According to the local news, here in Florida, the 911 operator did NOT SPECIFICALLY order an action. The whole Private Property thing applies again. This is going to be one big legal Charlie Foxtrot.

Geoff
Who is afraid the grand jury and the persecutors may throw Zimmerman to the mob, and completely eliminate the rule of law in Florida and the US of A, where it has been in deadly danger for years, and been shredded by the US Government recently.

I don't think the dispatcher's telling him not to follow the guy,
just like the dispatcher's telling Joe Horn in Texas not to go outside, carries that much weight. Throwing him to the mob would be decision mady by the jury or the grand jury. I figure they have enough witnesses to get to the bottom of it, and if the jury thows the case out
I figure there might be widespread trouble.

This whole incident would never have happened if Zimmerman had remained in his vehicle. I thnk the case ought to go to a grand jury myself. Let the facts come out, and if he is found not guilty then there may be widespread trouble. I am confident that if that happens Texas officials can deal with it here. Here in Texas, those putting out wanted dead or alive posters do not have immunity at the State level, as apparently they do at the federal level.

I figure if it comes out that Zimmerman did not have his nose broken, he likely will go to prison.

Does anyone know for sure that recently Martin was found carrying women's jewelry in his back pack with a burglary tool?
There was an initial report about it, but none of the news media seem to mention that now.

That was a separate incident. According to reports, in October Martin was suspended for writing obscene graffiti on a school door. During a search of his backpack, campus security found a bunch of women's jewelry and a watch, as well as a screwdriver. Martin said he got the jewelry from a friend but would not say who.

Does anyone know the facts about this case? Or at least some facts???

Although the coroner has yet to speak publicly, someone thought to ask the funeral director some questions. And he stated that there is no evidence of bruised knuckles, cuts, scratches, or any signs of a scuffle other than the gunshot wound to the chest.

Which is as relevant or irrelevant as Zimmerman being fired as a security guard because he was "overly aggressive", or that he was once arrested for fighting with a cop.

Hello pot? - this is the kettle calling!

Right. Those with agendas will use the same tactics and then cry foul at each other.

"This isn't rocket science, yet we make it more complicated than it needs to be."

Unfortunately there are attorneys who aren't rocket scientists and they are more than willing and worse yet trained to make it more complicated than it is.

Maybe yall have heard the latest on the (-1-1 call. NBC played an edited version, showing that Zimmerman volunteered Martin's race. YTurns out, when you play the ENTIRE 9-1-1 call, the 911 operator ASKED about his race, Zimmerman only answered a question. If this turns out to be true, and I heard the REAL version, after all the other instances with major news outlets out and out LYING, NBC should be fined, have to issue extreme apologies, maybe run out of town. It's disgusting that they would deliberately turn this into a race issue.

I agree with one of the members who said that some people who get a CCW act like James Bond.

There is a BIG difference between an off duty (or even retired) LEO and a person with a CCW.

I don't know other states, but in CA it makes a HUGE difference.

Can you even imagine what would have happened if the role players where reversed. It is just one huge mess as of now.

__________________
Doesn't hasta call me Johnson

Before the Stand your Ground laws started to become more accepted, it was common for people to get into trouble if they used a gun when other options were available. In other words, if you could have run and did not, you would get arrested for using your gun. If you were cornered or being beaten with no option of escape, then you were justified. (assuming your life was in danger, etc). This is all very subjective so you had to be sure. This is in answer to your question about CCW before Stand your Ground.

Well there is a copy of the police report out there now with some very interesting findings. It also proves Rev JJ made several false statements about the case.

However this plays out, the SYG laws are now being serious looked at and it gave the Anti's way too much ammo.

The media on this has been just terrible. Lies, Lies, and more Lies on both sides, but more on the M side than the Z side IMHO.

As a famous German dictator proved, you tell the lies often enough and long enough, the people believe them to be the truth. Our media is very good at this.

As far as Texas SYG, I believe it is a good law but still I can only use deadly force when I believe myself or somebody is in fear of grave bodily injury or death.

I do not have all the facts, and I will not pretend to know who was right, but I do know this, it is going to hurt all law abiding citizens when all the rulings and judgements are done.

Maybe a good time to remember this- even with a SYG law, if you aren't cleared of a crime after a shooting, you can still be sued for wrongful death- like, a family member could sue ya cause you killed their 'baby.' If you go to trial, and are found INNOCENT, only THEN are you safe froma lawsuit. At least that's what Mas Ayoob said about one state- we all know laws in states are different.

