Unarmed teen shooting: Is Florida law to blame?

[Coito ergo sum]

@ CES: I would support holding the guy until a reasonable amount of evidence had been collected and analyzed. It's contextual. If it's somebody suspected of stealing a candy bar, just a few minutes. If it's somebody suspected of assassinating the president, probably a bit longer.

I would never want us to become a country where the cops just arrest people and throw them in jail while investigations continue to determine whether there was actually probable cause to arrest them in the first place.

Non sequitur/strawman argument. Brief detention without arrest is what I described, and only in cases that involve a person's death.

It's not a strawman. I would never want us to become a country where cops just arrest people for homicide crimes and throw them in jail while investigations continue to determine whether there was actually probable cause to arrest them in the first place.

I mean - remember the Madeline McCann case? Or, the Jon Benet Ramsey case? Why weren't the parents "detained" while investigations ensued as to the deaths of their children?

How long is brief?

Under US law, a police officer can "briefly" detain a person for a "stop and frisk" if there is "reasonable suspicion" that the person is committing a crime of some kind. Or, a cop can detain you "briefly" to write you a ticket, or stop your car on suspicion of some shenanigans going on in the car or that you may be a suspect or something. But, they can't throw you in jail for days pending investigation. That would be nuts.

It's a stawman because you're trying to apply general principles to a specific case in which it is not clear that those principles apply.

Wrt detention sans arrest: Again, context is crucial. If it's a candy bar, just a few minutes. If it's someone's life, longer. How long? Again, context. If someone is standing over a 5-year-old child with a bloody hatchet in hand, 24 hours should be enough. In the case at hand, 24 hours should have been sufficient for any police force that works around the clock.

Of course the statement I made applies - you're suggesting that Zimmerman be arrested pending 24 hours within which to determine if there is probable cause to arrest him.

What was lost by Zimmerman being free for the 24 hours after the shooting?

1. The investigation was not hampered by him not being in jail. The cops were able to do anything they could have done with him in jail. He cooperated with them, even though he has an absolute right to remain silent, and to refuse to cooperate.

2. After the 24 hours, he presumably would have been released. How do we know that? Because he wasn't arrested. If there was reason to arrest him, then he'd be arrested now. Wouldn't he?

3. Nothing other than talking to him could have been completed in one 24 hour period after arresting him. The coroner's inquest and autopsy has not even been completed yet - at least a report has not been issued. They had already taken Zimmerman's statement and all the witness statements. They had marked out the crime scene, and crime scene investigators could pour over it all they want, regardless of whether Zimmerman was home or in jail.

Why is 24 hours of Zimmerman in jail worth anything here?

[klr]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-17492445

Trayvon Martin: Obama says teenager's death a tragedy

US President Barack Obama has said the "tragedy" of an unarmed black teenager shot dead in Florida should prompt some national soul-searching.

The death of Trayvon Martin, 17, gunned down by a neighbourhood watchman, who has not been charged as he claimed self-defence, has sparked outrage.

"If I had a son he would look like Trayvon," President Obama told reporters at the White House.

Thousands of protesters demanded justice in Florida on Thursday evening.

"I can only imagine what these parents are going through and when I think about this boy I think about my own kids," Mr Obama said.

"I think they are right to expect that all of us as Americans take this with the seriousness that it deserves and we're going to get to the bottom of what happened."

There have been calls for the arrest of George Zimmerman, 28, who opened fire on the teenager last month in the Orlando suburb of Sanford.

In Florida, a law known as "stand your ground" can prevent criminal or civil prosecution when deadly force is used in self-defence.

[mistermack]

And the evidence that Zimmerman was motivated by race is...?

There are a couple of his recorded comments that support that view.
Firstly, he makes a point of the kid being black to the police operator. Later he says "these asseholes always get away", again it's on the tape.

More pointing to a pre-judging bias than an outright racist motive. But it's there nonetheless.

And you consider this to be conclusive of his racial motivation? In one sentence he refers to the suspect as being black. In another he says "these assholes". In the second, does he intend to refer to blacks specifically or to theives in general? Most thieves do get away, also.

My point is that it's always best to say, "I don't really know, therefore I suspend judgement" rather than, "I don't really know, but I say he's guilty, anyway".

I said "support that view" not "conclusive of racial motivation".
You quoted it, and then ignored it.
YOU asked for evidence. Is it only evidence if it proves the case? Or is there such a thing as supporting evidence? Or evidence that suggests something? Otherwise, trials are going to be pretty short.

[Warren Dew]

There are tens of thousands of fights every night in the US. Getting the worst of it doesn't entitle you to pull out a gun and kill the person you're fighting. Especially if you initiated the fight.

And that's if his story is true.

