Much of this case came down to speculation versus fact. We saw it in the trial, we saw it in the prosecution’s case, we see it even in comments on this blog.  In the spring of 2012, in the question/answer session that followed the CATO Institute “Stand Your Ground Symposium”, a sincere young man who happened to be African-American asked me if SYG protection would have been in effect for Trayvon Martin if he had been violently attacked by George Zimmerman, and had killed Zimmerman in self-defense.  My answer was “Yes, of course.” And I would give the same answer now.

The only problem with that hypothetical is, there is nothing to substantiate it, and there is a large body of facts in evidence to support the jury’s verdict that Zimmerman was not guilty of murder, or any lesser included offense. A large body of collective evidence showing that it was Martin who attacked Zimmerman, and not vice-versa.

“What if Zimmerman hadn’t gotten out of his car, and just driven on to his destination, the Target store?”  Well, certainly, the confrontation would not have occurred. But that pales in comparison to what if Trayvon Martin had not attacked him and smashed his head into the sidewalk? In following a strange man who was looking into windows in a community riven by burglaries and even a home invasion, Zimmerman never broke the law. Indeed, had it not ended in death, most would have appreciated him taking notice and calling the authorities…as people had done earlier, when the head of the homeowner’s association in that community had chased down and captured a burglary suspect.

“What if Zimmerman had avoided any danger by not getting involved at all?” Well, if the nineteen firefighters killed last month in Arizona hadn’t “gotten involved,” they wouldn’t have died either. Does that make them responsible for their own deaths? Review the case of Kitty Genovese  and then get back to me with your “Don’t get involved” argument. But take a long look in the mirror, first, and ask yourself how long you’d want to live with looking in the mirror of the face of someone who “didn’t get involved” enough to pick up a phone to help Kitty Genovese, and didn’t do what a reasonable and prudent person would construe the voice of authority on that phone asked you to do.

“What if Zimmerman hadn’t carried that evil gun?”  Well, with Zimmerman having his head smashed against the sidewalk and being unable to escape, Trayvon Martin would probably have stood trial for the murder of George Zimmerman. The evidence and testimony are consistent with Zimmerman’s account of what happened. So is something the jury never learned of during trial: the lie detector test (voice stress analysis) which Zimmerman passed shortly after the shooting, and which confirmed that he was telling the truth.  He also passed the “bullshit detector test” of not one but two veteran police officers who expertly and vigorously interrogated him, without defense counsel present.

“What if it turned out that Zimmerman had made the first confrontation and pulled his gun on Martin, causing Martin to jump him and beat him in self-defense?” That WOULD have been justifiable for Martin…but there is ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE TO INDICATE THAT IT DID HAPPEN. Stop and think: would a man hungry to kill, with a loaded gun already in his hand, have taken the savage beating Zimmerman did, for at least 40 seconds, before firing?

“What if” is not the standard of the law, nor the standard of logic. “WHAT IS” remains the standard for both.  The evidence, not a hypothetical “theory of the case,” is what counts in every aspect of the real world…the real world of the courts, and the real world of the streets.

A duly empanelled jury determined the truth from the facts in evidence and the testimony presented.  Even the testimony of the prosecution’s witnesses overwhelmingly favored the defense.

And that was only the evidence the jury was allowed to see.  There was much more evidence which was confirmatory to Zimmerman’s account of a clear-cut self-defense shooting. We’ll get to that soon in this space…and why the jury was not allowed to see it.

1 COMMENT

  1. One “what if” question that occured to me is, “What if the person who called the cops on a prowler had not been an armed Neighborhood Watch member, but instead an UNarmed little old lady of the ‘nosy neighbor’ variety, and Trayvon Martin had decided to take exception to her following him and watching what he was doing?”

  2. Facts are there for the viewing..but facts and truth NEVER enter into the mind set of the people that lead and those that follow , defined as the HATE CRIME CROWD……they never see themselves as the HATERS…even when called out…….in the end they all no matter how ‘righteous’ they are ,they have chosen to allow evil into their minds and souls and will rot in hell for their decision…..imho

  3. Easily some of the best money I ever spent was on LFI-I in 2007. What I learned in the classroom from Mas allowed me to better serve my self-defense minded customers for the six years I worked in a gun store. Unfortunately, even some of my extended family are too deafened by ideology to hear the truth. I sincerely wish George Zimmerman the best of luck as he tries to rebuild his life. But for the grace of God go I.

