44
   

Florida's Stand your Ground law

 
 
JTT
 
  2  
Reply Sun 8 Apr, 2012 04:15 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
This ranks right up there with your insistence that throngs of racist whites are plotting to kill Obama because he a black president......


You don't think that that's theoretically possible, Hawk?
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 8 Apr, 2012 04:31 pm
@JTT,
JTT wrote:

Quote:
This ranks right up there with your insistence that throngs of racist whites are plotting to kill Obama because he a black president......


You don't think that that's theoretically possible, Hawk?


I dont think that it represents reality....the Secret Service has broad powers to monitor the citizens and many tools to do so, and yet how many reports have we had of arrests of racist whites plotting to kill Obama because he is black? I have not seen even one.

Snood spends a whole lot of time living in his imagination.
Irishk
 
  3  
Reply Sun 8 Apr, 2012 04:36 pm
Grand Jury or Not? ... Maybe

Quote:
Most people emotionally and intellectually engaged in this tragedy, anxiously await the decision as to the whether Angela Corey, the special prosecutor appointed by Governor Rick Scott, will bring this matter before the grand jury on April 10, 2012. Corey, the state attorney in the Duval, Clay and Nassau counties in Florida, told the Miami Herald, "I always lean towards moving forward without needing the grand jury in a case like this. I foresee us being able to make a decision and move on it on our own."

However, as the clock continues to tick closer towards April 10, and reports swirl that two district attorneys, appointed by Corey, have interviewed Trayvon Martin's girlfriend within the last couple of days, it looks more likely that the grand jury will make the ultimate recommendation as to whether or not to indict George Zimmerman. Still, most people calling for an indictment, do not understand the role of a grand jury, nor the grand jury indictment process in Florida.


More at the above link.
MontereyJack
 
  3  
Reply Sun 8 Apr, 2012 04:46 pm
re hawkeye. I've seen quite a few cases of people who were pretty far along on plots to kill him. I've also seen a whole lot of rhetoric against him that mentions his being black specifically, including some here on a2k. Killing him is killing him, whatever the motive. For whatever reason they're plotting, put 'em away before they do it.
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  3  
Reply Sun 8 Apr, 2012 04:53 pm
You think this might count, hawk? Two white supremacists planning to kill Obama and 88 other black people, including 14 black schoolchildren?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama_assassination_scare_in_Tennessee
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  1  
Reply Sun 8 Apr, 2012 05:02 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
Snood spends a whole lot of time living in his imagination.


That's hardly an affliction limited to Snood, Hawk. Y'all live in a highly delusional la la land world that was pounded into ya in your school days.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  4  
Reply Sun 8 Apr, 2012 06:49 pm
@hawkeye10,

Here's one hawk

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27405681/ns/politics-decision_08/t/atf-plot-skinheads-kill-obama-foiled/#.T4Ixd1S_8Z4

Now at least you can't argue you have never seen any.
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Reply Sun 8 Apr, 2012 08:07 pm
ha, parados, beat you to it.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  -4  
Reply Sun 8 Apr, 2012 11:03 pm
@Irishk,
Irishk wrote:

Grand Jury or Not? ... Maybe

Quote:
Most people emotionally and intellectually engaged in this tragedy, anxiously await the decision as to the whether Angela Corey, the special prosecutor appointed by Governor Rick Scott, will bring this matter before the grand jury on April 10, 2012. Corey, the state attorney in the Duval, Clay and Nassau counties in Florida, told the Miami Herald, "I always lean towards moving forward without needing the grand jury in a case like this. I foresee us being able to make a decision and move on it on our own."

However, as the clock continues to tick closer towards April 10, and reports swirl that two district attorneys, appointed by Corey, have interviewed Trayvon Martin's girlfriend within the last couple of days, it looks more likely that the grand jury will make the ultimate recommendation as to whether or not to indict George Zimmerman. Still, most people calling for an indictment, do not understand the role of a grand jury, nor the grand jury indictment process in Florida.
An old saying attributed to district attorneys is:
"I coud indict a ham sandwich."
He goes in to the grand jury ALONE,
with no one to contradict him.
By law, everything that he says is secret.
Anyone that he wants to indict, he WILL succeed in so doing,
with very rare exceptions.





