Top Navigation  
 
U.S. Flag waving
Office Hours Momday - Friday  8 am - 5 pm Pacific 1-800-835-2418
 
Facebook   YouTube   Twitter
 
Features
 Home Page
 Current Issue
 Article Index
 Author Index
 Previous Issues

Bookstore
 Subscriptions
 Kindle Subscriptions
 Kindle Publications
 Anthologies
 Books
 Back Issues
 Discount Books
 All Specials
 Classified Ad

Advertise
 Web Site Ads
 Magazine Ads

More
 BHM Forum
 Contact Us/
 Change of Address

Forum / Chat
 Forum/Chat Info
 Lost Password
 Write For BHM


Link to BHM

Massad Ayoob on Guns

Want to Comment on a blog post? Look for and click on the blue No Comments or # Comments at the end of each post.



Massad Ayoob

DUNN AND ZIMMERMAN

Monday, February 17th, 2014

So here I am, in five-below-zero Cleveland on a Monday morning, watching CNN’s sandbag interview of George Zimmerman, and listening to Nancy Grace and assorted other talking heads conflate his case with Saturday’s verdict on Michael Dunn in the Jacksonville “loud music” homicide.

It makes me want to wander outside into the snow. There’s less bullshit out there in the cold, clean air.

The Dunn verdict gives me no heartburn.  He sent bullets toward three young men who were fleeing from him and had themselves shown him no overt threat; that suffices to sustain the jury’s guilty verdicts on three counts of attempted murder, and for firing at the vehicle.  There is much rage that the jury could not agree on a verdict on the charge of murdering the fourth young man, Jordan Davis.  The defendant came across well with his testimony, unsupported by any other testimony, that he perceived Jordan to be bringing a gun to bear on him when he fired the fatal shots.

Did that suffice to give at least one juror reasonable doubt as to guilt? To believe that Dunn might well be telling the truth?  That seems to be the primary assumption of commentators so far.  It’s certainly a possibility, but it might also have been that the jury simply couldn’t agree on premeditated murder vis-à-vis lesser included offenses.  In his closing statement, prosecutor John Guy told the jury that the state didn’t want anything less than a Murder One conviction.  It may turn out to be a case of “be careful what you ask for, you might just get it.”

Just hypothetically, if Michael Dunn was telling the truth and there was a shotgun in the other vehicle when he opened fire upon it, the defense claim that the young men in that vehicle dumped the evidence is rendered largely moot by Dunn’s own actions. When he fled the scene, he didn’t just trigger the whole “flight equals guilt” thing; he removed from the scene the one person who could have told police that there might be a shotgun they should be looking for.  It puts him somewhat in the position of the guy who kills his parents and then pleads the court’s mercy as an orphan.  The cops can’t find something they don’t know to look for.

There was much fail in Michael Dunn’s actions.  The innocence he claimed was nowhere near as clear as Zimmerman’s, based on his statements at the scene, and the totality of the evidence.  The cases don’t really belong in the same discussion, and neither has a damn thing to do with Florida’s Stand Your Ground law.  Dunn emerges as, at best, a bad example of stupid behavior whose only positive legacy will be learning points for more responsible armed citizens.  Zimmeman remains a whipping boy for the willful ignorance of those who prefer superficial sensationalism to research into the actual principles of law and justice.

Part One of the CNN Interview:

 

Part Two of the CNN Interview:

51 Responses to “DUNN AND ZIMMERMAN”

  1. Enjoy Every Sandwich Says:

    The fact that neither case had anything to do with Stand Your Ground laws is not stopping the anti self defense crowd from trying to tie them together. Yesterday on MSNBC I saw an interview with a legislator from Florida who was making all sorts of ignorant statements about Stand Your Ground. I suppose it’s mean-spirited of me to expect her to READ the statute before offering an opinion about it.

    If Stand Your Ground works the way the “progressives” claim, then why aren’t the gang-bangers taking advantage of it? I figure that criminals would be all over a law that lets them shoot people and get away with it.

