The facts behind the killing of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Florida continue to slowly emerge. I have previously stated that I view critical facts as murky for a prosecution — even though I believe that there was sufficient evidence to arrest George Zimmerman at the scene. While we have still not seen some of the forensic evidence, a new report indicates that police may have based their initial decisions in part on the statement of a witness. We have been discussing the maddening gap in witness testimony at the critical moment of the confrontation. Now a new report suggests that there may have been a witness to the struggle and that witness reportedly told police that it was Martin who was on top of Zimmerman before the fatal shot was fired.
FOX 35 in Orlando says that it has spoken to the witness. The witness reportedly said that
“The guy on the bottom who had a red sweater on was yelling to me: ‘help, help…and I told him to stop and I was calling 911.” Martin was wearing a hoodie that night and Zimmerman was wearing a red shirt or sweater. A friend of Zimmerman has also come forward to say that Zimmerman looked like a mess after the fight and that he recognized Zimmerman as the voice on the 911 call asking people to help him.
An obvious defense case is emerging for a classic self-defense claim. Zimmerman on the 911 tape admits to have shadowed Martin but says it was Martin who was checking him out and moving toward him a threatening fashion. Zimmerman claims that he was attacked when he was returning to his SUV. Police and counsel reported that Zimmerman had cuts on his face and head and appeared to have been in a struggle. Zimmerman was lawfully carrying a handgun was allowed to use the weapon if he was in reasonable fear of serious bodily injury or death. This includes the possible use of the gun in a struggle of control of the weapon.
While the case has been treated as racially motivated, the Zimmerman family has strongly denied such a motivation — noting that he is a hispanic with many African-American friends. Frankly, Zimmerman does closely resemble an alternative profile — that of a defendant in “Castle Doctrine” or “Stand Your Ground” cases. In these controversies, we often see people who are obsessed with crime and in some cases inclined to use lethal force. That does not mean that race did not play a role here. However, it is possible that Zimmerman was motivated by his well-documented obsession with crime as opposed to race. While I understand the sensitivity to the race issue and have my own suspicions concerning the role of race, I believe it is premature to label this a racially motivated crime without more evidence of such a motive. None of this means that Zimmerman should not be charged, but rather than there remain murky elements to the case. We simply need to know more about such motivations. In terms of the state law, we also need more information (particularly forensic evidence) to better gauge the chances of a conviction in the case. I still find the fact that Zimmerman was armed and outweighed Martin to be the most significant. However, this case is still in its earliest stage in terms of development of the evidence and witnesses. Among other things, if a charge is brought, such evidence could push prosecutors toward a manslaughter claim with a lower likely sentence than second or first degree murder. Even with manslaughter, the prosecutors would have to establish the element beyond a reasonable doubt, including the claim of self-defense. Of course, the mere fact that Martin may have gotten the better of Zimmerman in dominating fight at one point does not mean that Zimmerman was not the original aggressor. It will depend on the full range of witness testimony and, again, the missing forensic evidence.
I was asked last week to sign an online petition demanding the prosecution of Zimmerman. As I have noted, I believe that there is sufficient evidence for an indictment. However, I have never support such public campaigns for indictments. I do not believe in prosecution by plebiscite. Whether there are 100 or 100,000 people demanding an indictment, a prosecutor should not be influenced by such popular outcries. We saw how distortive and corrupting such campaigns can be on prosecutors like Michael Nifong. Prosecutors must based their decisions on the weight of the evidence not the weight of public opinion. Regardless of my views about a possible indictment, I would not want a prosecutor influenced by any petition supporting those views. There is a line between the visceral and the legal and such petitions fall on the wrong side of that line.
Source: Daily Mail
John Fox, pictures are not evidence. They ARE symbols that are identified by people to mean things. “A picture is worth a thousand words.” I’m not going to go into the thousand words each picture means, now, or even when I first saw them, to me, but I will give a small sample. And when you change the pictures and show a more recent Trayvon (still pre-dead) and a more recent Zimmerman (suit, tie and non-mug-shot look), the same words come to my mind:
Trayvon’s picture, words re: So young? Dead? Killed? Shot? Some mother’s son! OMG! Why?
