Replies

When you start out wrong, more than likely the rest of what you say is wrong.
The dispatcher said in response to zimmerman saying he was going to follow the suspicious person was ‘we don’t need you to do that’ is was said in a very casual way. Not even the most radical translation suggests that this was an order.
This means #2 is wrong.
3-doesn’t matter.
4-you are correct but it doesn’t matter
5-you are correct but it doesn’t matter
6-doesn’t matter
7-you are correct but in this case, you are wrong.
So, basically, your position is incorrect as stated.

I teach the legal aspect of a CPL class so I am following this very closely. I do tell people not to engage unless there is a threat to self or loved ones.

What led to the confrontation has little bearing to the actual moment of threat. As long as Zimmerman had the legal right to be where he was, he is covered under castle. In this case, he was legally where he was.

After searching the net I found and listened to 911 call.

Here's my corrections

1) The 911 operator said "We don't need you to do to that" which is copspeak for "Don't do that." The 911 operator and Zimmerman agreed to meet at a specific location. Zimmerman agreed but choice instead to go after Martin. If they knew that Zimmerman was armed and intend to confront the kid they would have dropped the politeness and told him to remain in his car. If you think the cops would OK his actions then that's your problem.

2) He did leave the car and proceeded to intercept the kid. Again, against the advice of the 911 operator and failed to meet with the cops as he agreed to do.

3)It does matter as Zimmerman is proceeding on a false premise that Martin is up to no good and possible on drugs.

4)According to Florida’s justifiable use of force statute you have the right to defend yourself. Section 776.012, in relevant part: “A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force.”

Getting a bloody is not cause for deadly force. Martin had no weapons but Zimmerman certainly did. Zimmerman has stalked and cornered Martin, not the other way around. It is Martin who has every reason(and rightfully so)to fear for his life. One can and will in court argue that Martin has the law on his side.

5)just stating the obvious.

6)That's an incredible statement coming from someone whose job it is to teach people the correct way to handle firearms in such a situation. Zimmerman's whole case depends upon the proper situations regarding the use of deadly force.
If, using your own logic, the rest of your statments are equally faulty but I will correct your mistakes.

7) Zimmerman provoked the altercation with Martin, he is not entitled to claim self-defense.

Under Section 776.041, use of force is not justifiable under the statute to a person who initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless: “(a) such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or (b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.”

. Martin was armed only with a bag of Skittles and a can of Arizona Iced Tea. Zimmerman had a 9mm handgun. Zimmerman place himself in this situation, had the greater ability to inflict bodily harm and initiate contact.

He will most likely escape any jail time as time and critical evidence has slipped away. It is only by the luck he had an thoroughly incompetent police force investigate this shooting.

Under any other reasonably compete law enforcement agency this man would force criminal charges.