Witness: Martin attacked Zimmerman

[jtdc]

Originally Posted by schaabdl

jtdc - one question, what law prevents Zimmermann from following this guy.

Perhaps "stalking laws". Zimmerman's intent was stated on the 9-1-1 recording. He didn't want the guy to get away. But was he aware of ANY crime having just been committed? Did this guy fit the description of any wanted suspect that Zimmerman was aware of? If Zimmerman witnessed a crime by Trayvon, he would be empowered to conduct a "citizen's arrest." Do you see any justification in that from what evidence we have?

Originally Posted by schaabdl

The 911 operators wasn't there and has no authority to direct anyone to do anything.

They are there to offer good advice. And in this case the advice given was good.

Originally Posted by schaabdl

They have one job - get the information to the police.

So they never give advise about how to get a child or adult breathing or anything else? Just relay information to the police?

Originally Posted by schaabdl

And often, 911 operators are also private citizens hired by the authorities.

And a private citizen is not allowed to give good advice?

Originally Posted by schaabdl

Then, what reason is the federal government involved in a local crime?

As I said above, the Constitution does not end at the border.

Originally Posted by schaabdl

You don't see them at any other crime unless it happens to be of a specific type. Now who are the real racist; who are the real segregationist today?

The first black president, Eric holder (protector of HIS people) are. But that does not mean everybody in the government is. Remember subordinates of Holder had the case and testified that Holder interfered. You seem ready to discredit everyone in the department just because of the loser president who appointed incompetent, corrupt people to serve him.

[bond]

Not a cop not his job he had no legal Authority for him to do what he did .
It wasn't his business to ask the young man what his business was .

I hope that community had a Liability Policy for a Crime Watch and any actions he might take because if he was out there on the property's behalf they will need it .

And if he wasn't out there on the property's behalf ?

OBSERVE and REPORT yes follow and confront ? Not so much .

[jtdc]

Originally Posted by bond

It wasn't his business to ask the young man what his business was .

Right! The all that discussion about cops stopping people on the street to check if they are here legally, without cause. And they aren't allowed to do that. This guy wasn't even a cop.

[bond]

I see a lot of folks are OKAY with Zimmerman's actions .

Fine . So you are going to allow someone in civilian clothes confront and accost you as you freely make your way about your Business at night ?

Some one in civilian) NOT IN UNIFORM OR REFLECTIVE VEST THAT IDENTIFIED THEM SELVES AS A CITIZEN ON PATROL OF CRIME WATCH ?)clothes who walks up to me and asked me what I am doing somewhere when I have every right to be where I am ?

I don't think anyone of you would give that person the time of day.
And I strongly believe those of you with CHLs would already be thinking about using force and defending your self .

[GeronL]

Citizens are what the Constitution are about.

Where in the Constitution does it say self-protection with a gun only comes to those with a badge or a reflective vest?

[GeronL]

Democrat Hispanic George Zimmerman does have a right to protect himself even when confronting a possible trespasser in the neighborhood, even if he has no badge or reflective, shiny vest.

[bond]

Originally Posted by GeronL

Democrat Hispanic George Zimmerman does have a right to protect himself even when confronting a possible trespasser in the neighborhood, even if he has no badge or reflective, shiny vest.

He claimed to be a Crime-watch captain !

[GeronL]

we should all be crime watch captains

[bond]

Originally Posted by GeronL

we should all be crime watch captains

Then I guess Zimmerman should go by the established crime watch rules ?

[jtdc]

Originally Posted by GeronL

Citizens are what the Constitution are about.

Citizen's "rights". The Constitution addresses many things, government, war, finances. Citizen's rights are one part of it.

Originally Posted by GeronL

Where in the Constitution does it say self-protection with a gun only comes to those with a badge or a reflective vest?

Where in the Constitution does it say anybody can demand anything of anybody anywhere?

Originally Posted by GeronL

Democrat Hispanic George Zimmerman does have a right to protect himself even when confronting a possible trespasser in the neighborhood, even if he has no badge or reflective, shiny vest.

