Please show me exactly where I stated that a police officer engaged in a consensual encounter is performing an illegal search.
What I stated on several previous occasions is that lacking probable cause or at least reasonable suspicion, a person going about his business is not obligated to answer or cooperate with the police officer. Once the person declines to cooperate, if the police officer persists absent probable cause, it is an illegal search. it is also no longer a consensual encounter because the citizen has chosen to not consent.
I wouldn’t necessarily agree with the statement that “it’s weak”, I haven’t heard what Zimmerman’s account of his actions are (have the police released his description of the events?), and I don’t know how long it usually takes to charge someone in a case like this, but I assume that it would usually happen sooner if the case was a “slam-dunk”. I am prepared to accept right now that the case, from the law enforcement point of view, is not clear-cut.
He might not be guilty of anything under Florida law. But if not, then this case clearly shows that there is something wrong with Florida law, if a vigilante can approache people at night, despite the advice of the emergency responder, confront an innocent person with a gun, shoot them dead, and get away scot-free. I would hope that anyone’s sense of justice would be outraged by this kind of event.
Why do you assume that Martin behaved normally and legally, but Zimmerman must have crossed the line into assault?
When we discuss reasonable suspicion, a level of suspicion BELOW that of probable cause, we say that in order to develop reasonable suspicion, the police must identify specific, articulable facts that give rise to the finding.
You need probable cause here, a more demanding standard, and the best you can apparently do is speculate that Zimmerman must have crossed the line into assault.
That’s not sufficient. If you asked a magistrate to issue an arrest warrant based on the facts you’ve laid out here, he would refuse.
Yes you do, unless “confront” means something more than the dictionary says it does.
Correct.
Again with “confront.” He can confront anyone he wishes for any reason at all. It’s true he cannot stop anyone without reasonable, articulable suspicion.
Correct.
The problem is we don’t know what this is. Probable cause contains the word PROBABLE because we don’t allow speculation and inchoate guesses to form the basis for an arrest.
If two people are grappling on the ground in direct contact and one manages to pull a gun from a holster or pocket, then it’s entirely plausible that the other party might try to grab it. It would in fact the safest possible move given the not unreasonable belief that you’re about to be shot with it.
The 911 call paints a very bad picture of him:… “another “bleeped” one gets away”. This backs up his actions where he gets out of the car to confront the kid. He did not want him to get away from the crime committed in Zimmerman’s head.
From Martin’s perspective there is a guy in a car watching him who then gets out and confronts him. Looks like a case of “DWB” committed by a vigilante.
I would like to know what was bleeped from the 911 call.
Well, normal behaviour, to me, would be someone getting scared when a larger, heavier man stops them in the street at night, and trying to get away from that guy. We have no reason to think that Martin would have approached Zimmerman first. We have many reasons to think that Zimmerman approached Martin first. It’s very probable to believe, based on the 911 calls, that if the young man tried to get away, Zimmerman would have stopped him physically.
In any case, I’ll suppose that legally, Zimmerman’s behaviour fits the criteria for Florida law to be able to shoot someone and get away with it. Regardless, if he’s wandering around at night carrying a gun and confronting people, and can’t get out of a tussle with a teenager much smaller than himself without shooting the teenager dead, he has no business going out with a gun at night, is engaging in dangerous behaviour, and society would benefit if we discouraged this kind of behaviour and prevented these kinds of deaths. If Florida law has no penalty for someone like Zimmerman, then obviously the law needs to be modified.
If you go by this theory, then the teenager, by grabbing the gun, was also trying to defend himself? It was just a flip of the dice which one shot the other first, but either would have been justified in shooting the other?
Why would you assume that the gun wasn’t already pulled? Because it makes perfect sense that it would have been out from the start of the altercation.
Zimmerman is approaching, on a dark street, someone who he had determined was a criminal. In his mind, the kid is armed and dangerous. So why would he confronting someone without making it known to his opponent that he has the capacity to kill? It would be like running into a burning building without a hose in hand. A weapon doesnt protect you if no one knows you have one.
So if you were as paranoid about Martin as Zimmerman revealed himself to be when he phoned 911, ask yourself how likely is it that you wouldn’t already have your gun out when you walked up to him. That is probably the only reason he had the balls to approach him the first place.