Partially incorrect, at a minimum,, for the following reasons: A defendant is NEVER adjudged "innocent." They are either "guilty" or "not guilty." (And even then there can be variations.) But the prisons are chock full of innocent peops.

In many jurisdictions a criminal verdict has little bearing on civil proceedings as standards are different. (i.e. "beyond a shadow of doubt" versus "preponderance of evidence.") The OJ Simpson proceedings are prime examples.

Be safe.

Here are links to a more recent, and somewhat different case here in Nevada. There are some issues about the "need" to shoot for self defense.

Intruder killed in Summerlin identified as Las Vegas teen - Wednesday, March 21, 2012 | 2:45 p.m. - Las Vegas Sun

Demarcus Carter « CBS Las Vegas

Mother defends her slain son from behind bars - FOX5 Vegas - KVVU

Any thoughts on shooting a, seemingly, unarmed person through your patio door? He's outside, you are inside.

Ken

Not enough information and too many questions to answer that.

OK, here is a link to another story about this shooting.

Man slain in Summerlin yard had lengthy record - News - ReviewJournal.com

This one goes on to say:

Ken

Probably would have waited until the door or window was opened. Once the door or window is open, he does not have to be inside, the intent is already there. If he had a screwdriver in his hand I would also consider him armed with a deadly weapon.
Case in OK, guy broke out the lady's sliding glass door so she shot him. He never made it inside. No reason to let them get any closer.

Let the bike go. Whether a motor bike or not, what you save in lawyer fees will more than replace it. First question to ask yourself, am I willing to pay my lawyer $100/hr to defend me for the action I'm about to commit. When you carry a gun it changes your response to almost any situation you find yourself in. You must retreat when you would rather punch someone's lights out. Much worse, you are morally bound to intervene to save the life of an innocent if required. I was present at a carjacking when the owner was threatened by a man with a bat. If the owner had been struck I would have felt morally compelled to shoot the perp, thank fully he surrendered his keys and I watched the perp drive away without having to draw my weapon. I was very thankful I didn't have to shoot, I am not a wealthy man. If you carry a gun you WILL be held to a higher standard, if you can't accept that, don't carry. I carry a gun because, as Clint Smith says " An armed man will kill an unarmed man with monotonous regularity."

Not in Ohio. If I shoot somebody in self-defense and either am not charged, or am acquitted, neither my assailant nor his survivors can collect a PENNY from me.

In Ohio we don't believe that a failed attacker should be able to profit from his lack of skill or luck.

In MA, I can carry a gun to protect myself from imminent deadly harm.

However, if I can safely retreat, I have a duty to retreat, except if I am in my home (Castle doctrine).

In addition, I cannot escalate the violence. I can't turn a minor argument into a self defense situation.

These seem like reasonable laws to me.

SHOOT MY OWN BIKE? Shame on you for even suggesting that!

This is the case in Florida as well.

__________________
Illegitimus Non Carborundum

cmort666 I agree with you regarding the protection intended by the castle doctrine. Here is a case in Texas where this law failed to protect the homeowner from a significant expense of over $60,000 after he had to defend a civil case, even after the criminal charges were dismissed.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...g=content;col1

The case was the Graham Chambers shooting in Tyler, Texas 2009 in which the homeowner was not convicted. Although succesful in defending the criminal charges, it being self defense. I would guess that Ohio's castle doctrine is not much different from the one we have in Texas.

+1!!!! A person MUST not keep escalating the situation to a point where HE/SHE is justified to use deadly force.

Florida law specifically states that if you have a legal right to be there, you have no duty to retreat. I don't think it's reasonable to expect me to 'retreat' if that's not where I want to go. I have every right to be there, and the fact that a bad guy is in front of me should not force to go where I don't want to go.

He has the duty to retreat and leave me alone. If he refuses to do that and tries to press an attack or assault, Florida law puts his life in danger. A 'duty to retreat' on the assaulted always give the advantage to the assailant.

Having said that, I do not want to ever shoot anyone. I sincerely hope that no one ever puts me in that position.

__________________
Illegitimus Non Carborundum

The laws on using deadly force against a person here in NH clearly state that they do not apply to situations like the Zimmerman case, I think he would be in jail here in NH. One who is given a CCW permit should not go looking for trouble. Even if no criminal charges are filed against Zimmerman, he still has potential civil charges to defend himself against, glad I am not in his shoes.

