Apr 11 2012
Justice Served In Trayvon Martin Case
Yes, this the Trayvon Martin killing is a complex and tragic case. As I predicted when first posting on this matter, it was clear charges were coming since George Zimmerman had plenty of off-ramps to avoid the confrontation and the end result. This is the right path to take. This will shut down the nonsense from far right and far right, and allow the rules of evidence and trial to work the proper conclusion.
I was very surprised the charge was 2nd degree murder (I was expecting a lesser charge) but that only confirms my original suspicion that the evidence was much clearer than many suspected it was.
Now we follow the process for justice, and as the prosecutor said – Trayvon Martin is the victim here, not Zimmerman.
Update: This is clearly the form of 2nd Degree Murder being used in the charge:
Murder with a Depraved Mind occurs when a person is killed, without any premeditated design, by an act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind showing no regard for human life.
As I have said many times, Zimmerman had not authority or right to follow and confront Martin while armed. This was not a race crime, but a crime of someone playing vigilante and ignoring warnings by police to avoid a situation. And that is a ‘depraved mind’ in my book.
Update 2: Watching the National Action Network with Al Sharpton and Attorney Crump I have to applaud their statements. They were measured, humbled and focused on bringing American justice for an American child. As Crump noted, it really is for all the young people we needed to take the time to assess the evidence and do what is right. And as Sharpton said, this is not a celebration, simply one successful step in the right direction. Well done folks. And well done for all those calling for calm and allowing the process to run.
Update 3: I expected a little more discussion from Hot Air on this, but their one post on this is here.
Maybe there is hope for this nation and all its people. God’s Speed Trayvon
[…] case and that the facts of the case are tried, not the politics of presumed racism as stated at Strata-Sphere, I have my doubts. We at SM cover murder cases and True Crime all of the time, not just when it has […]
Sanford, Fl is an obscure place. WHO thrust this case into the national media? WHO (selectively) leaked information to the media?
This has all been orchestrated, do we not all understand that?
Contrary to what some believe, the rule of law is being shredded by this orchestrated campaign to roil certain voting blocks.
The perpetrators of this MUST BE DEFEATED.
In the meantime, I pray that we will all reserve judgement until ALL the f
Evidence has been made known. And btw, I wouldn’t count on most of the media to be a good source for this.
Their should be no f before “evidence” above…darn iPhone!
momdear,
Zimmerman was not on duty – he was self annointed.
And he is still a kid, and was likely over 6 foot at 15, before he could drive.
You all seemed really spooked by people in hoodies – don’t you have teenage kids???
I think I will go out and buy one, since apparently my leather biker jackets won’t do the trick anymore ….
NEDevil,
I see manslaughter a slam dunk. And I know prosecutors play some games, but they would not bring Murder 2 without some strong evidence (we have 2 prosecutors in the family).
The reason manslaughter is a slam dunk is existing case law. A lot of these are in cases where someone ‘messed up’. For example, manslaughter has been won where someone fired a gun in the air in celebration and killed someone. It is also used in car accidents for reckless and drunk driving (the most common ‘ I messed up’ case out there). People who get drunk and kill someone accidentally in fights. etc. Baby sitters who leave kids in cars accidentally.
Look up manslaughter cases and you will find Zimmerman is a classic example. Which is why this is the right move.
Hoodies and paranoid delusions about the far left aside, this is going the way it should and follows probably thousands of similar cases.
Regardless of status, time of day etc. Zimmerman was not barred from access to a public throughfare. The same goes for Martin.
The case will boil down to who initiated the “physical assult” and the “use of deadly force”. At the moment of “use of force” was Zimmerman’s life in danger and was the use of deadly force justified. The use of “force” when your life is in danger is not prohibited in Florida and most places in the United States and is not a criminal act.
Every “duty” applied to Zimmerman equally applies to Martin.
Anytime you kill someone there has to be an investigation. We all agree, right?
Rarely does the person who took another life get to walk away without charges. Take away home invasions, carjackings, and violent assaults and usually a charge of some kind is brought. A conviction is not always certain, but for most cases a trial is in order.
As I pointed out here, and was often mocked for, someone with a concealed carry permit has had to undergo special training before that permit is issued and they should have a special understanding of their responisbility. Carrying a gun has a huge responsibility. Carrying concealed takes that level to a whole new level. This is why I orginally stated that Zimmerman had (some level) of responsibility for the confrontation and why I am not surprised that a charge has been filed against him.
Please go back above and read the definition of manslaughter. It can occur during “the commission of a lawful act” and the killing “may be involuntary”. Also, it can occur if the killing took place during that lawful act but was done “without due caution and circumspection.”
I don’t know what levels of manslaughter exist in Florida law, but a charge of manslaughter seems resonable to me. Now if they go ahead and charge Murder 2, without addtional charges, then we can start talking about political motivations. Right now it is too early to tell.
Layman ,
You raise some good points.
This Ken Blackwell article on CNS is pretty good he discusses points of law:
http://cnsnews.com/blog/ken-blackwell/truth-about-stand-your-ground-laws-and-why-they-dont-apply-trayvon-martin-case.
OL
Ok Layman, you weren’t mocked for saying a person with a
CCP had special training or responsibility, it was because you said it gave them ‘special insight’. But as I pointed out, you had to also get the box of CrackerJacks with the CCP as that’s where the ‘special insight’ was packaged. (just jerking your chain)
Anyhow, when a person fires a gun in the air and kills someone or is drunk driving a car and kills someone, in both those cases, if the person that got killed (accidently) were also banging the head of the person onto a concrete sidewalk at the same time, there is a strong liklihood that the person would be found not guilty.