Zimmerman’s picture, words re: Authority figure? Captain of something? Superman? Self-deputized cop? Master? OMG! Why?
Change the picture. The words do not change.
Despite the pictures that are available that are current, the individual who wrote this drivel leaves both of the old ones up. He is no better than Sharpton for doing such a thing.
@ Westchaser: You said:
Finally, supporting evidence for Zimmerman is surfacing. The truth shall prevail. If someone walks into a convenience store in the late evening hours, any citizen of class would feel concerned and be on guard. It’s a fact of life. Don’t want to be considered a criminal, stop acting and talking and dressing like one .. join the rest of normal society and stop wittingly creating chaos. It will NEVER be accepted to do otherwise .. but then again I am convinced that certain people don’t really care about that fact.Instead, they thrive on creating uncomfortably .. and in some cases pay for that stupidity with their lives. Will it ever change? Doubtful.
By “supporting evidence for Zimmerman,” are you suggesting there is evidence suggesting he should have followed and shot Martin?
And if “someone” walks into a convenience store in the late evening (that would be about 7:00 p.m., in this case) any citizen “of class” would feel concerned and be “on guard.” So that means the citizen “of class” is free to shoot the “someone” dead? Just checking, because these stores are generally open late. That’s what they mean by “convenience.”
It’s a fact of life: that citizens “of class” can kill people they “consider…criminals?” If it is, we need to change our life in this country right quick.
Your advice, “Don’t want to be considered a criminal, stop acting and talking and dressing like one…” That would mean that you have evidence of Trayvon Martin “acting and talking and dressing” like a criminal? Interesting. Why didn’t the clerk in the 7-11 shoot him right then and keep Zimmerman from having to disturb his evening when he was on the way to the store for groceries?
“[J]oin the rest of normal society” would mean, to you, become like yourself? Become like George Zimmerman? Become like someone who decides that another person should die because he is not dressed, walking and acting the way you want him to?
There IS a normal society that has all those characteristics already, Westchaser. It is in Iran. If a woman dresses wrong she can get killed. Anyone saying they don’t agree with the state religion (Islam) is in danger. Failing to “join the normal society” can be paid for with one’s life blood.
We’re just trying to do a little bit of a different thing over here, if you don’t mind. We DO know that within Iran, the stricter rules work for some. Perhaps this society is just not ready for it.
Premeditation can occur as close to the crime as a single second before the killing takes place. Zimmerman wouldn’t have had to “premeditate” very long before shooting Martin to be charged with First Degree Murder, I think. Two things, however, would make a wise prosecutor want to avoid the First Degree Murder charge: (1) In Florida, a first degree murder charge REQUIRES a grand jury. Too much could go wrong. (2) If Zimmerman had to face first degree murder charges, the high tension might have continued in the case and that in itself would have presented a real risk for the prosecution.
I also think the possibility that Zimmerman got himself a beating on the way to killing the “f*&$#ing punk” is irrelevant to the question of his guilt or innocence. Since he had no authority to stop or detain (or question or apprehend or accost or assault) Martin, whatever response he got for whatever he did comes under the heading of “oh boo hoo” in my book. HE knew he was armed and dangerous. If he thought he should take the law into his own hands, he clearly would have to face AT LEAST the kinds of dangers trained police face on a daily basis and would have no reason to complain if that occurred.
Think: If he WERE a cop and he DID shoot and kill an unarmed youth. Would he give a story and go home? No. According to police protocols in every state of the union, even Florida, he would have had to turn in his gun and await an inquest into whether he was justified or not. If he got beaten up in the process of trying to detain someone, that wouldn’t change the fact that he shot someone (to death) and had to face the music.
There’s no way around this. He chose to engage with Martin; HE chose to subject himself to whatever risk there was from an unarmed youth; HE chose to shoot and kill that unarmed youth.
