Posted on 07/11/2013 5:31:39 PM PDT by Talisker
Okay, so let's say what happened to Zimmerman happened to a cop. The cop was not trying to enforce the law, he was not using professional training to surveil a suspect (I know Zimmerman was, but bear with me here, it's a thought experiment). The only thing the cop was doing was getting jumped, under exactly the same circumstances as Zimmerman was jumped.
It seems to me that the ONLY thing the cop would have to say is that he feared for his life. Right? There would be no inquiry as to whether the cop's head got beat into the pavement enough, or if it hit the grass instead. There would be no discussion about whether the cop was enough of a wimp to have to use his gun. Nothing. The only question would be whether the cop feared for his life – or even if he feared that he was going to suffer bodily injury, or even if he just was physically attacked at all. If so, then the shooting would be deemed justified, end of subject.
Right?
So why ddoesn't the same legal standard apply to a non-cop? In a case of purely self-defense for a cop, subtracting police work, what is left? The right of a human being to defend himself from injury, harm or death, right? How are these actual facts different for a non-cop under the law? What is the justification for using a different standard for basic self-defense, and why can't Zimmerman's lawyer simply say that in an identical situation, a cop would be ruled as using jusitfiable lethal force, therefore as Zimmerman did the same, he is similiarly not guilty.
And please, no cynical comments about "how the world really works." This is a legal question - I'm looking for a legal explanation of exactly why this defense argument wouldn't be allowed by a judge.
In short, why aren't the purely self-defense standards and thresholds equal for both cops and non-cops?
There are Civilians and Military.
Unless they are Military Police, they are Civilians.
The Courts do not command Cops.
The mistake is their trying to distinguish themselves from their employer.
YES AND HERE BYE THE BYE ARE some OTHER FACTS. CRUCIAL facts HAVE We NOT HEARD BECAUSE no one but ANN COULTER has been PRESCIENT enough to point them out...LETS SEE WHAT PRINCESS ANN TELLS US NO ONE ELSE HAS BOTHERED RESEARCH.... WHAT WOULD WE DO WITHOUT HER! SEEMS TO ME LIKE.. SHE’S SORT OF WORTH HER WEIGHT IN GOLD... TAKE A GANDER..
There were at least eight burglaries in the 14 months before Zimmerman’s encounter with Martin. Numerous media accounts admit that “most” of these were committed by black males. I’m waiting to hear about a single crime at Twin Lakes that was not committed by a black male.
Just six months before Zimmerman’s encounter with Martin, two men had broken into the home of a neighbor, Olivia Bertalan, while she was alone with her infant son. She had just enough time to call 911 before running upstairs and locking herself in a room. The burglars knew she was home, but proceeded to rob the place anyway, even trying to enter the locked room where she held her crying child.
Bertalan had seen the burglars just before they broke into her house — one at the front door and one at the back. They were young black males. They lived in the Retreat by Twin Lakes.
In another case, a black teenager strode up to Zimmerman’s house and, in broad daylight, stole a bicycle off the front porch. The bike was never recovered.
Weeks before Zimmerman saw Martin, he witnessed another young black male peering into the window of a neighbor’s house. He called the cops, but by the time they arrived, the suspect was gone.
A few days later, another house was burglarized. The thieves made off with jewelry and a new laptop. Roofers working across the street had seen two black teenagers near the house at the time of the robbery. When they spotted one of the teens the next day, they called the police.
This time, the roofers followed the suspect so he wouldn’t get away. The cops arrived and found the stolen laptop in his backpack. This was the same black teenager Zimmerman had seen looking in a neighbor’s window.
The only reason it’s hard to imagine the Zimmerman case with the races reversed is that it’s hard to imagine a white teenager living in a mixed-race, middle-class community, mugging a black homeowner. This is not a problem of society’s reactions, but of the facts.
There is, however, at least one case of a black homeowner fatally shooting a white troublemaker. He was not charged with murder.
In 2006, the ironically named John White was sound asleep at his nice Long Island home when his teenage son woke him to say there was a mob of white kids shouting epithets in front of the house. The family was in no imminent danger. They could have called 911 and remained safely behind locked doors.
But White grabbed a loaded Beretta and headed out to the end of the driveway to confront the mob. A scuffle ensued and White ended up shooting one of the kids in the face, killing him.
White was charged and convicted only of illegal weapons possession — this was New York, after all — and involuntary manslaughter. He was sentenced to 20 months-to-four years in prison, but after serving five months was pardoned by Gov. David Paterson.
With all due compassion for the kid who was killed, the public was overwhelmingly on the father’s side — a fact still evident in Internet postings about the case. The kids were punks menacing a law-abiding homeowner. Even the prosecutor complained only that Paterson hadn’t called the victim’s family first.
