The Back Alley Archives

I'm sure most of you have heard about the whole Trayvon Martin situation in Sanford.

If anyone has any questions, I will offer my opinions - I began my legal career at the State Attorney's Office in Sanford. Keep in mind, that was more than 10 years ago and before the passage of the "stand your ground" law that is being talked about so much. I did work with the Sanford PD on occasion.

Questions? Comments?

I think the grand jury should come back with an indictment for murder in the first degree. The facts are pretty clear that the shooter ignored the 911 dispatcher's instructions not to follow the kid and started a confrontation. I think it's fairly clear that the shooter initiated a fairly hostile encounter, and there can be no credible claim of self-defense.

Accordingly, I don't think the "stand your ground" law has a very good application here, as a plaint reading of the law indicates that it's not available to the aggressor. I think the media is using this tragic incident to drum up support for the revocation of the law as well as Florida's concealed weapons law.

I expect the shooter to ultimately be convicted of first- or second-degree murder.

its like the wild, wild west down there...wtf?! everyone wants to be wyatt earp

One guy != everyone.

all it takes

I feel so bad for this poor kid's family, and I hope they get justice for Trayvon's death. There was no reason for Zimmerman to shoot him. He was unarmed and minding his own business. Last time I checked, walking in your neighborhood at 7:30 at night is not a crime.

^^ Wasn't his neighborhood. But other than that, I agree with you.

Well, his dad's fiance's neighborhood - or whatever it was. We live in an incredibly small neighborhood (just one street), and I don't think anyone walking along the sidewalk at that time of night seems suspicious... regardless of whether they live in our community or not.

my neighborhood is quiet and i'd be suspicious of ANYONE walking around at night...2 things: 1) i'd be suspicious because in the 13yrs i've lived there, NO ONE'S walked around at night 2) there's not foot traffic in my neighborhood at anytime...no sidewalks...nothing

having said that - if i saw someone, i wouldn't be calling 911 and i certainly wouldn't seek the person out with a weapon...sheer stupidity

No one walks in your neighborhood at night? What the hell is up with New Yorkers?! We get a ton of foot traffic. We live in an area where people are very active - always walking, biking, running, etc. It really wouldn't surprise me to see people out after dark doing any one of those things. The kids in our neighborhood sometimes play out front in the grassy area that divides the street until 8 or 9 at night. Now if it were 2 am, that might worry me a little. But, like you, I wouldn't run outside with guns blazing. That makes no sense.

Trayvon Martin was killed around 7:15 p.m. While it might have been dark at that time, it was hardly the middle of the night.

Doc, I'm going to have to disagree with you thus far.

This stand your ground law is a giant pain in the ass for prosecutors. Much like any other well intentioned legislation, it has been exploited. Defense attorneys and weak minded judges have allowed it to be used in such a broad fashion that makes arresting Zimmerman a near impossible task.

Without any other eyewitnesses, All we have to go on is: 1) Trayvon Martin is dead. 2) Zimmerman says he acted in self defense. 3) 911 call he indicates he is following and the dispatcher tells him to stop. 4) Zimmerman says a few seconds later he decided to abide by dispatcher's request and began returning to his vehicle. 5) Zimmerman claims Martin then came towards him. 6) Scuffle ensues. 7) see (1).

The bitch of this is - Zimmerman's claim can not be disproven. The reading of the law also specifically forbids an arrest when a self defense claim under this statute cannot be disproven. Essentially, they open themselves up to a lawsuit if they arrest him and he later wins on a stand your ground motion.

Personally, I believe Zimmerman is guilty of murder. I just wish I could get convictions on all the cases where I personally believe the person is guilty.

Well, you have more up-to-date and practical experience than I do, as this law was not around when I was a prosecutor.

I was unaware of your points 4 and 5. Still, I don't find Zimmerman's claims credible at all, for two reasons: Martin's phone conversation with his friend where he said he was afraid of the guy following him indicates that he's not going to attack Zimmerman. Second, the sheer size disparity - I don't know too many lone 17-year-olds who are going to attack a grown man who easily outweighs him by 50 pounds. It just doesn't make sense to me.

I was also unaware that the law forbids arrest if the claim cannot be disproven? Really? That's surprising to me; I didn't read that in the statute.

zimmerman would not be in this situation if he'd listened to instruction...wyatt earp deserves what he gets

[quote=DocZaius]Well, you have more up-to-date and practical experience than I do, as this law was not around when I was a prosecutor.

I was unaware of your points 4 and 5. Still, I don't find Zimmerman's claims credible at all, for two reasons: Martin's phone conversation with his friend where he said he was afraid of the guy following him indicates that he's not going to attack Zimmerman. Second, the sheer size disparity - I don't know too many lone 17-year-olds who are going to attack a grown man who easily outweighs him by 50 pounds. It just doesn't make sense to me.

I was also unaware that the law forbids arrest if the claim cannot be disproven? Really? That's surprising to me; I didn't read that in the statute.[/QUOTE]

That may have been in case law, Doc...I'm trying to find my packet from a CLE we had on the issue. I agree with you in that I don't personally buy his claims. All he has to say (and may have said) is that Martin started reaching into his waistband or his pockets for what he thought was a weapon and then how do you get around that as a prosecutor? Argue he made it up? That won't get you past a JOA

The most aggravating part of all this, for me, anyway...

Up here the most vigorous of supporters of Zimmerman's arrest are some black defense attorneys...all of whom are the most notorious for filing these stand your ground motions to get some serious thugs off of serious charges...now, they're the ones claiming that this law shouldn't apply to this guy. Makes me sick.

Just to clarify, all of it makes me sick. The law had good intentions. Unintended consequences, however, are a bitch. I still think it doesn't need to be repealed, but it does need to be amended.

I know the whole "he was reaching for something" sometimes works for the cops, but that will really get you a JOA if you can't rebut it? The fact that the kid didn't have any weapons on him isn't enough?

I'm coming around to your point of view on this: maybe it needs to be amended - some burden-shifting could be in order.

[quote=DocZaius]I know the whole "he was reaching for something" sometimes works for the cops, but that will really get you a JOA if you can't rebut it? The fact that the kid didn't have any weapons on him isn't enough?

I'm coming around to your point of view on this: maybe it needs to be amended - some burden-shifting could be in order.[/QUOTE]


It's worse than just a JOA....

With a stand your ground motion, they get two bites at the apple...

The motion is heard by the judge, essentially, a bench trial...if the judge feels we've disproved the motion, they can still raise the same issues in front of a jury.

Worse, Judges are not treating this like you would a motion to dismiss where they're asserting no factual dispute and are bound by it at trial...they can change their fucking story at the time of trial.

Wow, really? That's messed up.

No kidding.

I'm learning so much from this conversation. My only opinion is that Zimmerman should have never gotten out of his car. As to what happened after that, there are no witnesses so I don't know what to think.

That's what sticks out here he got out of the vehicle....

Was to "see what street he was on"...then he was "attacked"...here is the rub, if he was shown to be actively pursuing the kid on dispatch, then lets say the kid found a coke bottle and shanked dude dead, then the kid is justified, no? He was at that point afraid for his life as he obviously should have been. But that's not how it went down, you telling me he came outta nowhere with nothing but his dukes up on a dude that was 50 to 100 pounds heavier...bullshit

Yeah, Zimmerman's story makes NO sense at all - he's the self-appointed neighborhood watch guy who calls 911 ALL the time to report things and he didn't know what street he was on?

I agree completely.

Fish,

To answer your hypothetical question, yes, likely justified

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk

Sorry, but I don't think he should have been IN his car following him in the first place - neighborhood watch or not.