Support NeoGAF

[Roger Danish]

There is no likely referring in the law. Its the words, plain and simple. Thats KHarvey's whole stickt. But he won't reply to it.

I'm just telling you how the word "repeatedly" would likely be interpreted in this statute. If Harvey is arguing that this fails "repeatedly," I would tend to agree with him/her. However, I disagree with Harvey that this means "no crime was committed"--as I pointed out, following someone in your car and then getting out to confront them could absolutely be considered harassment, or assault, or any number of other crimes.

 

[Korey]

And the events leading up to that point have no effect on the case?

They absolutely do. Which is why the murderer will be convicted. It's open and shut case, unless jurors in Florida are racist.

 

[Derwind]

He's the self-appointed captain of the neighborhood watch in that gated community.

Seriously.

Was he wearing his tights of justice? I think not!

 

[Draft]

The self defense thing is what I'm struggling with. So, if I went up to a guy on the street and told him he looked suspicious and I was detaining him until the police arrived, and this guy decided I was a loon and tried to walk away, and I got in his face and insisted that he lay on the ground and wouldn't move out of his way, if it gets physical and I kill the guy, no harm no foul, self defense? Seems like utter madness.

 

[Verelios]

The potential for grievous bodily harm justifies lethal force in Florida. The witness describes, and the incident report lines up with, the 17 year old being on top of the man while hitting him. If that accurately describes the incident, under Florida law the shooting could be legal self defense.

Witness also doesn't recount how the confrontation began. But you know how it would have never happened? If the asshat hadn't followed the kid and then stepped out of the car.

 

[Particle Physicist]

The potential for grievous bodily harm justifies lethal force in Florida. The witness describes, and the incident report lines up with, the 17 year old being on top of the man while hitting him. If that accurately describes the incident, under Florida law the shooting could be legal self defense.

So it doesn't matter who instigated?

If I am in Florida, I can run up to someone, start a fight, get my ass kicked, pull out a gun and legally kill someone?

 

[DY_nasty]

You know... I take back what I said earlier. Batman doesn't kill people.

Sorry, Batman.

 

[Kusagari]

I think the law should come down harder on this guy because he was flat out told by the police not to instigate things like this. And he did it anyway.

That's even worse than if he had just done it blindly.

 

[commedieu]

He brandished the weapon? When?

Either when he warned of an immediate shooting, since he was threatened. Or in the midst of being attacked violently by the threatening teenager.

 

[Korey]

The self defense thing is what I'm struggling with. So, if I went up to a guy on the street and told him he looked suspicious and I was detaining him until the police arrived, and this guy decided I was a loon and tried to walk away, and I got in his face and insisted that he lay on the ground and wouldn't move out of his way, if it gets physical and I kill the guy, no harm no foul, self defense? Seems like utter madness.

It's not self-defense if you're the one that provokes it. Which is why there's no way this guy gets off on that claim.

 

[Log4Girlz]

The self defense thing is what I'm struggling with. So, if I went up to a guy on the street and told him he looked suspicious and I was detaining him until the police arrived, and this guy decided I was a loon and tried to walk away, and I got in his face and insisted that he lay on the ground and wouldn't move out of his way, if it gets physical and I kill the guy, no harm no foul, self defense? Seems like utter madness.

Bububububu who got in who's face?


We should ask the dead kid.


But seriously I totally agree with your sentiment.

You know... I take back what I said earlier. Batman doesn't kill people.

Sorry, Batman.

Ok...I lol'd

 

[slidewinder]

It might be interesting if people found some other killings in Florida where the killer claimed self-defense, and saw how the circumstances and the police's treatment of the killer compared. Maybe it's common that if self-defense is claimed, and appears to be a possibility, that the killer is not held until a more thorough investigation has been conducted? Maybe the opposite? Is there some established standard?

 

[Professor Beef]

You know... I take back what I said earlier. Batman doesn't kill people.

Sorry, Batman.

The Punisher, on the other hand...

 

[Air]

I'm just telling you how the word "repeatedly" would likely be interpreted in this statute. If Harvey is arguing that this fails "repeatedly," I would tend to agree with him/her. However, I disagree with Harvey that this means "no crime was committed"--as I pointed out, following someone in your car and then getting out to confront them could absolutely be considered harassment, or assault, or any number of other crimes.