Actually, Zimmerman's story is that he was headed back to his car when Martin attacked him - though apparently that doesn't have to be true for it to be self defense under Florida law.

Because somebody died and it's worth one person's brief inconvenience to make sure it wasn't a crime.

So if someone dies, you arrest everyone in the area, even if they claim to be innocent bystanders? Or you only arrest the people who admit to participating, thus making it more difficult to get people to talk about what happened?

Bad idea, either way.

[Coito ergo sum]

[

Because somebody died and it's worth one person's brief inconvenience to make sure it wasn't a crime.

So if someone dies, you arrest everyone in the area, even if they claim to be innocent bystanders? Or you only arrest the people who admit to participating, thus making it more difficult to get people to talk about what happened?

Bad idea, either way.

Good point. Then you'd have bystanders running away to avoid "investigatory detentions." And, of course, everyone would be well advised to not say a damn word to the police in any investigation ever. Already, suspects are well advised to keep their mouths shut and not say anything to the police.

[FBM]

It's a stawman because you're trying to apply general principles to a specific case in which it is not clear that those principles apply.

Wrt detention sans arrest: Again, context is crucial. If it's a candy bar, just a few minutes. If it's someone's life, longer. How long? Again, context. If someone is standing over a 5-year-old child with a bloody hatchet in hand, 24 hours should be enough. In the case at hand, 24 hours should have been sufficient for any police force that works around the clock.

Of course the statement I made applies - you're suggesting that Zimmerman be arrested pending 24 hours within which to determine if there is probable cause to arrest him.

I recommend that you consult a dictionary and learn the distinction between "detention" and "arrest". This should bolster your reading comprehension, but I doubt it will do much to resolve your political/emotional bias. That's more of a personality problem, I think.

[maiforpeace]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-17492445

Trayvon Martin: Obama says teenager's death a tragedy

US President Barack Obama has said the "tragedy" of an unarmed black teenager shot dead in Florida should prompt some national soul-searching.

The death of Trayvon Martin, 17, gunned down by a neighbourhood watchman, who has not been charged as he claimed self-defence, has sparked outrage.

"If I had a son he would look like Trayvon," President Obama told reporters at the White House.

Thousands of protesters demanded justice in Florida on Thursday evening.

"I can only imagine what these parents are going through and when I think about this boy I think about my own kids," Mr Obama said.

"I think they are right to expect that all of us as Americans take this with the seriousness that it deserves and we're going to get to the bottom of what happened."

There have been calls for the arrest of George Zimmerman, 28, who opened fire on the teenager last month in the Orlando suburb of Sanford.

In Florida, a law known as "stand your ground" can prevent criminal or civil prosecution when deadly force is used in self-defence.

Yup, just saw the clip. The news over this is mushrooming.

[Svartalf]

@mistermack: Haven't you paid attention to the news? LOTS and LOTS of people are screaming at the tops of their lungs that the guy is guilty.

He should be held until a proper investigation is conducted, and everybody else, if they were wise, should suspend judgement on all parties involved, including the police and the American people in general (who constitute the juries), until all available and relevant evidence is collected and analyzed. Doing otherwise is sloppy reasoning.

Wheras there's no reason to wait for anything to axe every member of the local PD who had anything to do with the event not being properly investigated already.

[Warren Dew]

By San Jose standards, Zimmerman was a "person of color." Racist cops tend not to be fans of Latinos.

Sorry, I just saw this, but I was wondering about that...how come reports have called him white? And where did he get a last name like Zimmerman?

Jorge Zimmerman?

Mai, you of all people should know that nonwhites can have some white ancestors.

Also, "latino" is actually an ethnic designation, not a racial one; you can be latino and white, or latino and nonwhite.

Here's a picture of the two people involved, for anyone interested; Zimmerman is on the right.

[FBM]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accident_(fallacy)

The logical fallacy of accident (also called destroying the exception or a dicto simpliciter ad dictum secundum quid) is a deductive fallacy occurring in statistical syllogisms (an argument based on a generalization) when an exception to a rule of thumb[1] is ignored. It is one of the thirteen fallacies originally identified by Aristotle. The fallacy occurs when one attempts to apply a general rule to an irrelevant situation.

For instance:
1.Cutting people with a knife is a crime.
2.Surgeons cut people with knives.
3.Surgeons are criminals.

It is easy to construct fallacious arguments by applying general statements to specific incidents that are obviously exceptions.

Generalizations that are weak generally have more exceptions (the number of exceptions to the generalization need not be a minority of cases) and vice versa.

This fallacy may occur when we confuse generalizations ("some") for categorical statements ("always and everywhere"). It may be encouraged when no qualifying words like "some", "many", "rarely" etc. are used to mark the generalization.