All bad choices. You see, people say that Martin made a bad choice in “mouthing off” to Zimmerman. But how do they know? They know because Zimmerman claimed that it happened? Interesting. Let’s see him testify to that under oath and subject himself to cross-examination. I bet he won’t do that.
it doesn’t matter if he seen the young man on top of Zimmer or Zimmmer on top of the young man. The dispatcher told Zimmer to not follow him, but The want to be cop did back down. He had a gun, when someone that isn’t law enforcement carries a gun, their mind set is to kill. To me, this is premedited.
anon nurse1, March 30, 2012 at 2:03 pm
Op-Ed Contributor
The Gated Community Mentality (sry a little behind here)
I think too many people forget, and too many take advantage, of the fact that the news presents the ‘news’, not the commonplace. You hear over and over crime stories, all white on white, black on white, white on blck and black on black. What is usually missing is the disclaimer ‘this is being reported because it is not the normal, if it were no one would t hink it is interesting and we would lose all our viewers.
I dont know, at the end of the day if this was a hate crime, the news has muddied it so with all their commentators and discordant ‘facts’. It does bother me, a lot, that absent the issie of racism I think people would have said ho hum.
Finally, supporting evidence for Zimmerman is surfacing. The truth shall prevail. If someone walks into a convenience store in the late evening hours, any citizen of class would feel concerned and be on guard. It’s a fact of life. Don’t want to be considered a criminal, stop acting and talking and dressing like one .. join the rest of normal society and stop wittingly creating chaos. It will NEVER be accepted to do otherwise .. but then again I am convinced that certain people don’t really care about that fact.Instead, they thrive on creating uncomfortably .. and in some cases pay for that stupidity with their lives. Will it ever change? Doubtful.
It seemed to me, when I first read the affidavit in support of the second-degree murder charge, that the “f—–g punks” comment was put in there so that the issue would NOT be considered a possible BASIS for the murder charge. In order words, it could not be considered possible that the prosecutor was basing the charge on the idea that this was a racially motivated crime. Preserving the malice of profiling Martin as a “punk” while not crossing the line of suggesting that he was being profiled as a “coon” might be a pre-emptive strike by the prosecutor against the defense argument that if Zimmerman was NOT a racist he could not have commmitted a murder against a Black kid. It occurred to me that as long as there IS a motive for a crime, there need not necessarily be a clearly identified motive for a crime, and then it occurred to me that in most cases, motive is not as easy to identify as we may think.
The “911 call” thread of this blog has recently seen a lot of information about psychopaths, and particularly, psychopaths in government. See, I don’t think you can know a psychopath by what he DOES, by his BEHAVIOR, alone. I personally know of two people who illustrate this. One of them has borrowed a lot of money from another, and never paid back, and never will pay back. I’ll call him “A.” Another has borrowed a lot of money from another, and never paid back, and never will pay back. I’ll call him “B.” I think B is a psychopath but I don’t think A is a psychopath. Why?
They did the same thing; they meant to do the same thing; and now, they mean to do the same thing in the future, too. A, however, really did imagine he was going to pay back, and he paid back other people very well and feels just terrible about not being able to do it in this case. B never meant to pay anybody anything; he was a scam artist and he’s been doing that for years. Is the effect on the person who lost the money any different? Only if the person losing the money actually knows what has happened, and I think, in this case, both of the creditors are aware of what has occurred. The creditor of A feels bad about it of course and in fact feels bad about the loans altogether because the friendship is ruined. The creditor of B sees that he was defrauded and he is upset, but he still thinks he may be able to use some leverage to get his money back.
So I’m saying that Zimmerman could have killed Trayvon Martin because he was profiling him as a “coon” who was obviously going to be presumed to be a criminal in need of killing, or he could have killed Trayvon Martin because he was profiling him as a “punk” who obviously was going to be presumed to be a criminal in need of killing (and just happened to be black).
I think I mixed up my logical analogies a bit here. But Zimmerman didn’t have to be racist to commit 2nd degree murder. He only had to be a criminal with malice (against a punk? OK, against a punk) to do so.
