Posted by: random.etc13 | August 4, 2014

Again, Self-Defense?!

While reading “Porch killing defendant: ‘I wasn’t going to cower’ ” (AP  Monday, August 4th 2014), I was reminded of Trayvon Martin – before the article mentions him.

Both cases call on self-defense, personally I just see stupidity! The guy, who killed Trayvon Martin, called the police but then ignored what they said. This one didn’t even bother calling the police, he just went ahead and killed an unarmed 19-year-old woman (because she was drunk).

This guy said that he feared for his life – apparently because she was banging on the doors and he thought that there may be others. So what does he do – he opens the door (does this remind you of bad horror films where everyone watching is saying/thinking – don’t open the door).

The police have been trained to deal with such situations, let them deal with it. At least one young woman and one teenager would still be alive. But alas, self-defense and stupidity rule this day!

 

 


Responses

  1. Facts matter, wouldn’t you agree?

    The guy, who killed Trayvon Martin, called the police but then ignored what they said.

    The dispatcher for 911 is not the police. He is not law enforcement. He stated at the trial that his suggestions have no force of law. And there is evidence that Zimmerman was returning to his vehicle when he was attacked by Martin.
    Which brings up a point; if Martin was so fearful, why didn’t he call 911?
    Why didn’t he make it 400 feet to the house he was staying at, get behind closed doors…and or then call 911? He had 4 minutes. IN the 60s, Roger Bannister ran a MILE in 4 minutes.

    This guy said that he feared for his life – apparently because she was banging on the doors and he thought that there may be others.

    It is a common and known technique for home invaders to send a person to the door to pretend to need aid; use of a phone, first aid, help with a friend and then others rush in. This has been reported by the media; isn’t it common sense to think it is possible?

    The police have been trained to deal with such situations, let them deal with it.

    And the Martin case shows exactly the problem with what you say — when needed, the police are minutes away. The police WERE called by Zimmerman !! They got there in time to see the aftermath of Martin attack Zimmerman.

    • I’m sorry but I am having trouble following your argument. You say “911 is not the police” so “[the dispatcher’s] suggestions have no force of law”. But then you say “if Martin was so fearful, why didn’t he call 911?”. Does 911 not ‘count’ for Zimmerman, but it does for Martin?

      From what I have read, Zimmerman followed and attacked Martin, not the other-way-around, as you said. I wasn’t there, but all I’ve read shows that Martin did not have 4 minutes to get indoors.

      As for the ‘Porch Killer’, I stand by my opinion. If you fear for your life because of banging on the door, DON’T OPEN THE DOOR!

  2. 911 is the mechanism to get the police to your location – the dispatchers in most cases — and definitely in Zimmerman’s – are not actual police officers.

    Pretty simple.
    Zimmerman was under NO legal compulsion to follow the directions of the 911 dispatcher. Do you understand that?
    But the fact is when the dispatcher said “We don’t need you to do that” Zimmerman started giving information to where he would meet the officers. And according to testimony and forensic evidence, was on his way to meet them.

    So, even though he was not required to follow the instructions, it appears he was.

    Yet MARTIN who had plenty of time, plenty of opportunity to call and let the police know somebody was following him didn’t do that.

    Why didn’t he call the police.

    From what I have read, Zimmerman followed and attacked Martin, not the other-way-around, as you said

    There was not one shred of evidence presented in court, not a single point backing up that claim. Sorry but that is complete fabrication.

    IF you have information to the contrary, please present it.

    • As I said, I was not there. I was also not at the court. Therefore, as I said, I can only go by what I read. I looked up the transcript of the 911 call. Zimmerman himself says that “he’s running” and admits to following him.

      First off, a gun is an offensive (in both senses of the word) weapon. Why was a neighborhood watch person going around with a loaded gun? I thought the whole basis of neighborhood watch is to WATCH and report suspicious activity to the police, not act on it. If a defensive weapon is needed, how about pepper spray – after a shot of that, IF the person has a gun, they could not see to shoot.

      Second, you still seem to ignore the main part of this blog – the ‘Porch Killer’.

      Your arguments have not changed my mind. I still just see needless/stupid loss of lives. I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

  3. Random,

    Let’s actually look at the 911 call transcript. Perhaps Zimmerman felt he had a reason to ‘follow’ Martin.

    Zimmerman: Uh, huh. Something’s wrong with him. Yep, he’s coming to check me out. He’s got something in his hands. I don’t know what his deal is. [01:20]

    911 dispatcher: Let me know if he does anything, OK?

    Zimmerman: OK.

    911 dispatcher: We’ve got him on the wire. Just let me know if this guy does anything else.

    Two specific instances of the dispatcher giving ‘instructions’ that could easily be interpreted as commands to keep watching Martin.

    Then there is the ‘don’t follow him’. Yes, that was said and you’ll note that Zimmerman immediately agreed and started giving directions regarding where to meet the police – directions that do not match up with the location of the shooting.