The local NAACP had campaigned aggressively on White’s behalf. There were no threats to riot in case of an acquittal.
The centerpiece of White’s self-defense argument was his recollection of his grandfather’s stories about the Ku Klux Klan. George Zimmerman’s memory of young black males committing crimes at Twin Lakes is somewhat more recent.
John White wasn’t jumped, knocked to the ground, repeatedly punched, and his skull knocked against the ground. He wasn’t even touched, though he claimed the white teen was lunging at him. Talk about no reason to “follow,” there was no reason for him to leave the safety of his locked home. White’s son knew the kids by name. They could have waited for the cops.
So, yes, this case probably would be very different if Zimmerman and Martin’s races were reversed. It is only when the victim is black that we must have a show trial, a million-dollar reward paid to the victim’s parents and the threat of r
A cop is expected to know non-lethal means of ending a confrontation, and it is further assumed that in order for him to resort to lethal means he (or she) would have exhausted those means.
A cop will also expect a close investigation of the facts of the case, and that is expected to temper his response.
That’s the theory.
A cop will rightly expect near instantaneous exoneration if he has used the proper verbal formula, "I felt threatened," no matter what the circumstances were or what witnesses sae.
I had a training once, and the trainer, an ex-cop, minced no words. Here is the "Coke bottle," and that's where you shoot. Nowhere else. Missed the bottle, failed the exercise. (This is an outline on a human target that surrounds vital organs. You can see examples here.)
He explained that even a mortally wounded man, a dead man walking, can still kill you if he can reach you. Hence the 21-feet rule. It only takes a few seconds for an attacker to cross that distance (go out and measure 21 feet! It's about 1.5 car lengths!) but you need about 2 seconds to release the retention latch, draw, and fire. You may have to fire as soon as the gun clears the holster and is rotated toward the target. You have no time to aim for extremities, and you can't take the risk of missing. If the threat is not severe enough to shoot to kill, don't touch the firearm.
And here we see another rookie mistake of GZ: he failed to maintain situational awareness and allowed an attacker to approach within strike distance.
Cops are special
In the state of Washington, a private citizen can use up to deadly force in an attempt to apprehend a felon. Just make sure you first tell them to stop or you will shoot. You can even shoot if they are attempting to flee after a warning. Just make sure they committed a felony before you shoot.
GZ walked, TM ran. Did TM got tired after 30 yards and stood there, panting, allowing GZ to approach him? GZ reported that he lost sight of TM and was returning to his truck (meaning "minded his own business") when TM approached him from behind and confronted him.
The point here is simple. TM had better mobility, and he had upper hand in everything that preceded the confrontation. He chose the time and the place. GZ only walked back and forth on a sidewalk between the clubhouse and the street.
That is the nut of the case. Zimmerman 'claims' he was jumped, was pinned to the ground, pummeled with punches with his head hitting concrete, and finally struggled for control of his firearm.
The prosecution contends that Zimmerman, armed with a gun, profiled, stalked, confronted, and shot Travon Martin.
In your 'cop scenario,' it's obviously self defense. In the first (I believe correct) Zimmerman scenario, it is obviously self defense.
In the second (prosecution) scenario, it is at least manslaughter.
Civilian — 1. nonsoldier: a citizen who is not a member of the armed forces
Here is the State of Washington statute on the use of deadly force. Please note the “Legislative recognition” in the notes section.
http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=9A.16.040
why don’t you provide more of that transcript, instead of cherry-picking the part in the middle of it?
You have the idea that this is about self defense when it is really about racism.
The cop would’ve shot someone’s dog....
Cops aren’t armed?
Cops are Civilians unless they are Military Police.
Cops are not “Armed Forces” (Military)
That is a lie. Not a theory.
I’m a cop, and I would have used the same self-defense method as GZ and it would have been a “good shoot.”
It might get sent to the GJ as perfunctory measure, but there would be no True Bill issued on it.
GZ did nothing legally wrong, my colleagues in Sanford did right by not charging him and careers were ruined over it.
I have NEVER had the PA take up a case that I did not arrest a suspect on...
Thanks - that is what I was referring to. And from your Supreme court case that you cited - it sounds like some form of that is true in all states (being a Federal case?).
You never had eric holder ordering your PA around, probably. The thing in Sanford is that the mayor was complicit in this kangaroo process from the minute holder phoned to tell them to make this a national spectacle. Even if George is acquitted and no major black panther violence ensues, the message the Obama thuggery wanted to convey has been delivered, that even if you have a lawful concealed carry you will be destroyed if you use the weapon for self defense. ... we are living under a thugocracy and black people are being heavily exploited to keep the pot stirred while the criminal transformations are put in place.
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.