# Time to officially Pit the Sanford Police Dept and their cover-up. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 29, 2012, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108 "2012-03-29T01:38:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2012, 4:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108/121 "2012-03-30T16:14:52Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Watch out, the fact that you have nothing intelligent to say is showing. Oh sure, a racist WOULD say something like that! :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2012, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108/122 "2012-03-30T16:15:37Z")
> [@](#): > > …Does that help, without being too technical? Who are you, and what have you done with **Bricker**? (Just raggin’ you, hoss! That was good.) ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2012, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108/123 "2012-03-30T16:23:05Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yes, it’s badly written. > > Here’s why. The usual formula for self-defense law is that the accused, the guy on trial, has to prove at least the basics of self defense. Then, after he’s made that basic case, the prosecution has to disprove him, beyond a reasonable doubt. The usual process puts the fact-finding in court, before a judge and jury. > > This law says a person who has used force “is immune from criminal prosecution.” And it specifically defines “criminal prosecution” to mean “arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.” See that? He’s immune from even being arrested. > > The only way around that is for the police agency to determine that probable cause exists that the use of force was unlawful. In other words, this is not your usual “is there probable cause to believe a crime was committed” but rather “is there specific information about the use of force that makes it probable that the force used was unlawful?” > > That is literally what the law says: > > This law puts the cart before the horse, in other words. what would normally be developed after arrest, interrogation, charging, etc., now must be essentially an one-the-scene determination by the police. > > It’s crazy. > > Does that help, without being too technical? Does it help? This should be the first post in every thread on this subject. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2012, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108/124 "2012-03-30T16:36:44Z")
I don’t approve of “hate crime” laws, I do not want to witness the spectacle of lawyers arguing over what someone was thinking at a particular moment in time. Seems to me that this law more or less depends upon that sort of telepathy, in that it suggests that if someone can say they were in fear of grievous bodily harm, they cannot even be legally arrested. “Of course I shot that Hawking fellow, he was coming right for me, with an evil glint in his eye, as if he intended to crush my foot beneath his wheelchair! Because that’s how he rolls!..” Edit: By the way, why was Zimmerman in handcuffs if he were not under arrest? ---
**Author:** ![BottledBlondJeanie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/0ea827/32.png) [@BottledBlondJeanie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BottledBlondJeanie)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2012, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108/125 "2012-03-30T17:12:21Z")
The law does seem to shift burdens a bit, too much. But, it was in place. Maybe it should be changed, but to retroactively blame police for following it seems to be wrongfully-place ire. **elucidator** I honestly answered your question. I tried to respond to your “Dallas” comment. Please tell me what point you were trying to make. Also, why make this into a gun/no gun issue? I do believe that is a factor as to positions people are taking on this, but you have gun carrying people supporting you, why alienate them? Hell, there are probably lawyers on your side, why insult all of us with a broad brush? Unfortunately, I now see your position as based in prejudice against guns. And I see you as a bit petty based on your lawyer comments. Thank you though for reminding me why I stay out of GD. As an aside, not directed anywhere, I talked to a good friend yesterday who is black and corporate counsel for a big company. He grew up in a fancy schmancy part of the US, but he told me to be more understanding of people, especially blacks, who have an issue with the police and tend to believe the worse about them. He’s been pulled over several times for DWB (driving while black) and been frisked etc. He reminded me I almost always assume police are there to help. But I still think objectiveness has to sneak in at some point, no matter what your prejudices are–be they “trust the police” or “fear the police.” ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2012, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108/126 "2012-03-30T19:54:27Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Yes, it’s badly written. > > Here’s why. The usual formula for self-defense law is that the accused, the guy on trial, has to prove at least the basics of self defense. Then, after he’s made that basic case, the prosecution has to disprove him, beyond a reasonable doubt. The usual process puts the fact-finding in court, before a judge and jury. > > This law says a person who has used force “is immune from criminal prosecution.” And it specifically defines “criminal prosecution” to mean “arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.” See that? He’s immune from even being arrested. > > The only way around that is for the police agency to determine that probable cause exists that the use of force was unlawful. In other words, this is not your usual “is there probable cause to believe a crime was committed” but rather “is there specific information about the use of force that makes it probable that the force used was unlawful?” > > That is literally what the law says: > > This law puts the cart before the horse, in other words. what would normally be developed after arrest, interrogation, charging, etc., now must be essentially an one-the-scene determination by the police. > > It’s crazy. > > Does that help, without being too technical? Yes it’s crazy. In short, it means all a murderer has to do is claim he was threatened or under attack and he gets a free pass. Of course it is in his best interest to make sure the target dies. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2012, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108/127 "2012-03-30T20:05:25Z")
