You are either not logged in or not registered with our community. Click here to register.
 
December 10, 2016, 10:25:54 PM

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

Click here if you are having problems.
Default Wide Screen Beige Lilac Rainbow Black & Blue October Send us your theme!

Hark!  The Herald!
Holiday Issue 2016

Wiki Blogs Dicebot

Author Topic: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.  (Read 12158 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #125 on: April 22, 2012, 11:20:07 PM »
The thing is,scalp wounds can look worse than they appear to be. I'm reserving judgement.  I'm still surprised he got bond. I'd be worried about someone trying to get him

Offline SilentScreams

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #126 on: April 22, 2012, 11:50:10 PM »
The issue is not how bad they are, the issue is that they were there. I can tell you for a certainty that if someone is on top of me, slamming my head into the pavement I don't care what damage they may be causing, I'm going to shoot them (I have a conceal carry permit). There should be no difference between a 115 pound woman shooting someone in that situation v. a 200 pound man. The reasonable expectation is that the person doing the slamming is attempting to kill or do serious bodily injury to the person being slammed.

Juries can't randomly decide to charge someone at a lesser offense. Juries can only provide a verdict of guilt or innocence on the charges the state files. For an excellent example of the govt. overstepping its case see the Kasey Anthony matter. Did she kill her child? Probably not, and the state was unable to prove the case that she did so she was acquitted. Did she negligently or recklessly contribute to her child's death? Absolutely, however the state did not go for the lesser charge that their case supported. The jury does not have the ability to randomly decide to charge someone at a lower offense. Juries are fact finders who are narrowly constrained by, in criminal cases, the elements of the statute(s) for the charge the state has filed.

Offline Iniquitous

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #127 on: April 23, 2012, 12:22:37 AM »
The issue is not how bad they are, the issue is that they were there. I can tell you for a certainty that if someone is on top of me, slamming my head into the pavement I don't care what damage they may be causing, I'm going to shoot them (I have a conceal carry permit). There should be no difference between a 115 pound woman shooting someone in that situation v. a 200 pound man. The reasonable expectation is that the person doing the slamming is attempting to kill or do serious bodily injury to the person being slammed.

The part you are not mentioning is the fact that this 200 lb man stalked a teenager because he believed he was 'up to no good'. He ignored the police dispatcher and chose to hunt down Trayvon - who knew he was being followed. I'm sorry - Trayvon had every right to defend himself against a stranger stalking him at night. Zimmerman did not have the right to be out with a gun doing Neighborhood Watch.

Sorry - Zimmerman is in the wrong here.

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #128 on: April 23, 2012, 01:02:01 AM »
The issue is not how bad they are, the issue is that they were there. I can tell you for a certainty that if someone is on top of me, slamming my head into the pavement I don't care what damage they may be causing, I'm going to shoot them (I have a conceal carry permit). There should be no difference between a 115 pound woman shooting someone in that situation v. a 200 pound man. The reasonable expectation is that the person doing the slamming is attempting to kill or do serious bodily injury to the person being slammed.

Juries can't randomly decide to charge someone at a lesser offense. Juries can only provide a verdict of guilt or innocence on the charges the state files. For an excellent example of the govt. overstepping its case see the Kasey Anthony matter. Did she kill her child? Probably not, and the state was unable to prove the case that she did so she was acquitted. Did she negligently or recklessly contribute to her child's death? Absolutely, however the state did not go for the lesser charge that their case supported. The jury does not have the ability to randomly decide to charge someone at a lower offense. Juries are fact finders who are narrowly constrained by, in criminal cases, the elements of the statute(s) for the charge the state has filed.

No, not randomly - but in most cases, the judge gives instructions for lesser-included offenses.  If the jury doesn't find that the prosecution has met the burden for murder, they are allowed to consider whether the prosecution has proved manslaughter, assault, or certain specific other offenses.  The prosecutor puts forth what they think is the highest offense the evidence supports.

Edit:  In regard to FL. v. Anthony (thank you Sunshine Laws):

Quote
INTRODUCTION TO HOMICIDE

In this case, Casey Marie Anthony is accused of Murder in the First Degree, Aggravated

Child Abuse, Aggravated Manslaughter of a Child, and four counts of Providing False Information to a Law Enforcement Officer.