__________________
Geoff. Since 1960.

If the investigation shows that he was justified in the shooting, (and I do not know that it will), and he isn't charged he cannot be sued under Florida law.

__________________
Illegitimus Non Carborundum

CCWKY shares my view on this case. The whole matter has been fatally spun by the media. It was only recently that it was brought to my attention that this young man, Martin, was 6' 1" in height. All of the pictures on TV have left the impression that he was this diminutive little guy. All of the photos show him in the best possible light, in my opinion, while this other man is shown in mug shots of some kind, evidently right after the incident; he looks mean and aggressive, what a surprise, adrenaline will have that affect on human beings. Then you have the "poorly advised witlessness " that, for unknown reasons or "motivations" bring their "testimony" to add to the mess. This woman who told about what she "heard" assuming it was Martin asking for help and Zimmerman, "the older, deeper voice," will make finding a jury that is un-tainted, if it gets that far, mighty hard to do. I wanted to begin my questions with, "Now, how many confrontations of this kind have you been involved with,mam ?" and proceed from there, seeing that I would have to start somewhere, and having just to many places to start. I don't know what happened, and thanks to the media, we may never know. One last observation: can someone tell me how the real facts of what happened can be better understood if we could know IF there was a "racial Slur" used in the incident, or was that suggestion just to add some more spice the the mumbo jumbo gumbo. It is interesting that a voice analysis expert was brought into the case, before there was even any charges, much less a trial, unless you count the one conducted my the media. Flapjack

Here in Nevada, where it appears I can shoot a unarmed man in my back yard, from inside my home, through a window, and not be charged I can still be sued. It appears I can be sued even if I am attacked by multiple armed miscreants who have broken into my house.

Ken

Given that the assailant or his survivors CANNOT collect a judgment in a good shoot, it would be EXCEPTIONALLY hard to find an attorney willing to take a case on a contingent basis, for clients who very likely will NEVER pay him, and who in any case CANNOT collect, REGARDLESS of the outcome.

Ohio has laws regarding what are called "vexatious litigators". There are in fact CRIMINAL penalties for bringing frivolous suits.

Here in Ohio, they can sue... they just can't collect.

Good luck finding a lawyer to pursue such a case.

From the Florida Statutes:

776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—

(1) 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...

__________________
Illegitimus Non Carborundum

What is so disturbing to me about this whole thing is how fast the Media picked this up and polarized the country. We had lawmakers up here in NY wearing hooded sweatshirts to show their support for the man who was killed, without knowing anything about the case that happened 2000 miles away!
I simply can't make a judgement whether Mr. Zimmerman made the right call as I'm old enough to realize that you should NEVER believe what you read or hear on national news media.
As a ccp holder I have asked myself when I would pull and I think thats a question all of us should ask ourselves and cement in our brains. I will not allow myself or family to be hurt or worse if I can stop it. I do not consider belongings being stolen a case for deadly force unless it involves the use of a weapon. I will not make idle threats or brandish my weapon. If I pull the decision is already made.

Just got back to updates on this thread, really good to see some states don't allow civil suits after shootings- this country isn't TOTALLY messed up- yet-

__________________
No work? No eat. 2 Thes

I am absolutely disgusted by this. Let's hope that if the situation is ever reversed, that someone with more backbone will come to your aid.

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.....

[QUOTE=Chuck1217;136452827]Just got back to updates on this thread, really good to see some states don't allow civil suits after shootings- this country isn't TOTALLY messed up- yet-[/QUOTE

The fact that some states including Texas don't allow civil suits after shootings that are justified, does not mean that the homeowner or CHL holder won't be out some legal expenses,
because they will.

There was a 14 year old teen ager shot in Dallas Monday night, when he and two other teen agers knocked on a front door of a homeowner, when there was no answer they went to the back door and kicked the door in. A man and his adult son was at home, and shot the teenager. The link below has some details. The homeowner was not charged, but it goes to a grand jury and the homeowner is out legal fees. Shouldn't the parents of the unsupervised teenagers ages 13 to 14 have to pay all the legal fees, and shouldn't the teenagers be charged with manslaughter since their doing a felony (burglary), resulted in the death of another teenager. So far the two teenagers have only been charged with burglary. The Texas Castle doctrine provides civil immunity for the homeowner but I would expect the homeowner will be out legal fees when it goes to the grand jury which will likely no bill it. The link indicates that the teenagers likely thought there was noone home, but the newspaper indicated the homeowner warned them he was armed. Why shouldn't the parents of the teenagers be held civilly liable for any expenses incurred by the homeowner.
The newspaper article in the Dallas paper incorrectly indicates that Texas has no SYG law. We do but in this case the Castle Doctrine applies.