David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  -4  
Reply Sun 8 Apr, 2012 11:10 pm
@hawkeye10,

Quote:
SANFORD, Fla. — Last August, Wendy Dorival got a call about setting up a local neighborhood watch. As the volunteer coordinator for the Police Department here, she gets such calls regularly, and the city already had at least 10 active watch groups. So she thought nothing of this call, from George Zimmerman

She set up a visit for the next month at the Retreat at Twin Lakes, a gated community that had been dealing with a string of burglaries. When 25 residents showed up, a decent turnout, she had the residents introduce themselves; after all, people join the groups to look out for each other. She then gave a PowerPoint presentation and distributed a handbook. As she always does, she emphasized what a neighborhood watch is — and what it is not.

In every presentation, “I go through what the rules and responsibilities are,” she said Thursday. The volunteers’ role, she said, is “being the eyes and ears” for the police, “not the vigilante.” Members of a neighborhood watch “are not supposed to confront anyone,” she said. “We get paid to get into harm’s way. You don’t do that. You just call them from the safety of your home or your vehicle.”

Using a gun in the neighborhood watch role would be out of the question, she said in an interview.


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/23/us/trayvon-martin-death-spotlights-neighborhood-watch-groups.html?pagewanted=all


hawkeye10 wrote:
We see here David the State intimidating the citizens, so where the **** is SCOTUS on this practice??
Has this principle been brawt b4 the USSC ?????

I suspect that if it had been, we 'd have heard about it.





David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  -4  
Reply Sun 8 Apr, 2012 11:23 pm
@Irishk,
OmSigDAVID wrote:
Anyone has a perfect right to follow anyone else.
Irishk wrote:
Not Zimmerman, though, if he was acting on behalf of his neighborhood watch group.

a) As a volunteer for that group, he ignored their instructions that volunteers are not allowed to arm themselves and

b) That volunteers are -- under no circumstances -- to pursue a possible suspect.
So maybe thay will prohibit him from doing the secret handshake
or from singing the official club song,
or suspend him from the club for 7 weeks,
but his independent thought and action does not expose him to criminal liability.


Irishk wrote:
He also ignored the dispatcher who clearly told him to not pursue Trayvon.
Well, maybe the dispatcher will get mad at him
and refuse to go to dinner with him any more. Who knows??
I don 't see any criminal liability arising from disobedience of a dispatcher.

If I get a fone call from a dispatcher ten minutes from now,
ordering me around, I don 't believe that I 'll govern my choices by those commands. I 'm a freedom-loving fellow.





David
hawkeye10
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 9 Apr, 2012 12:37 am
Quote:
“I have no problem with people owning guns to protect themselves,” says Bill Kuch, Billy’s father. “But somehow, we’ve reached the point where the shooter’s word is the law. The victim doesn’t even get his day in court. I don’t think most Americans realize it, but that’s where we are.”

In Florida and across the country, “Stand Your Ground” laws — the same kind of legislation that authorities cited for not arresting a neighborhood-watch volunteer after 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was killed in Florida in February — have coincided with a sharp increase in justifiable-homicide cases.

Prosecutors still reject many claims of self-defense under the new law, and no long-term studies definitively tie the rise in justifiable killings to the passage of laws that relieve citizens of the responsibility to back away from threats. But the Martin case has focused a spotlight on incidents in which the mere statement that people feel endangered allows them to — depending on your sense of what’s right — defend themselves against thugs or act like vigilantes.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/stand-your-ground-laws-coincide-with-jump-in-justifiable-homicide-cases/2012/04/07/gIQAS2v51S_story.html?hpid=z3

American Law made the wrong turn way back during the 70's, when we began to codify into law the excuse from women " I did not FEEL like I could say no, so I did not say no, but I had "NO!" on the brain so this was rape"....
OmSigDAVID
 
  -3  
Reply Mon 9 Apr, 2012 04:48 am
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
“I have no problem with people owning guns to protect themselves,” says Bill Kuch, Billy’s father. “But somehow, we’ve reached the point where the shooter’s word is the law. The victim doesn’t even get his day in court. I don’t think most Americans realize it, but that’s where we are.”

In Florida and across the country, “Stand Your Ground” laws — the same kind of legislation that authorities cited for not arresting a neighborhood-watch volunteer after 17-year-old Trayvon Martin was killed in Florida in February — have coincided with a sharp increase in justifiable-homicide cases.

