Gun Rights

Did George Zimmerman Ignore the Police Dispatcher, and Why Did He Have a Gun?

|

Although it has been widely reported (by me, among others) that George Zimmerman continued to follow Trayvon Martin after a police dispatcher suggested that he stop, the recording of Zimmerman's 911 call leaves that point unclear. Zimmerman gets out of his SUV before the dispatcher asks (probably because the wind is suddenly audible in the background), "Are you following him?" Zimmerman says yes, and the dispatcher replies, "OK, we don't need you to do that." Zimmerman says "OK" and then dithers for a minute or so about where police should meet him, finally saying they should call him when they arrive, "and I'll tell them where I'm at." The dispatcher agrees, and the recording ends at that point. The implication that Zimmerman did not plan to stay put could mean he continued to follow Martin, although he claims (through his father) that he was only looking for an address so he could figure out exactly where he was. In an interview with The Miami Herald, Walt Zalisko, "a former Jersey City police commander who now owns a police management consulting company in Central Florida,…said it's implausible that Zimmerman would not know where he was in a tiny gated community that he patrolled regularly," declaring, "That's a lie right there." Maybe, but it's consistent with the confusion Zimmerman expresses during the 911 call: 

Dispatcher: What address are you parked in front of?

Zimmerman: I don't know. It's a cut through, so I don't know the address.

Another point commonly raised against Zimmerman is that he was carrying a gun, contrary to the guidelines for neighborhood watch volunteers. But according to the Sanford Police Department's Q&A on the case, Zimmerman, who has a carry permit, was heading to Target on an errand when he spotted Martin and decided he looked "real suspicious." It is not clear whether Zimmerman also carried his gun on regular patrols, when volunteers are supposed to serve as the "eyes and ears" of police, rather than pursuing or confronting suspects. Zimmerman admits following Martin, at least up to a point, although he claims Martin approached him and started a fight as he was heading back to his SUV. As I've said before, Zimmerman's actions were at least reckless, since he needlessly created the circumstances that led to Martin's death, but it remains unclear whether they were criminal. It seems increasingly likely that question ultimately will be settled by a jury.

The transcript of Zimmerman's 911 call is here.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

166 responses to “Did George Zimmerman Ignore the Police Dispatcher, and Why Did He Have a Gun?

  1. no, not more Zimmerman!

    Anyways-

    “Do you know who waited for the church-goers to get out of church so that he could hand them flyers in an attempt to organize the black community against this horrible miscarriage of justice? Do you know who helped organize the City Hall meeting on January 8, 2011 at Sanford City Hall?? That person was GEORGE ZIMMERMAN.”

    http://www.thetruthaboutguns.c…..g-edition/

  2. “Zimmerman’s actions were at least reckless, since he needlessly created the circumstances that led to Martin’s death”

    Just playing devil’s advocate here…. Let’s say that all Zimmerman did was follow Martin to keep an eye on him, and Martin confronted him and started the fight (a scenario that, AFAIK, is not inconsistent with the facts we currently have). I don’t think that that is recklessness on Zimmerman’s part.

  3. I am still open to the possibility that Zimmerman is a criminal, but the behavior of the media – consistently “erring” against Zimmerman – makes me wonder. Of course, some things are true even if the media says they are. Yet the media have not made their case – and they’re certainly trying!

    1. That is to say, the media has it in for Zimmerman and are desperately trying to prove him guilty, yet their claims are constantly being exposed as exaggerated. They said the 911 call proved Z was following martin – the calls don’t resolve that question. They said there were no scars on Z’s head – turns out there were. One network said z brought up Martin’s race – the 911 transcript shows the dispatcher brought it up instead. They downplayed the reports that Martin was slamming Z’s head on the ground [pavement?]*, only alluding to it indirectly in invoking the Stand Your Ground Law (which would only kick in if Z were being attacked).

      This is getting more and more Brawley/Lacross-y by the day.