You can't repeatedly stalk somebody if their dead. It all depends on context. If the neighborhood watch guy left after he called the police, there would not be a problem. But it was on his ass to WILLINGLY go face a potential threat, after being told not to. I'm not saying that it's rock hard stalking, but I am saying that you can definitely make that case if you want.

 

[Aeonin]

I'm just telling you how the word "repeatedly" would likely be interpreted in this statute. If Harvey is arguing that this fails "repeatedly," I would tend to agree with him/her. However, I disagree with Harvey that this means "no crime was committed"--as I pointed out, following someone in your car and then getting out to confront them could absolutely be considered harassment, or assault, or any number of other crimes.

*shrug*

Disregarding a police order to discontinue, and still continuing - counts as a repeat for me. But I get ya.

EDIT: Is it impossible to STALK just once? ... weird question. Cause in my mind and with the English language by my side, I'd say yes. But maybe its no.

 

[Derwind]

I think the law should come down harder on this guy because he was flat out told by the police not to instigate things like this. And he did it anyway.

That's even worse than if he had just done it blindly.

Nah, you're not legally allowed to follow police orders. It's just an optional exercise..

/sarcasm

 

[DY_nasty]

The Punisher, on the other hand...

"Did you see how black that kid was? How could it be anything other than self-defense!?"

 

[railGUN]

I'll say this, and then I'm done with this thread. If, in Florida, you can confront a youth, against police orders, and shoot them dead, despite there being no evidence said youth is armed, regardless if a scuffle ensued or not, then I have a great reason to never visit Florida. Crazy fucking state.

 

[commedieu]

*shrug*

Disregarding a police order to discontinue, and still continuing - counts as a repeat for me. But I get ya.

No no no... the police didn't ORDER him to do anything. They advised him not to... which makes absolutely no difference, but yes. Just so Kharvey doesn't get stuck while responding.

Police directions are optional. You guys didn't know?

 

[Maddness]

The self defense thing is what I'm struggling with. So, if I went up to a guy on the street and told him he looked suspicious and I was detaining him until the police arrived, and this guy decided I was a loon and tried to walk away, and I got in his face and insisted that he lay on the ground and wouldn't move out of his way, if it gets physical and I kill the guy, no harm no foul, self defense? Seems like utter madness.

I would never....

 

[Log4Girlz]

No no no... the police didn't ORDER him to do anything. They advised him not to... which makes absolutely no difference, but yes. Just so Kharvey doesn't get stuck while responding.

But that advice will be brought up in court, that's for sure.

 

[LaserBuddha]

Why do I feel like there are different interpretations of justice in this thread.

Justice means to me and KHarvey16 that we don't know enough yet to determine what would be a just outcome, and hope that the facts of the event lead to the right verdict. For others, the comfort of moral outrage precludes any further information from mattering, and causes anyone not on that bandwagon to viewed as having sworn to the man's innocence.

And no matter how many times you say "I'm just saying we don't know for sure.", it will be translated as "It was self-defense.", and no one has the courage to even acknowledge it when you point out that they're doing it.

 

[Aeonin]

Edit: Now I'm just being silly.

 

[Roger Danish]

You can't repeatedly stalk somebody if their dead. It all depends on context. If the neighborhood watch guy left after he called the police, there would not be a problem. But it was on his ass to WILLINGLY go face a potential threat, after being told not to. I'm not saying that it's rock hard stalking, but I am saying that you can definitely make that case if you want.

And I'm saying it's far easier to argue that this was assault. I'm too lazy to look up the Florida penal codes, but assault generally covers actions that cause a person to fear violence or bodily harm. Which, yes, could absolutely have been satisfied even under the best-case scenario painted by Harvey.

For ease of understanding (from Wikipedia):

In law, assault is a crime which involves causing a victim to fear violence. The term is often confused with battery, which involves physical contact.

 

[DY_nasty]

Justice means to me and KHarvey16 that we don't know enough yet to determine what would be a just outcome, and hope that the facts of the event lead to the right verdict. For others, the comfort of moral outrage precludes any further information from mattering, and causes anyone not on that bandwagon to viewed as having sworn to the man's innocence.

You know who was innocent?