> [@](#): > > …Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law took effect in late 2005. In 2006, the first year of “Stand Your Ground”, only 12 justifiable homicides were tallied. The very next year, that number jumped to 42 statewide, and has remained about the same since… [http://www.abcactionnews.com/dpp/news/local\_news/investigations/i-team-justifiable-homicides-double-since-stand-your-ground](http://www.abcactionnews.com/dpp/news/local_news/investigations/i-team-justifiable-homicides-double-since-stand-your-ground) Offered without comment. ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2012, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108/128 "2012-03-30T20:06:52Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Edit: By the way, why was Zimmerman in handcuffs if he were not under arrest? Too lazy to link but there is a GQ thread on the subject. ---
**Author:** ![R.P.McMurphy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/7993a0/32.png) [@R.P.McMurphy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/R.P.McMurphy)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2012, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108/129 "2012-03-30T20:07:52Z")
This case is a perfect demonstration of why the law is bad. Who was defending himself? Martin was walking while talking on his cell phone. Some guy (with a gun), not in uniform, no badge, no marked vehicle, starts stalking him. Martin feels threatened. The law (as I understand it) gives Martin the right to stand his ground and beat the shit out of the guy. At what point does it pass from being Martin’s self defense to Zimmerman’s. You could make the argument that this law makes it legal to have a full-blown shootout. Taken to its extreme, Florida could have Mexican style drug gang violence and the cops wouldn’t even be able to arrest anybody. I would think a just court would find that under the circumstances the law applied to Martin and not Zimmerman because Zimmerman was the stalker. This whole thing is messed up. The Florida legislature and all those that lobbied for the law should be held culpable. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [March 30, 2012, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108/130 "2012-03-30T20:17:59Z")
> [@R.P.McMurphy](#): > > At what point does it pass from being Martin’s self defense to Zimmerman’s. [Anytime.](http://disorientedtheology.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/541480_415544018471115_108038612554992_1589674_653278602_n.jpg) ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2012, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108/131 "2012-04-01T13:39:00Z")
> [@BottledBlondJeanie](#): > > And, I didn’t see it linked here, but **brazil84** posted it in the other thread: [http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/29/police-surveillance-video-of-zimmerman-may-show-head-injury/](http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/29/police-surveillance-video-of-zimmerman-may-show-head-injury/) That might be an injury to his head. Let’s wait and see. Thank you, and here is another [pic](http://www.wagist.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/nose.jpg) I saw. It does appear that there is something the matter with Zimmerman’s nose. Anyway, I have a feeling that better pictures are coming up the pike. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2012, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108/132 "2012-04-01T13:46:24Z")
Also, if you look at [this video](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VaXieC3o5g), there appears to be some kind of red discoloration on the back of Zimmerman’s head. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2012, 3:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108/133 "2012-04-01T15:17:16Z")
I don’t see discolorations on his head, but his nose does look red and swollen. But that shirt and jacket are spotless. Not even a wrinkle. ---
**Author:** ![DianaG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7ab992/32.png) [@DianaG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DianaG)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2012, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108/134 "2012-04-01T16:05:46Z")
brazil, repeatedly linking to possibly altered photographs on wildly biased and completely disreptutable websites doesn’t make quite the point you’re hoping to. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2012, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108/135 "2012-04-01T16:10:14Z")
> [@DianaG](#): > > brazil, repeatedly linking to possibly altered photographs Lol, what photographs on the internet are NOT “possibly altered”? > [@](#): > > wildly biased and completely disreptutable websites Lol, nice ad homenim. > [@](#): > > doesn’t make quite the point you’re hoping to. Exactly what is my point, in your view? This is the last time I’m asking. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2012, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108/136 "2012-04-01T16:12:20Z")
Promise? ---
**Author:** ![DianaG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7ab992/32.png) [@DianaG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DianaG)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2012, 4:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108/137 "2012-04-01T16:17:20Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Lol, what photographs on the internet are NOT “possibly altered”? None. But the one on the Daily Caller was \*admittedly \*altered. > [@](#): > > Lol, nice ad homenim. Whatever. Anyone with approximately one more functioning brain cell than you possess doesn’t need my help to be convinced of the bias of the websites you’ve linked to. > [@](#): > > Exactly what is my point, in your view? This is the last time I’m asking. Ask as many times as you like, if it never ceases to amuse you. Me, I got bored with that game quite some time ago. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2012, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108/138 "2012-04-01T16:20:24Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > But that shirt and jacket are spotless. Not even a wrinkle. This. How does one get a “broken nose”, and have not a single spot of blood anywhere on their face or clothing? It’s not possible. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2012, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108/139 "2012-04-01T16:22:03Z")
> [@DianaG](#): > > None. But the one on the Daily Caller was \*admittedly \*altered… Whoa, hold it! What? When was it “admitted”? Not that I’m shocked that it was, only that they admitted it. Advise. ---
**Author:** ![DianaG](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7ab992/32.png) [@DianaG](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DianaG)\ **Post date:** [April 1, 2012, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108/140 "2012-04-01T16:23:03Z")
Also, I don’t know how many of you have taken a hard hit to the back of the head, but in my experience it doesn’t leave one quite so sprightly. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-officially-pit-the-sanford-police-dept-and-their-cover-up/617108.md?page=8)