May 12 2012
FL Domestic Shooting Case Bad Omen For Zimmerman
Before we get into the nuts and bolts of the recent case for domestic shooting (no one harmed) I will say I believe the sentencing was way over the top. However, the case illustrates what I have been saying about the Trayvon Martin case for some time.
That is: the use of a firearm in self defense requires a clear and present danger, not a feeling based on emotion.
Here is the situation that transpired:
Alexander said she was attempting to flee her husband, Rico Gray, on August 1, 2010, when she picked up a handgun and fired a shot into a wall.
She said her husband had read cell phone text messages that she had written to her ex-husband, got angry and tried to strangle her.
She said she escaped and ran to the garage, intending to drive away. But, she said, she forgot her keys, so she picked up her gun and went back into the house. She said her husband threatened to kill her, so she fired one shot.
…
Corey said the case deserved to be prosecuted because Alexander fired in the direction of a room where two children were standing.
Here’s the rub. While the gun was discharged to ward off attack, the “attacker” in this situation had not yet reached a point where deadly force was considered proper. But there is more
Alexander’s attorneys tried to use the state law that allows people to use potentially deadly force anywhere they feel reasonably threatened with serious harm or death.
But a previous judge in the case rejected the request, saying Alexander’s decision to go back into the house was not consistent with someone in fear for her safety, according to the Florida Times Union newspaper.
This is the whole thing about avoiding conflict. You cannot take actions and make decisions that create a confrontation and then use the confrontation as a self defense. Personally I am stunned at the outcome, since the man had apparently tried to strangle the women. But the law is clear, she had escaped and she should have called police, not armed herself and gone back in.
This is why Zimmerman is in such deep trouble. He too had opportunities (many of them) to stand back and avoid the conflict. He defied police direction to do so. This woman fired a warning shot – Zimmerman killed a kid. She was in her home, Zimmerman was in a public space.
The story also explains why I think Zimmerman should avoid a jury trial and actually plea deal:
After the sentencing, Rep. Corrine Brown confronted State Attorney Angela Corey in the hallway, accusing her of being overzealous, according to video from CNN affiliate WJXT.
“There is no justification for 20 years,” Brown told Corey during an exchange frequently interrupted by onlookers. “All the community was asking for was mercy and justice,” she said.
Corey said she had offered Alexander a plea bargain that would have resulted in a three-year prison sentence, but Alexander chose to take the case to a jury trial, where a conviction would carry a mandatory sentence under a Florida law known as “10-20-life.”
Virginia is just as strict. With your CCP permit comes harsh penalties for stepping a hair out of line. Let me repeat – this sentence is unjustified and unfair. The conclusions are correct, the punishment ridiculous. Hopefully the Governor will intervene and set it to something reasonable.
Now, I want address the incident map and show how Zimmerman was not likely to have been ‘jumped’ by Martin. In fact the map shows just the opposite:
You can click to enlarge, but the key points here are
- C – Zimmerman’s truck, where he left it armed to chase down Martin
- E – Where Zimmerman ended up thinking Martin would try and leave the neighborhood (it never dawned on him Martin had a right to be there and lived in the nearby buildings)
- G – Martin’s residence
- F – The site of the physical altercation and killing of Martin
Now a lot of people claim Martin ‘doubled back’ to confront Zimmerman. That is pure BS given this map. Martin would not know where Zimmerman is because he sprinted down between the buildings and likely did make it to is house. He also probably assumed the coast was clear, having stayed between the buildings for a long time (as everyone admits given the phone call time line). Zimmerman could be anywhere since he was in a truck.
Zimmerman is actually standing in the parking lot out of site of Martin. There is no proof Martin knew where Zimmerman was, anymore than Zimmerman knew where Martin was.
So the story goes thus: Zimmerman ends his 911 call to head back to his truck from Point E. There is a straight line between C and E right down the walkway.
But look where F took place!
F is not on that straight line to Zimmerman’s truck. It is on Martin’s path to/from home. There is nothing against Martin assuming the nut job (Zimmerman) had left. Martin reasonably could have assumed the coast was clear and went back to his phone call with his girlfriend.
But Zimmerman must have seen him down the path and diverted his heading. Zimmerman HAS to have walked towards Martin for the event to occur where it did. Which blows Zimmerman’s story out of the water. Zimmerman was the consistent instigator. And like the case above, he had no right to go armed after Martin. None.
Zimmerman is toast.
AJ,
A couple of minor tweaks are needed to make your post factually accurate.
First, Brandy Green’s residence is designated as “D” in the graphic. That is where the Martins were staying. Your post indicates that Martin’s residence was “G”.
Second, the graphic shows the location of the body marked with an “F”. That is not the correct location of the body. The body was actually found just to the left of the T intersection of the sidewalk, up from where “F” is marked.