  2. David Keough Says:

    I’ll agree, Dunn made a mistake by leaving the scene, his actions made no sense to me.

  3. tom Says:

    I can only imagine your frustration here.
    I say imagine, because I stopped watching TV years ago. For TV at least, journalism has been dead for awhile.

    Dunn? No standing at all. He started the confrontation in a public space. A confrontation over something all kids do, I do/did, and many adults do too, play music loudly. Music.

    Liars run. Adult liars especially.

  4. Dave (the liberal, non-Uncle one) Says:

    While I mostly concur on Mas’ analysis of Dunn, let’s also remember, just hypothetically, that Dunn could have avoided all of this by merely not engaging in conduct which risked a needless confrontation at a time that he was going around armed. Just as Zimmerman could have avoided a needless confrontation by waiting on the police rather than getting out of his truck while armed. Just as Curtis Reeves could have avoided a needless confrontation over a cellphone at a time he was going around armed. Just as Joe Hendrix could have stayed behind a locked door when he was armed and avoided needlessly mistaking a confused Alzheimer’s sufferer for a prowler. Mas has, as far back as his matchbox advice in Gravest Extreme, advised avoidance of needless confrontation when one is going about armed. People should be more circumspect, more cautious, more dispassionate, and less confrontational when they’re armed, but far too many do not or, worse, use it as a psychological crutch to become more reckless or macho.

  5. Long Island Mike Says:

    Zman has to learn to stay out of the limelight. Only thing I ‘ve seen him do of any worth lately is his Univision interview in flawless spanish. He should have done that back when instead of Hannity.

  6. William Says:

    I’m betting the jury indecision was a result of m1 v. m2 conflict, possibly at least two jurors holding out against the others, as it’s easier to “stand your ground” in the jury room if you have an ally. Hopefully we will find out.
    Lesson learned from the trial, if one carries a firearm with the chamber empty, the prosecution may/will submit the the act of chambering a round as an element of premeditation, if one unlucky enough to be prosecuted in a self-defense encounter.

  7. Paul Edwards Says:

    Mas, I was just about to ask whether you had anything to do with this “Loud Music” shooting case, or any thoughts on it?

    Yes, it certainly does seem to be a case of “Well, it worked for Zimmerman, so I might as well try to use it too”?

    Only thing I haven’t heard, but I haven’t been closely following this case either, is what kind of a record, if any, do the victums have with the police, or which gangs, or gang assoiates, do they have?

    Got to admit, from what little I have heard of this shooting, we should hope the shooter is really guilty as charged, and not just stupid, and easily frightened, because it certainly looks like he’ll be doing the time for it, abiet a lot less than the prosecutor wanted, and hoped for?

    Will you be giving us more of your insight into this shooting, in the future?

  8. Matt Says:

    Mr Ayoob,

    Thank you for providing your seasoned input on these cases. It’s often very difficult to sort things out with the media sirens wailing so loudly.

    Matt

  9. Marc-Wi Says:

    Did he kill the kid? Yes. It doesn’t seem like there was any premeditation. I think asking for only murder one was stupid. And I read in today’s paper they were going to retry on murder one.. I don’t think the prosecution is serving the community well.

  10. Dennis Says:

    I suspect Dunn suffered from “John Wayne Courage” syndrome. I have to ask myself, if he had not had a gun, would he have pushed a confrontation with the teens?

    Being a strong proponent of concealed carry and stand your ground, I also am a proponent of keeping a low profile. Very few days pass without someone pissing me off. When confronted by some inconsiderate act, I ask myself is it worth escalating the situation.

    The only justification for deadly force is for defending myself or another from death or grave bodily injury. I can replace property, a bruised ego will eventually heal, but life after a shooting is destined to be a miserable experience no matter how righteous it might have been.