    911 dispatcher: OK. We don’t need you to do that. [2:26]

    Zimmerman: OK. [2:28]

    911 dispatcher: Alright, sir, what is your name? [2:34]

    Zimmerman: George. He ran.

    911 dispatcher: Alright, George, what’s your last name?

    Zimmerman: Zimmerman.

    911 dispatcher: What’s the phone number you’re calling from?

    Zimmerman: 407-435-2400

    911 dispatcher: Alright, George, we do have them on the way. Do you want to meet with the officer when they get out there?

    Zimmerman: Yeah.

    911 dispatcher: Alright, where are you going to meet with them at?

    Zimmerman: Um, if they come in through the gate, tell them to go straight past the clubhouse and, uh, straight past the clubhouse and make a left and then go past the mailboxes you’ll see my truck. [3:10]

    911 dispatcher: Alright, what address are you parked in front of? [3:21]

    Zimmerman: Um, I don’t know. It’s a cut-through so I don’t know the address. [3:25]

    If you listen to the 911 call itself, you’ll note the wind noise changes; as if Zimmerman turned out of the wind or stopped walking. Indicative that he was following instructions.

    Again — note the time line – nearly 2 minutes from the time Zimmerman reports Martin to be running to the end of the 911 call. The shooting happened after that. So – why didn’t Martin make it 400 feet in 2 minutes to the safety of the house he was staying at?
    Why didn’t Martin call the police to report someone following him if he was so fearful?

    And if he had lost Zimmerman, why was Martin still so close to the location where he lost him?

    Moving on —–

    First off, a gun is an offensive (in both senses of the word) weapon.

    That is your opinion. It is only that. Most people see a pistol as a defensive weapon; a rifle is generally considered ‘offensive’ due to the longer range. I argue against that also but hey, let’s go with ‘pistol = defensive, rifle = offensive”

    Why was a neighborhood watch person going around with a loaded gun?

    HMMMM, because as the evidence showed Zimmerman wasn’t on patrol at the time. He was on his way to the store; you know the type of places that get robbed, where people get mugged, assaulted, raped, etc? 66% of all violent crime takes place in public areas or locations.

    I thought the whole basis of neighborhood watch is to WATCH and report suspicious activity to the police, not act on it.

    Are you following what you are actually saying — and arguing — that Zimmerman who was ON THE PHONE WITH 911 — Watching and reporting suspicious activity was doing exactly what the Neighborhood watch was supposed to do.
    Had he chosen to ‘act on it’; wouldn’t it made more sense to call the police after he had chased down Martin? Consistency in your argument would help.

    If a defensive weapon is needed, how about pepper spray – after a shot of that, IF the person has a gun, they could not see to shoot.

    Pepper spray is a deterrent to some people. Some people are able to shrug it off without affect. It is a personal choice.

    I still just see needless/stupid loss of lives.

    I agree but we disagree about the cause of the needless loss of life. Had Martin not been suspended from school for the 3rd time, he might be alive. Had Martin’s mom not kicked him out of her house, he might be alive. Had Martin not gone to the store to purchase two of the three ingredients needed for a street drug called “lean” he might be alive (His cell phone texts show he is familiar with making and using it. Had Martin not been the type of person who was willing to fight, he might be alive — again his own words show he was into street fighting. The testimony of Rachel Jeantel indicates that Martin was the one who confronted Zimmerman “Why are you following me” and “You have a problem now” — testimony that actually supports Zimmerman’s version of the events.

    I’m not ignoring the “Porch Killer” events — I’m waiting for the trial to be over and the evidence to be presented.

    Bob S.

    • Excuse my language, but no **** it is my opinion. And your arguments have not changed my opinion!

  4. Random,

    I doubted I would change your opinion from the beginning but had to present information to show you were stating facts incorrectly.

    The guy, who killed Trayvon Martin, called the police but then ignored what they said

    Fact — the 911 dispatcher is not the ‘police’
    Opinion – based on the transcripts of the call and the testimony of not just Zimmerman but Rachel Jeantel and the forensic evidence; it does appear that Zimmerman was following the instructions of the dispatcher.

    he just went ahead and killed an unarmed 19-year-old woman (because she was drunk).

    While Wafer was convicted of 2nd degree murder; your implication was he did so because of her drinking. Not the fact that she was banging on his door at 4:30 in the morning. Not the fact that she tried to close the distance — for whatever reason, drunk or not — and he shot her.

    I think the jury made a mistake in their decision because his actions (opening the door) could be misconstrued as not being afraid. People make bad decisions during times of stress; doesn’t change the underlying fear though.

    The police have been trained to deal with such situations, let them deal with it.

    Again your implication is both men took action outside of the law or proper bounds. Not so in my opinion. Zimmerman did call the police to handle it. Wafer did what was legal – opening the door but not wise.

    But more importantly do you feel/believe that people should not defend themselves but only call the police?

    Bob S.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: