Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Can Cops Arrest George Zimmerman for Murder in Trayvon Martin Case?
Opposingviews ^ | 24 March, 2012 | Eugene Volokh

Posted on 03/26/2012 5:27:56 AM PDT by marktwain

To arrest someone for a crime, the police need probable cause to believe that he committed the crime. But what if it’s clear that the person committed the act (e.g., intentionally killed someone), but it seems likely that he has a good affirmative defense (e.g., self-defense)? My view is that probable cause should be probable cause to believe that the conduct was indeed criminal, and if the self-defense case is strong enough, that negates probable cause to believe that a crime (as opposed to a justifiable homicide) was committed. But when I looked into this several years ago, I saw that the few courts that had discussed the matter were split.

Florida law, though, clearly resolves this: “A law enforcement agency … may not arrest [a] person for using force [in a self-defense situation] unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.”

So in Florida, the police must have probable cause to believe that the defendant wasn’t acting in lawful self-defense in order to arrest the defendant. It’s not enough to say, “we have probable cause to believe that you killed the victim, so we’ll arrest you and then sort out later how strong your self-defense case is.”

I can’t speak with confidence to whether in the Martin/Zimmerman case the police indeed have such probable cause (which, as you may recall, is a not very clearly defined standard that is well below proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and probably somewhat below preponderance of the evidence).


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events; US: Florida
KEYWORDS: banglist; fl; georgezimmerman; trayvonmartin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-147 next last
To: marktwain
Liberals and the MSM are acting like it's 1964 - and this took place in Mississippi or Georgia - AND Bull Conner is Chief of Police. I'm embarrassed for them. They're idiots.
101 posted on 03/26/2012 8:13:04 AM PDT by GOPJ (Democrat-Media Complex - buried stories and distorted facts... freeper 'andrew' Breitbart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bigh4u2
"I’m a bit battered up and the 5 are dead. No witnesses to the beating and no witnesses to the shooting. When the cops show up, do they have ‘probable cause’ to arrest me?

It depends on how many you shot in the back.

102 posted on 03/26/2012 8:18:53 AM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeDude; Vaquero; Joe the Pimpernel; mac_truck; Old Teufel Hunden

Liberals in the MSM are acting like it’s 1964 - this took place in Mississippi OR Georgia - AND Bull Conner is Chief of Police. I’m embarrassed for them. They’re idiots.

Here’s a link to how people in the MSM think - it’s some elite New York Times connected ‘journalists’ talking freely when they don’t know a conservative is taping them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBFOmUXR080


103 posted on 03/26/2012 8:19:27 AM PDT by GOPJ (Democrat-Media Complex - buried stories and distorted facts... freeper 'andrew' Breitbart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf
"I doubt very seriously that Zim ever wanted to shoot anyone and very much regrets putting himself in a situation where he needed to. Again, assuming things happened that way."

I'm sure of it.

"BTW, the reason you want to follow him is to be able to point him out once the cops get there."

However, the 911 or police dispatcher (whoever it was) clearly told him after he reported it and the police were dispatched that he didn't need to follow him and he told the dispatcher he was going back to his car. He could have met the police later from his car or some other place. It was not needed and turned out to be tragic.
104 posted on 03/26/2012 8:27:37 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden
However, the 911 or police dispatcher (whoever it was) clearly told him after he reported it and the police were dispatched that he didn't need to follow him and he told the dispatcher he was going back to his car.

Slight correction - while he acknowledged the dispatcher's "we don't need you to do that" comment with an "okay", he never tells the dispatcher that he was going back to his car. From what I've read, the comment about heading back to his truck was in the statement he gave the police after the shooting.

105 posted on 03/26/2012 8:36:22 AM PDT by Reese Hamm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Conscience of a Conservative

From police report: “bleeding from the nose and back of the head”


106 posted on 03/26/2012 8:38:57 AM PDT by palmer (Before reading this post, please send me $2.50)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009

The key to this situation is the law. In your sample case, you start a fight and then use force to prevent yourself from being killed when you are losing big time.

Are you guilty of murder or self defense?

The answer is... IT DEPENDS.

In MO, the lethal force laws require the user of force NOT to be the initiator (RSMO 563) and IF one was indeed an instigator, and then, having broken off his attack, is counter-atacked, he may then indeed be able to claim self defense. The issue would be what constituted “breaking off”-fleeing, saying uncle, what?

That is where the fine teeth of the law are aplied by first the Police who are first on the scene, then the investigators, then the Prosecuting Attny, then a grand jury. Arrest may occur at any point.... But certainly if and when the GJ forwards a recommendation of charges....

The SYG law in FL is notwhithstanding, I think, if Z indeed had initiated (meaning attacked, not just trailed etc) then he may be in jeopardy of murder or other charges, unless he subsequently broke of the engagement and attempted to depart etc as described above (if FL law is similar).

As I undersdtand it, the GJ in this case meets in April and will have the duty to review the facts for PC and either bill or no bill Zimmerman.

The feds will likley act the clown either way-

My personal opinion based on what I have read/heard (tapes) is that Z follwed M in his car until M disappeared around a building, then M sneaked up n and attacked Z, gaining a lethal advantage (on back, bloodied w/head wounds, beaten down) and Z eventually shot him. I may be wrong, but my understanding based on the information available(not all facts , I think).