    Dunn’s actions were wrong on so many levels, I find none I can defend.
    I can see no similarities between this case and George Zimmerman’s.

    If one can’t control their temper, they shouldn’t be carrying, period.

  11. Wendell Says:

    The family of the victim has my sympathy. I do not know all the facts, and am not the judge, or have the license to be a attorney. I do believe in “Stand Your Ground Law.” I believe in open carry. No way does this case of loud music, cursing, becoming a part of a argument constitute a right to shoot. The result of death could have been avoided. I do have a CCP. I was informed of how to conduct myself when having a firearm. Also the consequences if I did use lethal fire power and was wrong. I feel the defendant, actions was be on what the law permits, and guilty to a higher degree. Ignorance and shooting is not justified, because of fear, anger or what you want to believe. This action gives those that want to disarm lawful citizens. The fuel to cause destruction of our “Bill of Rights,” and “The United Constitution.” I feel the guilty verdict should be enforced and the sentence be carried out. The life can not be brought back. The lack of respect by the victims were sadly a spark that caused these actions. Whether by firearms, knives, clubs, rocks or fist. This will leave scars, sorrow and hatred that the years will never heal. Our society no longer values life. The “Knock Out Game,” the gang banging mentality, the racial malice, and violence on the homeless, weak, the old, and different is prevalent in out world. May God have mercy on all of us. We reap what we sow. Remember when crimes take place the police is minutes away, 9 to 23 minutes if you are fortunate.

  12. Randy-Republic of Illinois Says:

    It should be remembered that the same special prosecutor was acting in both cases. Maybe that goes towards incompetence. I believe that the procecutor was reaching when asking for a murder 1, murder1 should not have been on the table. Then they could have gotten a conviction. Dunn was obviously wrong and should have retreated to another location.

    On the other hand I hate it when someone intrudes on my space. In the check out line did you ever have someone crowd you to the point that they could count how much money you have in you wallet? I now always drag a cart in behind me to keep them at length. Ever been seated on a plane or a movie theater and have someone constantly kicking your seat and when you say something they act like they are the injured party?

  13. Geoff a well known Skeptic Says:

    What? No comments on the “closing argument” where the persecutor advised Felony Brandishing as a legit action? A class action lawyer should be starting a lawsuit on that right now, should get a lot of folks out of jail in FL and make millions. Living here in FL I have been aggressively accosted by gangs of “minority youth” in a typical Welfare Queen carriage (Cadillac Escalade both times) when they pulled into a gas station at 0 dark thirty, I was on my way to work. A load of pumps available and they pulled up opposite me, didn’t get out to pump gas just rolled down the windows and started blasting hate speech music. I departed. No confrontation. I could have never qualified for that jury a county north of where I live. Advice, if you are white stay inside in Florida during hours of darkness…in more ways than one. Geoff Who is honest.

  14. Heather from AK Says:

    In arguing this case with liberals, I’ve figured out the terminology problem. When we say “Stand Your Ground,” we are using the term to correctly refer to the provision of the law which removes the requirement to retreat before employing deadly force.

    Liberals, on the other hand, seem to be using SYG as a catch-all phrase for the entire self-defense law… in addition to not actually understanding any of it.

    This is dangerous for us. When we hear “Get rid of SYG” we hear “Get rid of this one provision.” What they really mean is “get rid of self-defense.”

  15. Jack Branson Says:

    It was nice to finally hear someone who understands the concept of lesser included offenses. The first degree murder charge (at least in my state of Wyoming) requires premeditation as one of the elements. Assuming Florida requires the same elements and also assuming (big leap of faith here…) the reported scenario is correct, there was no premeditation on the part of Dunn. He apparently made some incredibly stupid decisions and would be (at least in Wyoming) likely convicted of 2nd degree murder – 20 years to life…

    Guilty of three counts of attempted murder – absolutely.
    Guilty of 1st Degree murder without a showing of premeditation – absolutely not.

