Whats your opinion on the florida shooting?

[FN1910]

A few things that I missed and would like some clearification on. I understand that this was a gated community but I have also heard that Martin's step-mon to be or some relative lived in the community so he had a right to be there and was not tresspassing like some have said. Is this correct? From that it appears to me that he had every right to be there as much as Zimmerman. If Zimmerman was the head of the "Organized Neighborhood Watch" he should have had a better knowlege of who was to be in the community than he did. Since this is a gated community are there guards at the gate or just a gate with a card or key?

From reading some more of the "Facts" and yes the reported facts of what happened I am coming to the conclusion the Zimmerman screwed up and so the did the police by taking his version of the story as fact and not doing an investigation. I don't know what actually happened but I am beginning to believe that those crying for an investigation by and outside agency have some justification for it. It's beginning to remind me of the fellow that they drug from the river with 200lbs. of chains wrapped around him. When asked about an investigation the Sheriff answered, "What kind of investigation you need, SOB just stole more chain than he could swim the river with".

 

[CapGun]

Being armed, as we know, is a huge responsibility. At no time while armed can I assume an offensive position. At no time while armed can I escalate a situation/altercation.
From everything I've read the shooter really messed up.

You truly get it! Guess that's why they say an "armed society is a polite society"!

 

[cmhbob]

Martin's dad and dad's fiancee lived in the complex.

SGB, you're right - it doesn't clear up who assaulted whom. But it sure gives some idea as to who was following whom, and who challenged first. Extrapolating from what Martin's girlfriend said, we can assume Zimmerman wasn't wearing any identification, making him just a big maybe scary-looking guy who started following a kid.

And why isn't the HOA backing Zimmerman? They've been strangely quiet about the whole neighborhood watch thing.

 

[Bttbbob]

BC1 its great down here. I have had my gun school here for over 24 yrs and I love it.

 

[SGB]

Martin's dad and dad's fiancee lived in the complex.

SGB, you're right - it doesn't clear up who assaulted whom. But it sure gives some idea as to who was following whom, and who challenged first. Extrapolating from what Martin's girlfriend said, we can assume Zimmerman wasn't wearing any identification, making him just a big maybe scary-looking guy who started following a kid.

And why isn't the HOA backing Zimmerman? They've been strangely quiet about the whole neighborhood watch thing.

All good questions that none of us can answer. I'll add one for you, if Watkins was so afraid why didn't he call 911?

 

[williewrp1]

The guy over step the right to self defense claim when he was told to back off and didnt

 

[NotTwoShure]

The “Court” of public opinion has tried and convicted this person, as has the media. Now we are bitching with each other? My issue is the very consciences folks in the Department of Justice running down to the state of Florida. I wish Eric the Holder would be as fast and furious with his thoughts on the Boarder Agent that was killed. Think?

 

[SGB]

The guy over step the right to self defense claim when he was told to back off and didnt

This is stated over and over and over without any shred of supporting documentation, further under Florida law it's just flat out inaccurate. It's easy to mimic, heck even birds can do it.

 

[dragon6]

This is stated over and over and over without any shred of supporting documentation, further under Florida law it's just flat out inaccurate. It's easy to mimic, heck even birds can do it.

Documentation is the recorded 911 call where he was told not to follow the kid. If he had stopped his pursuit there would not have been a shooting. Stand your ground does mean pursuit until the other person's fight or flight instinct kicks in.

Romans 8:37

 

[BC1]

Actually, Bob, if the neighborhood watch was sanctioned by the homeowners association (i.e. the owners of the private property that Martin was on) which I'm sure it was, Zimmerman was entirely in his rights to confront someone just as you would be within your rights to confront someone on your property.

I'm not so sure this is private property. If this was a gated community who owns the street? Can any person make a claim to own it? If it is owned by the homeowners association did they formally appoint Zimmerman? No, he was "self-appointed." Was Zimmerman a licensed guard? Was he trained? Did he wear a uniform? Did he present identification to the kid? I think all of this comes into play as the kid may have reacted differently. He clearly can't follow someone on or off MY property even if I live in that gated community. Are my guests subject to being followed on my property by a self-appointed neighborhood watch? Are my guests at risk? Am I culpable too if I know this mutt is following everyone around and fail to stop it?

Zimmerman is absoutely culpable in this situation. One argument frequently made on USA Carry forums is that the police have no right to stop you and detain you without cause. Walking in the rain with skittles and ice tea hardly constitutes such cause even for a LEO. How does this wannabe get more leadway than the police when he's on MY property and not his own? By following the boy he clearly escalated the confrontation and should not be allowed to use an affirmative defense.