      *I can see a Chris Rock monologue here – how *not* to get shot by a Neighborhood Watch volunteer. “Don’t bang his head into the ground.”

      1. MSM seem to be taking their cues from the Martin family’s legal team. Whatever their lawyer says is reported as fact (until it’s debunked).

        1. It’s not like they don’t have a stated agenda:

          http://www.examiner.com/politi…..orts-crime

      2. One networkNBC said edited the 911 tape to falsely imply z brought up Martin’s race
        FTFY

    2. I’m way past wondering.

      When race is the issue du jour, that’s good for the Historic One. White people who want to prove they’re not racist are a pretty gigantic voting bloc.

  4. TEAM TRAYVON
    TEAM ZIMMERMAN

    1. Translation:

      TEAM BLUE
      TEAM RED

      1. TEAM SICK OF THIS SHIT

        1. You and me both, brother.

        2. Seriously. At this point I just wish they both could have died.

      2. THIS OUTRAGE PROVES EXACTLY WHAT I ALREADY BELIEVED

      3. I don’t think we have discussed this issue enough. You just want to stop the debate Episiarch.

        1. You just can’t handle a dissenter, so you have to resort to registration and stifling dissent. You monster.

        2. Guilty as charged. Maybe Mary can chime in on this. OOPS…no she can’t!

          HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

          1. How’s it feel to be impotent Epi?

            1. MAKING THE PUPPET DANCE

              1. She just got of the phone wih Brandeis security, Epi. You’re going down HARD, son. Better get a lawyer.

                1. Nice to see registration has helped.

              2. You’re replying to me in every thread, so yeah.

                Dance more now.

                1. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

                  Project much? DANCE PUPPET DANCE

                  1. Come on, Mary, you need a better trick than this leading space bullshit. I haven’t seen any of your griefing attempts in hours. Try harder, moron. AMUSE ME.

                    1. Where do blank lines go?

                  2. As you reply to me again.

                    1. As you reply to me again.

                      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

                    2. Tell us more about gamboling Mary. You have stopped posting obsessive nonsense. Why is that? and your handles don’t seem to last long. What happened to “Yup” and “Puppet Master”?

                    3. I would like to point out that if elected moderator, her IP and whatever email address she is doing this from would have been banned hours ago.

                      Where is JW? Asleep under a desk somewhere? Masturbating in the janitor’s closet while huffing floor wax? No one knows. But we do know he’s not here right now dealing with this problem.

                      SugarFist Of FreeEtiquette fights for you!

                      #SFMOD2012

                    4. They can’t help themselves, they know if they think if they don’t try to appear snide that they’ve lost.

                      They can’t stop.

                    5. Watch them freak out and dance for me now.

                    6. No one is freaking out but you Mary. Come one, post some primitivist bullshit for us. You know you want to. Just do it.

                      What is the matter? Are you afraid? Do you no longer want to gambol?

                    7. We all know that JW is powerless to do anything about Warty. But NutraSweet can control him! Watch him make Warty dance! Or don’t!

                    8. Sugar Free making Warty dance, what is that some kind of circus act?

                    9. Warty does what I say or he gets the hose again.

                      “PUT THE STROKE LOTION IN THE FUCKING BASKET!”

                    10. By basket, SugarFree is referring to my alligator Fleshlight, of course.

                    11. This Chrome + Reasonable is great, why would someone filter the Gamb*l word?

                    12. I would like to point out that if elected moderator, her IP and whatever email address she is doing this from would have been banned hours ago.

                      Such an ineffectual response is so predictable.

                      Were I the Moderator, not only would she be banned, her kind would be hunted down and removed with extreme prejudice. Don’t treat the symptom, treat the disease, I always say.

                      H&R today. H&R tomorrow. H&R forever!

                    13. Where is JW? Asleep under a desk somewhere? Masturbating in the janitor’s closet while huffing floor wax?

                      If you must know, I was occupied because our janitor was constantly masturbating in the closet and huffing floor wax. I couldn’t let that man go by without reaching out to his tortured soul. He is now bound to his work and family as a new man!

