The Trayvon Martin story has received so much attention it’s probably beyond my abilities to offer anything directly. For those in an isolation booth or something, it’s the story out of Florida where a black kid returning home in his neighborhood after getting some Skittles was followed by a self-appointed neighborhood watchman named Zimmerman. Zimmerman called 911, was told not to keep following the kid, did anyway, and ended up killing the kid. There appears to be some uncertainty as to just what happened in the very final moments. In my own mind, it would take a fairly startling turn of events to make Zimmerman’s shooting an act of self-defense given he chose to keep following Martin, despite instructions not to, and put himself in whatever situation that followed, causing him to shoot.
So, there, despite myself saying I had nothing to add, I went ahead and offered some redundancy anyway. But, what prompted me to write was this entry by Angry Black Lady at Balloon Juice. She is hitting back at Dan Riehl over his apparent efforts at Breitbart to make Martin seem more dangerous – through details that would be irrelevant to Zimmerman’s interaction with him – than he has generally been portrayed in most places.
The dynamics of partisan fighting are mysterious to me and a little fascinating. It’s fairly clear that a lot of events aren’t reasons for the partisan fighting, just another battle ground – just another place to have the fight. Why do the armies choose to engage in particular places? In this case, I can see why the Forces of the Left would be interested – you have a minority whose life is apparently being undervalued by The Man coupled with what appears to be the irresponsible use of a firearm. You’d think the Forces of the Right might want to let this one pass. (And, maybe many of them are — these groupings are not monoliths.)
If you let him burn, Zimmerman can just be a lone nut – nothing wrong with the system, nothing wrong with the stand your ground concept when properly applied. If you embrace Zimmerman, however, you have to contend with the argument that stand your ground includes chasing after a guy, purposely putting yourself in harm’s way before standing your ground. Making it worse, in this case, is that so far the only reason Zimmerman put himself and Martin in harm’s way seems to be the argument that Martin was black and we all know how >they are. Especially – according to Fox News’s Jerry Rivers a/k/a Geraldo Rivera – when they are wearing hoodies. (“I think the hoodie is as much responsible for Trayvon Martin’s death as George Zimmerman was.”) Practically begging to be murdered.
So, we have voices from Fox News and Breitbart declaring for Zimmerman’s side of things. I wonder if there is much thought behind that declaration or if it’s almost reflexive. “The Left is all worked up over this. They’re being silly, of course. I just have to figure out and point out why.”
Despite being a nation of individuals, I think it’s fairly clear we feel safer traveling in packs; both metaphorically and increasingly – with ‘watchmen’ like Zimmerman on self-declared duty – literally.
If something like this had happened in Indiana, nobody would have noticed. Last year, a Goshen police officer shot and killed an African-American man, Melvin Bledsoe, after police pursued him for a minor traffic offense and penned his vehicle against a building. The police first tazed the guy several times before one of the police officers shot him in the neck and killed him. A grand jury declined to indict the police officer after the coroner ruled he died as the result of a homicide. Not sure how it constituted self defense since the police had used their cars to pen his vehicle against the building and he was getting out of the vehicle unarmed when he was tazed and shot. He died laying next to his car. The Indiana media didn’t even take a close look at the case.
Very well written and incisive, Doug. It seems that every news event becomes a throwdown.
This one does suprise me, also. It seems on first glance more like a execution than legitimate self-defense, and a case where the “stand your ground (don’t puss out)” is inapplicable, but an easy to understand meme.
In fact, unless your alleged attacker is armed with a deadly weapon or of much larger size, the use of deadly force against the attacker would almost always be imperfect self defense, voluntary manslaugher or murder.
In a legitimate debate, you pick your points to make a persuasive case and maintain your credibility. But if the only purpose is to maintain a perpetually bellicose cadre, credibility and logic are irrelevant.
Here’s my question about the so-called stand your ground law. How come it doesn’t work for Trayvon Martin? He was the one being followed by an armed stranger. If he did, as alleged by Zimmerman, make an aggressive move toward Zimmerman isn’t that allowed under the stand your ground law?
