17 year old kid shot dead by Neighborhood Watch "Captain"

[CathyInBlue]

Of course, that completely ignores the predictive capabilities generated by Trayvon's "You gonna die today!" threat.

 

[KG1]

Whenever someone breaks my nose and bounces my head against the pavement I usually take it seriously. That's just me though.

 

[sharkey]

Whenever someone breaks my nose and bounces my head against the pavement I usually take it seriously. That's just me though.

Yeah, that's when it's time to pee on them.

 

[Fargo]

..and, since when is self defense predicated on how much damage you take before you are allowed to defend yourself? This could be a terrible precedent.

"Well, yeah, he broke your nose, and was pounding your head into the concrete, but he OBVIOUSLY wasn't trying to KILL you, just hurt you"

Self defense against an attack not involving a weapon pretty much always includes severity of injuries in the analysis. It isn't the only factor, but it pretty much always plays in.

IME, it primarily comes up in making the determination of whether ordinary force or deadly force is justified. Simple battery does not normally justify deadly force and battery with injury normally does not as well. However, if battery with serious bodily injury is occurring or it is reasonable to believe it is about to occur, you then normally hit the deadly force threshold. This is codified in IC 35-41-3-2(c).

That is not to say that you have to wait for SBI to act, but evidence of injuries sustained or not sustained is pretty much always relevant (but not dispositive) to the determination of whether deadly force was reasonable.

If Z is telling the truth, I don't see how he wasn't justified. I disagree with Kut that manslaughter could lie here as the justification defense is a all or nuthin proposition. If it applies, he must be acquitted.

I just don't see how the state can disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt; especially after the trainwreck their witnesses have been to date.

Then again, you never know with a jury, particularly when you have what appears to me to be an unsympathetic defendant. They may hold it against him how the incident unfolded, particularly if he doesn't come off well on the stand.

Best,


Joe

 

[Landon]

You assume Z is going to take the stand then?

 

[churchmouse]

"Z" is only an un-sympathetic defendant because of the media. They have used a deep dark brush to paint him.

 

[Fargo]

"Z" is only an un-sympathetic defendant because of the media. They have used a deep dark brush to paint him.

Maybe, but I'm not so sure. Perhaps I need to clarify what I mean. By "sympathetic" I mean a person whose body language/appearance/actions/demeanor is such that people find him immediately likeable or at least likeable by the time the trial concludes. This is COMPLETELY independent of what the person is alleged to have done. It is almost a charisma type thing.

It is my experience that a juries will all too often convict unsympathetic people on relatively weak evidence and will acquit sympathetic people even in the face of relatively strong evidence. It is a fascinating facet of human nature to me.

From what I've seen of George in his public appearances, I'm leaning toward him being viewed unsympathetically, particularly by women. This is completely apart from and has nothing to do with what he is alleged to have done.

You assume Z is going to take the stand then?

Unless the case is a directed acquittal at the close of states evidence, I would say it is at least VERY likely that he will testify. Presumption of innocence and right to remain silent be damned, juries almost invariably see not telling your side as an indication of guilt, particularly when you are claiming a JUSTIFICATION defense. If you are unwilling to defend your own actions, they generally are not willing to either.

In this case, I think that George's testimony is going to be fascinating. I really think how he comes off to the jury is going to play a huge role in determining the outcome of the case, probably even moreso than the actual content of what he says. I just don't know how well he is going to do at that based upon the little I've seen of him.

Best,


Joe

 

[churchmouse]

Maybe, but I'm not so sure. Perhaps I need to clarify what I mean. By "sympathetic" I mean a person whose body language/appearance/actions/demeanor is such that people find him immediately likeable or at least likeable by the time the trial concludes. This is COMPLETELY independent of what the person is alleged to have done. It is almost a charisma type thing.

It is my experience that a juries will all too often convict unsympathetic people on relatively weak evidence and will acquit sympathetic people even in the face of relatively strong evidence. It is a fascinating facet of human nature to me.

From what I've seen of George in his public appearances, I'm leaning toward him being viewed unsympathetically, particularly by women. This is completely apart from and has nothing to do with what he is alleged to have done.

Best,


Joe

Makes perfect sense.