                      Alas, I fear that my work will never be done with defectives such as our beloved SugarFree around. He causes so much pain and anguish in the common folk.

                    14. It the sweet pain of this board being born anew. JW didn’t even want registration. Can you trust someone like that?

                    15. Hahaha, reasonable filtered out your post for using the word gamb0l.

                    16. Hey John!

                      You’re back!

                      What kind of pussy lets himself get run off a web board by trolls?

                    17. LOL. You are so funny Mary. Too bad you got my name wrong. And again, why can’t you post some primativist bullshit? What is the matter are you afraid?

                    18. Hey John!

                      You’re back!

                      What kind of pussy lets himself get run off a web board by trolls?

                      “Too bad you got my name wrong.”

                      Nope.

                    19. Yup. You missed the name dear. Perhaps you can figure it out later. And you seem so impotent these days. Why are you so mad bro?

                    20. The fuck? So now we have to register AND STILL put up with this shit?

                    21. It will stop when I am elected moderator, WTF. This I vow. JW doesn’t care about you.

                      #SFMOD2012

                    22. Her posts disappeared. I am sure she will have to get a new IP address. We should have some peace for a bit.

                    23. Need I remind the electorate that SugarFree only wants you for your bodily fluids, as his own broken body is unable to produce even the most minimal of excretions.

                      Seeing him constantly ladling brackish water onto his own tissue-like, veinous skin is not something you forget easily.

                      H&R today. H&R tomorrow. H&R forever!

                    24. JW will capitulate to the trolls, appease them even. He sickens me.

                    25. I formally endorse the Nutrasweet ticket for moderator, based on this single issue alone.

                    26. The way this threaded makes it look like a very bizarre response to JW, but it was a response to SugarFree.

                    27. Anyway, I will support whoever will promise me a pony.

                    28. I promised ponies this morning.

                      And free ice cream!

      4. I used to think I was Team Purple. Some Blue, some Red.
        Eventually I came to the realization I’m team Gold. Not Blue, not Red.
        But Team Blue calls me team Red, not to mention some very nasty, some even homophobic, names.
        And Team Red ignores my candidates even when they outperform a lot of the “front-runners.”

        OK, I’ll quit whining now.

        1. It is all team stupid now. Come on son, don’t want to join the winning team?

          1. “Act like a dumbshit and they’ll treat you as an equal.”

    2. I think it’s more like “team lynch mob” versus “team fair and impartial investigation and (if necessary) trial.”

      Team Fair Trial responds to Team Lynch Mob, and immediately there’s a phony moral equivalence. Team Lynch Mob is trying to pressurize the government into throwing Zimmerman in prison on the basis that We Already Know All the Facts. Team Fair Trial is against the lynchers, which doesn’t mean they’d go out in the streets and “protest” a conviction of Zimmerman based on an impartial hearing of the evidence. With Team Lynch, we may expect that an acquittal (or refusal to charge) for any reason would be greeted by indignant “protests.”

  5. I recently saw something that said that the time period for the 40 whatever calls to 911 was from 2004 to present, not the last year or so. If that true?

    If it is, why can’t the media get any of this right? Present company excepted, of course.

    1. “Text without context is pretext.”

      Jesse Jackson.

      1. I need to remember that one.

      2. Dang, I had not seen that.

        Pretty close to “Meaning comes from context.”

      3. Jesse later followed up with “Subtext without a dress is sext”

    2. Sullum didn’t get the “following” part right either.

    3. I think this was on a previous thread – it’s since 2004, not in the past 18 months.

      1. I saw it elsewhere, but it was saying the same thing–2004.

        I still think Zimmerman is likely culpable in some way for the killing, but the reported facts are so wrong as to seem willfully so. I don’t care what your politics are, it’s wrong to mess with justice and with a man’s life. If he’s guilty of a crime, let him be tried for it. The actual facts don’t seem to warrant trial by public opinion just yet.