Prosecutors still reject many claims of self-defense under the new law, and no long-term studies definitively tie the rise in justifiable killings to the passage of laws that relieve citizens of the responsibility to back away from threats. But the Martin case has focused a spotlight on incidents in which the mere statement that people feel endangered allows them to — depending on your sense of what’s right — defend themselves against thugs or act like vigilantes.
The OTHER way to process cases of emergencies of predatory violence
is that after the innocent victim of bloodthirsty criminals
has successfully defended himself by killing the bad guys,
the police shud drag away the good guy throw him in jail
for criminal prosecution to be convicted unless he convinces
a jury that he did not use excessive force on the bad guys,
or that he shud not have begun to defend himself until
the predators were attacking him for a longer time,
because the innocent citizen was in TERROR of the bad guys' partner: government.

In other words: innocence becomes an AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE;
the burden of proof is on the innocent fellow. That is pro-evil and is unConstitutional.

That is what the evil liberals want.

That way, even if the innocent victim wins, and is acquitted,
and even if he wins the bad guys' families' civil suits against him,
he is financially wiped out in paying his own lawyers' professional fees.

I guesss that woud be OK as long as ONLY the liberals
were prosecuted for self defense, not the decent people.





hawkeye10 wrote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/stand-your-ground-laws-coincide-with-jump-in-justifiable-homicide-cases/2012/04/07/gIQAS2v51S_story.html?hpid=z3

American Law made the wrong turn way back during the 70's, when we began to codify into law the excuse from women " I did not FEEL like I could say no, so I did not say no, but I had "NO!" on the brain so this was rape"....
That is another question.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  -3  
Reply Mon 9 Apr, 2012 04:52 am

EVERY State in America shud have a Stand Your Ground Law,
protecting each citizen 's right of self defense. NO right is more FUNDAMENTAL than that.





David
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  3  
Reply Mon 9 Apr, 2012 08:22 am
This is as succinct and clear a synopsis of the pertinent facts of this case as I've seen. It highlights the fundamental failure of the Sanford Police to handle the situation. A week before important witnesses were interviewed. Not accessing the victim's cell phone records for weeks. I know we all have heard a lot of things about this case, but I invite everyone to read this short summary.

"...Among other things, George Zimmerman, 28, was not subject to a criminal background check until after he was released from custody. A possible racial slur muttered by Zimmerman on a 911 call was overlooked. Nearly a week passed before important witnesses were interviewed by the police. Perhaps most crucially, investigators failed to access Martin’s cell phone records for weeks.

Those records revealed that just before he was shot, the teen was on the phone with his girlfriend, who said she overheard crucial moments of the encounter between Zimmerman and Martin.

“Those mistakes should not have been made,” said Andrew Scott, former chief of the Boca Raton police department and a national policing consultant. “They were such rudimentary aspects of an investigation.”

Martin family members and their attorneys relentlessly cited these errors, which echoed through the national media and the blogosphere.

“It has fueled the fires,” Scott said. “The credibility of the agency is now in question.”

'THEY SHOULD HAVE HAD THIS'

Around 6:30 p.m. on Feb. 26, Trayvon Martin left his father's girlfriend's house at the Retreat at Twin Lakes, a gated community where he'd been staying for about a week, and headed to a 7-Eleven store to pick up some snacks before the NBA All-Star game. The store was a walk of about a three-quarters of mile.

Martin spent much of his trip to and from the store on the phone with his 16-year-old girlfriend back in Miami. The entire day had been much the same, with the two talking in in calls of a few minutes at a time. According to cell phone records obtained by The Huffington Post, Martin was on the phone with the girl from 6:30 p.m. to 6:49 p.m.

Martin made it back to the gated complex just after 7 p.m.

At that point, Zimmerman, patrolling the neighborhood in his vehicle, noticed Martin walking slowly. Zimmerman called 911 to report Martin as a "suspicious person." The call began at about 7:09 p.m.

"This guy looks like he's up to no good, or he's on drugs or something," Zimmerman tells the 911 dispatcher. "He's just staring, looking at all the houses ... Something's wrong with him."

The 911 call lasts just over four minutes. Toward the end, Zimmerman says Martin is running and the sounds of Zimmerman breathing hard can be heard as he describes the location to the dispatcher. Some hear what sounds like Zimmerman muttering a racial slur. "These assholes always get away," he then says.

The dispatcher asks Zimmerman if he's chasing the individual. Zimmerman says yes. "We don't need you to do that," the dispatcher responds.

