Posted on 03/28/2012 6:33:32 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
President Obama, Jesse Jackson, and others have chosen to personalize the shooting of Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Fla., highlighting the racial issues by expressing concern for people who look like they do or live where “blacks are under attack.” Many conservatives and liberals have also already concluded that the shooter committed a crime. All of these reactions are premature.
In response to the shooting, Florida governor Rick Scott has set up a commission to review the state’s “Stand Your Ground” law. Gun-control organizations, including the Brady Campaign, have gone beyond this and even more drastically called for the end of right-to-carry laws.
But such outrage should be restrained until we have all of the facts. Zimmerman’s call to the police, which has been heard over and over again, does not appear to tell the whole story. There is other information that appears to back up the shooter’s account. That evidence, rather than racism, might well be the reason that police chose not to arrest the shooter. Fox 35 in Orlando spoke to one eyewitness, identified as “John,” the day after the shooting. He explained: “The guy on the bottom who had a red sweater on was yelling to me: ‘Help, help’ . . . and I told him to stop and I was calling 9-1-1.”
The witness further indicated that it was the guy on top who was doing the hitting, and that the shot occurred while that attack was taking place. The man who shot Martin, George Zimmerman, was the man in the red jacket. The police report corroborates the witness’s account: “While I was in such close contact with Zimmerman, I could observe that his back appeared to be wet and was covered in grass, as if he had been laying on his back on the ground. Zimmerman was also bleeding from the nose and back of his head.” Zimmerman told the police, “I was yelling for someone to help me, but no one would help me.”
Zimmerman and his neighbors seem to have had reason for forming a neighborhood-watch group: During the past year, the Miami Herald reports, eight burglaries, nine thefts, and one shooting occurred in their gated community. And Zimmerman had even caught at least one thief himself.
Prior to the spread of “Stand Your Ground” and “Castle Doctrine” laws, citizens who wanted to defend themselves from a criminal had to retreat as far as possible and then announce to the criminal that they were going to shoot. But obvious problems arise: Forcing a victim to take time to retreat can put their life in jeopardy, and a prosecutor might argue that a victim didn’t retreat sufficiently. There have been many cases where victims have been chased and knocked down a couple of times before firing in self-defense, and yet prosecutors claimed that the victim still could have done more to retreat before firing their gun.
The Stand Your Ground and Castle Doctrine laws replaced the original requirement to retreat to a “reasonable person’s” standard, instead stating that lethal force is justified when a reasonable person would believe that a criminal intends to inflict serious bodily harm or death. These laws do not protect those who shoot fleeing criminals in the back, provoke attacks, or use lethal force in the absence of a threat to life or limb.
The difference between the Castle Doctrine and Stand Your Ground laws is where they apply: The Castle Doctrine applies in a person’s home, and Stand Your Ground extends the right to any place the defender has a right to have a gun. Forty-one states now have these laws in some form, though most have adopted them in the last decade, and the statutes haven’t caused any problems at all. By case law, six other states protect victims from having to retreat before using deadly force.
Allowing victims to defend themselves not only protects the lives of victims who come under attack, but deters criminals from attacking to begin with. I have myself conducted the only published refereed academic study on these laws, and I found that states adopting Castle Doctrine laws reduced murder rates by 9 percent and overall violent crime by 8 percent.
But Martin’s shooting has raised a lot of confusion over what the Florida law would allow. Irrespective of the Stand Your Ground law, Zimmerman did indeed have the right to investigate a strange person in his neighborhood. And when, before any confrontation, Zimmerman informed the police operator that he was following Martin, the operator’s advice that “we don’t need you to do that” was suggestive, not compulsory. By itself, investigating someone who is a stranger in the neighborhood does not imply a provocation. In addition, Zimmerman claims that Martin attacked him from behind.
If it turns out that the police report and witness are wrong, and Zimmerman was the aggressor, he certainly deserves to be punished. But if Zimmerman was attacked, pummeled, and bloodied by Trayvon Martin, Zimmerman had justification to shoot in self-defense. So far it looks as if the police made the right decision.
— John R. Lott Jr. is the author of the third edition of More Guns, Less Crime (University of Chicago Press, 2010). He previously served as the chief economist at the United States Sentencing Commission. He is also a co-author of the newly released book Debacle: Obama’s War on Jobs and Growth and What We Can Do Now to Regain Our Future (John Wiley & Sons, 2012).
He didn't hang back - he chased Treyvon for at least a little while. He should have reported what he saw in his 911 call, got into his SUV and watched rest of neighborhood and let the real LEOs handle the rest.