Also, the rear entrance of the neighborhood (that Z thought M was headed toward) is actually located more closely to the bottom right corner of the graphic (to the lower right of “D”) instead of where “E” is located.
The site you gleaned the map from, Wagist, has another POV in interpretating what happened after Zimmerman ended that non-emergency call to the police:
*Bold is my addition.
You seem to take a hardened position towards Zimmerman, the same that apparently Corey took with Alexander (and now with Zimmerman), in giving the shooter no legitimate credence nor reason as to why a weapon was discharged.
However, According to Zimmerman’s testimony the reason he diverted, from that straight line you were talking about, in going directly back to his truck, was being confronted by Martin (apparently verbally). Maybe Martin was walking towards him saying something like “Hey you…” (who knows), and when Zimmerman started walking towards Martin to respond, that’s when it became a physical confrontation. The question then is who initiated the physical fight? And, was it initiated because someone felt threatened (either Martin or Zimmerman), or was someone just mad? Was Zimmerman’s gun a component of the fight happening in the first place? In other words, did Zimmerman have his gun out where Martin could see it and feel threatened by it? Or, did the gun come into play after the fight had already started? If the gun came into play after the fight started, who pulled it out? Did Zimmerman grab it in self-defense, because Martin was beating the hell out of him? Or, did Martin feel the gun on Zimmerman, when he was hitting the guy, and try to reach for it, putting the gun in play and up for grabs between the two men?
Some of these questions probably can’t be collaborated and/or answered by anyone but Zimmerman. And, because Corey has already shown a sympathetic hand towards Martin’s family, you may very well be right that Zimmerman will be hog-tied and convicted, very much like Alexendar was.
BGG, thanks for the corrections, old eyes and little time to write the post!
I think we get it by now. You do not accept Zimmerman’s defense.
On the other hand, Zimmerman will hopefully have the opportunity to present his defense to an unbiased jury. What chance do you see of that?
Is there anything else of interest going on in your world?
[…] Go here to read the rest: FL Domestic Shooting Case Bad Omen For Zimmerman […]
[…] The Strata-Sphere says George Zimmerman’s legal case may be in trouble […]
OFg8r (like moniker btw),
Not only do not accept his defense, I have been shredding it a new one without the critical evidence due to come public next week.
And I am giving Zimmerman a fair assessment. Fair does not imply he is right!
“I have been shredding it a new one without the critical evidence due to come public next week.”
Yeah, I heard about this!!! I guess it’s the same you heard about. They finally found Trayvon’s cell phone. The critical evidence is where they found it.
I can hardly wait.
Maybe Perry getting Paul Drake on the case worked out better than we thought it might.
Red, are you saying the evidence is on favor of Zimmerman?
Ivehadit, I have no inside knowledge, only what I read. I know I have been asking for some time where was Martin’s cellphone (police reports initially only listed in Martin’s possession, skittles and can of iced tea) I found it rather curious that since the girl friend was stating that she was talking to him during all this episode that the police did not find a cell phone on him. I could speculate what the cell phone itself might show, or the importance of the location of it and who actually had the phone if/or when it was recovered by the police.
but speculation on my part might sound as if I had inside info, and I don’t. I can only say/repeat what is revealed in news reports and since news sources are usually totally unreliable, I’ll assume their accuracy rate in reporting this story is still near zero.
I have heard absolutely no evidence that I would accept as credible that would tend to incriminate Zimmerman. Something incriminating will have to be presented by the prosecution to the jury and if they have such evidence, they haven’t released any of it to the public yet.
I have read that the prosecution is going to give quite a bit of evidence to the defense this week, possibly Monday. It’ll be interesting, I suppose.
Redteam
So many of your posts end with “where is the cell phone?” Somehow I thought a cell phone had to be part of the items recovered after Martin was shot. Because if it wasn’t, how did they know about the call from his girlfriend?
Jan, originally when this story first broke, it listed the items recovered with his body and it included only two items, skittles and a can of iced tea. That was widely reported. It was stated that he didn’t have a wallet or any id on his person, they didn’t identify him until the next day. I have heard from day one that he was talking with his girlfriend, so it just naturally occurred to me that the list of items on his body should have included a cell phone. So i wondered where it was. I have seen the question asked; why didn’t they identify him from his cell phone? good question, if they had it.
Now, news stories have gotten so wild, I’ve read on the net that his parents ‘listened’ to his conversation with his girlfriend. This kind of reporting by the press is very irresponsible.
Now I have started seeing stories that said he ‘must have had a cell phone, or that he DID have a cell phone.” etc. but my question to that would be: why didn’t the police know that he had a cell phone?