Murder in the First Degree includes the lesser crimes of Murder in the Second Degree,

Manslaughter and Third Degree Felony Murder, all of which are unlawful.

A killing that is excusable or was committed by the use of justifiable deadly force is lawful.

If you find Caylee Marie Anthony was killed by Casey Marie Anthony, you will then consider the circumstances surrounding the killing in deciding if the killing was Murder in the First Degree or was Murder in the Second Degree or Manslaughter or Third Degree Felony Murderwhether the killing was excusable or resulted from justifiable use of deadly force

source
« Last Edit: April 23, 2012, 07:48:26 AM by Oniya »

Offline blknwhite11

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #129 on: April 23, 2012, 03:18:20 AM »
The scalp wound looks fake to me. After looking at it based on a screenshot, I fail to see any cuts or gashes where the blood comes from. It's like it starts abruptly.

But this case has just gotten more atrocious by the minute, and I refuse to watch anything on the news about it. Bottom line is Zimmerman shot and killed a minor, allegedly, in cold blood. Ethnicity shouldn't be such an issue as it currently is.

Offline Elias

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #130 on: April 24, 2012, 07:21:14 AM »
I am trying to avoid this case because of how sensational it is, and find it incredibly sad that the only reason this young mans death makes it to the media is because a white man (He looks Hispanic by the way which I only bring up because I hate the race war concept I would like to think the majority is past out and out discrimination, if not prejudice) pulled the trigger. Do you realize how much black on black death goes unreported? Why aren't their deaths being used to fix the broken neighborhoods ravaged by gangs, poverty and drug dealers? Anyway my worry is the media makes good money off of race war and may skew things against Zimmerman.

I mean I think a lot of the people here are intelligent and are arguing things well, BUT you cant have an honest argument if you dont have the facts. I do know this on the REPORTING, and its not much but is true.

A) Multiple networks spliced tapes so it sounded like he was OBVIOUSLY racist, I believe that's now been proven true, this did happen. So what else has the media faked to push our hatred onto this white male?

B) There was a history of crime in the neighborhood. I tried to read every comment not sure if this was mentioned, but multiple break ins had occurred and Treyvon fit the description of those acting in such a way within the neighborhood. African American males wearing hoodies had broken into multiple homes in the vicinity and people had taken it upon themselves to protect the neighborhood, not just Zimmerman.

Thats it, its not much. But I figured I would throw them out there since not everyone gets to hear about that. Could this be racially motivated? Definitely, I pray it wasn't, and yet I tell myself it doesn't matter anymore because perception dictates it will be about the color of his skin. Us hating one another seems more important than the loss of this life.

I just hope the jury can see the truth they will get a lot more information than we will. They always do. If there was more to Zimmerman, and he acted out of vigilantism, racism or just plain stupidity I hope he goes to jail. If this boy acted violently too soon and Zimmerman in fear (Negligent though it may be) pulled the trigger killed him and is haunted for his actions, I think the tragedy is enough.

Offline Iniquitous

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #131 on: April 24, 2012, 07:54:40 AM »
As I said before, I've never bought into the race thing. For whatever reason, it just didn't sit well when I read the news stories and it actually irked (still irks) the shit out of me to have the race card thrown in.

What I look at is A: Neighborhood watch is not suppose to be armed - Zimmerman was. B: Zimmerman was told by the dispatcher that they did not need him to follow Trayvon - Zimmerman continued.

Now, I've read somewhere, can't remember where now for the life of me, that Zimmerman's story of what happened changed a few times. I'm willing to grant that in such a situation he wasn't thinking as clearly as you or I and things may have become garbled in his thoughts - but it is still suspicious. The fact of the matter is Zimmerman took it into his own hands to track Trayvon despite being told the police did not need to do that (go figure - they tell you not to follow/confront suspected criminals for just this reason - someone is likely to end up dead) - Trayvon, knowing he was being followed, confronted Zimmerman when he could not get away from him.

Zimmerman is at fault for trying to be the hero.

BTW - I suspect the race card was thrown in more because of how the police handled things and the fact no one notified Trayvon's family for three days.