 

[B2Tall]

I'm not so sure this is private property. If this was a gated community who owns the street? Can any person make a claim to own it? If it is owned by the homeowners association did they formally appoint Zimmerman? No, he was "self-appointed." Was Zimmerman a licensed guard? Was he trained? Did he wear a uniform? Did he present identification to the kid? I think all of this comes into play as the kid may have reacted differently. He clearly can't follow someone on or off MY property even if I live in that gated community. Are my guests subject to being followed on my property by a self-appointed neighborhood watch? Are my guests at risk? Am I culpable too if I know this mutt is following everyone around and fail to stop it?

Gated communities are private property. You can't just throw up a gate on a public street. The HOA (i.e. the community) is responsible for maintinence (inc. streets) just as you would be responsible for maintaining your property. Laws still apply of course but it's still considered private property and the legal residents have all the associated rights that are attached to private property. So long as Zimmerman was there with the blessing of the HOA (and if he's a resident then he doesn't even need that) then he has every right to question someone on that property. He doesn't need a badge, uniform, or special training. That doesn't excuse any subsequent aggressiveness/escalation on his part but it does give him certain legal rights. It's no different than if my neighbor went away and asked me to keep an eye on his house. I would have every right to confront and question someone that was snooping around if I chose to....."Can I help you with something??".

 

[SGB]

Documentation is the recorded 911 call where he was told not to follow the kid. If he had stopped his pursuit there would not have been a shooting. Stand your ground does mean pursuit until the other person's fight or flight instinct kicks in.

Romans 8:37

The "MEDIA" continues to spread "Against the advice of the 911 dispatcher, Zimmerman followed Martin" when we know it to be UNTRUE. Yet it keeps being parroted. In the 911 call after the dispatcher tells Zimmerman "we don't need you to do that" Zimmerman clearly states "OK" and then that he's lost sight of Martin. Does this not just as likely indicate that Zimmerman ceased his surveillance at this point, at the advice of the dispatcher? Were is the proof that Zimmerman continued to follow Martin? I submit that there is none, that's it's just more media conjecture.

It's my understanding that Zimmerman claims he was walking back to his vehicle when he was jumped from behind by Martin. An eyewitness puts Martin on top of Zimmerman beating Zimmerman.....A LEO has stated that Zimmerman's back was wet with grass clippings clinging to him and that he was bleeding from the nose and the back of his head. It's been reported that the injury to the rear of his head required stitches in the ER.

Why aren't these portions of the incident being repeated? I dare say because the lynch mob wants a lynching.

Why aren't more people seeking verifiable information? I dare say because it's easier to be a parrot

 

[BC1]

Gated communities are private property. You can't just throw up a gate on a public street. The HOA (i.e. the community) is responsible for maintinence (inc. streets) just as you would be responsible for maintaining your property. Laws still apply of course but it's still considered private property and the legal residents have all the associated rights that are attached to private property. So long as Zimmerman was there with the blessing of the HOA (and if he's a resident then he doesn't even need that) then he has every right to question someone on that property. He doesn't need a badge, uniform, or special training. That doesn't excuse any subsequent aggressiveness/escalation on his part but it does give him certain legal rights. It's no different than if my neighbor went away and asked my to keep an eye on his house. I would have every right to confront and question someone that was snooping around if I chose to....."Can I help you with something??".

Consider this... if I live in that gated community and I don't want Zimmerman on my property then he may not trespass. The HOA cannot give him permission to be in my yard. He may not pursue someone on my property without my permission. Now where did the shooting occur? Was it in the road or in someone's yard? Was he approved by the HOA? Even if he was it does not supercede the rights of the deeded property owner. There's not enough known. I'm betting he gets indicted. In any event, he'll never be able to go home again... people need to think about that when they get involved in an altercation. Even if you are 100% right it will ruin your life.

 

[SGB]

Sanford, Florida, police answer questions about teen's shooting death – This Just In - CNN.com Blogs





Partial Police Report.pdf

 

[cmhbob]

The HOA has been silent AFAIK about Zimmerman's position. One report I read said he was "self-appointed." Another said he was the only one to volunteer when the HOA called for such. Link Removed

I've emailed two reporters, in Miami and Orlando, asking them who has checked up with the HOA to see what they have to say. No response from either.

In condos, typically doesn't the HOA own the yard? Or at least up to a certain distance from the structure?

It is unconscionable to me that the Sanford PD didn't check the cellphone logs of the people involved in a fatal shooting. That is an absolute failure of training and supervision. There is no excuse at all for that failure. For the father of the deceased to come up with that phone call is a total slap in the face WRT to the right of the deceased to be properly represented. You don't walk up to a fatal shooting, hear the shooter say, "It was self-defense," and be done with your investigation.

