Opinions/Editorials
See other Opinions/Editorials Articles
Title: ZIMMERMAN TRIAL MYTH BUSTERS
Source:
clashdaily.com
URL Source: http://clashdaily.com/2013/07/zimme ... rs-a-must-read/#ixzz2Yab7ss6A
Published: Jul 9, 2013
Author: clashdaily.com
Post Date: 2013-07-09 18:21:32 by CZ82
Keywords: None
Views: 19817
Comments: 43
ZIMMERMAN TRIAL MYTH BUSTERS: A MUST READ By Clash Daily / 9 July 2013 / 20 Comments AM MYTH #1 – It is against the law for a neighborhood watch member to be armed while on duty. ***FALSE*** ANSWER: There are no statutes or administrative code that governs neighborhood watch. The only Florida statutes that mention neighborhood watch specifically are: 1. §843.16(2)(b) [ http://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2012/0843.16 ] which governs radio equipment use. 2. §30.06 [ http://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2012/30.06 ] which provides authorization for the County Sheriff to form neighborhood watch programs within their jurisdiction. 3. §166.0485 [ http://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2012/166.0485 ] which provides authorization for municipalities to form neighborhood watch programs within their jurisdiction. 4. §843.20 [ http://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2012/843.20 ] which provides for relief if members of a neighborhood watch program are victims of harassment or other criminal acts against them for performing their duties. Nowhere in the above statutes listed in 1-4 does it mention anything about weapons or firearms and the prohibition of carrying for the purpose of lawful self-defense. 5. §790.06(15) [ http://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2012/790.06 ] which governs the statewide preemption of the regulation of concealed weapons and firearms. This is called the class W license or more commonly referred to as the concealed carry license. 6. §790.33 [ http://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2012/790.33 ] which governs the statewide preemption on the regulation of firearms and ammunition. 7. §790.06(12)(a) [ http://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2012/790.06 ] which governs the EXCLUSIONS to concealed carry. 8. §790.25 [ http://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2012/790.25] which governs the EXCEPTIONS to the open carry and conceal carry ban (except concealment on or about your person without a class W license). Again, nowhere in these statutes that I’ve listed in 5-8 mentions that concealed carry during the duty of a neighborhood crime watch volunteer is prohibited. Furthermore, these statutes specifically state that a neither the county, municipality nor any political subdivision of the state OTHER THAN the state legislature can FURTHER regulate concealed carry, possession and use of firearms! Therefore, as the state’s witness for the Sanford PD (SPD) volunteer coordinator stated on the stand, and I paraphrase, “…When that topic [armed] comes up, which it does a lot, we do not even answer that question because it is not within our area of jurisdiction. We do preach not to confront the subjects or enter a suspicious scene. They [neighborhood watch volunteers] are our eyes and ears. … .” MYTH #2 – When a non-emergency call taker, 911 operator or dispatch gives an instruction over the phone, you MUST follow that order. ***FALSE*** ANSWER: Having been a 911 Operator for a sheriff’s office here in Florida, this statement is completely false! The state’s witness 911 Operator even said on the stand, and I paraphrase, “…We always say that. … .” There is absolutely no statute or administrative code that stipulates that if an operator says something to you on the phone, you don’t follow it exactly or at all, then you will face criminal proceedings for not carrying out the order or instructions. The only time you have a potential criminal liability is if you do not follow and order or instruction if IN THE PRESENCE OF a law enforcement officer (LEO) directs you to assist him or comply with an order and you countermand said directive. Also, if you are following someone while on the phone with the police, you violate traffic laws and you are witnessed by the police in doing so, you will most likely get a ticket or worse depending upon the severity of the traffic infraction. These are just two examples as there are many more possibly scenarios. The distinction needs to be made that the criminal liability would occur when IN THE PRESENCE of a LEO and not based upon any instructions a police operator would give over the phone. Now the exact phrase in question was: Operator: “Are you following him?” Zimmerman: “Yes.” Operator: “OK, we don’t need you to do that.” Zimmerman: “OK.” And immediately following that exchange, Zimmerman actually had already lost sight of Treyvon Martin and was starting the exchange of information with the operator about where to meet the responding LEO’s. At this time, Zimmerman was behind the two rows of townhomes at the now infamous ‘T’. This is substantiated by both Zimmerman’s interview by SPD and his video reenactment; both of which were proffered by the state. MYTH #3 – Following someone is against the law. ***HALF TRUE*** ANSWER: While performing the duties of neighborhood crime watch, licensed private security, licensed private investigator, licensed private repossession or a concerned citizen that notices an out of ordinary event, following is NOT illegal. As a matter of fact, law enforcement encourages this by the consistent phrase of “We need the community to be our eyes and ears,” or, “Call Crime Stoppers with a tip.” Now this has an 1984-esque ring to it, but it underlies a critical component to, and specifically to this case, the main duties of the neighborhood crime watch program which is to observe and report. Here is the example that I alluded to in my opening remarks about “following”. Almost everyone is aware of the crime of