Offline Callie Del Noire

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #132 on: April 24, 2012, 10:45:51 AM »
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/04/23/marissa-alexander-shoot-to-kill-or-you-must-not-be-scared-enough/

Here's the other side of the 'stand your ground coin'. Apparently an order of protection, an established history of battery and being in one's home doesn't count as stand your ground.

Offline vtboyTopic starter

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #133 on: April 24, 2012, 12:24:21 PM »
BTW - I suspect the race card was thrown in more because of how the police handled things and the fact no one notified Trayvon's family for three days.

The initial evident indifference of the police and prosecutor to "just another" violent death of a black kid, far more than whatever racial stereotyping may have led Zimmerman to stalk Martin, is what has been so troubling about this case.

Also disturbing is that the weakness of the charging instrument may be attributable, not only to the questionable legal skills of the prosecutor, but to the failure of the police to discover and preserve evidence in the immediate aftermath of the shooting. 
« Last Edit: April 24, 2012, 04:18:07 PM by vtboy »

Offline Iniquitous

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #134 on: April 24, 2012, 12:35:20 PM »
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/04/23/marissa-alexander-shoot-to-kill-or-you-must-not-be-scared-enough/

Here's the other side of the 'stand your ground coin'. Apparently an order of protection, an established history of battery and being in one's home doesn't count as stand your ground.

Wow... what the... I literally cannot put my thoughts into words after reading that.

Offline Trieste

  • Faerie Queen; Her Imperial Lubemajesty; Willing Victim
  • Dame
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Apr 2005
  • Location: In the middle of Happily Ever After with a dark Prince Charming.
  • Gender: Female
  • I am many things - dull is not one of them.
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 4
Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #135 on: April 24, 2012, 12:42:58 PM »
Wow... what the... I literally cannot put my thoughts into words after reading that.

Agreed... there just aren't enough curse words in the English language to express it. >.>

Offline SilentScreams

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #136 on: April 24, 2012, 07:53:54 PM »
In regard to the assault with a deadly weapon incident.

I would argue that had she shot her husband she would not have been charged, regardless of whether he died or was wounded.

My previous experience in law enforcement, granted not in Florida, had similar rules for those of who who carried firearms. Basically, if we sighted in on someone we had an obligation to shoot because to sight in on someone was, and is, considered the point of no return in Alaska. I know that different jurisdictions have different rules, like in NY, especially the city, law enforcement are allowed to sight in, or aim, their weapons at people they are arresting. If a law enforcement officer (city police, Troopers, COs, Court Officers, etc.) sights in on someone and they do not have just cause for doing so they can be charged with attempted murder. Just cause includes anything relating to the defense of life, self defense, etc. The Alaskan rules stipulate that just pointing the gun at someone is use of deadly force because the threat of deadly force exists in sighting the gun in.

I'm not quite sure why I gave all that background. I'm tired. However, I do remember my point, thankfully.

The assault she is charged with is not (one would hope) against her husband but against the public at large. When you discharge a firearm you, the shooter, is responsible for that bullet. You are also responsible for ensuring that the gun is fired in a safe direction, or in a necessary direction. By firing into the ceiling she was assaulting the public. She has no control of that bullet once she pulls the trigger. If she pulled it on purpose to frighten her husband it IS a crime because she needlessly placed the public at risk. Had she shot into the ground, provided she was on the first floor, there would not have been a crime.

I could be wrong on the state but I believe it was in New Jersey sometime between 1995-2005 but at a New Year's party a police officer fired his weapon into the air celebrating. The bullet traveled across a lake, through a window, and killed a sleeping child. The officer was understandably fired and charged with murder. This is a similar situation. Guns are not toys and if one decides to shoot one MUST (has a legal responsibility in most jurisdictions) have reasonable knowledge of where that bullet is going and what it is going to do.

The woman in the assault case had a legal right to shoot her husband if she so desired. She, same as everyone, always, did not have a right to recklessly fire in an unsafe direction where she had no knowledge of where that bullet was going to go or what is was going to do.

She was properly charged. Unfortunately, I wish hunters would be charged like this. There are no such thing as accidental shootings, only negligent shootings. A gun is a responsibility that one voluntarily undertakes. Hunters need to be held to the same standard that this woman was.