  4. Just heard that Zimmerman, and another bystander, at the scene of an auto accident, helped to save a man, his wife, and chiclren, just the other day.

    Sure dosen’t sound like the hateful Racist, that the Media, and Prosecution have been making him out to be, now does it?

  5. Excellent Mas.

    I’ve once held a burglar at gunpoint and another time a purse snatcher in the Virgin Islands (two of us did that one.) So yes, ‘what if’.

    Zimmerman is now starting to impress me as not a ‘wanna be cop’ but a good man who gets involved. Your article shows more truth than all the TV news put together (and yes, even Fox.)

    And the excellent defense. This shows even if 100 percent right you may very well need that defense.

  7. WHAT IF GZ had been taught the practices of LE in initiating, analyzing, and ultimately continuing or terminating pursuit as I suggested in your prior post?

    WHAT IS true is that if GZ had utilized such practices and followed the gentle advice (not order) of the 911 contact “We don’t need you to do that” (follow TM), then the information that GZ had as to the activities of TM *at that time* would have led him to discontinue the pursuit out of concern for his own safety and that of the surrounding residents. Then providing the details of his observations to the responding LEO could be used if/when TZ’s suspicious/criminal activity itself moved from the realm of what if to what is.

    WHAT WILL BE true is that bad guys and good guys alike will learn from this episode that being or behaving like a thug can *just like that* take your ass from chillin’ with your homies to chillin’ on a slab, and trying to do good without utilizing methods of proper training and reason can just as quick kill you, an innocent bystander, or at best ruin that good life that you are trying to lead.

    None of which is to say that regardless of how you come to be on your back and straddled by someone is intent on smashing your face and skull, you shouldn’t be ready and willing to do what you have to do to survive, which is why you have that KelTec strapped on to start with. But doing everything you can to avoid being in that position in the first place can and will save your life, literally or figuratively.

  9. There are many armchair quarterbacks but few who play football. I’ve
    always felt from the beginning that getting involved was part of what it
    meant to accept a position in the neighborhood watch so being watchful
    brought along with it no negative connotations. Most people don’t want
    to get involved but are happy when another does. It takes character to
    take on responsibility and, further, to get training for it.

    And to talk to the police without an attorney? Now that’s brave! But
    everything this man did shouts honesty and truthfulness. To see him
    crucified in the media is so sad. If I were in a jam, I’d want someone
    like a Zimmerman covering my back.

    Some years back the boyfriend of one of my tenants took offense to
    something I said and decided to give me a good pounding. I ended
    up on the hallway rug and couldn’t get up without losing my balance.
    If he hadn’t been so drunk his blows would have caused some serious
    damage. I screamed for about 20-25 seconds and who came to my
    assistance? My deaf tenant in the apartment nearest us who felt the
    vibrations from the floor. And an individual a full half block away who
    hear my screams and not knowing exactly where they were coming
    from, or the circumstances, ran toward them.

    I’m not so cynical that I believe no one wants to help or get involved.
    On the contrary, I’ve seen a lot of the best in people in 24 years of
    driving a taxi. Yet when someone does take on responsibility to be
    a positive influence in their community, and something bad comes
    down on them, we need to support them all we can.

    These columns are a wonderful resource to help your neighbors and
    friends understand this case. Make copies and pass them on to those
    who have doubts. Thank you Mas!

  11. Mas,

    Thank you very much for this series on the George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin case.

    You are very good at clarifying things and you did an excellent job here. You made me think of things I had not considered before.

  12. I am old enough, lived in Queens, and remember the Kitty Genovese incident. It was shameful and hard to believe that so many people would ignore the pleas of a young woman being attacked and murdered because they “didn’t want to get involved”. As I said before if I had seen someone slinking along in a place where they did not belong near where I lived I would have probably behaved the same as GZ. “If the landlord knew when the thief were to enter, he would not suffer it to happen”. Do we really want to live in a world or country where people could care less what is happening or could happen to others??

  13. What if- the jurors were allowed to know Trayvon was on suspension from school and and had been kicked out of his mothers home because of her inability to handle him? What if- jurors had been allowed to view his cell phone pictures of guns/ gang signs/ marijuana? What if- his juvenile records had been unsealed so jurors could see what this “child” had morphed into in the four years that had passed since the 13 year old child depicted in the pictures that the media tried so valiantly to convince the public was the true Trayvon? Nothing would have changed. It was still a classic self defense case, correctly adjudicated.