  6. It isn’t against the law to carry a gun or follow a person you think is suspicious. Zimmerman does not need to justify himself here. Of course I think he is an overzealous idiot, but that in of itself isn’t illegal.

    1. Oh, I think somebody who guns somebody else down needs to do a little justifying.

      1. Yes, he needs to justify the shooting, not the fact that he was carrying in the first place.

      2. It’s exactly _what_ needs to be justified that appears to elude you though isn’t it.

  7. So, the default position of Reason is identical to the MSM: The whiter one is guilty, even if he is the victim.

    1. Can you quote exactly what makes you think that, Mr. Tagliaferro? Because it seems to me you cannot read.

    2. by that standard, my wife is always guilty of something!

      (she of pale nordic features)

      1. Good for her you are not a MSM writer.

      2. Doesn’t “wife” already indicate that?

          1. My wife allows me one snark per week.

            1. My wife doesn’t know about you people, and she never will.

              1. Mine posts here. No rest for the wicked or the careless, I suppose

                1. ban her?

    3. Jesus Christ, just fuck off already, JohnSukiBot. Wouldn’t you be much more at home at FreeRepublic anyway, asshole?

  8. Hooray for registration.

    Also, I really wish you hadn’t used those two pictures. By using an actual mugshot of Zimmerman (from a few years ago), and a photo of Martin when he was 12 does nothing but poison the well. IMO articles should try to find the most recent pics of the subjects, rather than try to influence a story by cherry picking photos.

    1. Is that picture really from when he was 12? I haven’t heard anything one way or the other. I’d believe it if you said he was 17 in the picture.

      1. I was a bit off. I’m not sure how old he was when the hoodie photo was taken, but he does look close to 17 in it. I was confusing it with the picture the MSM originally ran with, which was a 12 year of Martin wearing a maroon Hollister shirt.

  9. If he had followed him on Facebook would he still be racist?

  10. In an interview with The Miami Herlad, Walt Zalisko, “a former Jersey City police commander who now owns a police management consulting company in Central Florida,…said it’s implausible that Zimmerman would not know where he was in a tiny gated community that he patrolled regularly,” declaring, “That’s a lie right there.”

    Jesus Christ, there are a lot of declarations of fact from blowhards and media whores who don’t know dick. Producers love having these assholes on telling us Zimmerman did this or Martin thought that. What the fuck do they know?

    1. They know TEAM RED and TEAM BLUE. Isn’t that enough?

    2. Yeah, I thought that one was bullshit, too. I’ve lived in my current home for 14 years now, and if a 911 dispatcher asked me the exact address of the house I was standing in front of, and it wasn’t mine or a couple of other, I’d have to go look.

  11. Is it just barely possible that fate brought together two flawed assholes and the result was tragedy?

    1. You mean like you and Warty’s mom?

      They wrote a book about that. What was it called? Oh yeah: Beowulf.

      1. THANK YOU SIR MAY I HAVE ANOTHER!

    2. My wife and I were discussing that possibility last weekend.

      1. If either one of them had had an ounce of self control, this never would have happened. Why was it so hard just to have a rational conversation about the issue?

        1. Hey she came on to ME.

  12. It was certainly legal for him to carry a gun. It is also certainly legal to follow someone down the street.

    What is, arguably, reckless, is taking a gun with you when you follow someone down the street to “make sure they don’t get away”. And that is the distinct impression that I have of what Zimmerman was doing, based on the 911 calls.

    If you’re following someone to make sure they don’t get away, you are looking for trouble. Taking a gun with you while looking for trouble is reckless. IMO. YMMV.

    1. I’m not a gun person. Maybe if you’re a gun person, going somewhere without your gun is like my going somewhere without my blackberry? Dunno.

