Why isn't this murder?

[KrazyHorse]

The most likely order of events I can imagine:
Zimmerman sees the suspicious black person (Trayvon)
Zimmerman calls the police
(Maybe during the call)Zimmerman confronts the person, wants to hold him in custody till the police arrives
Trayvon just continues walking or even reacts agressively, because he wants to return to TV to continue watching the game (very probbaly therefore was in a hurry)
Zimmerman grabs Trayvon in order to hold him till the police arrives
A fight ensues
*bamm*

Yeah, that's my working hypothesis, in which case the vigilante goes down.

[MikeH]

The most likely order of events I can imagine:
Zimmerman sees the suspicious black person (Trayvon)
Zimmerman calls the police
(Maybe during the call)Zimmerman confronts the person, wants to hold him in custody till the police arrives
Trayvon just continues walking or even reacts agressively, because he wants to return to TV to continue watching the game (very probbaly therefore was in a hurry)
Zimmerman grabs Trayvon in order to hold him till the police arrives
A fight ensues
*bamm*

You've ignored the evidence that there is a voice heard begging for help.

[Al B. Sure!]

You've ignored the evidence that there is a voice heard begging for help.

There's also evidence (grass stains on the back of Zimmerman's shirt, bloody nose, contusion on the back of his head, witness corroboration) that Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman at one point of the altercation.

Pretty sure this should be second degree murder or voluntary manslaughter but people are crying for blood.

[MikeH]

I'm not the one trying to piece together the story, but if I was I wouldn't leave out bits of evidence.

[Proteus_MST]

You are right ...
if we take this report into account:

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/20/10774247-trayvon-martins-final-phone-call-he-said-this-man-was-watching-him

this voice might havce been the voice of Trayvon
and there might have been fear involved fro m Trayvons side
(which might change the line:
"Trayvon just continues walking or even reacts agressively, because he wants to return to TV to continue watching the game (very probbaly therefore was in a hurry)")
into:
Trayvon is confronted by Zimmerman and reacts agressively because he thinks he is getting attacked by him

[Al B. Sure!]

I also don't like the way the media (especially MSNBC's cronies on Al Sharpton's show) disdains the fact that Zimmerman called the police 46 times since January 2011. He was the neighborhood watch captain. He's supposed to. We're supposed to have community policing and call the police if something's up. I can't believe that MSNBC is giving implicit support to the "No Snitching" campaign by denigrating Zimmerman's vigilance as something extreme and inappropriate.

[MikeH]

Isn't:

Trayvon is confronted by Zimmerman and doesn't react aggressively (he sees Z has a gun after all) but instead calls for help and is eventually forced to defend himself after Zimmerman attacks him.

at least as plausible based on the evidence?

[Lorizael]

I also don't like the way the media (especially MSNBC's cronies on Al Sharpton's show) disdains the fact that Zimmerman called the police 46 times since January 2011. He was the neighborhood watch captain. He's supposed to. We're supposed to have community policing and call the police if something's up. I can't believe that MSNBC is giving implicit support to the "No Snitching" campaign by denigrating Zimmerman's vigilance as something extreme and inappropriate.

I think the fact that he called the police so often adds to the picture that he appeared to be looking for a fight.

[Al B. Sure!]

I think the fact that he called the police so often adds to the picture that he appeared to be looking for a fight.

Calling the police means looking for a fight? How does calling the cops mean you're looking for a fight? NOT calling the cops and taking the law in your own hands, maybe, but how does calling the cops look like that?

They're trying to portray him as imbalanced and say something is wrong with 'snitching'.

[Lorizael]

It's looking for a fight in the sense that he seemed to see illegal activity where there was none. He felt a need to call the police on apparently innocent people because he believed they were suspicious for some reason.

[kentonio]

He shot and killed a kid for carrying Skittles and talking on the phone. Portraying him as unbalanced isn't that hard.

[notyoueither]

Yeah, that's my working hypothesis, in which case the vigilante goes down.