That is a very good point, Interested. Your argument is that Zimmerman as the aggressor and Trayvon Martin as the victim, provided Martin the right to use reasonable self-defense against Zimmerman when Zimmerman confronted him. That is likely correct.
So when Zimmerman confronted Martin, he had the right to reasonable self defense. And since Zimmerman was armed with a pistol, Martin would have had the right to use deadly force and would not have had a duty to retreat.
The duty to retreat, as I recall, comes from the old common law and the law of some American states. Some states recognized it, some did not. It provides that when a person is confronted with deadly force, you must retreat if possible or your use of deadly force is not permissable.
The no duty to retreat provision (stand your ground) changes that requirement. Also, the duty to retreat requirement did not apply when a person is threatened with non-deadly force.
The applicable Florida Law is set out below:
776.012?Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1)?He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2)?Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.
Mutually escalating right to stand one’s ground reminds me of those mailing lists where you’d get battling out-of-office auto-replies.
“So, we have voices from Fox News and Breitbart declaring for Zimmerman’s side of things. I wonder if there is much thought behind that declaration or if it’s almost reflexive.” – Also have Spike Lee tweeting Zimmerman’s home address, which has only one meaning…do you see “much thought” behind Spike Lee’s threat ?
I think Zimmerman went after Martin, Martin started wailing on Zimmerman, and Zimmerman shot Martin. Zimmerman’s a nutjob, like the white IPD officer who executed a black man on the circle 25 years ago over a parking violation.
My point wasn’t that The Left was thoughtful and The Right was not. In this case, I understand why the Left would choose it as a cause. I don’t understand why The Right would do so as well, except in reflexive opposition.
I agree that it is reflexive opposition. I would also add that it appears “the Right” believes “the Left” is exaggerating the case. This is a tragedy that is very sad. That being said, I also appreciate Abdul’s comment that we should be just as worked up about people being murdered in Indiana as we are about people being murdered in Florida.
The Left hasn’t just made it “a cause”, some on the left have threatened Zimmerman’s life. The right’s “reflexive opposition” as you put it is similar to their opposition to Sharpton’s claims in the Tawanna (sp?) Brawley business, which demonstrated that Sharpton is was and always will be a liar.
Zimmerman is not a racist (as corroborated by his black friends and family members and students), and was in the process of getting his head smashed into the pavement (as corroborated by eyewitness) when (this is my belief) he shot Martin.
Gene, he followed the child, armed, after being told not to by police. That is not standing your ground. That is not self-defense. It wasn’t even on his property.
I haven’t heard anything about witnesses seeing him being attacked, but even IF he was, which I doubt, he invited himself into that situation. He wasn’t merely an innocent bystander. So the fact that he hasn’t been arrested for anything is completely ludicrous.
That is, of course, unless you consider Skittles a deadly weapon.
So when an armed Zimmerman approaches an unarmed Trayvon Martin (who up to this point was just minding his own business), Mr. Martin isn’t entitled to defend himself against a seemingly hostile and aggressive attacker?
Hey Gene – new video shows Zimmerman arriving at the police station immediately following this incident completely uninjured!
So either he’s lying about what happened, or else he was magically healed in the police car enroute to the police station!
What I really see going on in the Martin killing and a recent case the the Allen County prosecutor Karen Richards inaccurately called self-defense is the permitted use of deadly force in situations that do not permit deadly force by making a claim of fear of bodily harm, making an inappropriate reference to the “stand your ground” phallic fantasy, and daring the state to charge the shooter.
It is bootstrapping the inappropriate use of deadly force to a potentially legitimate claim to use nondeadly force against a threat of nondeadly force.
Often times helped, I would imagine, by the fact that the person by whom you claimed to feel threatened is dead and can’t speak for himself.
Doug that is wy murder can be such an effective crime. The main witness has been rendered “unavailable” to testify.
If someone’s smashing your head into the pavement repeatedly (as Martin was doing to Zimmerman), and your only hope of escaping alive is to shoot them, that’s permissible self defense. Has nothing to do with SYG.
Don’t use this tragedy to further your anti-gun agenda. Gun laws were invented in order to disarm black people.