OL, that article starts out, it seems, to say Stand Your Ground didn’t apply because Zimmerman was the attacker, but then it goes on to say actually it basically doesn’t apply because just plain of Self Defense is all that is warranted in this case. That if another person is on top of you, banging your head on concrete you are very likely to sustain an injury or be killed and are therefore legally entitled, by self defense, to stop that from happening. You clearly don’t have an option, at that time, to retreat. Good points, but assumes that the eye witness story is true, but hasn’t been proven. So, if you assume that Blackwells assumptions are true then it’s safe to say his conclusions are also true, and vice versa.
RT:
I just read the article: Simply states that if Zimmerman was the attacker SYG doesn’t apply and if Martin was the attacker (as described by Zimmerman) then SYG doesn’t apply. Doesn’t assume anything.
Redteam,
I thought the Blackwell article related some interesting points, I am not judging its merit on the basis of ultimate truth with regards to this case. Its just information. My wife, who passed away 10 years ago was an attorney, and I am still in the habit of looking at things from that prespective. As an attorney, how would I defend this man. It just rubs off on you.
The “law” can be quite exacting, often asking you to make split second decisions, and making only the correct ones, if you fail it will judge you from the calm, cool, metered confines of the courtroom.
Some have said here carrying a gun requires a high degree of responsibility, yes, but equally so driving an automobile, an most of us never thing of that as we tool around town taking care of business. One blind spot, a shadow or unseen barrier and then you’ve made a mistake that could destroy your life. And ther are othe examples.
I hope Zimmerman can get a fair trial. I am impressed with his new attorney.
Layman, Blackwell spent a lot of time laying out scenarios where ‘if’ ‘and’ ‘or’ applies then came up with two possible scenarios. the first is if Zimmerman attacked, then this one:
“If Zimmerman’s account is true that he was on the ground and Martin was on top of him, then retreat was impossible, so there would be no duty to retreat anyway. A victim in such a situation can use deadly force, but only if he reasonably believes he is being attacked with deadly force.”
The word ‘if’ implies an assumption (without using the word ‘assume’) and basically says that Martin would have been guilty ‘even without using SYG’ just because it would have been plain old ‘self defense’
and you want to know how I know this: I opened my CrackerJacks.
Here is a link to the Florida statues:
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/STATUTES/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0782/0782ContentsIndex.html&StatuteYear=2011&Title=%2D%3E2011%2D%3EChapter%20782
RT: Come on, give me a break. I assume a modicum of intelligence and common sense. Most people can do what we call: “bottom line it”. Most people can distill the salient points and condense their comments to a reasonable summary.
With you its always every little thing, absolutely literal, no ability to read between the lines or make inferences. Actually its quite annoying. Want proof?
Go back to the Blackwell article. Yes! He spelled out a bunch of differnet scenarios making a bunch of assumptions. Does that make you happy?????
The bottom line though was: No matter what scenarion SYG doesn’t appy. Why is that so (deleted expletive) hard for you to understand?
As for your Cracker Jack box. To get a CCP requires training which covers the law. Therefore someone who has a CCP probably has a little more (special) insight into what the law says than the Average Joe. Not magic! Not a crystal ball! Just training and experience. Once again I have to ask: Why is that so (deleted expletive) hard for you to understand?
Layman, while you claim intelligence and common sense you clearly demonstrate that you have zero sense of humor. Very little of what I write is to demean anyone.
I’m certainly not lacking in intelligence, common sense and am fortunate to have a good sense of humor. but I’m not here to demonstrate any of those, just to exchange comments and thoughts on current events that we do here.
Now, you know very well that you initially claimed ‘special insight’ because of a CCP, something that you claimed everyone got when they got the CCP, except for some reason Zimmerman didn’t get that special insight thing. I then hypothesized that he may have not opened his box of CrackerJacks that come with the CCP and contains the ‘special insight’ gift. Now you’re trying to qualify the ‘special insight’ to be: ” has a little more (special) insight into what the law says than the Average Joe.” but, I’m guessing you still don’t think Zimmerman got any of that, do you?
Then you come along and say: “Simply states that if Zimmerman was the attacker SYG doesn’t apply and if Martin was the attacker (as described by Zimmerman) then SYG doesn’t apply. Doesn’t assume anything.” and then you say: “Yes! He spelled out a bunch of differnet scenarios making a bunch of assumptions.” which is it? did he or did he not assume anything?
Look, I know you really do have a good sense of humor and are pretending like you don’t understand just to have a lively discussion and I appreciate that. Just don’t get so wound up and have a good laugh now and then. What you think and what I think about Zimmerman is not going to convict or free him, only the jury will do that.
PS, I have heard, that some CrackerJack boxes have been known to contain a sense of humor as the prize. Keep looking….
Going to the bar now…
Has anyone read the details of the basis of the charging of Zimmerman? It is amazing, she based her whole case on the story told by Martin’s girlfriend and largely ignored everything else, including the 3 witnesses that told that they had seen Martin on top of Zimmerman. The recorded call from Zimmerman is largely ignored while full credibility is given to the recollections of the girl friend. This is the best a special prosecutor could come up with after all this time that we ‘thought’ she was investigating. I’m not sure what she was doing but it sure wasn’t something that was going to help her case. After seeing this, I’m amazed the judge said their was ’cause’ for a trial.
There has got to be more to it than this, surely no one is going to waste taxpayer money paying for a trial with no more evidence than it appears she has. I just don’t understand such a display of total incompetence. Amazing…….
Layman, going to the bar? no way, didn’t you spend the night there last night?
Just read a copy of the actual affidavit and it is actually worse than the opinion that I had read that I based my comment above on.
Geez, and someone will get paid for producing that?