So being a DimocRAT and being Hispanic affords him special rights?

And, is walking down a public sidewalk "trespassing"?

Originally Posted by GeronL

we should all be crime watch captains

We all should be generals? You are a socialist. Everybody the same.

[Bemused]

Originally Posted by GeronL

Zimmerman doesn't work for 911 operators. They were on a sidewalk or something, Trayvon Martin did not own that sidewalk.

Say what?

Sorry to be the one to inform you, but people have the right to walk down the street without being hassled. As someone who once upon a time had long hair and a beard, I am well aware of cops (let alone individuals) who have delighted in hassling people like me. This was ruled illegal in a SCOTUS case in the mid 80's if I can trust my sources. (I still get questioned by some as I photograph some places and some properties. Nowadays I respond by explaining what I and doing and why, even though I dont have to because someone's property has no expectation of privacy) and I offer a business card with my information and website)

I dont know what your agenda is, but no one has the right to gun down someone just because.

PS I have listened to a LOT of talk radio programming covering this topic, from John and Ken to Armstrong and Getty, to Stacy Taylor this afternoon. The general consensus from the hosts to the guests is that Zimmerman was a cop wannabee, and ultimately proved the case that he should not be entrusted with a uniform and a gun.

Sorry, GeronL, but you are out of the mainstream of thought, not to mention common sense on this one.

[GeronL]

Being asked what you, a stranger, is doing in a neighborhood is harassment? It giives you the right to jump on someone like a mad dog?

[GeronL]

The right to gun someone down who attacked you, broke your nose, sitting on you and pounding your face.

YES!!!!!!!!!

[bond]

I still do not get the lack of understanding that folks want to give Zimmerman some kind of super rights .

I mean I would have no problem of rendering Zimmerman unable to DO-SI-DO if had been following me and then came up to me on a street I was on and Challenged me about who I was and what I was doing there.

I notice the Family has plans to file a wrongful death suit against the HOME owners association .


Lets see how quickly that bunch cuts its losses and lets Zimmerman twist in the wind.

[schaabdl]

911 has no authority even if the advice is good. (BTW, I was advised by 911 once to follow a drunk driver on an Interstate until police were on the scene - fun time doing 90+). So advice may not always be good but may serve a purpose.
Stalking - under most laws with which I have some familiarity - per-meditation is the norm. Simply following someone in your own neighborhood who does not appear to be part of the neighborhood is common with watch groups.
And if it does come out that the victim attacked - being followed is not a reason for instigating the attack. In fact, we do know the victim had a cell phone so maybe he should have tried 911 as well.
***
Let the local authorities get to investigation then let the crime, if any, be determined.

[David]

Originally Posted by schaabdl

jtdc - one question, what law prevents Zimmermann from following this guy. The 911 operators wasn't there and has no authority to direct anyone to do anything. They have one job - get the information to the police. And often, 911 operators are also private citizens hired by the authorities.
***
Relative to the case - far too many jumping to conclusions and sadly the race pimps immediately come out to stir up more trouble. Then, what reason is the federal government involved in a local crime? You don't see them at any other crime unless it happens to be of a specific type. Now who are the real racist; who are the real segregationist today?

[David]

Originally Posted by David

Not that five year old picture of Martin. Media trying to convict Zimmerman in the pics they choose to peddle.

There is no way Zimmerman can get justice. If he murdered the kid bust em. Manslaughter? But, the eye witness says it was self defense. No matter. They can always get him for a "hate crime."

[GeronL]

The left tweets his address and puts a bounty on someone.

Not even newsworthy apparently.

The MSM doesn't consider it a scandal or controversial or extreme?

[BigRed]

I work as a security guard and ave made severalhunderd contacts with people on my clients property over the time that I haave worked for my current company and I know for a fact that I have the mst 911 calls to to the local PD to report incedents vs. the school district that I patrol.

