Let's take a look at the Florida "Stand Your Ground" law and put the shoe on the other foot, or in the Trayvon Martin case, the gun in the other hand. The law reads:
Trayvon Martin was not engaged in any unlawful activity, he was walking back to the home of his father's girlfriend after a trip to the store where he purchased candy and tea.
Trayvon Martin had every right to be where he was.
Trayvon Martin was not the one who initiated the confrontation, George Zimmerman was. Thus, Martin was the one who was being attacked, he was not the attacker. How was Martin supposed to know who this person was who was following him? Zimmerman was not in a vehicle or wearing a uniform that would have identified him as a police officer.
Did Martin have reason to believe this unknown and unidentified person was going to do bodily harm to him? Put yourself in his position. You're walking home at night, knowing you haven't done anything wrong and are in a place where you have a right to be, and someone is following you. This person gets out of his unmarked vehicle and pursues you. Do you know what his intentions are?
So let's say Trayvon Martin had been carrying a gun and he shot and killed Zimmerman as he approached, which would have been his right in accordance with the "Stand Your Ground" statute. Would Trayvon Martin be a free man a month later? Would the state attorney have overridden the recommendation of the lead homicide investigator on the scene and ordered that Martin not be charged? Would Zimmerman's family be denied access to the autopsy report? The answers are clear. Not no, but Hell No. The reason why is just as clear.
"A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony."
Trayvon Martin was not engaged in any unlawful activity, he was walking back to the home of his father's girlfriend after a trip to the store where he purchased candy and tea.
Trayvon Martin had every right to be where he was.
Trayvon Martin was not the one who initiated the confrontation, George Zimmerman was. Thus, Martin was the one who was being attacked, he was not the attacker. How was Martin supposed to know who this person was who was following him? Zimmerman was not in a vehicle or wearing a uniform that would have identified him as a police officer.
Did Martin have reason to believe this unknown and unidentified person was going to do bodily harm to him? Put yourself in his position. You're walking home at night, knowing you haven't done anything wrong and are in a place where you have a right to be, and someone is following you. This person gets out of his unmarked vehicle and pursues you. Do you know what his intentions are?
So let's say Trayvon Martin had been carrying a gun and he shot and killed Zimmerman as he approached, which would have been his right in accordance with the "Stand Your Ground" statute. Would Trayvon Martin be a free man a month later? Would the state attorney have overridden the recommendation of the lead homicide investigator on the scene and ordered that Martin not be charged? Would Zimmerman's family be denied access to the autopsy report? The answers are clear. Not no, but Hell No. The reason why is just as clear.
May he rest in peace, I am hoping that his case will be resolved. Its really horrifying to die in such a tragic event.
Sheena from pompe immergée
Doug, I have a son with a wife and daughter currently living in Florida. He has mentioned several instances that are very disturbing. He called once to tell me that he was tired of going into Wal-Mart to buy something and encountering people joining hands and praying out loud in the aisles - while - also having to listen to some of the most hate filled and racist remarks he had ever heard in his life. It has become old hat that I ask with each phone call, what have their whacko pastors threatened this week, or, what sensational murders have happened recently there, or, which whacko politician is saying what this week? (Although, I do have to admit our own Texan politicians often win in THAT particular weekly war!)
Granted it was 10 years ago, but my experience in Florida with racism and the police, shocked me. It really did.
That’s what neighborhood WATCH is supposed to do. Watch and call the police if necessary. Not pursue and confront. Except when the person on watch has a history of violence including being arrested for assaulting a police officer, only to have the charges dropped when he agreed to enter an alcohol treatment program.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/03/30/former-co-worker-zimmerman-lost-security-guard-job-after-he-snapped/
So why was Martin tested but Zimmerman wasn’t? And how did Zimmerman get a carry permit?
The law read very clearly that you are to do what you reasonably determine is necessary to secure yourself and property. Wouldn't driving off and calling police have accomplished this? This is so basic it's scary to see why there is a debate at all.
Trayvon Martin DID stand his ground, unfortunately. If he had taken off running (and I fully understand why he did not) MAYBE someone would have aided him, if by at least catching him and holding him until the police arrived. There was only a 5 minute interval from the time of the 911 call by Zimmerman to the shot being fired. However, I don't like that idea because it seems to blame the victim for his own death. Zimmerman was the pursuer. He was not "standing ground" he was in hot pursuit. He should have been charged with murder. I think eventually he will because he has been so busy building up his own guilt with his constant lies and self aggrandizement. I also think Zimmerman will not be the only person charged with crimes in this incident. There certainly should be charges for whoever altered the police report by inserting Trayvon's identity when they held him for 3 days as a John Doe. The county attorney, or whoever it was, that refused the charges should also be charged with abuse of power and anything they can throw at him. just saying.