Unarmed teen shooting: Is Florida law to blame?

[Coito ergo sum]

the other part of the "what you call details" is after zimmerman already started pursuing martin, started scarying him and the whole cat and mouse chase began ending in martin's death.

No. Not in the least. Why do you keep using your own words here - quote the transcript. I've posted it twice.

[MrJonno]

Look - he can't be questioned if he doesn't want to be. But, he answered all the cops' questions without a lawyer on the spot. So, he didn't, apparently, want access to a lawyer.

What benefit would keeping him in jail for 24 hours be to the investigation? It wasn't completed in 24 hours and they almost never are.

Is your suggested course of action the law in your country? If so, do you have a link or something that says that is what they do as a matter of course?

Being arrested is not minor. I assure you. I have been to, but not an inmate in, jails. It is NOT minor.

Main reason to arrest someone as well as question them is to restrict their access to anyone else. If you are arrested I would hope you get your own cell in a police station (you do in the UK). It's not pleasant but nor is it the end of the world. Arresting someone gives a suspect protection that they don't have until they are arrested.

Haven't been arrested but if I had killed someone even in self defence I hope I would be more traumatised by killing someone rather than spending a day talking to the police

[Coito ergo sum]

Trayvon wasn't staying on the sidewalk, he was suspiciously trespassing through other people's yards. That is what made Zimmerman suspicious, and because they had a rash of burglaries in the area.
Tyrannical

you have quite an immagination,.

Pot Kettle

[kiki5711]

Trayvon wasn't staying on the sidewalk, he was suspiciously trespassing through other people's yards. That is what made Zimmerman suspicious, and because they had a rash of burglaries in the area.
Tyrannical

you have quite an immagination,.

Pot Kettle

bubble gum..

you've run out of any relative words to continue this discussion.

read the post from me quoting the judge and his opinion. That's the reality my friend.

[Coito ergo sum]

Whoever said it wasn't? What's weird is that the discussion you posted is 180 degrees from the kind of thing you post.

Naturally, the whole case depends on the evidence, which is the thesis of what the judge in your post was saying.

There are different thresholds, however. The first threshold is "search." A cop can search a person if they have "reasonable suspicion" of criminal activity. That's not an issue here, but that is the lowest standard of proof. The determination is made by the cop. If the defendant has a beef, they can sue, or they can raise a defense in a criminal prosecution that there weren't demonstrable facts justifying the claimed reasonable suspicion. If there is no arrest as a result of a search, then the person is limited to a civil suit or a complaint to the police department.

The next threshold is arrest. Police need probable cause to arrest. That means demonstrable objective evidence on which to conclude that a crime may have been committed by the defendant. In the case of self-defense, arrests don't have to be made. Extreme examples to make the point are like the young woman who shot and killed an intruder while she was on the phone with 911 dispatcher. The evidence was clear to the police that she acted in self defense. They didn't arrest her. Should she have been arrested and put through the wringer? By your logic, yes. In the case of Zimmerman, the cops on the scene investigated, and they checked the story and they determined that his self-defense claim made sense, or so the cops say. They did take him into the station. They examined him, and he cooperated. I bet if he did not cooperate, and if he asked for a lawyer and exercised his right to remain silent, I bet he would have been arrested and charged on the spot. But, he did cooperate and the evidence lined up.

At trial, the next threshold is proof beyond a reasonable doubt. That is the threshold we are at now.

After the public outcry, violence, threatened violence, and other hubbub, the Governor appointed a special prosecutor. Her job, you can bank on it, regardless of what others here have said, is to make sure we make an arrest. She said political pressure was not an issue, but when a prosecutor is specially appointed, it's because the State wants a prosecution. The prosecutor is part of the State. They are law enforcement.

So, that's it, I guess. Believe me, kiki, I am fully aware of "the reality."

[kiki5711]

I clearly understand what it means. I don't need your interpretation of it for me.

[amused]

It probably doesn't matter what the criminal case determines, but the civil case needs to get the SYG laws repealed or highly restricted to where they can be applied. Any time pursue and confront is involved there should be a determination of willful intent to murder. IMO

[Seth]

Remember, Trayvon was trespassing by cutting through people's yards. A gated community is private property and Trayvon was a guest. Trayvon had no right to break the law like that even though it was a minor offense, and Zimmerman as a property owner had every right to confront Trayvon over this.

that's totally wrong. he wasn't traspassing if he was a guest and probably even if he wasn't a guest. AND HE WASNT CUTTING THROUGH peoples back yards. there's a walkway between the yards that is clearly meant for humans to walk through, unless you feel it's only for their pets.

I live in several gated communities and sometimes I just like to jog, or walk through them looking at houses and their yards.

does that mean I'm staking out a house to Rob?????? And therefore I can be a suspicious person, maybe on drugs, up to no good???

Yes. At least enough so that one is justified in viewing you with suspicion and keeping an eye on you if you're not recognized, and even approaching you to ask what you're doing there.