At roughly 7:14 p.m., Zimmerman ends the call. Less than three minutes later, Trayvon Martin was dead from a single gunshot wound to the chest from Zimmerman's Kal-Tec 9 mm pistol, which he carried in a holster on his belt. Police arrived almost immediately and found Martin face-down and motionless in a patch of grass about 70 feet from the back porch of his father's girlfriend's house.

Zimmerman told police that he was the victim of an unprovoked attack by Martin and said he shot the teen in self-defense, according to Bill Lee, the Sanford police chief who has since taken a leave from his job...."

There has been a lot of dithering on this and another thread... Characterizing those who are outraged about law enforcement's treatment of this case as hysterical; making false equivalencies between Zimmerman and Martin on that night that blur the perception of who was pursued and who was the pursuer - about who was to blame for Martin's death.

Some people on A2K seem to be saying "I don't really know what happened and won't know until after the grand jury hearing on April 10th." But I want to say for this record that I think it is pretty clear what happened, and what "remains to be seen" is if Zimmerman will be made to pay for his crime.


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/09/trayvon-martin-cops-botched-investigation_n_1409277.html
MontereyJack
 
  3  
Reply Mon 9 Apr, 2012 08:37 am
from the article snood quoted:

Quote:
The 911 call lasts just over four minutes. Toward the end, Zimmerman says Martin is running and the sounds of Zimmerman breathing hard can be heard as he describes the location to the dispatcher. The dispatcher asks Zimmerman if he's chasing the individual. Zimmerman says yes. "We don't need you to do that," the dispatcher responds.



Once again, WHO tried to avoid confrontation? And WHO forced it? WHO was not just walking after an innocent kid, but CHASING him?
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  2  
Reply Mon 9 Apr, 2012 08:38 am
@hawkeye10,
Hawkeye, you've had a lot of sensible things to say on this thread, but connecting the ability to shoot and kill someone and get off based on your word alone with date rape isn't one of them.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  2  
Reply Mon 9 Apr, 2012 08:43 am
@snood,
snood wrote:
Some people on A2K seem to be saying "I don't really know what happened and won't know until after the grand jury hearing on April 10th." But I want to say for this record that I think it is pretty clear what happened, and what "remains to be seen" is if Zimmerman will be made to pay for his crime.


I think Zimmerman was definitely stupid, from the facts that are not in dispute.

I think he acted unethically and dangerously, from the facts that are not in dispute.

I think it's likely that he chased Trayvon down and either forced a confrontation that led to Trayvon's death (as in, if Trayvon was being chased by a weird guy and he had no idea why, it makes sense that he would try to defend himself) or just plain shot Trayvon with no actual provocation.

However, I do think there is still room to say there is a lot we don't know.

The Tyler Clementi case definitely has an influence on my thinking there. I followed the news reports and thought I knew what was going on. I thought Dharun Ravi was scum and he should feel the full sting of the law for what he did.

Then I read this long New Yorker article about it -- and found that many of the things I thought I knew were wrong. And that context changed things I knew that were factually correct.

I do think that there is a danger of trying someone in the media, rather than in an actual courtroom.

That doesn't mean that the media can't contribute to getting him IN a courtroom. That's something that should happen, and I hope it does.

But yes, I'm reserving some judgment until we know a lot more than we know now.
ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Mon 9 Apr, 2012 08:43 am
@snood,
Quote:
"At roughly 7:14 p.m., Zimmerman ends the call. Less than three minutes later, Trayvon Martin was dead from a single gunshot wound to the chest from Zimmerman's Kal-Tec 9 mm pistol, which he carried in a holster on his belt. Police arrived almost immediately and found Martin face-down and motionless in a patch of grass about 70 feet from the back porch of his father's girlfriend's house.

Zimmerman told police that he was the victim of an unprovoked attack by Martin and said he shot the teen in self-defense, according to Bill Lee, the Sanford police chief who has since taken a leave from his job...."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/09/trayvon-martin-cops-botched-investigation_n_1409277.html


seems 3 minutes is a very short period of time for Martin to beat up Zimmerman and then be killed by Zimmerman ... maybe beatings go a lot faster in Florida Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  2  
Reply Mon 9 Apr, 2012 08:46 am
@sozobe,
sozobe wrote:
That doesn't mean that the media can't contribute to getting him IN a courtroom. That's something that should happen, and I hope it does.


Well, it shouldn't have to happen like that, but it looks like media involvement is the only way to have the case looked at.

It does seem odd that someone could admit to killing someone (as Zimmerman appears to have done) and that there would simply be no charges.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 11/24/2024 at 01:41:09