did make it into the trial.