stalking. All too often, supporters of Treyvon Martin state that George Zimmerman was “stalking” Treyvon Martin that night. Well, since this is a criminal proceeding, we do need to use the correct LEGAL terms in discussing the events that took place. Stalking is defined in §784.048 [http://www.flsenate.gov/laws/statutes/2012/784.048 ] which states: (1) As used in this section: (a)“Harass” means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person which causes substantial emotional distress to that person and serves no legitimate purpose. (b)“Course of conduct” means a pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time, however short, which evidences a continuity of purpose. The term does not include constitutionally protected activity such as picketing or other organized protests. (c) “Credible threat” means a verbal or nonverbal threat, or a combination of the two, including threats delivered by electronic communication or implied by a pattern of conduct, which places the person who is the target of the threat in reasonable fear for his or her safety or the safety of his or her family members or individuals closely associated with the person, and which is made with the apparent ability to carry out the threat to cause such harm. It is not necessary to prove that the person making the threat had the intent to actually carry out the threat. The present incarceration of the person making the threat is not a bar to prosecution under this section. (2)A person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person commits the offense of stalking, a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. Now to prove stalking in a court of law, the state must prove the following element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant “willfully, maliciously and REPEATEDLY followed, harassed or cyberstalked the victim.” [ http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/jury_instructions/chapters/chapter8/p2c8s8.6.rtf ] Now, listening to the 911 Operator’s testimony, the SPD volunteer coordinator testimony and the 911 recording, all either exhibit or has been confirmed that George Zimmerman was professional in his conduct as a neighborhood crime watch volunteer during his tenure and his calm demeanor on the phone on the night of 2/26/12. That it would be extremely difficult to near impossible for the state to prove that Zimmerman was willful and maliciously harassing Treyvon Martin; especially since it was a SINGLE event. Therefore, when folks consistently use the term “stalking” in describing Zimmerman’s actions in this case, under Florida law, they would be 100% INCORRECT. MYTH #4 – The interchanging of terms: “Self-Defense”, “Stand Your Ground” and “Castle Doctrine”. ANSWER: These terms are NOT interchangeable. They are very specific terms based upon the specific scenarios. All of this is defined specifically in Chapter 776 of Florida Statutes. [ http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2012/Chapter776 ] “Stand Your Ground” (SYG): Self-defense is a component of SYG. Prior to 2005, if a self-defense scenario presented itself where deadly force was being used against a victim, the victim had a duty to retreat FIRST if that option was available before meeting with like kind deadly force in the protection of self or another. When SYG was instituted, it removed the duty to retreat and you could meet force with force; both less-than-lethal and deadly force. “Castle Doctrine”: This law provides for the presumption that someone attempting to gain entry to your OCCUPIED home (a type of dwelling) is going to cause great bodily harm or possible death. This states that the use of deadly force is AUTOMATICALLY authorized in the defense of your OCCUPIED home. This law was also extended to your private conveyance (car). “Self-Defense”: Is an act by a victim to reciprocate with necessary and proportional force in the defense of self, another or property. As it relates to property, you can only use force to protect property that which is yours or have been given authorization from the property owner to protect on their behalf. “Deadly Force”: The use of deadly force is authorized if the victim believes that he or she is in imminent fear of great bodily harm or possible death. Self-Defense, or the legal term of justified homicide, is proven according to these jury instructions: [ http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/jury_instructions/chapters/chapter8/p2c7s7.7.rtf ] “The killing of a human being is justifiable homicide and lawful if necessarily done while resisting an attempt to murder or commit a felony upon the defendant, or to commit a felony in any dwelling house in which the defendant was at the time of the killing. § 782.02, Fla. Stat” We will soon discuss the elements of the crimes 2nd Degree (Depraved) Murder and the automatic lesser charge of Manslaughter. The term “justified homicide” is defined in the jury instructions of Manslaughter which has already been cited above.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 36.
#5. To: CZ82 (#0)
At issue is whether Zimmerman initially provoked the use of force against himself. If so found, the claim of self-defense may fail. At issue is when Zimmerman drew his weapon. The assertion that he unholstered his weapon while mounted by Trayvon Martin is questionable. FLORIDA Statute, Justifiable Use of Force, Title 47, Chap 776 by nolu chan
It all depends on where he had his gun holstered... If it was in a shoulder holster, ankle holster or a small of the back holster it would be almost next to impossible for him to draw his weapon with Martin sitting on his chest... If it was on his hip he shouldn't have had too much of a problem... Without an eye witness I don't think you could assume he drew it any other time than when George said he drew it, unless his holster was located in one of the 3 "next to impossible" positions I mentioned above...