Do you have any speculation on what the truth about the cell phone might be?
oh yeah, I forgot to mention that neither Martin, ‘with his cell phone’ or his girlfriend that ‘knew he was in imminent danger’ called 911. Isn’t that strange? yet the killer did call the police. Isn’t that even stranger? Here he set out to kill someone and called the police to let them know about it. Isn’t that even stranger?
Redteam
I just wasn’t paying too much attention to the cell phone scenario. However, you bring up some points that do merit inquiry.
If Martin had a cell phone on him, then why wouldn’t authorities have been able to ID him right away, instead of listing him as a ‘John Doe,’ and waiting until his father placed a missing persons report to piece the parts of the puzzle together on who the deceased was?
However, if there wasn’t a cell phone then how did the authorities know about this girlfriend who was on the line with Martin until almost the very end?
And, yes, if Martin felt threatened, or the girlfriend was somehow on the phone and thought her friend was in danger, why, indeed, didn’t one of them call the police themselves?
Also, if Zimmerman was a crazed vigilante, why did he have the self-discipline and/or even interest to call the police to report this ‘suspicious’ guy wondering around in the rain? Doesn’t a vigilante-type just like to strong-arm the situation and not have anyone around him reminding him to follow the rules?
Hi AJ
I’ve read your blog for years and mostly love your stuff. Even when I disagree with you, you typically make good points. I love reading much more than writing so I’ve never commented.
But watching you strain at gnats to conclusively prove Zimmerman guilty is disappointing. I certainly have no final opinion in the case. I want more facts. Reading Zimmerman’s statements to police is at the top of my list before I join the hunt to convict in the court of public opinion.
Unfortunately I still don’t understand your need to convict now. One item suggesting you might be going overboard is your interpretation of the word “need.” The 911 dispatcher said to Zimmerman “we don’t need you to do that.” That just doesn’t translate into “he defied police direction. . .” If someone says “we don’t need you to” it means – do it if you want but it’s not a useful action to us. Or it might mean, I don’t think that’s a good idea but I’m not going to forbid you. At most, it’s a veiled suggestion.
So let’s try a hypothetical. You’re flying out of DC and you tell the TSA agent on the security line, “I’ve got my driver’s license and my FOID card.” He says, “We don’t need you to show us the FOID card. You hand over both your driver’s license and FOID card. Which scenario happens next? He looks at your DL and waves you through or he slaps the cuffs on you and charges you with “disobeying a federal officer.”
If the phrase “we don’t need you to . . .” is now some sort of police command to cease and desist, then we are a lot closer to the “everything not mandatory is forbidden” world than the America I know.
Good questions, Jan.
“I have been shredding it a new one without the critical evidence due to come public next week.”
So, THAT’S what you’ve been doing! Here I thought you were ignoring the facts that we DO know and making crap up!
I for one can’t wait to get a look at what evidence the state does have since we already know what they don’t have.
shredding it a new one. lol
Strata, how can you give his defense a fair assessment when you do not know what it is? All you know is what the media, which has been hostile from the beginning, has told you. A number of errors, or lies, have been exposed. There is no way to know how many other have not, as yet. Besides, I trust that his defense team has the sense not to publish their strategy, nor to reveal any of their cards in advance, to the same media.
I asked if you thought he could possibly get a fair hearing. My vote is that it is unlikely, and that you have played your part in that result by pre-judging, and using your forum to try to influence others. This before you have heard a word of testimony–given under oath–or seen any official exposition of the evidence.
Glad you like the moniker, but not sure what you think it stands for. Nothing esoteric, just short hand for an amalgamation of past profession and an athletic program dear to my heart, aka Oldflyer Gator.
jan, I just don’t know the answer to the question about how they knew about the phone conversation with his girlfriend. I find it hard to believe that his father was there at his(fathers) girlfriends apartment and Trayvon left to get something from a 7-11 and all that commotion and gun shot occurred right near his apartment and his son was right in the proximity and it never occurred to him to wonder why his son didn’t return and he didn’t call the police to report that he was missing. I know that when squad cars pull up on the street where I live, I know about it. And if I had a child I thought might be right in the middle of it, I would know all the details. I guess it’s possible (and as I said, I’m guessing) that when his girlfriend found out that the gun shot she ‘heard’ on the phone had killed her boyfriend, that she called someone and reported that she believed that she had actually been talking with Trayvon when he expired. But it actually seems, from what is reported, that she didn’t report anything at all, that someone actually contacted her to see if she had been talking with Trayvon at about that time. I guess she wasn’t too concerned, that she assumed that Trayvon would call her again if and when he had the time or inclination. Maybe all these details will be revealed this week in this big news(evidence) dump.
Of course, it’s entirely possible, with all the stuff I’ve heard ‘made up’, speculated and guessed about this case, that there was never a cell phone and he never had a conversation with his girlfriend.
[…] heard anything about case being “in trouble,” so we decided to head on over to the site and read the […]