Offline Elias

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #137 on: April 24, 2012, 09:53:08 PM »
I did not know that Silent, that's something I'd have never thought about.

Offline Valerian

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #138 on: April 25, 2012, 07:08:59 AM »
Well, I don't have any particular legal or law enforcement training, so I may be misunderstanding the finer points, but according to the link Callie gave, she was charged with and convicted of three counts of assault with a deadly weapon -- one for her ex and one for each of her ex's two children, who he brought with him.  If the argument is that, by firing a single bullet wide of the three people in front of her, she put the life of a fourth, unknown person at risk, that would seem to me to be only one charge, not three charges specifically naming the people she deliberately avoided shooting.

Also, since the bullet didn't hit anyone, assault doesn't seem like the proper charge anyway.  Reckless endangerment seems more appropriate -- I've never heard of charges of assault against a person or persons unknown.

Offline Iniquitous

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #139 on: April 25, 2012, 07:36:48 AM »
My issue with what was posted is the fact that the woman had a restraining order on the husband, there was previous documented evidence that he was violent and she was charged because the woman prosecuting did not think she was in 'fear of her life' because she didn't run out the first available door - among other things.

I went through an abusive marriage. I remember quite clearly being terrified that he would go too far. I remember running through the house trying to get away from him and instead of running out the front door I locked myself in the bathroom.

I'm sorry. That charge is bullshit. There is no reason that woman should be sitting in jail just because she fired a warning shot and his actions - to leave the house immediately and rush to the police department to file charges against her just shows how manipulative the asshole is. He couldn't 'punish' her by beating her/killing her so he did the next best thing in his mind. He deprived her of her child and fucked up the rest of her life. Classic abuser mentality.

Offline SilentScreams

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #140 on: April 25, 2012, 08:22:51 AM »
Warning shots are not allowed. You don't fire warning shots. If you aim a gun at someone you shoot them or you don't. You don't miss on purpose, missing on purpose is a crime. Warning shots are fin and interesting in the media and in movies and television but legally they are a crime.

As far as assault charges go....Florida has codified much of the common law and sticks with the original legal definitions. Assault is the the threat of force whereas battery is actually injuring someone with that force. So assault is the threat of force, battery is the application of that force. 

Offline Valerian

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #141 on: April 25, 2012, 08:40:49 AM »
I'm still not clear on why she was convicted of three charges of assault against three specific people, though.  If the warning shot is the crime, shouldn't one shot equal one count of whatever the appropriate charge would be?

Offline Oniya

  • StoreHouse of Useless Trivia
  • Oracle
  • Carnite
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2008
  • Location: Just bouncing through. Hi! City of Roses, Pennsylvania
  • Gender: Female
  • One bad Motokifuka. Also cute and FLUFFY!
  • My Role Play Preferences
  • View My Rolls
  • Referrals: 3
Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #142 on: April 25, 2012, 09:01:12 AM »
As SilentScreams explained - assault is the threat of force.  If I am brandishing a weapon in front of three people, all three people are threatened by that weapon.

Offline SilentScreams

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #143 on: April 25, 2012, 09:08:19 AM »
The reason why one shot resulted in three charges is because there were three (at least) potential victims. Each victim is equally threatened by the bullet until the bullet actually hits someone. Those people don't even need to know that they are being, or have been, threatened.

Offline Valerian

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #144 on: April 25, 2012, 09:36:53 AM »
Then the warning shot doesn't seem to be the real issue, if simply holding the gun in their presence is what makes it assault.  If she hadn't fired at all, the charges would still have been exactly the same, yes?  Which seems illogical... but I know, the law is usually only logical from the legal standpoint, which is often very narrow.

I read through the ex's deposition, by the way, and it was pretty appalling.  He admitted to having lied to the police when he filed the charges against his wife -- they gave him a threat assessment questionnaire, and he stated that she had previously threatened him with a weapon and that he believed she might intentionally kill him.  He also said that she had been violent to him before, and recanted that as well.  In the posted deposition, he says flat out that he lied because he was "mad as hell so I would say anything".

