# Why hasn't the Neighborhood Watch shooter been arrested? **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [March 12, 2012, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504 "2012-03-12T00:53:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 39
**Author:** ![Arnold\_Winkelried](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Arnold\_Winkelried](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arnold_Winkelried)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2012, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504/761 "2012-03-20T16:41:44Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > But I have never seen a case where they considered the age of a possible attacker for whether or not it was self-defense. So are you saying that any age should be irrelevant? I could shoot a 12-year-old and claim self-defense? A 10-year-old? How about an 8-year-old? Just because you’ve never seen a case, doesn’t mean age should be irrelevant. In this case, I get the impression that 17-year-old is sometimes used as a shorthand to mean a young boy who was smaller and of a slighter build than the person that shot him. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2012, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504/762 "2012-03-20T16:42:14Z")
> [@newcomer](#): > > Oh, come on, now… put yourself in Martin’s situation - late, nobody around, off-road and all-in-all a non-public place - and someone gets out of the car and goes after you as you are the only person around. > > There is no other conclusion but intentional assault. > > Your analogy with marathon is totally inappropriate as it ignores the whole situation. Actually, I can’t believe it how you - as I understand, a lawyer - can even come up with an analogy like that. “Ignores the whole situation?” That’s precisely the point. You don’t know what the whole situation was. You don’t know how Zimmerman approached Martin. If you don’t know that, you’re not entitled to assume that Zimmerman “goes after him” in any way that constitutes a threat, and unless Martin was actually assaulted, he is not legally entitled to punch Zimmerman. You said “there is no other conclusion.” Suppose Zimmerman exited his car, approached Martin and said, “Hey, you! You don’t look like you belong in this neighborhood, boy. What’re you doing here, stealing shit? Selling drugs?” That’s another conclusion, isn’t it, other than yours? Right? Martin is not entitled to strike Zimmerman in the nose in response. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2012, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504/763 "2012-03-20T16:42:17Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > I don’t know whether the guy sitting next to me on the train isn’t a serial killer just waiting to murder me, either. I guess I should just preemptively label him such and shoot him before he can shoot me. So, then you agree. It doesn’t matter that the kid was 17. Either it was right for Zimmerman to act as he did, or it was wrong, regardless of whether the kid was 17 or 21. ---
**Author:** ![SnakesCatLady](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/4af34b/32.png) [@SnakesCatLady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnakesCatLady)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2012, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504/764 "2012-03-20T16:43:53Z")
I’m not suggesting Zimmerman should be hung from the nearest tree, but it is upsetting to me that he wasn’t arrested. Self-defense is a defense; it should be proved in court. From what I’ve read, it seems a pretty weak defense in this case. Zimmerman was told by police dispatch “we don’t need you to do that” when he said he was following the kid. He did it anyway. That’s not breaking any laws, but it shows he didn’t care about the advice of law enforcement personnel. He claims he got out of his truck to check a street sign? In an area where he is Neighborhood Watch Captain? I find that really difficult to believe. What it boils down to is that an unarmed teenager, who had every right to be where he was, was shot and killed. The police seem to be taking the claim of self-defense as a proven fact instead of something to be proved. The young man is dead. If I were his parents I’d be pretty upset, too. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2012, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504/765 "2012-03-20T16:44:17Z")
> [@Arnold\_Winkelried](#): > > So are you saying that any age should be irrelevant? I could shoot a 12-year-old and claim self-defense? A 10-year-old? How about an 8-year-old? > Just because you’ve never seen a case, doesn’t mean age should be irrelevant. In this case, I get the impression that 17-year-old is sometimes used as a shorthand to mean a young boy who was smaller and of a slighter build than the person that shot him. “I mean, it’s not like he was 4yo riding a tricycle.” You do know that often 17yo boys can be just as big or even bigger as a 21yo adult, right? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2012, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504/766 "2012-03-20T16:46:15Z")