      1. I don’t go anywhere without mine, but different people have different carrying habits.

        1. How quickly can we get you into a studio? We need a gun nut for the 5:00 news.

          1. j/k, in case it wasn’t obvious

            1. I got it. No worries.

      2. I carry sporadically, but that’s mostly because my job is in a No-Gun Zone (This Means You, CCW Guy).

        Carrying a gun everywhere is just fine. If you don’t want to leave your gun behind, take it with you.

        But don’t go looking for trouble. By following “suspicious” people down the street. To make sure they “don’t get away.”

        1. I’d say (as another sporadic carrier for similar reasons) that a good rule is if you are going to carry, you have a responsibility to make at least a modest positive effort to avoid situations where you might need to use a gun.

    2. And not only that, but to make sure he didn’t get away with… what? The kid wasn’t doing anything but walking down the street talking to his girlfriend on the phone. The criminal activity was apparently all in Zimmerman’s mind.

    3. Seems to me that “looking for trouble” while UNarmed is reckless, but, TOMAYTO – TOMAHTO, I guess.

  13. Where’s the media’s famously short attention span when we need it? My capacity to give a fuck is tapped out.

    1. Mine too. Fuck them both.

      1. I give a f___ about the behavior of the media and the hard-core Democrats (*there’s* an overlapping Venn diagram) who think it’s fair to indict and try a suspect in the media with phony-ass “evidence” – all in the name of ripping off the country’s racial scabs and getting more votes for our “post-racial” President (who has of course remained scrupulously neutral while the investigation is ongoing – except for saying Martin might have been his son).

        With all that, Zimmerman could be guilty as sin. I will need a fair, judicial trial to establish that point – not the lynch mob swearing that this time they’ve found an actual guilty person unlike several other of their crusades where, oops, the target turned out to be innocent.

        1. ^^^ This. It’s like Bonfire of the Vanities come to life (sort of).

          1. Sorry, the pres said if he’d had a son he’d *look* like Martin.

            And I suppose that if some Latin politician had a son, he’d look like someone Obama deported – or locked up in the WoD.

            1. By “it’s” I meant the situation, not your post, with which I agree.

              1. I was correcting my own post 🙂 – lest Obama say he’s been misquoted, God forbid!

            2. I will never stop LOLing at Barack Obama essentially saying that all black men look alike.

  14. It seems increasingly likely that question ultimately will be settled by a jury.

    Unfortunately, this is the truth. He’s going to get railroaded – at least into a trial, if not a lot more.

    At this point with the media and the race hustlers screaming every day, the Sanford prosecutor is much like a certain Roman governor. He’s going to have to placate the mob or they’ll have bigger problems soon.

    1. And if he is acquitted we will have a nice riot. Won’t that be great?

      1. The absolute worst thing about this is the assholes pushing the race angle so hard. Because that is going to be the cause of the riots if that comes to pass. This would be a fairly interesting case to discuss if it weren’t for the stupid race baiting bullshit.

        Here’s a hypothetical: if Zimmermann’s father had been Hispanic instead of his mother (so he didn’t have a German last name), would people have jumped to the racism conclusion here?

        1. Someone’s never heard of the Zimmerman Telegram.

          1. The Zimmerman telegram was named after the German Foreign Secretary.

            1. You know what I mean.

  15. So Jacob, did you pull the short straw to get stuck on non-stop Trayvon/Zimmerman duty or something? Did Peter beat you in Just Dance 3?

  16. If forensics shows that path of the bullet is consistent with Zimmerman shooting Martin while Martin was on top of him, then Zimmerman will walk; not trial; nothing.

    There isn’t much else to talk about until the forensic report is made public.

    1. Probably right. I seem to be in the tiny minority who believes that if you start a fistfight, you don’t get end it with a gun no matter how bad your ass is getting beaten, but whatever. We’ll never know who started this particular fistfight anyway.

      1. We’ll never know who started this particular fistfight anyway.

        Precisely! Which renders all demagoguery either way not only wrong and irrelevant, but actively harmful.