Maybe not.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/worldview/killing-of-black-florida-teen-puts-stand-your-ground-law-on-trial/article2374877/

Killing of black Florida teen puts ‘Stand Your Ground’ law on trial
paul koring
Washington— Globe and Mail Update
Posted on Tuesday, March 20, 2012 8:38AM EDT

The gated community where Trayvon Martin was shot and killed was named The Retreat at Twin Lakes. But there was no retreat and no longer any legal need to back off on Feb 26 when George Zimmerman, 28, a gun-toting crime-watch volunteer followed, confronted and eventually shot the 17-year-old.

And no charge either because a new Florida law swept aside the limits of a centuries-old legal principle that “an Englishman’s home is his castle” that defined when a citizen could kill another rather than retreat from a confrontation.

Gov. Jeb Bush, the brother of then President George W. Bush, changed all that for Floridians in 2005 when he signed a controversial “Stand Your Ground” law.

If the fevered fears of critics who warned of gun battles at check-out counters and showdowns in parks haven’t been realized, the shooting of an unarmed black teenager by a gun-toting, crime watch volunteer has put the law on public trial.

The so-called ‘castle doctrine,’ long part of English common law and fundamental to key elements of the U.S. Constitution includes not only a ‘right to defend’ but also corresponding ‘duty to retreat.’

In other words, a citizen facing a threat in his home can use deadly force in self-defence. But the same right of self defence – at least until Florida’s Stand Your Ground law – didn’t apply in public spaces.

Backed by the powerful National Rifle Association and passed overwhelmingly by Florida’s legislature, the ‘Stand Your Ground’ law made it legal for citizens to use lethal force in self-defence in almost all public spaces. They no longer had to back off from confrontations. There was no ‘obligation to retreat’ from confrontation.

Seventeen other states have since passed similar laws.

Many of them, like Florida, also permit citizens to carry concealed handguns. Mr. Zimmerman had just such a permit and was packing a powerful, 9mm Kel-Tec semi-automatic pistol as he patrolled The Retreat at Twin Lakes north of Orlando.

And he told police he acted in self-defence, fearing for his life.

Under Stand Your Ground, the police said they had no grounds to arrest him and no evidence to challenge his version of events. That sparked what has now become a national furore with accusations of racial bias. After weeks of growing outrage, the U.S. Justice Department announced it would investigate the case.

But Mr. Martin’s death wasn’t the first to bring the sweeping shift in citizens’ rights to wield lethal force into view.

The Orlando Sentinel cited a handful. “In 2010 an unarmed man was shot and killed at a park near Tampa in a dispute over skateboarding rules. The victim's 10-year-old daughter watched her father die. A judge is currently considering whether the shooter merely stood his ground. In 2008, a 15-year-old boy was killed during a shootout between two gangs in Tallahassee. Nobody was held accountable for the crime because a judge, citing the law, dismissed the charges. And in January, a former Broward County sheriff's deputy shot and wounded a homeless man inside a Häagen-Dazs ice cream shop in Miami Lakes. He said the man was threatening him and his family. Police said charges were unlikely in that case as well.”

The individual cases are disturbing but it’s the stunning increase in the number of lawful citizen killings that underscores just how dramatically Stand Your Ground has changed the calculus of when and where pulling a trigger is legal

In the five years before the law was passed, citizen killings averaged 13 annually in Florida. In the five years after the law was passed, citizens lawfully killed others 36 times a year. In 2009 there was 45 such killings.

[The Mad Monk]

Since he initiated the confrontation, I don't see how that applies.

[Al B. Sure!]

In the five years before the law was passed, citizen killings averaged 13 annually in Florida. In the five years after the law was passed, citizens lawfully killed others 36 times a year. In 2009 there was 45 such killings.

And how many of those were murders of the armed citizen prevented?

[notyoueither]

Since he initiated the confrontation, I don't see how that applies.

Without a witness it's going to come down to his version of what started the altercation and how that would play for a judge and jury. The law might explain why there may never be a prosecution.