<p>The police either had the evidence to arrest him or they didn’t. If they had determined that they didn’t have the evidence, but arrested him anyway, that would constitute a violation of Zimmerman’s civil rights. You cannot arrest someone on the basis that it is politically correct. Zimmerman is always subject to future arrest, but such arrest will need to be made upon the discovery of additional evidence that was not available at the time of his detention.</p>
<p>Who says they “determined” anything? Other than the police, that is.</p>
<p>Again, I’m not sure what you mean, katliamom.</p>
<p>Just askin’ - is it normal for Neighborhood Watch people to be carrying guns? Is it normal even in Sanford for Neighborhood Watch people to be carrying guns? Maybe I’ve lived in the “wrong places”, but where we’ve had such groups, they were strictly prohibited from carrying guns while on duty (and even had to sign a statement to that effect).</p>
<p>Just wondering.</p>
<p>Bay, I’m saying that without even the cursory investigation, Sanford police took the word of a white man that he was acting in self defense when he shot a black kid. Even when they told the said white man to stop chasing the kid. Even when one of their own felt Zimmerman should have been arrested.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How does that add to our understanding of this situation?</p>
<p>katliamom,
To my knowledge, the public has not been made aware of the extent of the police investigation. You seem to be presuming that it was not sufficient enough for them to make a determination of arrest, on the basis of…? Further, you appear to consider the “word” of a white man suspect. Apparently, they did not.</p>
<p>nothing here adds to our understanding…just folks posting their opinions…and many rushing to judgement.</p>
<p>Mini, Florida’s gun laws are abominable. This is just one example of what can easily happen when such laws are in effect. The gun lobbies are putting together money for Zimmerman’s defense already, because what their main concern is that it is going to put some much needed controls on lax rules in that area. </p>
<p>It is entirely possible that the laws are such that Zimmerman should not be arrested and cannot be convicted. It’s the laws as they now stand that need to be changed. There is a lot of superfluous information in the media, backing and panning both sides of this issue that have nothing to do with this individual case but have everything to do with the laws there.</p>
<p>It is a crappy law that is being made into federal race case.</p>
<p>This case is only a cause celebre because of the races involved, not just because of police ineptitude. Recently in the Bay Area, an illegal immigrant from Vietnam killed a family of six. He had been in prison before but was not deported back to Vietnam because they wouldn’t take him. Instead he was released back into the community to murder six. Government stupidity. Indeed. Any outrage by anyone. No</p>
<p>Then we had a Border Patrol agent killed by guns that were GIVEN to Mexican drug lords by our own Justice Department in a harebrained scheme called Fast and Furious. More government stupidity. Any outrage. A little. Mostly on Fox News.</p>
<p>I do not want cable news and Sharpton and Jackson whipping malleable mobs into some sort of frenzy and having innocent people killed or harmed because they want to promote their own celebrity, time on TV and political agendas. There is a federal investigation going on. Let the process proceed. Cool it before more lives are lost.</p>
<p>“Mini, Florida’s gun laws are abominable. This is just one example of what can easily happen when such laws are in effect.”</p>
<p>I wasn’t asking about the laws, but local custom. Allowing Neighborhood Watch participants to carry guns massively increases neighborhood liability. It’s not a legal question, but a contractual one.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No. The Uncles and Aunts who participated in their respective neighborhood watches in many states…including Florida never carried guns and even said it was against their respective watches’ and the national neighborhood watch associations’ guidelines. </p>
<p>Probably a factor in why the neighborhood watch Zimmerman belonged to wasn’t registered with the national association…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If it was just police ineptitude…that’d be putting it very charitably. Based on that police department’s documented past history as illustrated in the story I posted some comments above…seems like this department also earned suspicions that it protects its “good old boys” as well…whether it is a son of one of their Lieutenants or more recently…the son of a former Judge.</p>
<p>More biased presumptions being thrown in the crock pot…</p>
<p>No different than your biased presumptions, Bay</p>
<p>“Just askin’ - is it normal for Neighborhood Watch people to be carrying guns?”</p>
<p>Some neighborhood watches around the country do permit watchers to be armed … some prohibit firearms. The Sanford PD Guidelines are moot on the subject, though the guidelines are explicit that the job is to watch and report, and not confront or apprehend. </p>
<p>It does not appear that Zimmerman was part of a sponsored Neighborhood Watch. That probably doesn’t matter. Sponsored, not sponsored. Appointed, self-appointed. Armed, not armed. I’m not sure I see the legal relevance. If he was acting as a Neighborhood Watch extension of the Sanford PD then he was in violation of the Sanford PD guidelines for Neighborhood Watch personnel:</p>
<p>[Daily</a> Kos: Sanford, FL. Neighborhood Watch Materials: “DO NOT GET PHYSICALLY INVOLVED”](<a href=“http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/03/29/1079014/-Sanford-FL-Neighborhood-Watch-Materials-DO-NOT-GET-PHYSICALLY-INVOLVED-]Daily”>Sanford, FL. Neighborhood Watch Materials: "DO NOT GET PHYSICALLY INVOLVED")</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.sanfordfl.gov/investigation/docs/NWProgramHandbook.pdf[/url]”>http://www.sanfordfl.gov/investigation/docs/NWProgramHandbook.pdf</a></p>
<p>The Program Handbook does provide a clue as to why Zimmerman reported Martin as “Behaving strangely. Possibly on drugs or illegal activity.” It was the only Reporting Criteria that remotely applied to Martin.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So since you have the facts, why don’t you lay them out for us? I’m sure you’ve done more than a “cursory investigation” afterall…</p>
<p>cobrat, I keep waiting for you to tell us that Trayvon’s mysterious cache of women’s jewelry, the evidence of his past drug use, and the fact that he once tustled with his little brother are substantial reasons to presume that he was high, planning to rob houses and initiated a physical altercation on the night he was killed.</p>
<p>Hops, there was no investigation. (Until the state/feds stepped in. Or should say, were shamed into stepping in.) That’s the point.</p>
<p>What are my biased presumptions, katlimom? I am trying very hard to make only one presumption and that is that all of the parties involved are innocent until proven guilty by a court of law.</p>