    The jury did not say that Dunn was innocent; they said that he was not guilty of the charge laid by the State. I would guess that on re-trial, the State will include in jury instructions lesser included offenses and that Dunn will be fairly easily convicted on a charge of 2nd degree murder.

  16. Desert Sheepdog Ret Says:

    For many years, when instructing in academy and in-service training classes, we emphasized that armed, off-duty officers first need to be good witnesses and make every effort to not directly involve themselves in a confrontation and let our on-duty brothers and sisters handle it. An even more important lesson for armed civilians and retired officers.

  17. Steve R Says:

    The Michael Dunn and Curtis Reeves cases bring to mind Robert Heinlein’s statement “An armed society is a polite society.” At least, it should be. If someone’s texting or playing loud music, make a polite request to stop, but don’t escalate the matter. And if someone asks you to stop texting or playing loud music, just stop. It isn’t worth getting shot over.

  18. jack76590 Says:

    On George Zimmerman. The trial is over, so George should just stay out of the public eye, as much as possible. I realize he needs to make some money, so stick to painting, whatever, not interviews.

    I would be interested in hearing from Mas on the positions of the various parties in the Dunn case. My thinking is retreat to cover may have been an appropriate tactical response in this case.

    A gun in his holster rather than in his vehicle also may have provided Dunn more options, esp the ability to retreat to cover, while armed. In any case, I can not envision it providing him fewer options.

    In addition to exercising restraint, I believe, the Dunn case also illustrates the need to be able to shoot accurately. If Dunn was truly threatened a single well placed shot would have served him far better than spray and pray.

    Naturally, I agree with other comments that Dunn should not have left the scene. Or if Dunn did leave fearing their return, then Dunn should have stopped a short distance away and called the police. I assume he had a cell phone, which is always a good idea.

  19. tc Says:

    My impression (and I could be wrong) is that a first degree murder conviction in Florida requires evidence of premeditation, or evidence that the homicide resulted from the defendant intentionally committing a crime (e.g., a bank robber who shot the teller during the commission of the robbery, or who shot a cop while resisting arrest). So the Dunn incident sounds more like second degree murder or even manslaughter. You would think that prosecutors in Florida (especially after the Zimmerman case) would have learned by now not to over-charge defendants. Demanding “all or nothing” runs the risk of getting nothing. And, yes, Stand Your Ground laws were irrelevant in both cases, but Progressives never allow facts to interfere with their agenda.

  20. Matthew Carberry Says:

    jack,

    One thing noted at the trial was he actually fired three distinct, reasonably tight 3-4 shot groups, not anything worth calling “spray and pray.”

    -If- he was justified on the first group (which the evidence doesn’t support) it did what was needed and hit the perceived threat, it was the second two volleys at the retreating car that were pretty clearly worth convicting on based on his own testimony.

  21. Marc-Wi Says:

    Mas, I must admit I am baffled. If the shots that missed were attempted murder two how is the one that killed murder one? I heard it was because Dunn had one in the chamber. WTF???????? If true, I’m pretty sure that I know you’re feelings on that by now. Florida deserves better than this.

  22. Dale Says:

    Always interested in your take on a case. Thanks for providing it once again. Otherwise hope you didn’t get stuck in the lovely weather of my hometown this morning.

  23. Tom606 Says:

    I normally carry a box of donuts and a rap CD in my car when I drive. The donuts are used to get me out of trouble if I’m confronted by rogue cops and the rap CD would be tossed at gangsta thugs in case they approach me. I can then escape while they’re occupied picking it up and fighting over it.

  24. Roger Tranfaglia Says:

    To Sandwich maker,from reading of other blogs there are instances where gangbangers (in florida) did,or try to take advantage of SYG in regards to shootings of other bangers. To Geoff, I would do my best to ignore them and drive away. Now if it becomes a regular ocorrance with different (or the SAME) people…….THEN I would lean against my car,look them in the eye and dail 911. I would wait for them to make the next move……..and proceed accordly……..

  25. Geoff a well known Skeptic Says:

    The persecuting Attorney is going for Murder One again. The only basis is possession of a handgun as premeditation. Or having a Carry permit.
    The local radio station got sound bites from the protestors. “Change the Law” “The System is Corrupt!” They did ID one commentor as a Communist, in from Georgia for the protest. WOKV.COM
    But the Florida Lawyers Monopoly Collective will get millions from the taxpayer again! They can use it for their campaign to legalize drugs, prostitution and child rape. Florida lawyers all need money desperately, some are nearing age 40 and are NOT EVEN BILLIONAIRES YET! The Injustice!
    Geoff
    Who is extremely annoyed with the waste of his tax money.

  26. Noah Vaile Says:

    jack76590- It looks like that is what the boys did. Tried to just drive away, and were shot at for their trouble.

    What we seem to have here is a man, armed and dangerous, waiting for his girlfriend at a 7-11, gets ticked at the loud music coming from a nearby vehicle, tells them to ‘turn it down’ and when they mouth-off back at him pulls his gun and empties it at them.

    Then, as if nothing at all had happened, he drives back to his hotel? If it hadn’t been for that one witness who wrote down the plate number would this still be an open and unsolved case?

    Is he even from Florida? Did he have a “permit” for his gun (not that I believe one should need one) or a concealed carry permit (not that I believe one should need one)? I mean, who is this Dunn guy anyway? And what was he doing there?

    It appears to be a “crime of passion” and if prosecutors (although “persecutor” – a la ‘Geoff the skeptic’- seemed hauntingly correct) keep asking juries for wrongly applied verdicts the conviction rate in Florida should begin to bottom out. I mean are Florida prosecutors purposely trying to whip the public into a frenzy?

  27. wg Says:

    There was some testimony that Dunn had been drinking. This could have helped cause Dunn’s overreaction and why he fled. Drinking and guns do not mix–see Richard Venola for that one.

  28. Kukul Kan Says:

    I was very impressed with George Zimmerman’s presentation during his interview with CNN. CNN had to resort to voiceovers to try and make Zimmerman look evil: “The state brought a strong case of murder against Mr. Zimmerman.” The case should never have been brought. Virtually all of the state’s witnesses supported self-defense. So, CNN came off very badly (IMO) and Mr. Zimmerman came off very well.

  29. Dave (the liberal, non-Uncle one) Says:

    At http://justicefordunn.com, a website put up by Michael Dunn’s relatives, it says, “Put yourself in Michael Dunn’s place. You are sitting in a car at a convenience station. Yes – the SUV is parked too close to you – but it’s that vehicle that parked oddly. You were within your marked parking space. You are unfamiliar with the area, just passing through from your son’s wedding to the hotel where your new puppy is waiting. You can’t tell the age of the people in the SUV…” At the trial, Dunn’s attorney “told jurors that the music was so loud, it was rattling the windows of the teens’ SUV, and … Dunn politely asked one of them to turn it down.” (The prosecution painted a somewhat different story, but let’s take Dunn’s version as true for the moment.) Juror “Valerie” spoke and said that at first two, and then later three, jurors believed Dunn acted in self-defense, the rest including Valerie voting to convict. She also said, “It said if he believed that he had an eminent threat to himself or his fiance, so that was a thing that those two folks believed – he was frightened and there was no other option for him in regards to Mr. Davis,” Valerie said, referencing the jury instructions. “The rest of us were 100 percent sure, you didn’t have to react [with gunfire], you could have had another option.” As for what those options were, Valerie told ABC, “Roll your window up. Ignore the taunting. Put your car in reverse. Back up to the front of the store. Move one parking spot over. That’s my feeling.” If that’s true and accurate it’s pretty interesting, because it means that 3/4 of the jury were ready to deny Dunn a self-defense finding because he could have avoided the confrontation altogether. That’s very different than what is at issue in SYG, which prevents you from having to retreat after you believe that you are in peril. The “options” that Valerie would have required were of the kind which would have prevented the peril from happening in the first place.

  30. Left Coast Conservative Says:

    Heather from AK: you are spot-on.

    Read this from E.J. Dionne to see how he conflates “stand-your-ground” with the “reasonable belief” standard common to many (most?) state self-defense laws:

    http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_25191343/e-j-dionne-jr-stand-your-ground-laws?source=nav

    Does he wish to eliminate “stand-your-ground”, or weaken the justification of self-defense in general?

  31. Kukul Kan Says:

    “Mas, I must admit I am baffled. If the shots that missed were attempted murder two how is the one that killed murder one? I heard it was because Dunn had one in the chamber. WTF???????? If true, I’m pretty sure that I know you’re feelings on that by now. Florida deserves better than this.”

    One of the jurors (#4) stated in an interview that three of the jurors felt the state failed to disprove self-defense with respect to the first three shots fired (which were the fatal bullets). Since the state failed to disprove self-defense for those shots, the jury could not convict of First Degree Murder or any of the lesser included crimes. The jury was unanimous in concluding that shots 4-10 were not necessary for self-defense. These shots killed no one, but did count as attempted murder.

  32. Mas Says:

    Kukul Kan, he started with the pistol in the glove box, 15 rounds in the magazine but chamber empty. The state tried to imply that his chambering a round was a predicate act of premeditation.

    The charge was Murder One in re the death of Jordan Davis, because Dunn testified that he was aiming specifically at him. His testimony was that he fired at the car, which contained the three young men who ha admitted never individually threatened him, though he testified that Davis threatened to kill him and he thought he saw a gun in Davis’ hand.

    He offered no excuse for firing the subsequent shots, hence the predictable conviction on those counts. As of this date, the two jurors who’ve come forth to speak indicate that three of their group thought there was reasonable doubt that the shots fired at Davis, because of Dunn’s explanation, might have been justified.

  33. Alonzo Gomez Says:

    Nice hack job from the ‘reporter’, using leading questions, putting words in Z’s mouth and otherwise angling for sensationalism. Oh, wait, was that Chris Cuomo and CNN? Never mind. Why even speak to those obviously biased fools?

  34. Noah Vaile Says:

    I thought the SYG law is where you are (standing around) in a place you have every right or reason to be, and someone comes along and threatens you. That someone else initiates the confrontation and that you do not HAVE to back down. Possibly because there is no way/place to back down to. You are simply not obliged by the law to back down as you used to be. And you never had to “backdown” if you couldn’t anyway.

    NOT that you can be annoyed by someone’s behavior (they’re playing their music louder than is your liking), initiate a confrontation- the kid may have felt threatened and afraid for his life- and then open fire because you get scared that your actions have aroused antipathy.

    And certainly when the other party withdraws SYG doesn’t hold at all unless you are being fired upon. And in such a case S-ing YG would be pretty stupid. Go for cover.

    Am I wrong about this?

  35. Mas Says:

    Noah Vaile, I don’t think you’re wrong. (Love your screen name by the way.)

  36. Master Cylinder Says:

    Dunn’s actions were stupid. Too much Hollywood here. There is literally nothing in this world worth taking a life over, unless its yours or another’s life.

    I live in Washington State and admire Florida’s SYGL, but minus education, it’s a formula for more of these mistakes.

    What I really want to know is why society, is giving more grace to gangs, thugs, punks and outlaws, than to people who are trying, however imperfectly, to live their lives.

    Dunn’s actions give credance to the insanity of the left wing, anti-gun, anti-self defense ilk, while tarnishing the image of those who do everything they can to get it right.

  37. T. Michael Loftus Says:

    Dunn was guilty as sin…
    Zimmerman murdered that boy!
    He approached his victim assuming he would run or kneel once seeing the fat little “cop wanna be’s” weapon. In a fair fight Zimmerman would have had his ass handed to him. His action since have shown he is just a problem thinking he’s above the law. Big business gun $$$ should have remained out of it and he should have had the same defense the dead black teen would have had he prevailed.