      2. We will never know how the confrontation started, but we’re starting to get a picture that Zimmerman was on the ground, Martin was on top of him, and Zimmerman had some level of injury.

        So if Martin was shot from below while on top of Zimmerman, the prosecutor will never be able to prove that Zimmerman started the confrontation and deserved the beating he was getting.

      3. I seem to be in the tiny minority who believes that if you start a fistfight, you don’t get end it with a gun no matter how bad your ass is getting beaten, but whatever.

        Are you against any use of lethal force during a fistfight or just that involving firearms? The latter would a very strange position.

        If someone is repeatedly bashing your head against a mailbox/sidewalk/sewer pipe because you pushed them, you certainly have the right to use lethal force to get them to stop. What implements that lethal force involves is irrelevant.

      4. Probably right. I seem to be in the tiny minority who believes that if you start a fistfight, you don’t get end it with a gun no matter how bad your ass is getting beaten, but whatever. We’ll never know who started this particular fistfight anyway.

        You can make that argument morally, but LEGALLY, if you start a fight and then decide to disingage but can’t, and you fear for your life, you can still defend yourself with lethal force.

        The only time you absolutely lose that defense is if you’re committing a forcible felony.

        1. Absolutely correct!

    2. Consistent with what trajectory? I have seen nothing that indicates where Zimmer and Trayvon were in relation to each other when the shot was fired.

      The assumption seems to be that Trayvon was on top of Zimmer when Zimmer shot TRrayvon at extremely short range, but I have seen nothing that indicates this is more than just assumption.

      1. The witness saw Trayvon on top of Zimmerman, went for his phone to call 911, heard a shot, and then saw Trayvon and Zimmerman both on the ground.

    3. I can’t imagine how any such determination could rise above the level of bitemark analysis. Gravity is pretty irrelevant in the time it takes a bullet to travel through a human body.

      I suppose you could look at the entry angle to come up with which orientation is more likely, but I can’t see how that would rise above the level of reasonable doubt.

      1. Gravity isn’t relavent.

        The point of entry, point of exit, and path in between will indicate the relative position between the gun and Martin’s body when the shot was fired.

        Powder burns and stippling will indicate relative distance between the gun and Martin’s body when the shot was fired.

        If Zimmerman shot Martin when both men were standing some space apart, the forensics would then contradict Zimmerman’s claims.

        What we have now, is Zimmerman’s claim that Martin attacked him and tried to take his gun. We have a witness that says Martin was on top of Zimmerman just prior to the shot.

        The forensics will either agree with or disagree with Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense.

        1. OK, I thought you were implying that if the forensics showed Zimmerman was on top then he’d be convicted. I was doubting whether you could tell who was on top while they were going at it.

          Distance obviously could be figured out without much speculation.

  17. Everybody who has a comment on this case should be roasted over a charcoal spit turned by David Duke and Louis Farrakhan.

    1. Isn’t what you just said, technically, a comment?

      And, yes, I checked Duke’s site and he supports Zimmerman – perhaps the German name makes him all warm inside.

      But Duke is not mainstream – most of the “pro-Zimmerman” people are responding to the lynchers, not getting a mindless allegiance to a criminal suspect. If he has a fair trial, resulting in conviction, Z’s “supporters” will considerably diminish – and there probably won’t be enough of them left to hold a decent riot. You can’t say that of the Martin supporters.

      1. Isn’t what you just said, technically, a comment?

        Fudge. Ow, it’s hot! Mmmm, something smells like spare ribs.

  18. Okay, squirrels. Either fix the iOS app to allow commenting or fix the website so that it remembers I don’t want the mobile version. This half-ass nonsense of booting me back to the mobile version at whim is bullshit.

  19. One difference between the “Team Zimmerman” and “Team Martin” people is the question of falsifiability. To most of “team Zimmerman,” the presumption of innocence can be overcome if an impartial investigation and/or trial shows that he’s a criminal.