For example:
Germans are Nazis
The premise above could be used in an argument concluding that all Germans or current Germans should be held responsible for the actions of the Nazis. Qualifying the first term:
Some Germans are Nazis
This premise may make it more obvious that it is making an (extremely weak) generalization and not a categorical rule.

Related inductive fallacies include: overwhelming exception, hasty generalization. See faulty generalization.

The opposing kind of dicto simpliciter fallacy is the converse accident.

Figure it out, if you've never heard of it. It's after 1 a.m. here. Bedtime-thirty.

[maiforpeace]

By San Jose standards, Zimmerman was a "person of color." Racist cops tend not to be fans of Latinos.

Sorry, I just saw this, but I was wondering about that...how come reports have called him white? And where did he get a last name like Zimmerman?

Jorge Zimmerman?

Mai, you of all people should know that nonwhites can have some white ancestors.

Also, "latino" is actually an ethnic designation, not a racial one; you can be latino and white, or latino and nonwhite.

Here's a picture of the two people involved, for anyone interested; Zimmerman is on the right.

Yea, well that's why my parents decided to name me Mai instead of Helga - my mother even railed about that once, regretting they had given me a Vietnamese name when I was once taunted by the other kids for being a 'Jap'.

I was more interested in why many news reports have been calling him white instead of latino, even those out of Florida.

[Coito ergo sum]

It's a stawman because you're trying to apply general principles to a specific case in which it is not clear that those principles apply.

Wrt detention sans arrest: Again, context is crucial. If it's a candy bar, just a few minutes. If it's someone's life, longer. How long? Again, context. If someone is standing over a 5-year-old child with a bloody hatchet in hand, 24 hours should be enough. In the case at hand, 24 hours should have been sufficient for any police force that works around the clock.

Of course the statement I made applies - you're suggesting that Zimmerman be arrested pending 24 hours within which to determine if there is probable cause to arrest him.

I recommend that you consult a dictionary and learn the distinction between "detention" and "arrest". This should bolster your reading comprehension, but I doubt it will do much to resolve your political/emotional bias. That's more of a personality problem, I think.

What's your problem? Personality problem? Political/emotional bias? I've expressed no bias here. I have said multiple times if the police had probable cause they should have arrested Zimmerman, and they should still arrest Zimmerman. What bias are you claiming I have?

You have to get insulting about this?

Under US law, a "detention" is a brief stop made by the police on "reasonable suspicion." The detention is to be brief, and is to see whether criminal activity is going on. And, the police may detain you there for the time they reasonably need YOU to see if there is probable cause to arrest you. They may not detain you just because they are doing other things to investigate. I.e. they can detain you to ask you questions if you agree to answer them (in the US you don't have to answer police questions) and they can detain you to take photos and look at your clothes, wounds or whatever - but, they can't just detain you because they are investigating some other aspect of the matter that doesn't need you to be there, and they can't just plop you in jail and call it "detention." Putting Zimmerman in a jail cell overnight would be an arrest.

And, if they detain you for too long and arrest you as a result, that becomes a basis for a motion to quash or suppress which can result in dismissal of the charges.

[Audley Strange]

Can't you lot just tut, shake your heads in pity and then rather than discuss problems of endemic racism and gun control, just ignore it, lock it away like we do in Europe, you know the same kind of thing we do with our imperial and political guilts. We sensibly inter them in the shame cupboard like they were deformed siblings or something rather than airing our dirty laundry in public, and we don't have ANY problems with racism at all.

[Atheist-Lite]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-17492445

Trayvon Martin: Obama says teenager's death a tragedy

US President Barack Obama has said the "tragedy" of an unarmed black teenager shot dead in Florida should prompt some national soul-searching.

The death of Trayvon Martin, 17, gunned down by a neighbourhood watchman, who was not charged as he claimed self-defence, has sparked outrage.

"If I had a son he would look like Trayvon," President Obama told reporters at the White House.

(continued, obviously not thinking this through considering the health of the kid right now?)

[laklak]

Newt Gingrich said that Zimmerman was a man with "a dangerous hobby". Obama has weighed in on it. Some rep was shouting about it on the House floor in D.C. It's all over FB, the TV and radio news, Farrakhan's spouting off. Yer Honor, my client cannot get a fair trial ANYWHERE in the fucking country. It's a defense attorney's wet dream.

No one knows what happened out there except Zimmerman. There may or may not be evidence that either supports or discredits his statements, but unless it's a slam dunk against him (like CCTV, or unequivocal audio tape) then he's unlikely to be charged. The law permits the use of deadly force when in "fear of death or great bodily harm", how can you disprove he wasn't in fear? Particularly if evidence shows some sort of physical confrontation.