> [@ladyfoxfyre](#): > > The point is, him wearing a hoodie is indicative of nothing. Correct. A hoodie is not a ski mask, which is perfectly acceptable cold-weather wear but donned in summer makes one wary. The hoodie has no bearing on this case. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2012, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504/767 "2012-03-20T16:46:41Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > So, then you agree. It doesn’t matter that the kid was 17. Either it was right for Zimmerman to act as he did, or it was wrong, regardless of whether the kid was 17 or 21. Out of all the details of this case, out of all the relevant and irrelevant dimensions of the two individuals involved, out of all the facts that have come out in recent days…why are you so hung up on Martin’s age? But you’re right. 17, 24, or 59. It doesn’t matter legally speaking. But generally we consider it especially tragic when a young person dies. _OMG, how crazy is that?_ ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2012, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504/768 "2012-03-20T16:54:21Z")
> [@Hakuna\_Matata](#): > > Legally running after someone may not be assault. But I am 99.99% certain that both Shodan and Bricker would not feel the same way if I started talking to their wife or daughter on the street and then followed them and when they started running I chased them. Personally I would consider that assault if someone did that to my wife, my daughter or my son (if I had a son). Can you both honestly tell me that if I chased your wife/daughter down the street that you wouldn’t consider that assault? Interesting, almost a Dukakis moment here isn’t it! I can honestly tell you I would not consider it assault. Because, you see, I can read the English language and see how the state of Florida defines “assault.” I would probably consider it harassment, as discussed by FSA § 784.048, engagement in a course of conduct directed at a specific person that causes substantial emotional distress in such person and serves no legitimate purpose. But of course I would change my mind if I learned of some legitimate purpose for the action. ---
**Author:** ![Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimmy_Gibbler)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2012, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504/769 "2012-03-20T16:54:42Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No. If someone is simply running after you, you do not have the legal right to strike your pursuer in the nose. No, I think this is incorrect. Being chased (particularly by a stranger) I think falls well within the common law definition of assault—a voluntary act by the tortfeasor that arouses a reasonable apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact. The quarry is entitled to use non-deadly force to repel the feared contact. ---
**Author:** ![DigitalC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ebca7d/32.png) [@DigitalC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DigitalC)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2012, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504/770 "2012-03-20T16:55:59Z")
> [@Arnold\_Winkelried](#): > > So are you saying that any age should be irrelevant? I could shoot a 12-year-old and claim self-defense? A 10-year-old? How about an 8-year-old? Obviously yes if you are defending yourself. ---
**Author:** ![enomaj](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/59ef9b/32.png) [@enomaj](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enomaj)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2012, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504/771 "2012-03-20T16:57:12Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > No, actually I’m more concerned about a nation in which unarmed teenagers can get shot in cold blood and some people call them “nobodies”. This boy was an innocent victim. I don’t know and I don’t care if he punched Zimmerman, it is not a reason to take his life. There is no reason for an unarmed person to be shot. If the law says it’s okay, then the law is an ass. Zimmerman could have let the police deal with his concerns, he could have simply held the boy at gunpoint until the police arrived, he could have done a number of things except what he actually did, commit cold-blooded murder. Holding him at gunpoint would have been illegal. [http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/weapons/self\_defense.html](http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/weapons/self_defense.html) > [@](#): > > Q. What if I point my handgun at someone but don’t use it? > > A. Never display a handgun to gain “leverage” in an argument. Threatening someone verbally while possessing a handgun, even licensed, will land you in jail for three years. Even if the gun is b ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2012, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504/772 "2012-03-20T16:58:10Z")
> [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](#): > > No, I think this is incorrect. Being chased (particularly by a stranger) I think falls well within the common law definition of assault—a voluntary act by the tortfeasor that arouses a reasonable apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact. The quarry is entitled to use non-deadly force to repel the feared contact. Florida has abrogated the common-law definition of assault by statute. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2012, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504/773 "2012-03-20T16:59:57Z")
Beautiful. Pointing a gun at him would have been illegal, but pointing a gun at him and pulling the trigger is perfectly hunky-dory. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2012, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504/774 "2012-03-20T16:59:59Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No. If someone is simply running after you, you do not have the legal right to strike your pursuer in the nose. Would it be assault to mace a complete stranger who chases you on the street for reasons unbeknowst to you? The only reason I’m asking you this is to watch what kind of tortuous logic you throw at me. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2012, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504/775 "2012-03-20T17:02:30Z")