  38. Mas Says:

    Welcome, T. Michael, and thanks for providing amusement on a busy day. Differing opinions are welcome here, but it’s clear that you’re not really familiar with the case you’re pontificating about.

    I’m reminded of my girlfriend’s three year old grandson, who thought Santa must live in the Amazon instead of at the North Pole, because Amazon is where all the Christmas packages come from.

    Please share with us your proof that “Big business gun $$$” played any part whatsoever in the outcome of the Zimmerman trial.

  39. Will Says:

    It is very unfortunate what happen with the Martin/Zimmerman incident; the death of a young man and what his family has/is going through, as well as the Zimmerman family.

    One thing I’ve not read in any forum since this all began …. this occurred on private property, of which Zimmerman was an owner (gated HOA), and therefore this was his property.

    We make decisions based on the information we have at the time and folks are also not digging or recollecting that Zimmerman’s HOA neighbors had been experiencing several break-ins and home invasions of whom Martin matched the description of the perpetrators.

    It is unfortunate that Martin was on that property, matched the description, and then was in a physical altercation to the point that Zimmerman believed his life was in grave danger. Everyone can be Mon/Tue morning quarterbacks having never been in a fight for their life. Once you are there, you realize things are so much different than anyone has ever been told, imagined, or had nightmares about.

    I feel for both men and their families.

  40. R hughs Says:

    Concerning Zimmerman, the forensics did not support Zimmerman’s statements concerning the assault. No fingerprints on the weapon except Zimmerman’s. The angle of the projectile was not explored by the prosecution enough. If Zimmerman was having his head “slammed” against the concrete, and there was plenty of blood from his head wounds (heads really bleed), why were the kid’s hands not bloody? How about the “transference” of evidence? To me, when you are told “not to follow”, and you do, there should be a closer examinations then was done.

  41. R hughs Says:

    Additional, not only no fingerprints, no DNA.

  42. taz6190 Says:

    Mas: I don’t make a habit of responding to debates, but this one pushed me over the top. This reminds me of a bartender whispers something to the 1st guy at the bar, that guy whispers it to the next guy, and so on, and the bartender goes to the other end of the bar and the last guy whispers to him what he heard and it is completely different then how it started. I have read so many different accounts of what happened and how it happened and who it happened to that I can’t tell the good guys from the bad guys. I believe you started trying to show the difference between the two cases, and how the media was attempting to lump them together. how in the world did we end up with “big gun $$” and what does SYG mean. I am confused. Thank you for your explanation, it was a good insight, and thanks for allowing me to run off at the key board.. Taz6190

  43. Arnold Urobe Says:

    On Zimmerman, as Neighborhood Watch, would he not have followed Trayvon if he was Hispanic or Caucasian? If Z had not had his gun, at what point would Trayvon have quit beating him.

  44. R hughs Says:

    Arnold, Neighborhood Watch has a National parent organization. Part of their rules are: NEVER CONFRONT, JUST CALL LAW ENFORCEMENT and NEVER – NEVER CARRY A WEAPON OF ANY TYPE ON PATROL! I wonder if Zimmerman’s NW Organization belonged to the National Organization and if it had its own rules concerning carrying a weapon? Something more the prosecution FORGOT to research, I am sure !

  45. Mas Says:

    R Hughes, the prosecution’s own witness ((the police liaison for local neighborhood watch) stated that there was no such policy in force in Sanford. Zimmerman was not on patrol; he was on his way to go shopping when he observed what he considered to be suspicious activity and called it in.

    You might find it helpful to go back through this blogs entries from July 13 of last year, through the next couple of months, and look at the twenty segments discussing the case in detail. The trial blow-by-blow June-July 2012 at legalinsurrection.com will also prove informative.