]http://www.kens5.com/news/146743135.html

The use of deadly force is "legally" acceptable only as a last resort and it must be both reasonable and necessary to prevent "imminent" death or great bodily harm to yourself or someone else, stand your ground, or otherwise.

The use of deadly force is a serious matter.

How serious you say?

Mr. Zimmerman is now finding out, media or otherwise.

I believe he may be charged with manslaughter, no matter which side you are on. Then let the legal system start its engines.

We all like guns. We all shoot targets, some of us hunt, etc., but the death of ANY human being, will be taken seriously, not just by the court of public opinion, but by legal system, which is not perfect by any means, but its the only system we have.

I feel sorry for Mr. Zimmerman, but had he waited for the police in his car.....not committing a so-called "act of furtherance" by making physical contact with the subject in question, a few extra seconds of patience would have paid off...in droves.

Neighborhood watch means exactly that.

Let the police make the Terry stop.

TAKJR

What you have to look for is the facts in the case. For one, I was not there and there were no other accountable witnesses. Fact is that Zimmerman had a right to be there and so did Martin. Fact, Zimmerman was legally carrying a concealed firearm. He had a right to follow Martin as he appeared to be scanning the windows of the homes while walking. Fact, Martin was over six feet tall and not the timid little boy as viewed by a picture six years ago. Fact, the photo of Zimmerman was taken a few years ago when he was booked at the local jail. Fact, Martin did not have any lacerations or bruises on his body. Fact, Zimmerman had cuts on the back of the head and front his face. This information was supplied by the hospital. If Martin attacked Zimmerman and was on top of him punching and hitting his head, Zimmerman had the legal right, as self defense, to protect himself is just that. It must be subjectively reasonable under the particular circunstances, as the "reasonably" appeared to you at the time, even if you were mistaken. "Subjectively", means what you think. "Objectively" means how others will analyze yhour actions later on based upon reason. In other words, if you make a mistake, it must be a mistake that a "resonable person" could also have made knowing the same facts as you did at the time of the incident. This is not an easy definition since the reasonableness of your actions will be judged by others, rather than yourself, at a point in time well after the event has transpired. Sad to say, this has turned into a racial issue and his attorney concurs with this type of news media. As I stated earlier, I was not there and and as far as Zimmerman is concerned, he acted according to the Florida statues on Stand Your Ground Law and self defense. The Prosecutor should have her decision by Friday on whether she will prosecute or find him innocent by Florida Statues.

Nick

Same in MN. As has been already said this mess is going to hurt gun ownership in gen. as well as laws . Gun owners are looked upon as funatics already when in fact we are some of the most level headed people out there . A new power will make some people get a big head in situations ,like a promotion in a job . Just an example .The news media always makes it what it wants and people with nothing else to do but like to be heard jump in the limelight weather they know anything or not . Which seems to be going on in the news now which ends up being the guns did it or a race thing .What ever happened to let the law sort it out and except it . Sick of all the BS I guess .

Hobby-Gunsmith:

I am not against anything that you are saying but if one doesn't know the facts, how can you state facts?

I too, know nothing about this issue except Zimmerman is in trouble, period (that's obvious to everyone). All of the information I have came from the media too.

Having a gun on your person means you don't get into situations that the police are better able to handle. Call 911.....follow in your car.....that's it. You did your job as a "responsible" neighborhood "watch" person. After that, whatever you do, you are responsible for.

You are not "Miracle Man" (remember that Miami Vice episode?)

Now that you made contact with a "suspicious" person you were following and a struggle occurs between the pair and the other party is bigger, stronger and pounding your head into the ground to the point of severe trauma and possibly imminent death, then you did what you had to do at that moment, right, I get it....you stood your ground....but.....could you have "avoided" the entire incident in the first place?

Yes.

That is my point.

Now look at where you are at?

There is a fine line here that Zimmerman crossed, that he didn't have to cross.

Terry stops are for the "police" to make, not armed civilians.