The kid.

At best, the guy with the gun thought it was okay to pretend to be a cop. And there is plenty to substantiate that... love how its being strolled on by the local police though.

 

[Log4Girlz]

Justice means to me and KHarvey16 that we don't know enough yet to determine what would be a just outcome, and hope that the facts of the event lead to the right verdict. For others, the comfort of moral outrage precludes any further information from mattering, and causes anyone not on that bandwagon to viewed as having sworn to the man's innocence.

For some this is a racially motivated crime, open and shut case. Considering everything presented and the manner in which it was presented, I cannot imagine miraculous new information becoming available that would somehow justify Zimmerman's actions. Once the police advised him not to approach, Zimmerman was in the wrong and anything that happened were entirely his fault. But who knows.

 

[slidewinder]

Going against Police orders to follow - repeated following willfully.
Tailing teen in the middle of the night and then confronting while carrying loaded gun into gated community - harassment and malice

ANY response at all KHarvey?

Does this not compute? (...really, I'm just asking, I could be wrong...)

I'm pretty sure that "repeated" in the case of the definition of stalking does refer to multiple, separate occasions, and not a single continuous one of some length.

 

[KHarvey16]

Let's ask the dead kid.

Why do you repeat this as if it's an intelligent response to anything? Oh ok, if we can't ask him I guess we'll just make up an answer! Yeah!

And the events leading up to that point have no effect on the case?

Of course they do! If the man initiated the physical confrontation he committed murder, if the boy initiated it is likely self defense UNLESS the man did something to legally justify the boy reacting physically. This is what the police are investigating.

Witness also doesn't recount how the confrontation began. But you know how it would have never happened? If the asshat hadn't followed the kid and then stepped out of the car.

Certainly. Legally, however, that is not a determining factor here.

So it doesn't matter who instigated?

If I am in Florida, I can run up to someone, start a fight, get my ass kicked, pull out a gun and legally kill someone?

Of course it matters, see above. I don't know where you think I stated otherwise. I've spent many pages now explicitly detailing my position.

Either when he warned of an immediate shooting, since he was threatened. Or in the midst of being attacked violently by the threatening teenager.

You implied the former, no? If that is what happened it should change how the law views the incident.

 

[K.Jack]

Fuck it, I'm telling a quick personal story.

I was 18, Pittsburgh, culinary school.

I worked at a Japanese spot in Station Square, which is across a bridge then a mile walk through downtown from my dorm. I made the walk late at night every night, being a bartender. I'm a martial artist, and a generally dangerous young man (in my mind anyway), so whatever.

One night, this guy in this little red two-door was tailing me the whole way, only stopping at every corner until I got down the street a bit, at which point he would continue following. Now I'm a 6'4'' black dude in a shirt and tie. Where I'm from, the only person who's going to TAIL me is either a cop or someone who is actually after me for something I'm not offering.

If you've never been in this situation, let me tell you.... you run scenarios because there is no logical, safe reason for a person to be following you at night. Do I run? Nah, not yet. Maybe I'm tripping. Or he's a cop. So I continued on, but my level of alertness was sky high.

But I HAD TO make a decision on what I would do if this guy is a villain. I'm by myself, and I know nothing about who or what is in the car. My mind jumped to some abduction shit. So when he caught up to me, in my mind, he was either an officer or a DEAD MAN. Who else would follow me? If he gets out of the car without a badge, it's over for him. Period.

So anyway, he rolls up next to me really quickly, and I was calm. I jumped back on the curb. But instead of jumping out, he rolled down his window and said exactly, "Can I suck your cock for money?"

I flat out told him, well first NO, but second that he has no idea how close we were to fighting for our lives. Like I really gave it to this guy. He muttered a terrified "sorry" and sped off.

Okay, story time is over. I only shared that to give the perspective of someone who has been followed around by a stranger, after the sun was down. It gave me chills reading this story, because my mind went back a decade, and I can only thank God that old pervert didn't get out of his car with a gun on his waist. Because, let me be clear, we would've been fighting for that piece.

 

[commedieu]

Justice means to me and KHarvey16 that we don't know enough yet to determine what would be a just outcome, and hope that the facts of the event lead to the right verdict. For others, the comfort of moral outrage precludes any further information from mattering, and causes anyone not on that bandwagon to viewed as having sworn to the man's innocence.