I’ll admit that Sharpton and Nancy Grace’s taking Martin’s side gives me pause. They’re almost always wrong and, Grace, in particular is loathsome.
Personally, I don’t have Zimmerman pegged as racist so much as I have him pegged as a loser that no one had much use for and who found self-importance through his self-appointed neighborhood watch gig. That’s just a suspicion based on nothing much more than his demeanor on the 911 call and the fact that he seemed to be a frequent caller. I fear armed socially maladjusted and socially isolated individuals more than garden-variety racists.
If Zimmerman was getting his ass beat (taking all the pro-Zimmerman suggestions of events as 100% gospel), I think we still have to start questioning when we draw the line and require people to just take their licks after creating a dangerous situation for themselves. The confrontation that allegedly took place between Martin and Zimmerman took place after Zimmerman made the 911 call and was told to stand down. If he’d followed instructions and let the police do their job, Martin doesn’t get stalked, Zimmerman doesn’t get hit, and nobody dies.
Gene, I missed the part where Zimmerman was minding his own business on his own property when out of nowhere this boy charged and attacked him. You’d think the media might pick up on that.
It’s not “self-defense” if your head is being bashed into the ground repeatedly because you, while armed and hostile, threatened or attacked an unarmed person minding his own business.
Both the sponsor of the Stand Your Ground law (which is separate from the Castle Doctrine, which specifically applies to defense in homes) and former Florida Gov Jeb Bush (who signed it), while declining to speak on Zimmerman’s actions and their legality, have said SYG wouldn’t apply since the 911 tapes specifically state that he was pursuing Martin.
It is an odd case. But homicides happen all the time across the country, and surely dozens (if not hundreds) happen under questionable circumstances every year. While it seems like Martin was a good kid with no record and the evidence does seem to be against Zimmerman right now, I also don’t know why this one homicide is getting so much attention and others that undergo questionable police actions, do not.
Maybe if we can figure this one out, we can move on to the next and the next and the next. Try to deal with too many at once and I expect it will end up being just so much noise.
I cannot understand why people do not understand the reason this case is getting so much attention. If my child was killed in this manner, I would surely grieve. But to have my child not only killed but treated as a felon and denied even the pretence of an even handed look at the facts surrounding his death would spur me to never stop my efforts to make the truth known. Some new facts have come to light as a result of this outcry. In the recorded police tapes Zimmerman used racist language. One 911 caller was able to see the struggle behind her house. The person on top was in a white shirt: Zimmerman. Cries for help were also heard on those tapes. Zimmerman claimed that he was crying for help. National forensic experts now have definitively refuted that claim. It was Trayvon. Yet, in Florida, the law allowed Zimmerman’s story to go unquestioned because it was “self-defense” without more. Trayvon was treated in all respects as the criminal. He was even tested for drugs. I personally cannot think of his parents suffering, I believe the community rightfully shares this loss and this injustice. These type of laws don’t belong in our states or in our nation. Not only our children, but we ourselves are not safe when the law cannot even enquire into a case like this. Those who say, ‘why can’t they just let the law take it’s course?’ simply don’t understand. Under Forida law, with this self-defense claim, there is no opportunity for the law to take it’s normal course. The process stops there. Put yourself in Trayvon’s parents shoes for just one little minute. Imagine a world in which your child, regardless of race, can be confronted by a stranger and found dead at that stranger’s hand and there will be no enquiry into that stranger’s claim that your child attached him and he, in fear of your unarmed child, shot and killed your child. Never. It should Never happen.
I don’t have a link, but, as offended as I am over this tragedy, I think the more disgusting case (what terrible metrics…) is the one where the guy gunned down a homeless man in an ice cream store, in front of his own children, for “aggressively” pan handling.
Charging Zimmerman doesn’t bring Martin back to life. As a liberal, I have no problem saying the problem is a country where everyone thinks carrying a gun is a good idea.
Bad situation all the way around including Zimmerman’s overly aggressive position even as a neighborhood watch–that is when you call real law enforcement to assist. But, I find it equally a bad situation where no one is to report anything about the “victim” but it is open season on one party only. We will never know what really happened nor the mindset of either party so find the reaction/response a bit overwhelming.