I’m glad to hear that two highly respected bloggers have expressed reactions that are consistent with my “watch and wait but don’t let your guard down” position right now. What has been done now does NOT bring us right back to the point, on February 26, 2012, when he SHOULD have been charged. The reason we are still “behind” is that the evidence-gathering that should have been done that night cannot simply be recreated or “filled in” like blanks on a multiple choice test. “Did he say coons, goons, or punks?” Even the fact that the affidavit filed in support of the DA’s charge CHOSE a word to plug in (a word that was probably designed to neither inflame nor excuse, in terms of the sociopolitical scene) for the suspicious sound on the tape cuts both ways.
There is, of course, no point at which the system cannot “go south” again, and every inch gained is still on the slope, and the slope is still steep.
The DOJ should still be doing the same investigation they were doing the day before the charges were announced, of course, looking at the cops, Wolfinger, Zimmerman Senior, the Neighborhood “Watch Group” (or, who knows at this point, maybe the Neighborhood “Xenophobic Hostility Society”), etc.
It worries me that many things can now officially “go from coon to punk.”
I’m sad that it took all this to make the system work. But I am no longer as angry. I will be watching just in case the system starts to fail … again.
Feel? I feel like the right thing has been done in invoking the legal system properly, but I’ll wait until the verdict is back in light of the evidence presented before I’ll have any feelings more involved about the case proper than the cold satisfaction that someone who nearly got a walk because his daddy was “somebody” locally is now going to have their day in court for the sensless killing of a kid and his role in the matter. I’m heartened by the number of citizens who said “no” to the injustice that was about to be perpetrated, but disappointed but not surprised by how many racist apologists defenders did their best to argue against Zimmerman having to face the bar and account for his actions.
This is about what I’d expect. I’m a fairly compartmentalized kind of guy.
I want to see the evidence now and hear the formal arguments.
How personally I have taken the Trayvon Martin case. But now that Zimmerman is in jail and will have to deal with the criminal justice system, I don’t feel personal about it any more. NOW I do not feel personally involved in whether he pleads or goes to trial, whether various witnesses who promulgated stories to the press (i.e. Joe Oliver) have the nerve to get on the stand and testify, whether or not Zimmerman testifies, what the subpoenas for medical reports will show or fail to show — now, since he has been charged with the crime that occurred on 2/26/2012, I feel strangely “outside” all the action, and free of the pressure of making people see things.
How are all of you feeling about this now?
Alex, I only write pieces that are biased. I write MY own opinions, so the bias is usually PRO-ME and in support of MY opinions.
Story: One time I was down on the mall in DC leading a demonstration of mothers who were protesting the inappropriate responses of state social service agencies to children’s allegations of child sexual abuse. We had about 25, 30 parents there and an assortment of signs, a couple of portable microphones, a little table. Russ Funk of MEN AGAINST RAPE was with us, providing support and lending some of his own activists to our group. Up rides a guy on a bike. He starts an argument with Russ (obviously the male leader there) not with me (obviously the female leader there). I stayed on the sideline and listened. The guy told Russ that he considered HIMSELF to have been raped because he went up on the roof in summer and had sex with a woman and she got pregnant and did not ask his permission to let the baby come to full term and achieve birth and personhood, and now “I got a baby behind that shit” without wanting that. The woman had not asked him, at the time of the encounter, for his permission to get pregnant. The guy went on and on about how raped he felt, concluding: “You don’t say anything about THAT; you need to deal with THAT; we’re raped by that and you don’t care and you haven’t said ANYTHING about that!” Russ listened; I listened. Then Russ said to him, “OK, but we’re here to protest something completely different. If you want to protest that, you should go ahead and do that. Get a permit, put together a group, and do it.” When the “raped” bike-rider left, I said to Russ, “So we weren’t supposed to be biased toward our own issue huh?” He answered, “He just wanted equal protection for his own issue — but he can’t get it from US.”
Yeah. Even her poetry is good. Then again, Elaine sets a high standard around here. Again, not idle complement.
Malisha,
“Cut on the bias,
dances of the seven veils
show nature’s beauty.”
lol … damn, that was good!!
I guess I’m just slow. I don’t get it. ( I mean as it relates to my comment…I get the prose. I wonder if you get it…?)
Here’s a more biasly written piece:
Cut on the bias,
dances of the seven veils
show nature’s beauty.
my god. I don’t know when, if ever, I have read such a biasly written piece.