I was supposedly on Zimmerman's hip. It is difficult to get to a hip holster when someone is mounted on the "belly button area," as alleged by testimony.
It would depend how where his knee was in relationship to the holster and where on the hip it was mounted... Most people don't wear it directly on the hip cause it's harder to carry concealed, (sticks out too far) it's easier to carry it farther back towards the kidneys riding high... Which would make him have to roll over slightly to gain access to it, and would take some time... Enough time for Martin to do the damge shown in the photos... He could also have carried it farther forward "Doc Holiday style" which would have made him try to reach under Martin (if he was "sitting" directly on his stomach) or would only have to reach behind Martins leg if Martin was up on his knees stradling George...
Zimmerman claimed it was on his hip on the side. The expert testimony indicated that it was possible to inflict all of the Zimmerman head wounds with a single blow. He could have been bopped in the nose and fell, striking the back of his head. There were no traumatic injuries to the back of his head. There were no stiches and no medical care beyond cleaning him up. Expert medical testimony was contrary to the claims of Zimmerman repeatedly having his had slammed on concrete. The few facial injuries are contrary to the claims of Zimmerman having received dozens of blows. The claim of Martin having his hand over Zimmermans mouth is the complete lack of blood found on Martin's hands. Zimmerman had a Kel Tec PF-9 handgun. The ballistics expert testified that it has a double action firing mechanism, an automatic hammer block safety, and no thumb safety. This is confirmed by the Kel Tec website. It is safe to carry with a round chambered and with a full clip. Kel Tec calls it one of the flattest 9mm ever made. If the charge of 2nd degree murder fails, as seems likely, there will be lesser included offenses available to the jury, precisely what to be argued tomorrow. The issue of self-defense, if held for Zimmerman, will win the entire case for him. If the claim of self-defense fails, he would be headed for jail for one of the charges.
In that top picture I wish they would have cleaned his head up a little to get a better view of abrasions and bruises... It looks like "maybe" he hit his head twice on the concrete...
It appears more consistent with hitting his head on any hard surface after falling backward. It should be noted that the severity of Zimmerman's injuries do not determine the issue of self-defense. Zimmerman need only a reasonable belief of a threat of imminent severe bodily injury or death. A reasonable belief may be sustained in the absence of any injury. The Report documents Zimmerman being on prescribed Adderall. A documented side effect (among many) is "aggression/hostility." Also temezepam, an "intermediate-acting 3-hydroxy hypnotic of the benzodiazepine class of psychoactive drugs." Also omeprazole or Prilosec, and librax.
#41. To: nolu chan (#36)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest776.41 Use of force by aggressor.—The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
History.—s. 13, ch. 74-383; s. 1190, ch. 97-102.
#15. To: nolu chan (#5)
At issue is when Zimmerman drew his weapon. The assertion that he unholstered his weapon while mounted by Trayvon Martin is questionable.
#17. To: CZ82 (#15)
If it was on his hip he shouldn't have had too much of a problem...
#21. To: nolu chan (#17)
I was supposedly on Zimmerman's hip. It is difficult to get to a hip holster when someone is mounted on the "belly button area," as alleged by testimony.
#27. To: CZ82 (#21)
It would depend how where his knee was in relationship to the holster and where on the hip it was mounted... Most people don't wear it directly on the hip cause it's harder to carry concealed, (sticks out too far) it's easier to carry it farther back towards the kidneys riding high... Which would make him have to roll over slightly to gain access to it, and would take some time... Enough time for Martin to do the damge shown in the photos...
The PF-9 is a semi-automatic, locked breech pistol, chambered for the 9mm Luger cartridge. It has been developed from our highly successful P-11 and P-3AT pistols with maximum concealability in mind. The PF-9 has a single stack magazine holding 7 rounds. It is one of the lightest and flattest 9 mm ever made. Firing mechanism is Double-Action Only with an automatic hammer block safety. The PF-9 is available in blued, parkerized, and hard chrome finishes. Grips are in black, grey, and olive drab.
#35. To: nolu chan (#27)
#36. To: CZ82 (#35)
In that top picture I wish they would have cleaned his head up a little to get a better view of abrasions and bruises... It looks like "maybe" he hit his head twice on the concrete...
1. Scalp Lacerations: No sutures needed given well-approximated skin margins. Continue to clean with soap and water daily. We discussed the red flag symptoms that would warrant imaging given the type of assault he sustained. Given the type of trauma, we discussed that it is imperative he be seen with his Psychologist for evaluation.
2. Broken Nose: We discussed that is is likely broken, but does not appear to have septal deviation. The swelling and black eyes are typical of this injury. I recommended that he be evaluated by ENT but he refused.
Replies to Comment # 36.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 36.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]