 

[BC1]

In condos, typically doesn't the HOA own the yard? Or at least up to a certain distance from the structure?

That was my question. Does the HOA own it or is it owned by the developer or management company, merely granting right-of-way to the HOA and/or residents? These answers are absolutely relevent. My bet is that he gets indicted.

 

[cmhbob]

Location, if anyone is interested:

1231 Twin Trees Lane Sanford FL - Google Maps

Edited: Orlando Sentinel map of the shooting - Link Removed

 

[wjh2657]

Sanford PD, by not taking some sort of direct action and stating immediately that Mr. Zimmerman was covered by Castle Doctrine, have left the door open for the Feds. The decision of right or wrong here should have been verified higher up the legal chain, for legitimacy's sake.

Feds being in it will mean Federal Court. This could mean appeal and case law action in Federal District Court as to legitimacy of Florida SD law in light of Public safety.

Reversing Florida Law will not violate 2nd Amendment rights. but it could mean that Florida may have to rewrite the law and get it back through the legislative process.

The more the media push this as a "Legal Right to Murder" law, the more likely that legislature will linger long in the law-making process. Short version: Florida law could get reversed and a new law could be long in the coming. In short, Floridia residents could end up without an effective SD law for a while. That will probably have some effect on their carry privileges also.

I don't know what happened or what Mr. Zimmerman's thought processes were. But he has, through his actions, opened a very nasty can of worms for Florida.

 

[BC1]

Sanford PD, by not taking some sort of direct action and stating immediately that Mr. Zimmerman was covered by Castle Doctrine, have left the door open for the Feds. The decision of right or wrong here should have been verified higher up the legal chain, for legitimacy's sake.

Feds being in it will mean Federal Court. This could mean appeal and case law action in Federal District Court as to legitimacy of Florida SD law in light of Public safety.

Reversing Florida Law will not violate 2nd Amendment rights. but it could mean that Florida may have to rewrite the law and get it back through the legislative process.

The more the media push this as a "Legal Right to Murder" law, the more likely that legislature will linger long in the law-making process. Short version: Florida law could get reversed and a new law could be long in the coming. In short, Floridia residents could end up without an effective SD law for a while. That will probably have some effect on their carry privileges also.

I don't know what happened or what Mr. Zimmerman's thought processes were. But he has, through his actions, opened a very nasty can of worms for Florida.

Perhaps the Feds are considering a civil rights violation as well.

 

[B2Tall]

Consider this... if I live in that gated community and I don't want Zimmerman on my property then he may not trespass. The HOA cannot give him permission to be in my yard. He may not pursue someone on my property without my permission. Now where did the shooting occur? Was it in the road or in someone's yard? Was he approved by the HOA? Even if he was it does not supercede the rights of the deeded property owner. There's not enough known. I'm betting he gets indicted. In any event, he'll never be able to go home again... people need to think about that when they get involved in an altercation. Even if you are 100% right it will ruin your life.

Yes, you could make it clear that you didn't want the neighborhood watch on your property but was that the case here?? There's nothing to say that it was. You're introducing a variable that no evidence of exists. That would be like a Zimmerman defender saying "Well maybe Martin picked up an axe that soneone left outside of their house....". There's just no evidence of it. But even if it was, that would make Zimmerman guilty of trespassing, not murder. We have to deal with what we know....not with unsubstantiated "maybes" and "what-ifs" of which there are an infinite number.

I've lived in gated communities. Obviously the neighborhood watch was sanctioned by the HOA. It wouldn't have been operating inside a gated community if it wasn't and the stories I've read make it clear that the watch had been operating for a while. And if Zimmerman were a legal resident of the community (quite likely since gated communities don't usually allow non-residents access like that) then he could simply do it on his own.

My development has a HOA and although we're not gated, we still have "common ground" such as a swimming pool, clubhouse, and rec area that's owned and operated by the HOA (of which I, as a homeowner, am a member). When I bought my house I bought into this common ground and my monthly dues maintain it. It's considered private property of which I am an owner. I would be 100% within my rights (and anyone else whose legal residence is within the development) to confront someone on that property whom I thought was trespassing or up to no good. It doesn't give me the right to harass anyone but I can question them and expect them to respond accordingly just as if they were on my own personal property.

Zimmerman may have broken more than one law but confronting a stranger within this gated community doesn't appear to be one of them. He was well within his rights to follow and question an unrecognized person who he believed was acting suspiciously. It's what happened after that that'll determine who's at fault.