Now everything is all messed up and someone is dead and no one seems to know all of the REAL FACTS.
Below is the text of Bonaparte's letter, which includes Lee's FAQ and answers:
Fellow citizens:
There has been a lot of media attention to the recent incident where George Zimmerman shot and killed Trayvon Martin. This is indeed a tragic situation and has caused a flood of questions and strong emotions from within our community, the region and nation. On behalf of the employees of the city of Sanford, our deepest sympathy and prayers go out to the family and friends of Trayvon Martin. As a father, I can only image the pain Trayvon’s family must be going though. In an effort to continue to be as responsive as possible to the public seeking information on the incident, I have asked Chief Lee to provide answers to some of the most frequently asked questions regarding this matter. Below are his responses. Please understand that since this is still an ongoing investigation, the Police Department is limited in what information it can publicly release.
The city of Sanford is committed to (ensuring) that justice is served and, therefore, the city of Sanford has contacted the United States Attorney General’s Office for assistance in this matter.
The men and women of the Sanford Police Department extend our heartfelt sympathies to the Martin family. This is indeed a tragic situation. The death of anyone due to violence, especially a 17-year-old young man, is morally appalling. As this incident has generated a lot of media attention, we wanted to provide answers to some of the most frequently asked questions.
Why was George Zimmerman not arrested the night of the shooting?
When the Sanford Police Department arrived at the scene of the incident, Mr. Zimmerman provided a statement claiming he acted in self-defense which at the time was supported by physical evidence and testimony. By Florida statute, law enforcement was PROHIBITED from making an arrest based on the facts and circumstances they had at the time. Additionally, when any police officer makes an arrest for any reason, the officer MUST swear and affirm that he/she is making the arrest in good faith and with probable cause. If the arrest is done maliciously and in bad faith, the officer and the city may be held liable.
According to Florida Statute 776.032:
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, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.
Why the 911 tapes are not yet released?
There are exemptions to the public records laws for active criminal intelligence and for ongoing investigations. In this instance, the 911 calls made by neighbors in the subdivision, and the nonemergency call made by Mr. Zimmerman are all key to the investigation by Sanford Police Department. In consultation with the Office of the State Attorney, the Sanford police department has decided not to release the audio recordings of the 911 calls due to the ongoing investigation.
Many times, specific information is contained in those recordings which is vital to the integrity of the investigation. Should it be revealed, the information may compromise the integrity of the investigation prior to its completion.
Why did Mr. Zimmerman have a firearm in his possession while acting in the role of a neighborhood watch member?
Mr. Zimmerman holds a concealed weapon permit issued from the State of Florida. He is authorized to carry the weapon in a concealed manner wherever Florida Statute dictates. Neighborhood Watch programs are designed for members of a neighborhood to be “eyes and ears” for police and to watch out for their neighbors. They are not members of the Police Department nor are they vigilantes. Training provided by law enforcement agencies to Neighborhood Watch organizations stresses non-contact surveillance of suspicious situations and notifying police of those situations so that law enforcement can respond and take control of the situation.
Mr. Zimmerman was not acting outside the legal boundaries of Florida Statute by carrying his weapon when this incident occurred. He was in fact on a personal errand in his vehicle when he observed Mr. Martin in the community and called the Sanford Police Department.
If Zimmerman was told not to continue to follow Trayvon, can that be considered in this investigation?
Yes, it will; however, the telecommunications call taker asked Zimmerman, “Are you following him.” Zimmerman replied, “Yes." The call taker stated “you don’t need to do that.” The call taker’s suggestion is not a lawful order that Mr. Zimmerman would be required to follow.
Zimmerman’s statement was that he had lost sight of Trayvon and was returning to his truck to meet the police officer when he says he was attacked by Trayvon.
Why was George Zimmerman labeled as “squeaky clean” when in fact he has a prior arrest history?
In one of the initial meetings with the father of the victim the investigator related to him the account that Mr. Zimmerman provided of the incident. At that time the investigator said that Mr. Zimmerman portrayed himself to be “squeaky clean." We are aware of the background information regarding both individuals involved in this event. We believe Mr. Martin may have misconstrued this information.
What about media re-enactments of the shooting incident?
Any media re-enactments of the shooting incident are purely speculation. To date the Sanford Police Department has not released any rendition of the events of the evening to anyone other than the Office of the State Attorney. The renditions we have seen are not consistent with the evidence in this case.
The Sanford Police Department has conducted a complete and fair investigation of this incident. We have provided the results of our investigation to the Office of the State Attorney for their review and consideration for possible criminal prosecution.