Couple of questions was the nighborhodd watch affiliated with the HOA of the gated comunity that Mr zimmerman was patroling? If it was then Mr. Zimmerman had the right to stop and question anyone who he thought was suspious to determine if they were a resident. Zimmerman could not detain them unless he witnsess a crime being commited. As far as carrying a firearm it appears form the police that Zimmerman had a concealed carry liscine in the state of Folrida and was lawfuly carrying his 9mm pistol.

Some talking heads are whining that the police did not take Zimmerman's
pistol at the crime scene. I can't see that they did not as it is standard police procedure to take any firearm used in a Homicide at the crime scene.
[Note Homicde does not mean unlawful killing in the above it means the ending of a human life by means f other than natural death.] In All officer invovled shootings the investigating detectives or IA take the officers service weapon for balistics testing so if they do that for a sworn officer then they would do it for sure for a civialian involved in a fatal shooting as well as take
zimmermans shirt that had grass stains on the back from where he was knocked to the ground by Trayvon. Also the shirt would have gunshot residue on it and from the concentration of GSR the cornor could use it to determine the range of the shot as well as the impact wound on Trayvon's body.

It seems to me that both Zimmerman and Travon were at fault in the incedent and both a responsible for there actions if Travon had not attacked
Zimmermann Travon would still be alive and If Zimerman had not approached Travon the attack would not have happened.
It all boils down to if Zimmerman was acting as an agent of the HOA in being a member of the local neighborhood watch then IMO Zimmerman should be in the clear.

As to Zimmerman following the directions of the 911 dispatcher most 911 dispatchers are not sworn police officers so Zimmerman was not under a leagal obligation to fllow their instructions.

[Rifleman]

Originally Posted by jtdc

Which part?

The part I quoted.

Everybody is different. If I feel I am about to die, I would want to take my attacker with me.

Silly me, I assumed you were commenting on a "factual basis".

Source. I have not heard that the witness saw the gun. He saw two guys fighting, Trayvon on top, turned away and after the shot, saw Zimmerman on top.

It was several days before the "News" even talked about a witness.

And what would those be? In his 9-1-1 call he said the guy was getting away. Am I to assume from that limited evidence that Trayvon was coming at him?

You shouldn't assume anything....

I am assuming facts not in evidence. But at some point I am confident that the gun came out.

Exactly.

Unlike you, I am not a expert at forensics. The angle the bullet traveled inside the body would indicate if it might have occurred in a close struggle or while they were separated.

I never said I was an experty at forensics, it's just not that complicated.

I want them to find out what happened, not just his version.

You have no idea either way. You just assume because he hasn;t been arrested that the case isn't being investigated. When the police have "probable cause", is when they consider making an arrest. A court is required to issue a warrant, and an arrest can then be made. Sure someine can be held for questioning, but not indefinately. Somehow half the Bill of rights and hundreds of years of common law are supposed to be tossed out to appease black racists.

Irrelevant! Because injustiice was done in other cases doesn't mean we should not investigate this.

And it's NOT being investigated?

Now why did you add "unless Tayvon attacked responding police"? Police did not apparently arrive until after Trayvon was dead. So you are really reaching to distort the facts. You look down while driving your car an hit a pedestrian, killing them, do the police let you go because it was just an accident? After all, it was a "particular thing" you did that led up to the death.

No, I was making a comparison. If someone attacks, that changes the dynamics of the argument. Nearby here, a policemen shot a suspect who had gained control of his TASAR. Self defense is based upon expediancy. And I'm not defending Zimmerman, I have no idea, (and i am certainly not going to get good reliable information from the press) whether the shooting was justified or not. I can't imagine, even from the biased reporting, that it was Murder".

So not investigating what happened in an attempt to justify the death of Trayvon Martin, who there is no evidence that he did anything criminal, protects our Constitution?

Attacking another person is Assault, and from what I have heard, Zimmerman was bleeding, his own blood, Sounds like evidence to me.