    But to Team Martin, Zimmerman’s guilt is nonfalsifiable. If he’s convicted, that proves he’s guilty. If he’s acquitted, or not charged, that shows the racist system has let a guilty killer loose.

  20. Why did he have a gun?

    Thats the easy part. Because he could.

    The more important question is “Why isnt every eligible American carrying?”

    1. Bu-bu-but that’s cheating!

      Kinda like my old Pilosophy prof, in Wizard of Oz voice, “Why are we here?”
      Me, “It’s a required course!”

  21. Zimmerman’s actions were at least reckless, since he needlessly created the circumstances that led to Martin’s death, but it remains unclear whether they were criminal. It seems increasingly likely that The question ultimately will be settled by the color of a jury.

    FIFY

  22. So “We don’t need you to do that” == “You are hereby ordered by a duly-sworn police officer to cease your pursuit”??

  23. Seems to me that there are two parties, one who want to sweep the situation away, and one that wants there to be a formal presentation of facts and evidence and for a jury of peers to decide if the state has met its burden of proving the charges it will bring against the killer.

    Now I don’t understand why all the hand wringing is going on for Zimmerman, regarding the media and etc.

    It is clear that the Sanford PD conducted a piss poor investigation and even with that poor investigation the lead detective thought charges should have been brought forth.

    1. I think you’re leaving out the third party.

      The one that wants to see Zimmerman hang because he shot a black person.

      They’re not hard to find. Just look for Sharpton.

      1. The one that wants to see Zimmerman hang because he shot a black person.

        And that one is way bigger than that second one he mentioned.

      2. When did Sharpton, Jackson, or etc say they want to see Zimmerman hanged?

    2. A “formal presentation of facts and evidence and for a jury of peers to decide if the state has met its burden of proving the charges it will bring against the killer” is a pretty unpleasant experience and is likely to wreck your life even if you’re acquitted.

      We have a relatively stringent set of hoops the state has to go through to put you on trial for a reason.

      1. So a person who killed someone should shouldn’t have to answer for their actions because that would be an unpleasant experience for them?

        I don’t by that reasoning.

        There is enough murkiness about the situation to have a trial, and the bogus “complete and fair” investigation that the Sanford PD chief tried to pass off has clearly been shown to be neither complete nor fair.

        1. How can you say that, when you don’t know all the findings of the police?

          All we’ve gotten is a few leaks and a lot of media speculation, most of which was either wrong or deliberately altered to make Zimmerman look more guilty.

          1. The Sanford PD initially said they had all the findings they needed to close the book, remember. They said witnesses confirmed Zimmerman’s events and it was okay under the SYG laws.

            All of a sudden we Fed and State start reviewing the case again. We find out that the police were trying to coerce witnesses into changing their story, not recording the statements of witnesses who disagreed with Zimmerman’s version of events, trying to go back and change initial police reports without addendum, and simply doing terrible work such as not even trying to contact the person on the telephone with the victim at the time of death to get a possible different version of events.

            We have gotten leaked info from Zimmerman’s side as well as leaked information from Martin’s family.

            I don’t think anyone had made Zimmerman look guilty or bad more than Zimmerman did, when he decided that he should go harass a person who was minding his own business, walking home while talking to his girlfriend on his cell phone.

            1. There was no one on the phone with Trayvon when he died. The girl was lying about hearing Zimmerman confront Trayvon. Zimmerman was still on the phone with the dispatcher when that ‘confrontation’ would have happened.

              1. The phone records seem to contradict you, so I’m going to side those in this instance. Ok.

                1. Her records show 2 calls–the one in which she spoke to trayvon and the one after, where she couldn’t get him. During the one in which she spoke to Trayvon, Zimmerman was on the phone with the dispatcher. He was talking to the dispatcher at the same time that she claimed he was asking Trayvon what he was doing. Since we have a recording of Zimmerman at the time, and only her word–AND proof of only two calls, it is easy to conclude that she was lying about hearing Zimmerman.