You guys know his family lived in the gated community. Its the responsibility of the captain to be aware of this, since he rules with a stern fist & a loaded weapon. You guys know the kid didn't have a gun. You guys know the police told him to stand down. You guys are deciding to ignore the obvious, as unlawfully questioning & detaining black people is acceptable in your gated communities.

The only sad argument to be had is that the black kid went berserk and pounded the man within an inch of his life, justifying the shooting. .

 

[Maddness]

Justice means to me and KHarvey16 that we don't know enough yet to determine what would be a just outcome, and hope that the facts of the event lead to the right verdict. For others, the comfort of moral outrage precludes any further information from mattering, and causes anyone not on that bandwagon to viewed as having sworn to the man's innocence.

I'm currently on expedia trying to find the planet you live on where a man can basically harass someone by stalking them in a vehicle, then without showing any kind of badge or legal means tries to force a kid down at gunpoint before taking his life. I have a feeling tickets are a fucking steal.

 

[Air]

Justice means to me and KHarvey16 that we don't know enough yet to determine what would be a just outcome, and hope that the facts of the event lead to the right verdict. For others, the comfort of moral outrage precludes any further information from mattering, and causes anyone not on that bandwagon to viewed as having sworn to the man's innocence.

lol!

Look. I'm all for what you guys are saying. But it was this man's fault for this kid died. Argue this in court.

"Sir, you followed this kid, got in a fight.. maybe he swung first, but he's dead. You called 911, and you were advised not to go closer. What made you think it was a good idea to go closer?"

"I had a good feeling sir."

And I'm saying it's far easier to argue that this was assault. I'm too lazy to look up the Florida penal codes, but assault generally covers actions that cause a person to fear violence or bodily harm. Which, yes, could absolutely have been satisfied even under the best-case scenario painted by Harvey.

For ease of understanding (from Wikipedia):

I agree. I was just addressing Kharvey's point about stalking. I think they'd do better to go with assault as well.

EDIT: fixed typo.

 

[Korey]

Justice means to me and KHarvey16 that we don't know enough yet to determine what would be a just outcome, and hope that the facts of the event lead to the right verdict. For others, the comfort of moral outrage precludes any further information from mattering, and causes anyone not on that bandwagon to viewed as having sworn to the man's innocence.

That's just being a devil's advocate, which is super annoying. There's one or two in every thread. Look up "defense force."

We all pretty much know what happened, there's no need to keep arguing the other side and defending this psycho racist guy.

 

[Imm0rt4l]

Driving behind someone and then getting out to speak to them or walk over to them doesn't alone constitute a threat. Do you think that would justify you punching someone in the nose for doing that? I don't think you do. Did he approach with his gun out? Did he drive onto the sidewalk and slam on his brakes? Did he get out and scream at him to get on the ground? All of those could potentially be seen as threats that justified some kind of response. But we don't know what happened there.

Out of touch much? Wow. Stalking someone and coming up to them in the middle of the night isn't suspect? Really?

 

[Dibbz]

Harvey, lol. I feel sorry for anyone that has to converse with you on day to day basis.

 

[Log4Girlz]

Why do you repeat this as if it's an intelligent response to anything? Oh ok, if we can't ask him I guess we'll just make up an answer! Yeah!

Its an answer to the question below:

He brandished the weapon? When?

The only person who would know would be the dead kid unless another witness comes forward. As far we know, only 1 witness exists and I doubt there are any more.

 

[Onemic]

Justice means to me and KHarvey16 that we don't know enough yet to determine what would be a just outcome, and hope that the facts of the event lead to the right verdict. For others, the comfort of moral outrage precludes any further information from mattering, and causes anyone not on that bandwagon to viewed as having sworn to the man's innocence.

Please, you guys aren't indifferent to the situation. At least from Kharvey he seems like he's on the side of the officer as he refutes any post saying how the neighborhood watch guy could have been in the wrong. Are you willing to tell me that if the posters in here were saying that the guy was totally justified in the shooting you both would say that we can't jump to conclusions and we need all the facts, while picking apart any post that defends the dude that shot the kid? Please.

 

[Lionheart1337]

Any person of color who has walked around in a gated community before knows what likely happened here.

 

[DY_nasty]

Fuck it, I'm telling a quick personal story.

I was 18, Pittsburgh, culinary school.

I worked at a Japanese spot in Station Square, which is across a bridge then a mile walk through downtown from my dorm. I made the walk late at night every night, being a bartender. I'm a martial artist, and a generally dangerous young man (in my mind anyway), so whatever.

One night, this guy in this little red two-door was tailing me the whole way, only stopping at every corner until I got down the street a bit, at which point he would continue following. Now I'm a 6'4'' black dude in a shirt and tie. Where I'm from, the only person who's going to TAIL me is either a cop or someone who is actually after me for something I'm not offering.

If you've never been in this situation, let me tell you.... you run scenarios because there is no logical, safe reason for a person to be following you at night. Do I run? Nah, not yet. Maybe I'm tripping. Or he's a cop. So I continued on, but my level of alertness was sky high.

But I HAD TO make a decision on what I would do if this guy is a villain. I'm by myself, and I know nothing about who or what is in the car. My mind jumped to some abduction shit. So when he caught up to me, in my mind, he was either an officer or a DEAD MAN. Who else would follow me? If he gets out of the car without a badge, it's over for him. Period.

So anyway, he rolls up next to me really quickly, and I was calm. I jumped back on the curb. But instead of jumping out, he rolled down his window and said exactly, "Can I suck your cock for money?"

I flat out told him, well first NO, but second that he has no idea how close we were to fighting for our lives. Like I really gave it to this guy. He muttered a terrified "sorry" and sped off.

Okay, story time is over. I only shared that to give the perspective of someone who has been followed around by a stranger, after the sun was down. It gave me chills reading this story, because my mind went back a decade, and I can only thank God that old pervert didn't get out of his car with a gun on his waist. Because, let me be clear, we would've been fighting for that piece.

That's what I love about KHarvey

He has yet to insert himself into this in any manner. Logically, or illogically. The whole 'being threatened' thing is something that only the kid, or the person onlooking this entire thing, can answer. He's yet to do it though.

Even a vague "a car is following you in the middle of the night on the way back from a convenience store. the guy gets out and approaches you" is met with an immediate wall.

 

[KHarvey16]

Out of touch much? Wow. Stalking someone and coming up to them in the middle of the night isn't suspect? Really?

Isn't justification for a physical response.

Harvey, lol. I feel sorry for anyone that has to converse with you on day to day basis.

Thanks for contributing.

 

[Aeonin]

And I'm saying it's far easier to argue that this was assault.

Oh I agree.

But I was just responding to KHarvey's literal translation mind a-churning (which STILL hasn't got a response)

 

[DY_nasty]

Isn't justification for a physical response.

goddamn dude

is it threatening or not? lol

 

[Imm0rt4l]

Fuck it, I'm telling a quick personal story.

I was 18, Pittsburgh, culinary school.

I worked at a Japanese spot in Station Square, which is across a bridge then a mile walk through downtown from my dorm. I made the walk late at night every night, being a bartender. I'm a martial artist, and a generally dangerous young man (in my mind anyway), so whatever.

One night, this guy in this little red two-door was tailing me the whole way, only stopping at every corner until I got down the street a bit, at which point he would continue following. Now I'm a 6'4'' black dude in a shirt and tie. Where I'm from, the only person who's going to TAIL me is either a cop or someone who is actually after me for something I'm not offering.

If you've never been in this situation, let me tell you.... you run scenarios because there is no logical, safe reason for a person to be following you at night. Do I run? Nah, not yet. Maybe I'm tripping. Or he's a cop. So I continued on, but my level of alertness was sky high.

But I HAD TO make a decision on what I would do if this guy is a villain. I'm by myself, and I know nothing about who or what is in the car. My mind jumped to some abduction shit. So when he caught up to me, in my mind, he was either an officer or a DEAD MAN. Who else would follow me? If he gets out of the car without a badge, it's over for him. Period.

So anyway, he rolls up next to me really quickly, and I was calm. I jumped back on the curb. But instead of jumping out, he rolled down his window and said exactly, "Can I suck your cock for money?"

I flat out told him, well first NO, but second that he has no idea how close we were to fighting for our lives. Like I really gave it to this guy. He muttered a terrified "sorry" and sped off.

Okay, story time is over. I only shared that to give the perspective of someone who has been followed around by a stranger, after the sun was down. It gave me chills reading this story, because my mind went back a decade, and I can only thank God that old pervert didn't get out of his car with a gun on his waist. Because, let me be clear, we would've been fighting for that piece.

Some on gaf would have you believe you were totally irrational.

Isn't justification for a physical response.

So if the guy had ill intent instead of being just suspicious, then the kid should've just let the guy roll up on him? Ok.

 

[KHarvey16]

Its an answer to the question below:



The only person who would know would be the dead kid unless another witness comes forward. As far we know, only 1 witness exists and I doubt there are any more.

So we assume guilt.

That's what I love about KHarvey

He has yet to insert himself into this in any manner. Logically, or illogically. The whole 'being threatened' thing is something that only the kid, or the person onlooking this entire thing, can answer. He's yet to do it though.

Even a vague "a car is following you in the middle of the night on the way back from a convenience store. the guy gets out and approaches you" is met with an immediate wall.

I've explained to you multiple times why this is irrelevant. Unless he did something to justify, legally, a physical response it isn't a factor. If he did then the teen starting the altercation is not grounds for the use of deadly force.

 

[LaserBuddha]

For some this is a racially motivated crime, open and shut case. Considering everything presented and the manner in which it was presented, I cannot imagine miraculous new information becoming available that would somehow justify Zimmerman's actions. Once the police advised him not to approach, Zimmerman was in the wrong and anything that happened were entirely his fault. But who knows.

A. It's certainly likely, but not established, that he was instructed to stay away by the dispatcher (not officer, potentially an important distinction)
B. It's likely that the shooter escalated this situation himself and bears guilt of murder. While it is unlikely the boy is the aggressor, it's a whole different thing to call it unimagineable when you know well that it could have gone that way. I'd be pretty angry in the kid's shoes.
C. Everyone agrees that he was in the wrong for approaching, but you're definitely going too far in saying that makes him entirely at fault for anything that happens. It's what happened after he approached him that could make him entirely at fault.

 

[Blackace]

Justice means to me and KHarvey16 that we don't know enough yet to determine what would be a just outcome, and hope that the facts of the event lead to the right verdict. For others, the comfort of moral outrage precludes any further information from mattering, and causes anyone not on that bandwagon to viewed as having sworn to the man's innocence.

And no matter how many times you say "I'm just saying we don't know for sure.", it will be translated as "It was self-defense.", and no one has the courage to even acknowledge it when you point out that they're doing it.

The kid had a bag of skittles, and an ice tea... there is NO case for self-defense. Even if the flying starcrossed chopped him..

It's bad enough when police use profiling to harass people.. but normal person, who really has no RIGHT to harass the kid. If he felt the kid was a danger to his community call the cops and leave it at that..

 

[Roger Danish]

Isn't justification for a physical response.

Actually, it could be. If this was an assault (i.e., the boy feared violence), then he might even be justified in throwing the first punch. Though I admire how firmly you've dug in your heels.

 

[Devolution]

In the end I think it's obvious some people in this thread actually venture out into the real world and aren't disconnected with reality, while some others apparently have no fucking perspective.

 

[KHarvey16]

Actually, it could be. If this was an assault (i.e., the boy feared violence), then he might even be justified in throwing the first punch. Though I admire how firmly you've dug in your heels.

What is the definition of assault in Florida? How do we know the man met this definition? If your point is he could have been committing a crime that justified a physical response from the teen, I agree, it's certainly possible. Determining this will be done in the investigation.

 

[Log4Girlz]

So we assume guilt.

We are on a message board so from my vantage point, yes. Black kid in a gated community gets followed by an adult in a car while coming home from a convenience store. Said adult is advised by police NOT TO ENGAGE yet does so anyway presumably because he has a gun which gives him courage and confronts the MINOR. A fight ensues. Who initiated it? Considering all the other evidence, I think it is far more likely for Zimmerman to initiate. But who can know? The most reliable witness is dead. Nothing about this case supports Zimmerman being innocent.

None of us will be jurors on this case. Everything presented so far in the news paints a grim picture of a racially motivated crime.