Replies

Your description of the situation is well supported by all the known facts. However, no one but Zimmerman knows when he pulled his gun, or displayed it, or transferred it from his holster to his pocket, or whatever the devil he did ~ and he's not saying.

I'd imagine by now his lawyer has told him about saying things to the cops.

The Florida law is the issue ~ and that law certainly applied to Martin who was minding his own business and obeying the law at the time (virtually all those issues have been settled in the debates as additional information has come in about where he was going ~ to wit, to a townhouse in the development ~ to which he had a right to go).

We have a number of Freepers who seem to not believe that Martin was protected by the law ~ unfortunately.

However, no one but Zimmerman knows when he pulled his gun, or displayed it, or transferred it from his holster to his pocket, or whatever the devil he did ~ and he's not saying.

He may not be saying publicly, but I am positive he gave such details to the police, which they put into a report.

The Florida law is the issue ~ and that law certainly applied to Martin who was minding his own business

What law are you talking about? This was not "Stand your ground," but rather, self-defense per the city manager statement:

"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."

We have a number of Freepers who seem to not believe that Martin was protected by the law ~ unfortunately.

Martin WAS protected by law, right up until when he assaulted Zimmerman. That first punch made Martin the aggressor, put Zimmerman in danger of great bodily harm or death, and justified Zimmerman blowing Martin's brains out.

Whether you like it or not, that's how the cops see it, and that's how the grand jury will see it.

I think you are miss characterizing what the majority of people here are saying. Being followed or watched is not grounds for punching someone. He may not have liked being followed or watched but he had no right to attack. If he was so frightened by Zimmerman’s behavior why approach him. You can be somewhere you have a right to be, doing nothing wrong, and still be suspicious. Many times I have been places working late at night to finish some aspect of a construction project I was working on only to have the police show up because someone thought it was suspicious that a truck was pulled up to a job site late at night and a guy was loading tools. The correct response was to always explain politely that I was working late and give the name and number of the builder. Whether Zimmerman was a member of the neighborhood watch or just a concerned citizen makes no difference. He had a right to call in a suspicious person to the police. It also could be that this Zimmerman had a hair trigger when it came to calling things in. That still would not justify an attack, which the evidence seems to indicate happened. There’s no indication from what I have read that Zimmerman was breaking any laws so the comment that some freepers think that Martin was not protected by the law is not correct.