 

[HICKMAN]

I would show this in response to the ME's testimony:

http://youtu.be/U2L85M287gk

 

[bcskypilot]

Trayvon Martin's Involvement In Local Burglaries Covered Up By Media, School, Police, Prosecutors

I didn't see this posted anywhere... You decide.

M-DSPD Cover Up – The Curious Case Of Trayvon Martin’s Backpack With Stolen Jewelry and Burglary Tool… | The Last Refuge

 

[churchmouse]

Man she busted her melon on the concrete.

 

[churchmouse]

Trayvon Martin's Involvement In Local Burglaries Covered Up By Media, School, Police, Prosecutors

I didn't see this posted anywhere... You decide.

M-DSPD Cover Up – The Curious Case Of Trayvon Martin’s Backpack With Stolen Jewelry and Burglary Tool… | The Last Refuge

This is more of the info available I was posting about to get Kut to go look at. I had no links but it is out there if you look.

 

[j706]

Trayvon Martin's Involvement In Local Burglaries Covered Up By Media, School, Police, Prosecutors

I didn't see this posted anywhere... You decide.

M-DSPD Cover Up – The Curious Case Of Trayvon Martin’s Backpack With Stolen Jewelry and Burglary Tool… | The Last Refuge

I read through that this am. It almost sounds like Z was more correct on his initial assessment that one would have thought. Makes good sense to be.

 

[Kutnupe14]

This is more of the info available I was posting about to get Kut to go look at. I had no links but it is out there if you look.

I have no problem looking at the info, but I'm having a problem saying it confirms robbery, burglary, or even theft.

For instance, a while ago, I arrested a younger black male for OWI and Battery. While inventoring his car I found a back pack that contained an expensive watch (still boxed), and a fraternity ring. The ring had a class year of 1980-something, and was from a fraternity known to me (Phi Delt). I asked the kid if he had ever been to college... big surprise, no. Now, I had no issues in believing that this stuff was stolen, and I ran every number I could trying to get a "hit," still nothing. I sent up an email to our detectives detailing the instance (still nothing). I would've loved to chalk up an extra change on this waste of breath, but the LAW as it is, would'nt allow it. So, I put the stuff back into the bag placed a "hold" the vehicle, hoping something would eventually come to light. Nothing ever did.
Church, if you expect the law to work correctly, then you have to observe all the facets of it, and not act simply based on what you think. I "think" a lot of things, but won't act unless I can "prove" it.

That said, it's fair to say that Martin was a suspect in thefts due to the things found, but that hardly mean he's guilty (or at least proven to be).

 

[churchmouse]

I have no problem looking at the info, but I'm having a problem saying it confirms robbery, burglary, or even theft.

For instance, a while ago, I arrested a younger black male for OWI and Battery. While inventoring his car I found a back pack that contained an expensive watch (still boxed), and a fraternity ring. The ring had a class year of 1980-something, and was from a fraternity known to me (Phi Delt). I asked the kid if he had ever been to college... big surprise, no. Now, I had no issues in believing that this stuff was stolen, and I ran every number I could trying to get a "hit," still nothing. I sent up an email to our detectives detailing the instance (still nothing). I would've loved to chalk up an extra change on this waste of breath, but the LAW as it is, would'nt allow it. So, I put the stuff back into the bag placed a "hold" the vehicle, hoping something would eventually come to light. Nothing ever did.
Church, if you expect the law to work correctly, then you have to observe all the facets of it, and not act simply based on what you think. I "think" a lot of things, but won't act unless I can "prove" it.

That said, it's fair to say that Martin was a suspect in thefts due to the things found, but that hardly mean he's guilty (or at least proven to be).

I agree to this 100% and in your job you are somewhat ham-strung by the rules.

I think what has me turned up-side down is the white washing of the facts and available info.
I just realized I may have made what could be considered a racist statement.

The media and prosecution are painting "T" as an angelic teen with early pics and deletion of known facts about him. Tweets-FB posts and racial remarks and slurs. Known to be a fighter and he enjoyed/searched it out. They are digging up everything on "Z" and deleting so much of who "T" was.
This is totally motivated by race and it is just wrong.
"T" and "Z" share some heritage.

 

[Fargo]

That said, it's fair to say that Martin was a suspect in thefts due to the things found, but that hardly mean he's guilty (or at least proven to be).

Yeah, suspicious things are exactly that; suspicious. They may give a good probability, but unproven is still unproven.

For example:

If a search warrant were executed on my house, the cops might find:

pseudoephedrine
lithium batteries
coffee filters
empty 2 liter bottles
a bottle cap with a hole in it
various tubing
fertilizer containing ammonium nitrate
lye
drain cleaner
Etc.

Put together, I could damn near cook me some meth if I wanted to. Some might call that "suspicious". In reality though:

I had a cold so I bought some aleve cough and cold.
My surefire uses CR123's.
I brew coffee to drink it.
I save 2 liter bottles to cut the ends off and use as funnels in the garage.
the bottle cap is part of a broken homemade beer-chilling apparatus.
I keep various pieces of vacuum line on hand in the garage for auto repairs.
I have some miracle-gro around for planting in poor soil.
I use lye to clean old cast iron seasoning off.
There was drain cleaner left here when we moved in.

Suspicious is suspicious in the legal world and proven is proven. T sure may have been a thug but I don't see it as "proven".

I agree to this 100% and in your job you are somewhat ham-strung by the rules.

I think what has me turned up-side down is the white washing of the facts and available info.
I just realized I may have made what could be considered a racist statement.

The media and prosecution are painting "T" as an angelic teen with early pics and deletion of known facts about him. Tweets-FB posts and racial remarks and slurs. Known to be a fighter and he enjoyed/searched it out. They are digging up everything on "Z" and deleting so much of who "T" was.
This is totally motivated by race and it is just wrong.
"T" and "Z" share some heritage.

Well said^

Best,


Joe

 

[Expat]

I would think that possessing stolen property would be more evidentiary than having Sudafeds...

 

[churchmouse]

Yeah, suspicious things are exactly that; suspicious. They may give a good probability, but unproven is still unproven.

For example:

If a search warrant were executed on my house, the cops might find:

pseudoephedrine
lithium batteries
coffee filters
empty 2 liter bottles
a bottle cap with a hole in it
various tubing
fertilizer containing ammonium nitrate
lye
drain cleaner
Etc.

Put together, I could damn near cook me some meth if I wanted to. Some might call that "suspicious". In reality though:

I had a cold so I bought some aleve cough and cold.
My surefire uses CR123's.
I brew coffee to drink it.
I save 2 liter bottles to cut the ends off and use as funnels in the garage.
the bottle cap is part of a broken homemade beer-chilling apparatus.
I keep various pieces of vacuum line on hand in the garage for auto repairs.
I have some miracle-gro around for planting in poor soil.
I use lye to clean old cast iron seasoning off.
There was drain cleaner left here when we moved in.

Suspicious is suspicious in the legal world and proven is proven. T sure may have been a thug but I don't see it as "proven".



Well said^

Best,


Joe

Yes, suspicion and proven are different by definition.
We suspect "T" to be a thug but it was never proven.

Well said and I agree.

That said, they are putting up any "Suspicious" things they can find on "Z" and keeping reasonable doubt out of "T" (may not be the right terminology but I think you get my drift)

 

[Kirk Freeman]

T sure may have been a thug but I don't see it as "proven".

I'm going to take this opportunity to object on relevancy grounds.

What matters is that TM is acting the thug at the moment he was shot.

I believe the evidence does show that. It shouldn't survive a TR50 (or whatever Florida's equivalent is) but I understand the politics of it.

 

[Fargo]

That said, they are putting up any "Suspicious" things they can find on "Z" and keeping reasonable doubt out of "T" (may not be the right terminology but I think you get my drift)

Absolutely! I've said from page one that the more the media gets involved in a case, the less chance there is that justice is served. This case is one of the worst media charades I've ever seen, if not the worst.

The media's portrayal of the case has been orchestrated from day one, beginning with the ministers etc.

Both the prosecution and to a lesser extent the defense have openly done things to try it in the media and I hope both get whacked for it. It does nothing to serve justice and is unethical in my opinion.

Best,


Joe