Offline Zakharra

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #145 on: April 25, 2012, 10:27:24 AM »
Then the warning shot doesn't seem to be the real issue, if simply holding the gun in their presence is what makes it assault.  If she hadn't fired at all, the charges would still have been exactly the same, yes?  Which seems illogical... but I know, the law is usually only logical from the legal standpoint, which is often very narrow.

I read through the ex's deposition, by the way, and it was pretty appalling.  He admitted to having lied to the police when he filed the charges against his wife -- they gave him a threat assessment questionnaire, and he stated that she had previously threatened him with a weapon and that he believed she might intentionally kill him.  He also said that she had been violent to him before, and recanted that as well.  In the posted deposition, he says flat out that he lied because he was "mad as hell so I would say anything".

 That part right there should have gotten the charges reduced or thrown out. He admitted he would have done and said anything to get  back at her. I bet if he had had the gun, he wouldn't have stopped at just shooting the ceiling.

 It's sad because he will probably get the kids now.

Offline SilentScreams

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #146 on: April 25, 2012, 11:15:11 AM »
Even if he admitted to lieing  she still fired the gun. That part can't be undone. Again, if she had merely brandished a gun at him it doesn't matter if he felt threatened or not, the fact that she did it is the crime, not the mental state of mind of the victim.

Offline Malthas

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #147 on: April 25, 2012, 11:55:20 AM »
Considering even the man who came up with the whole Stand your Ground law says it does not apply to Zimmerman and after looking at all the evidence that exist from the phone calls I really find it hard to believe how anyone could blame Trayvon for this or that he acted in the wrong.   He was a poor dumb kid in the wrong place at the wrong time doing nothing that any other kid would have done.     Did Zimmerman mean to kill him?   No but that's what he ended up doing.     The police in this whole case tried to cover it up but they've been rather exposed for being corrupt and incompetent at best.   The whole thing is a mess.   

If by some chance Zimmerman gets off or doesn't go to jail there is only one outcome I see and it's in the vein of the LA Riots.   

It's been very disgusting how the victim has been vilified so far by some people and media.

Offline vtboyTopic starter

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #148 on: April 25, 2012, 03:37:13 PM »
Considering even the man who came up with the whole Stand your Ground law says it does not apply to Zimmerman and after looking at all the evidence that exist from the phone calls I really find it hard to believe how anyone could blame Trayvon for this or that he acted in the wrong.
This fellow who claims authorship of the statute should have done a better job in drafting it, as it may very well apply to Zimmerman. No matter how provocative Zimmerman's conduct in stalking Martin and how easily he might have avoided danger, the plain language of the statute appears to allow him a defense if he: (1) was lawfully present at the place of the killing; (2) was not engaged in any unlawful activity at the time; and (3) reasonably perceived that the use of deadly force was necessary to avoid great bodily harm or death.     

There does not seem to be much question but that Zimmerman had the right to be where he was when he shot Martin. The unsettled questions are whether he was engaged in some unlawful activity (e.g., whether he assaulted Martin) and whether his claim that he feared severe injury or death was true and the fear reasonable. Assuming delay and apathy on the part of the Sanford PD did not result in loss of critical evidence, it will be interesting to see what proof the prosecution will muster on these issues.   

Offline Cythieus

Re: Trayvon Martin and the return of a quaint southern tradition.
« Reply #149 on: April 25, 2012, 06:37:21 PM »
This fellow who claims authorship of the statute should have done a better job in drafting it, as it may very well apply to Zimmerman. No matter how provocative Zimmerman's conduct in stalking Martin and how easily he might have avoided danger, the plain language of the statute appears to allow him a defense if he: (1) was lawfully present at the place of the killing; (2) was not engaged in any unlawful activity at the time; and (3) reasonably perceived that the use of deadly force was necessary to avoid great bodily harm or death.     

There does not seem to be much question but that Zimmerman had the right to be where he was when he shot Martin. The unsettled questions are whether he was engaged in some unlawful activity (e.g., whether he assaulted Martin) and whether his claim that he feared severe injury or death was true and the fear reasonable. Assuming delay and apathy on the part of the Sanford PD did not result in loss of critical evidence, it will be interesting to see what proof the prosecution will muster on these issues.   

And you're already wrong, the law states that you can't carry a gun and provoke someone so you can use it. So he was engaged in illegal activity.