Although the Police Department is the target of the troubling questions, let me assure you we too feel the pain of this senseless tragedy that has dramatically affected our community. Therefore, as we move forward and strive to answer the questions that are a point of controversy in the community, we ask for your patience, understanding and assistance in getting the correct information to the community.
Thank you,
Norton N. Bonaparte, Jr., ICMA-CM
City Manager
“You call the cops, and that’s it.”
The cops in our area take an average of @60 minutes to respond. Our neighborhood was victimized by a series of burglaries a few years ago. The neighbors got together and now few strangers come through without being”chatted up “ or their tag being taken down. Guess what? No more burglaries. Nobody’s lookin’ out for us but us—and that’s the sad truth of the matter.
From my limited reading on the subject:
The contra-argument could be that he should have disengaged (maybe not realistically possible..) and retreated instead of using deadly force. The problem for him then becomes - why didn’t he retreat instead?
A prosecutor could/likely would have used this as a linchpin in Z’s prosecution. This gives the prosecution the advantage of getting to second guess life/death decisions made - and suggest alternatives that aren’t necessarily even possible. Stand-your-ground eliminates this option of the prosecution.
I don’t disagree that simple self-defense SHOULD be sufficient, but in these days that isn’t the case anymore. When you have zealous prosecutors who are interested in their raising their own political status (See Duke case as proof of existence) having “Stand-your-ground” is an insurance policy.
And this is the point Lt Columbo stops at the door and says "There's just one thing I don't understand"
Time period from exiting truck to "OK" to police operator ¼ minute
Time period from then to altercation, at least 2 minutes.
And Martin's body is 1-2 minutes distance away from Zimmerman's truck.
Martin's girlfriend had said in a recording obtained exclusively by ABC News that she heard Martin ask Zimmerman "why are your following me, and then the man asked, what are you doing around here." She then heard a scuffle break out and the line went dead.
Phone records obtained by ABC News show that the girl, who is 16 and asked to remain anonymous, called Martin at 7:12 p.m., five minutes before police arrived, and remained on the phone with Martin until moments before he was shot.
More eye witness comment at:
http://gma.yahoo.com/trayvon-martin-shooter-told-cops-teenager-went-gun-030349812--abc-news.html
Why? If I was bleeding from nose and had my head bounced around the concrete, I sure would go.
Head bangs to concrete - what if he had concussion or bleeding brain.
He had a broken nose? Again, why wouldn't he go to hospital?
I don’t think either law specifically applies in this case. If you reasonably assume that you are in danger of serious bodily harm or death, you have a right to defend yourself with force, including deadly force, whether you have a concealed carry license or not.
There is a Dr's report on one of the sites. So he did eventually get medical evaluation. (was questioned for five hours at police station)
Notice in the Girl friend's statement who asked the first question....(Who was first to verbally confront.)
Would like to see the autopsy report....Entry point and angle of bullet. Blood splatter on clothing etc.
If there was indeed a struggle for the gun, could “no one” have pulled the trigger?
Given what Zimmerman went thru that day, the trumatic struggle with Martin, being handcuffed by the police and taken to the station to be interviewed, including confiscation of his clothing and weapon, and the fact that paramedics had performed first-aid on the scene, I don't see why you think this is a big issue.
Wasn't that what he was trying to do? Didn't he get beaten up near his truck? Who was the pursuer at that point? Obviously couldn't have been Zimmerman.
“told him not to”??
John Lott (above) quotes the police operator as saying “we don’t need you to do that”. If accurate, that hardly rises to the level of a request, let alone a lawful order.
That’s my take on it too.
I would not be surprised if Obama and his fellow travelers would try to play this up to indeed, cause race rioting. Never waste a good catastrophe.
Z told dispatcher he had “lost” person. But if you look at the girlfriend’s statement to abc, she states that Trayvon was the first to confront Z verbally. Z answered the question with a question, then she heard the scuffle. Police arrived less than five minutes after her traced call with Tray.
Why does the dark side insist on saying Rush came up with the “magic negro”?
If I’m not mistaken it was a black “journalist” in California, I think.
It was part of an article or editorial.
Then Paul Shanklin wrote his parody to “Puff the Magic Dragon” (I think it was “Barack the Magic Negro”).
But Rush did not come up with “magic negro” no matter how many people say he did.
He did say who the author was who came up with “magic negro” but Rush himself did not invent “magic negro.”
Trayvon started this thing by hitting him first and proceeding to pummel Zimmerman. The thug got what he deserved.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.