[Tyrannical]

http://www.examiner.com/charleston-cons ... and-rapids

You didn't hear about this is the media, but on the weekend of March 24th and March 25th at least seven white people were brutally beaten by mobs of blacks in Grand Rapids, MI. Five of the victims filed police reports. At least two other victims exist, and there are probably others. The local media has refused to report the cruel attacks and the authorities are resisting any serious charges.

A detective told Jacob that they believe all the attacks were racially motivated. The detective also told Jacob that he believed the Trayvon Martin media frenzy is what prompted the attacks. Jacob also believed that the thugs were seeking revenge for Trayvon Martin before the detective confirmed this belief.

There's been quite a few Black on White "Trayvon revenge" attacks lately across the country. I suspect it's only going to get worse too.

[Warren Dew]

There's been quite a few Black on White "Trayvon revenge" attacks lately across the country. I suspect it's only going to get worse too.

Are assaults, even racially motivated ones, typically reported in Grand Rapids? Assaults are typically not as newsworthy as homicides.

[Tyrannical]

There's been quite a few Black on White "Trayvon revenge" attacks lately across the country. I suspect it's only going to get worse too.

Are assaults, even racially motivated ones, typically reported in Grand Rapids? Assaults are typically not as newsworthy as homicides.

What is news worthy is almost like a lottery, most crimes you never hear about. Some crimes you hear about constantly.
Chicago is up to 120 homicides so far this year, non-fatal shootings at almost 500, but you don't hear all that much about them in the news.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012 ... icago-lawn

During one particularly violent weekend last month, 49 people were shot — 10 of them fatally, including a 6-year-old girl as she sat between her mom's legs on the family's Little Village front porch. The violence was largely concentrated on the South and Southwest sides.

[MrJonno]

The next threshold is arrest. Police need probable cause to arrest. That means demonstrable objective evidence on which to conclude that a crime may have been committed by the defendant. In the case of self-defense, arrests don't have to be made. Extreme examples to make the point are like the young woman who shot and killed an intruder while she was on the phone with 911 dispatcher. The evidence was clear to the police that she acted in self defense

Have to differ on what probably cause is, as most deaths are not self defence the police should work on the basis that anyone that kills someone is lying. That in not to say they are on the courts/jury don't need far higher levels of standards to send someone jail.

Having laws say who the police can arrest as opposed who the courts can convict is unusual to say the least. I assume its to stop someone being inconvienced for 24 hours by the police. However as I've said before your loss of liberty with the appropiate legal protection for 24 hours is small price to pay to ensure someone doesnt get away with a serious crime. I just don't associate being arrested with someone either losing reputation or actually being guilty of something merely that they are part of the investigation process. Most people who are arrested are never charged with anything which I really don't see a problem with

[kiki5711]

Remember, Trayvon was trespassing by cutting through people's yards. A gated community is private property and Trayvon was a guest. Trayvon had no right to break the law like that even though it was a minor offense, and Zimmerman as a property owner had every right to confront Trayvon over this.

that's totally wrong. he wasn't traspassing if he was a guest and probably even if he wasn't a guest. AND HE WASNT CUTTING THROUGH peoples back yards. there's a walkway between the yards that is clearly meant for humans to walk through, unless you feel it's only for their pets.

I live in several gated communities and sometimes I just like to jog, or walk through them looking at houses and their yards.

does that mean I'm staking out a house to Rob?????? And therefore I can be a suspicious person, maybe on drugs, up to no good???

Yes. At least enough so that one is justified in viewing you with suspicion and keeping an eye on you if you're not recognized, and even approaching you to ask what you're doing there.

But then again, I wouldn't be asked anything, would I? cuz I'm white.

[kiki5711]

Stand Your Ground: Before Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman, there was John McNeil:

http://www.republicmagazine.com/news/st ... cneil.html

[Tyrannical]

Remember, Trayvon was trespassing by cutting through people's yards. A gated community is private property and Trayvon was a guest. Trayvon had no right to break the law like that even though it was a minor offense, and Zimmerman as a property owner had every right to confront Trayvon over this.

that's totally wrong. he wasn't traspassing if he was a guest and probably even if he wasn't a guest. AND HE WASNT CUTTING THROUGH peoples back yards. there's a walkway between the yards that is clearly meant for humans to walk through, unless you feel it's only for their pets.

I live in several gated communities and sometimes I just like to jog, or walk through them looking at houses and their yards.

does that mean I'm staking out a house to Rob?????? And therefore I can be a suspicious person, maybe on drugs, up to no good???

Yes. At least enough so that one is justified in viewing you with suspicion and keeping an eye on you if you're not recognized, and even approaching you to ask what you're doing there.

But then again, I wouldn't be asked anything, would I? cuz I'm white.

Statistically, how much more often is a young Black male to commit a burglary than what ever demographic you are in? If they are X times more likely to commit a crime, give them X times more scrutiny. Racial profiling is correct because it is statistically correct, and it also puts pressure on the group as a whole to adjust it's behavior.