On Anderson Cooper tonite, Martin’s dad was interviewed and he said that the boy was listening to his iPod as he was walking. Which means its possible he didn’t know Zimmerman was behind him up until he was right on top of him. Now if this the case, it explains how Zimmerman was able to close the distance between them so quickly. Perhaps Zimmerman called out to the kid and Martin ignored him. In anger he draws his gun and rushes over to give the kid a piece of his mind. Kid is freaked out and tries to run, but Zimmerman is having none of that. He grabs him by the arm. Kid tries to fight him off and manages to free himself. A chase ensues, with Martin heading behind someone’s house. Hes yelling for help. Zimmerman gets a hold of him again and they wrestle on the ground. Kid still is yelling for help, just as you would expect from someone who has an armed maniac fighting him. Zimmerman shoots the kid, if anything to get him to shut the fuck up because he’s drawing attention now. And he’s mad as well because he hit head on a rock or some shit while they were tousling on the ground.
Do I have evidence of this happening exactly like this? No, i would be surprised if it didn’t play out very close to it.
I thought he was quoted as saying “These assholes always get away.” Is that not right?
Honestly, Zimmerman could have said “These niggers, I would love to stick my .44 up their black asses and watch them try to run from me then!” and it still wouldnt matter. The 911 call as it is now couldn’t get any clearer that Zimmerman is a racially biased nutcase.
You can’t make that claim based on what he said. They had recently had a number of break-ins and could have been referring to the assholes who committed the crime.
He certainly was projecting his belief that the kid was trouble based on his appearance and behavior. If kids do anything on a universal basis in this country it’s to dress in a way as to piss off their parents.
Nothing like wild speculation to throw fuel on the fire. The simple fact is that everyone posting on this board is basing all of their assumptions on incomplete and circumstantial evidence. There is a legal term for this kind of information: hearsay. I have done a fair amount of research on this case and to my knowledge the police have not released a full accounting of their evidence by any stretch of the imagination. All we have to go on are bits and pieces of the whole story that have leaked out and a whole lot of “anonymous witness” reports that the media has spread around like gossip in a high school with virtually no corroborating evidence from anyone in an official status. Furthermore, we are unlikely to get any official report on the incident until either the case is closed or Zimmerman is officially charged and the case goes in front of a grand jury. Until then every reaction is nothing more than a knee-jerk response to emotional stimuli.
But, WTH, if we are all making wild postulations as to what actually happened that night I guess I will make a go of it myself:
Zimmerman called the cops to report a suspicious person (Martin). While on the phone with the cops Martin noticed Zimmerman on the phone and began to walk away (why would he run if he had done nothing wrong, right?)
Zimmerman was afraid that the potential burglar/vandal/whatever would get away so he exited the vehicle and followed on foot (once again, there is no reason to think that he was running).
Martin noticed Zimmerman was following him and turned to confront him. An argument ensued and Martin struck Zimmerman in the face (motive: an angry young man upset at being “profiled” by a neighborhood watch captain).
Zimmerman was not expecting to get punched so he made no effort to block the strike, which knocked him down causing him to bang the back of his head on the ground. This left him with the bloody nose and the injury on the back of his head. Undoubtedly it would have also left him shaken and frightened. This is probably when Zimmerman began to cry for help and “whine” as numerous 911 calls have reported. (To my knowledge it is also the official police position that Zimmerman was the one calling for help on those calls).
Instead of leaving the scene Martin either continued to attack Zimmerman or stood over him gloating for a moment. In either event Zimmerman would have had reason to fear continued attacks. At this time Zimmerman drew his weapon and fired a single shot upward at Martin. Martin then stumbled backwards before falling. He may have then made some effort to crawl away from Zimmerman so that he actually died some distance away from where the actual fight took place.
Now, once again, I have no evidence that it actually happened like this, but considering that the police have thus far declined to press charges on Zimmerman I think it is very likely that the final report of what occurred that night will end up looking a lot like this.
Two interesting things in this story that I haven’t read elsewhere, both from chief Lee regarding Zimmermans statement to the police:
Zimmerman told the cops he only left his truck to check the sign to see what street he was on, and
Zimmerman said he was walking back to his truck when Martin jumped him from behind
1 is obviously a lie as Zimmerman had been patroling around the small complex for over a year…constantly.
2 sounds like like complete bullshit and I don’t know why he would have much credibility since he lied about what he was doing in the first place. He told the dispatcher he was following Martin.
Has anyone seen a diagram anywhere that shows where the truck was and where the body was found?
I know of no parents (or random strangers, for that matter), who would object to a teenage boy wearing something as mundane as jeans, white sneakers, and a hoodie outside in the rain. It’s a wardrobe is that is so commonplace that it’s boring. By itself, it would mean nothing. But couple it with a black male, and suddenly you’re dealing with what looks like a criminal, to a mind programmed to think that way.
Some of Zimmerman’s neighbors have claimed that he has a anti black bias, based on his previous dealings with people. I think they would know better than anyone here whether the man is color-blind in his assessments.