You are not a police officer. You are an extra set of "eyes."

Now the entire world (thanks to the media) has its "eyes" on you!

I would not wish that on anyone.

I do feel sorry for Mr. Zimmerman, but when the facts come out (however long it takes) pro/con Zimmerman, his life is changed forever.

He should have just "watched."

To me......it is as simple as that.

TAKJR

@TAKJR

Who's to say he wasn't just watching? I thought Zimmerman's story was he got out to check a street sign so he could relay to the police which direction the kid went and then he was jumped.

The point is we don't know and people are calling for his head on a platter. They want him to prove he is innocent instead of someone proving he is guilty. The investigating PD let him walk. They had him in cuffs and at the station. They investigated his story and let him go. I trust the PD made the right decision unless something comes up differently.

The media is changing what the public hears to raise the level of hype so they get better stories. You cannot believe what you hear. Sad but true.

I saw on the news yesterday they are not sending the case to a grand jury. One of Martin's- spokes people?- says it's because they are going to charge him. But it may be because they AREN'T going to charge him. Once again, as Lost Lake says, we simply don't know. It's a shame that some folks put so much pressure on cops/prosecutors, sometimes 'justice' is more like crowd rule than real justice. Whether he's guilty or not, it's not up to the crowd.

__________________
No work? No eat. 2 Thes

Lost Lake:

His phone call to the police that he is "watching" where this guy is going, then giving a detailed description of him proves (only) that he was "initially" doing his job, but after that....the screams and shot (or shots) heard in the background proves contact was made somehow. Who contacted who first, we don't know. Just understand that no one had the right to stop any citizen for anything, unless a crime is being committed in his or her presence and even then (if you can safely do so first) call the police. Masaad Ayoob will tell you up-front, call 911 first. I know people poo-poo him a lot, but it is the truth.

Myself, as a cop, can follow-up on that "suspicious person" call and make an investigative stop...and possibly frisk the "suspicious person" (now a Terry Stop) for a weapon or weapon (only) if I feel I may be in some danger.

Different scenario, I know, but that scenario still involves Zimmerman, but only as an "eye" witness to "possible" criminal activity. A can of tea and Skittles found, good, name check for warrants done and clear, good, now go home and stay off of "private" property. That's the "extent" of contact for the police. Perhaps a "contact" card will be recorded just in case the "suspicious" person is seen in the area again at a future date or time.

If Trevon had burglarized the area in the past, that's the past.

If Trevon was seen coming out of a window of a building, the scenario then changes, even for Zimmerman, because, in essence, he may have caught a burglary suspect (felony) and Zimmerman "could" detain Trevon for the police. I would advise against that and just watch where he is running.

Off duty police officers too, are better "witnesses" than confronters, because they can be shot by on-duty officers. They "can" be shot. I am sure (statistically) that 80-90%
of off duty officers that make arrests come out ok (hopefully) but again, that is the risk they (we) take when we pin on the badge.

I am not saying for anyone to be passive and let someone beat the **** out of you. But.....if you are armed....that raises the stakes and consequences, right or wrong....if you use that gun.

I am saying that when you are armed...."think" before you act first...think fast....understand the consequences of your actions. A person's death by the hands of another is a serious matter and should never be taken lightly.

I now heard that shortly Zimmerman is believed to be charged with Manslaughter by the special prosecutor (ABC NEWS). Again, nothing official yet but remember this much.

Whatever ACTUALLY happened, Zimmerman was a NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH PERSON, not a police officer.

Good luck to him.

He will need it.

TAKJR

The report now says he is in custody, and he is being charged with 2nd degree murder.

http://news.yahoo.com/apnewsbreak-mu...214123361.html

__________________
Geoff. Since 1960.

yup .. I knew it would happen eventually.
Now lets all chill out and wait for the real facts to surface so that we can add to the CCW textbooks chapter about how to screw up.

__________________
it just needs more voltage

I guess now the real trial begins and the real evidence will come forward.

__________________
Doesn't hasta call me Johnson

If he is found to have made additional "inflamatory" statements on the 911 phone tapes, his "mind set" will be brought up in court.

As now stated, let's see how the justice system works.

TAKJR

Yes he is arrested and chged 2nd deg. murder and his lawyers also quit . Currious why his lawyers quit unless they were not qualified to handle crimminal cases . I would have thought going in it was a possibilty of the outcome .