    3. No, it’s not clear at all that the SPD did a piss poor job. Based just on the things that keep coming out to refute the lynchers, I’d say that they were pretty thorough. It looks like, so far, they’ve got all their ducks in a row while the lynchers keep tossing out garbage in the hopes that something will stick.

  24. None of us were there, right? What I find curious is that the circumstantial facts are much clearer in the Mumia case, pointing to Mumia as the murderer, than they are in this case making Zimmerman out to be a murderer. Yet many of the people who demanded “Free Mumia” are howling for
    Zimmerman’s head. Wait, if Zimmerman is convicted, there will be a group formed to “Free George” but you won’t find hipster, celebrities and Paris-street-namers on board.

    1. Sorry didn’t know Zimmerman and Mumia were involved in the exact same situation.

      Mumia got a trial didn’t he?

  25. I can hardly believe most of what I read here. If a good citizen is following someone suspicious, I see nothing wrong in that, nor that said citizen is armed. In fact, we need more such “good citizens”. Of course the police / 911 tell them to forget it. Job security. Protectors of individual liberty should be rejoicing in this kind of citizen activism. I am amazed that Reason attracts such a horde of “protecting us is government’s job” faux libertarians. Let them cower in their bedrooms while the brave protect their neighborhood.

    The facts will come out soon enough. If Zimmerman’s story is verified – and it is in large part by at least one eye witness – then he is not a villain. He is a hero.

    1. There’s no evidence Trayvon Martin was someone who the gated community needed to be protected from, friend.

  26. It seems increasingly likely that question ultimately will be settled by a jury.

    PPPPT!!! A “Jury” of media-frothing-internet-comments, you mean!! For most, this case is OBVIOUSLY solved!! Its just a matter of figuring out what the majority has speculated! Facts, schmacts!!

  27. I’m just gonna leave this here for all the “what if the races were reversed” people:

    http://www.npr.org/2012/04/01/…..aws-limits

  28. According to Florida’s SYG law Zimmer is shielded, assuming his story is true. See exception 2a below:

    “2010 Florida Code
    TITLE XLVI CRIMES
    Chapter 776 JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE
    776.041 Use of force by aggressor.
    Share |

    776.041 Use of force by aggressor.

    The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:

    (1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or

    (2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:

    (a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or

    (b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.

    History. s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1190, ch. 97-102.

    1. That was in the books before SYG. Hence the reference to “exhausted every reasonable means of escape”.

      1. Wrong, second Tulpa.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-your-ground_law

        776.041 is part of the SYG law.

    2. If Zimmer’s account is accurate then he cannot even be charged. The prosecutor is gonna have a hard time ever bringing this to trial.

      “A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force

      1. Yeah it is clear, the SPD did a terrible job, nothing new that has come out has changed how they mishandled the investigation from the get go.

        1. Sorry about the mispost above.

          I meant to shamalam, I would say that the issue is when he initiated the conflict was he committing a crime.

          I’ve heard that he could be committing harassment, stalking, or false imprisonment which negates any SYG protections.

          1. Yeah, I agree. If Zimmer was committing a felony then he would lose his SYG immunity.

            The problem (if you want to see Zimmer charged) is showing that he was in the midst of committing a felony. I see nothing to support such a conclusion.

            The are two other ways to charge Zimmer:
            1. show that he had not exhausted all possible means of retreat. This fails, IMO, because he wound up on his back with Trayvon on top beating him.
            2. show that he did not have a reasonable belief that he was in danger of great bodily harm or death. I don’t think that will hold water either.

            As I see it Zimmer simply can’t be charged or even sued for wrongful death.

  29. Another point commonly raised against Zimmerman is that he was carrying a gun, contrary to the guidelines for neighborhood watch volunteers. But according to the Sanford Police Department’s Q&A on the case, Zimmerman, who has a carry permit, was heading to Target on an errand when he spotted Martin and decided he looked “real suspicious.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.