Evidence, witness statements and forensics will be the clincher to the truth, but popular opinion has long been known to twist that quite well.

My recommendation is patience. Let the process work thorough. I have faith in my fellow citizens, but outside influence may hurt the truth one way or another.

The stat/feds should be looking to quell the conspriacy to commit kidknapping and murder etc, even if Z is guilty of murder. I won’t be holding my breath...


107 posted on 03/26/2012 8:39:41 AM PDT by Manly Warrior (US ARMY (Ret), "No Free Lunches for the Dogs of War" (my spelling is generally korrect!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: hoosierham

I think what was meant was that a shoot to kill should be the final defense. To be blunt, though, I suspect Zim was not shooting to kill. Rather, he was shooting to get the beater off him. It just happened to be a fatal shot. Just a conjecture.


108 posted on 03/26/2012 8:48:11 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

Actually, someone else has pointed out that although the dispatcher told him he didn’t need to follow, it may have been more along the lines of this:


I will add, that you could make a case that the 911 operator was actually suggesting Zimmerman follow Trayvon but was just covering his backside by saying “we don’t NEED you to follow him” at the same time implying it’s ok if you do follow him as that will help is locate the suspect.

A perfect example of this was a recent case where a single mother shot and killed a man who was breaking into the mothers home with an accomplice. The mother was armed and asked the 911 operator if she could shoot the intruder. The 911 operator stated “I can’t tell you to do that but you do what you have to do to protect your baby” (not and exact quote but close). In other words we can’t tell you to shoot this guy but if he gets in shoot him.



109 posted on 03/26/2012 8:50:13 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

Please provide a link for the police report, I have not seen that.


110 posted on 03/26/2012 9:07:35 AM PDT by Ratman83
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

Show me the law which says it is illegal to follow someone on public streets.


111 posted on 03/26/2012 9:21:31 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (Read SCOTUS Castle Rock vs Gonzales before dialing 911!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

Show me the law which says it is illegal to follow someone on public streets.


112 posted on 03/26/2012 9:21:39 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (Read SCOTUS Castle Rock vs Gonzales before dialing 911!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

I saw that post, but I don’t buy it. Two completely different cases. One was a woman having her door busted down by someone. No time for police and her life was in imminent danger. At first Zimmerman was in no imminent danger and was just following him and reported it to the police. What happened afterwards is the question.


113 posted on 03/26/2012 9:23:11 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

He mentored black youth with his wife....he was not racist Get a clue!


114 posted on 03/26/2012 9:24:15 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (Read SCOTUS Castle Rock vs Gonzales before dialing 911!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

He mentored black youth with his wife....he was not racist Get a clue!


115 posted on 03/26/2012 9:24:29 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA (Read SCOTUS Castle Rock vs Gonzales before dialing 911!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Red in Blue PA
"He mentored black youth with his wife....he was not racist Get a clue!"

Are you sure that you didn't mean this post to someone else? I never stated anywhere that this zimmerman was a racist.
116 posted on 03/26/2012 9:27:03 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: EBH
And why were these two out at 3am in the morning?

They wern't out at 3AM. The only source of that was some BS blog article. Dispatch was at 19:17 hours.

117 posted on 03/26/2012 9:27:24 AM PDT by Darren McCarty (Time for brokered convention)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: EBH
And why were these two out at 3am in the morning?

I thought it was around 9:00 PM and raining.

118 posted on 03/26/2012 9:29:42 AM PDT by Tenacious 1 (With regards to the GOP: I am prodisestablishmentarianistic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

I don’t necessarily buy it either. But it makes the point that we really don’t have all the facts regarding this case. And some facts will forever be in some people’s heads.

I don’t agree with everything Zim did, based on what I’ve read, at least, but I also think a strong case for self defense may be in order here. Or, more precisely, there is not a strong enough case for murder.

The only way, in my mind, that Zims first actions really play into this is if it could be proven that his goal, in following (and maybe confronting) Tray was to cause a physical confrontation. If that can’t be proven, there is really no case, based on what I am reading of eyewitness testimonies.


119 posted on 03/26/2012 9:30:51 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: TexasFreeper2009
It doesn’t matter if Zimmerman kept following Martin after the dispatcher told him not to (he is a free citizen and can walk down the street if he so chooses)

True, although did he get into close contact range? Then it becomes another matter. They were in close contact range at some point.

It doesn’t matter if Zimmerman asked Martin what he was doing(he is a free citizen and can talk to whomever he so chooses, it’s called free speech)

True, and Martin could have told him to eff off too.

It doesn’t even matter if Zimmerman started the fight.

That is wrong, and one of the things being sorted out before Florida makes their decision.

All that matters is if at some point during the fight Zimmerman felt that his life was in danger, at that point had the right to use deadly force to save his life (it’s called self defense)

Close. What matters is if Zimmerman REASONABLY believed his life was in danger. Reasonably in the eyes of the jury, not the eyes of George Zimmerman, David Duke, Barack Obama, or Al Sharpton. Whether he was or not is still being investigated.

120 posted on 03/26/2012 9:37:11 AM PDT by Darren McCarty (Time for brokered convention)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-147 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson