Right. It's a minor oversight IMO, especially since they had him at gunpoint and likely examined him closely when they had him in custody.
If anything, he sounds clinically depressed, which can affect cognition.
You honestly think they wouldn't able to smell alcohol on his breath or notice a staggering gait? They took him into custody and interviewed him at the police station.
Good point.The only problem with that is unless his self-defense claim is refuted according to the law he has immunity from criminal prosecution and civil actions.
http://www.standard.net/stories/2012/03/20/floridas-self-defense-law-complicates-shooting-teenager
You honestly think they wouldn't able to smell alcohol on his breath or notice a staggering gait? They took him into custody and interviewed him at the police station.
I don't know if he did or not. I'm just pointing out that the Florida stand your ground immunity is not as absolute as many portray it to be.What law did he break?
Doesn't matter, you still test him. Could have also been high, etc.
Based on the how poorly the investigation was done, you think these cops were observant? :biggrin:
Many states have the same law as applied here. When you are viciously attacked you are allowed to use deadly force and can't be held criminally or civilly liable.
Zimmerman committed no crime in approaching or asking Martin. Martin did however commit felony assault.
they interviewed witnesses and they did ballistics. Ballistics test shows me that they took this seriously.
and that helps what? it does not help or hurt either as it added no information.
Ballistics tests demand precisely zero effort on the part of the investigating officers.they interviewed witnesses and they did ballistics. Ballistics test shows me that they took this seriously.
IF you are jumped while walking home i have no issue with a person pulling a gun and defending themselves.
The law was NOT intended to start a fight then use it when you lose. A good law (such as texes) has it in the law that you can not do that. This law was badly written.
felony assault? are you fucking stupid. oh wait your just a racist sorry forgot that.
I understand why Z fallowed T. BUT he was wrong and shouldn't have. I also understand why T ran and reacted how he did. I don't blame him at all. BUT what it comes down to is Z started the fight, lost and then killed a innocent child. And Z is going to be protected by a badly written law.
Z fucked up. he shouldn't have confronted the kid and started the fight.
Again, not sure if serious. Do we need to go over all of the standard procedures that they did not follow? The witnesses they improperly interviewed? The witnesses that they didn't interview?
They did a half-ass investigation and have already been caught lying.
Ballistics tests demand precisely zero effort on the part of the investigating officers.
that's not true. I think knowing how many shots were fired is very important.
that's not true. I think knowing how many shots were fired is very important.
Do you have evidence or proof that Z started the fight? Wounds to Martin that would show this? I think this is the main problem with people making this story up in their head - there is ZERO proof that Z initiated physical contact or the fight.
Are you saying that if Martin did initiate they fight/assault then Zimmerman was justified in shooting as he was on his back being beaten and crying for help?
I think any time you use a weapon, there are certain anger issues working, Taaffe said. I think he had fed-up issues. He was mad as hell and wasn't going to take it anymore.
So Zimmerman was a hothead with a weapon and he wasn't going to 'take it anymore'. Gotcha. That has to be the shittiest defense of anything i've ever seen.
http://communities.washingtontimes....mar/20/trayvon-martin-case-and-legal-experts/
drug testing is not always standard operating procedure according to a former officer
That was an informative article that many in here need to read.
I think any time you use a weapon, there are certain anger issues working, Taaffe said. I think he had fed-up issues. He was mad as hell and wasn't going to take it anymore.
we've already gone over it. The ONLY witness who is crying foul is Mary Cutcher and it is my belief that she is mistaken. I've explained it before, but her statement to the press has logical contradictions and is full of speculation about things that she cannot know.
I do believe that the 911 calls prove it wasn't a case of racial profiling since a) he was not calling 911 b/c Martin was black but because of how he was walking and b) there are so many black residents of the neighborhood that a black guy walking on the street would be normal.
that leaves the drug test which IMO is a minor oversight since they could likely detect if he was on drugs at the scene and the events leading up including which he was safely operating a vehicle point to his sobriety.
we've already gone over it. The ONLY witness who is crying foul is Mary Cutcher and it is my belief that she is mistaken. I've explained it before, but her statement to the press has logical contradictions and is full of speculation about things that she cannot know.
I do believe that the 911 calls prove it wasn't a case of racial profiling since a) he was not calling 911 b/c Martin was black but because of how he was walking and b) there are so many black residents of the neighborhood that a black guy walking on the street would be normal.
that leaves the drug test which IMO is a minor oversight since they could likely detect if he was on drugs at the scene and the events leading up including which he was safely operating a vehicle point to his sobriety.
I see no evidence that Zimmerman started the fight, but Alkemyst's post of 9-1-1 transcripts apparently pokes a hole in one part of his story. If I understand it correct, Zimmerman claimed that Martin attacked him from behind while he was walking back to his truck after getting out to see what street he was on. Yet at least a couple calls indicated that the fight was "behind my house". I'd have to see the area on a map to be sure, but "behind my house" doesn't seem like where one would be after getting out of the truck to check a street sign. (I admit it is still possible; sometimes houses back not to other houses, but to a road, where there isn't enough room between roads for two rows of houses. But it doesn't seem likely.) It seems much more likely that Zimmerman chased Martin in his truck, then when the kid cut between houses pursued him on foot. At that point a physical fight started. I'd guess that Martin got tired of running and started it, but we don't actually no that; he might have run into a fenced area with no escape, at which point Zimmerman grabbed him to detain him for the police. We really have no way to tell at this point. I can easily come up with plausible theories either way as to who initiated a physical confrontation, and the fact that an athletic but skinny 6'-8" 17 year old got the best of an overweight man a decade his senior isn't necessarily evidence that the kid started it.Do you have evidence or proof that Z started the fight? Wounds to Martin that would show this? I think this is the main problem with people making this story up in their head - there is ZERO proof that Z initiated physical contact or the fight.
Are you saying that if Martin did initiate they fight/assault then Zimmerman was justified in shooting as he was on his back being beaten and crying for help?