> [@enomaj](#): > > Holding him at gunpoint would have been illegal. > > [http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/weapons/self\_defense.html](http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/weapons/self_defense.html) Like I said, the law is an ass. If murdering someone is less risky from a legal standpoint than detaining them at gunpoint, then the law needs to be changed. Or we need to get the guns out of people’s hands in the first place. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2012, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504/776 "2012-03-20T17:03:28Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > Out of all the details of this case, out of all the relevant and irrelevant dimensions of the two individuals involved, out of all the facts that have come out in recent days…why are you so hung up on Martin’s age? > > But you’re right. 17, 24, or 59. It doesn’t matter legally speaking. But generally we consider it especially tragic when a young person dies. _OMG, how crazy is that?_ It’s not crazy at all. But the age of the “attacker” does not affect the defense of the “victim”. _Either Zimmerman acted in self-defense or he didn’t_. Myself, I think that Zimmerman’s claims are shaky. But using the age of the kid against Zimmerman is not fair. A 17 yo kid can certainly be as much a threat as a 21 yo adult. Zimmerman could have felt just as threatened either way. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2012, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504/777 "2012-03-20T17:06:00Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > Would it be assault to mace a complete stranger who chases you on the street for reasons unbeknowst to you? No. Assault is a threat. Completing the threat by actually attacking is a battery. One could be charged with both crimes but the two convictions would merge into one for sentencing purposes. ---
**Author:** ![Lady\_of\_the\_Lake](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e19adc/32.png) [@Lady\_of\_the\_Lake](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lady_of_the_Lake)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2012, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504/778 "2012-03-20T17:07:59Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > No, actually I’m more concerned about a nation in which unarmed teenagers can get shot in cold blood and some people call them “nobodies”. This boy was an innocent victim. I don’t know and I don’t care if he punched Zimmerman, it is not a reason to take his life. There is no reason for an unarmed person to be shot. If the law says it’s okay, then the law is an ass. Zimmerman could have let the police deal with his concerns, he could have simply held the boy at gunpoint until the police arrived, he could have done a number of things except what he actually did, commit cold-blooded murder. Wow, I’d never even noticed that while reading through the thread. I gotta ask, **Martin Hyde** , what makes this 17 year old boy a **nobody**? He has no criminal record, nothing bad has been said about him other than that he wore a hoodie and might’ve been on a skittles sugar high, so…? ---
**Author:** ![JoelUpchurch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f05b48/32.png) [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2012, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504/779 "2012-03-20T17:16:30Z")
> [@ladyfoxfyre](#): > > Great for you. I marvel at your superior temperature tolerance. Me, on the other hand, I live further south than you do, and if it were 60 out I would be wearing a hoodie. Does that mean I would be up to no good too? The point is, him wearing a hoodie is indicative of nothing. The fact that you think it wasn’t cold enough to warrant his clothing choices is irrelevant. Implying that the only reason one would be wearing a hoodie in “not cold enough weather” is that you are up to no good is also stupid. If it gets down to 40 and you put on a ski mask, don’t get shocked when people call 911. Anything that conceals your face is going to make people trust you less. It is like the SOP when you are pulled over by the police. Turn on the interior light, get out your ID and put both hands on the steering wheel and make sure you make you make eye contact with the police officer. Pulling up your hoodie after you know the guy is looking at you is asking to be stopped. ---
**Author:** ![Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimmy_Gibbler)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2012, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504/780 "2012-03-20T17:18:02Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Florida has abrogated the common-law definition of assault by statute. Putatively, in their penal code. The tort of assault remains. I add that reading Fla. Stat. § 784.011 (An “assault” is an intentional, unlawful threat by word or act to do violence to the person of another, coupled with an apparent ability to do so, and doing some act which creates a well-founded fear in such other person that such violence is imminent) does not change my mind. The threat is communicated by the act of chasing (as the statutes plainly contemplates, threats do not need to be vocalized). At any rate, self-defense may be used to repel either tortious or criminal assault. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504.md?page=38) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-hasnt-the-neighborhood-watch-shooter-been-arrested/615504.md?page=40)