  46. R hughs Says:

    Mas, Thanks, will do.

  47. Bobo Says:

    As was noted by others here, in the Martin/Zimmerman case, both parties made mistakes that ended up with Martin being dead. It was shown that while being followed Martin was using a cell phone and in contact with a female (gf?) If he really was in fear he should/could have called 911…It was also shown that he had lost Zimmerman and then doubled back to confront him. Zimmerman could have stayed in his vehicle and followed the instructions given to him by the dispatcher. BOTH could have avoided the situation by choosing different actions. They didn’t…Martin is dead. As for the comment of there being no blood on Martins hands, I guarantee I can grasp your head in such a way that I could smash it on the ground a few times and NOT get any on my hand as well. By the way, for those who want to blame “Stand Your Ground” laws in the Martin case, you’ve just admitted that Martin Was The Agressor, as SYG only applies to the defender.
    There’s no doubt that Zimmerman is an idiot and would be best served by keeping a low profile and away from the spotlight and that his actions after the trial don’t help the cause of those of us who CCW and believe in the right to self-defense, but the verdict reached as presented by the evidence presented was right.

    In the Dunn case, he was guilty of attempted murder, and very likely a muder 2 charge (or manslaughter, not familiar with FL’s wording on those aspects) Murder 1 doesn’t apply unless it can be shown that he went out that evening (or decided at some point in the course of the evening) with the intent to kill someone (as would be the case with a serial killer or as in the case of the cpl in PA who were arrested for killing the person she/they met on Craigslist.) Also (again not familiar with the FL statue) Premeditated can imply that the killer had some connection or knowledge before hand of the intended victim. Again, the veridct based on the evidence presented at trial (and instructions given per “murder 1”) was the correct outcome. If the prosecution has any sense, they will go for a murder 2 or manslaughter charge the next round and I would be willing to bet Dunn will be convicted of it….And for those who are so upset over it, let’s remeber that he will still be in jail for a long time..

  48. R hughes Says:

    Bobo, I still need to read the actual court transcripts/reports, but I believe Z claimed (was in the photographs) M broke his nose, yet no blood or Z’s DNA on M’s hands (crime scene “transference”) . I am not sure on this, but I thought I saw a News Report (?) show Z stating on the stand that M grabbed the gun (?) yet not only no M fingerprints but also no M DNA. I still need to do some reading/research on the angle of the projectile. Maybe the reading/research will clarify these points,. I really did not follow the story closely.

  49. Mas Says:

    R hughes, the fist lands for an instant and is gone, and it can take a while for the resultant blood to flow.

    DNA and fingerprints are rarely found on guns, and can’t be found at all if the assailant is reaching for your gun, and you slap it away and then desperately draw and fire, as Zimmerman told the detectives on video (during interrogation, not on the stand).

    Por favor, follow through on reading those blog entries as you said you would.

    The testimony of Dr. DiMaio decisively confirmed that trajectory and other ballistic evidence were exactly in keeping with Zimmerman’s account of the shooting.

  50. R hughes Says:

    Mas, Thanks again. I am 2 1/2 hours into Dr. Di Mato’s testimony at present. Will be going deeper. Will be interested in a “small” detail I noticed when they “panned” Z, he is a “south paw” when he is writing, but according to testimony given on the path of the projectile, Z shot from his (Z’s) right side? I wonder which side the holster was on? This will probably come out when I view more video.

  51. Terry W Says:

    To me the Zman case and Dunn case are similar…had Zman stayed in the car like dispatch told him to (“we need you to not do that “) follow him of course. T Martin was really no threat to anyone and the police were on there way. When you are carrying and you leave the house, you better know what you can and cannot do including Deadly Force. Dunn has no life now simply because he didn’t move his car when irritated by the loud music.

Leave a Reply

 
 
 
 
Copyright © 1998 - Present by Backwoods Home Magazine. All Rights Reserved.