  15. Dave, your question has been clearly answered here. If what you’re “patiently waiting” for is for me to agree with you that Zimmerman was in the wrong, it just ain’t gonna happen. The facts in evidence simply don’t allow me to agree with you.

  16. What if Trayvon’s mother had exercised her right to abort him at 19 weeks? None of this would have happened. We wouldn’t be subjected to the baying of the race-baiting, politically correct hounds and George Zimmerman would be going about his life as an unknown good guy.

  17. Facts are hard to “twist”. Emotions, preconceived notions, half truths, outright lies and supposition were the prosecutions only tools. Too bad they didn’t have jurors that couldn’t see through the smoke and mirrors so they could persecute an honest man for political expedience.

  18. Great series Mas. Thanks for your great documentation and commentary. Glad to have you on our team.

  19. Kinda hard to believe no one in the neighborhood backed him up, watched out the windows, noticed what was happening… and went to see what was going on.

  20. Feds Officially Seize Zimmerman Evidence, Gun Included

    Posted on July 23, 2013 by Nick Leghorn

    It looks like things are escalating a bit in the possibly forthcoming federal Zimmerman trial. While the local cops had previously simply been asked to hold onto the evidence while the Department of Justice looked into federal charges, now it appears that the DOJ has actually physically taken possession of the evidence themselves. Which means that if Zimmerman wants his gun back, he’s going to need Eric Holder to release it to him instead of the local cops. From CNN . . .

    Florida authorities have delivered all evidence related to the George Zimmerman investigation to federal officials, who are weighing whether to pursue a civil rights case.

    The Sanford Police Department said it turned over all evidence, including a gun, to the Department of Justice on Monday.

    Does this mean that the DOJ is moving forward with charges? Or that they’re continuing with their fishing expedition to see if they can find any scrap of evidence to support a charge? Naturally, the CNN article mentions the numerous race-related organizations calling for Zimmerman’s head on a platter, but no mention of the support from the ACLU against federal prosecution.

  21. Dave,

    I appreciate your desire to have your question answered. When I read Mas’s post, I felt that he went out of his way to answer you. I think that he articulated to your question in this post.
    When you have troubles with criminals where you live or work additional vigilance is required. The criminals can become VERY bold. When they realize that a few citizens will not ignore them sometimes they go away.
    Your point has some validity. If GZ never left his car, history would be different. You or I do have the freedom to ignore the world around us and avoid going through what GZ and TM experienced. Yes, this was a very sad event.
    I have chosen to no longer allow criminals to control my life. When they realize that I will work against them, they usually go away . Yes, I call the police first. But, no, they cannot feel free to “hang around” the homes and businesses in our neighborhood without being addressed. They are treated politely. Who knows, they might need help, they look lost. I refuse to hide while the criminals make us feel like ” guests at work and home”.
    It is NOT a crime or a threat for me to say ” is everything ok” to a person aimlessly wandering on our dead end private road. If they need help, I will help them. If they are looking to do wrong, they know that I am there and aware of their presence. There are a few single elderly women in the neighborhood and some single young women. Who can help them? Does this involve some risk for my family and myself? Yes, in a thousand ways. Am I seeking trouble? No, I do not want trouble, life is hard enough as it is. Each situation each time calls fore prudence and thoughtfulness.
    From my perspective ( not Mas’s, I mean this is his blog) you are correct. If you don’t want problems, never leave your car, wheather the 911 operator tells you you should or shouldn’t.
    Mas, I request that if you feel that.this post is inappropriate, or unwise on my part, PLEASE, DO NOT APPROVE AND POST.
    Dave, if you feel that I have treated you unfairly,,, that was not my goal.

  22. All these “WHAT IFS” are only good for arguing over with a cold beer. Maybe in a class setting. Get over the damn “WHAT IFS”. We’ve got facts to deal with in this case and those facts exonerated George Zimmerman.
    The race baiters are doing the “WHAT IFS”, it’s their forte.

  23. “Just heard that Zimmerman, and another bystander, at the scene of an auto accident, helped to save a man, his wife, and chiclren, just the other day.

    Sure dosen’t sound like the hateful Racist, that the Media, and Prosecution have been making him out to be, now does it?”

    Apparently, TMZ thinks race was a factor:

    http://www.tmz.com/2013/07/22/george-zimmerman-crash-victims-white/

    BTW, these posts by Mr. Ayoob are exactly how I have been feeling, and it seems like the world is rabidly poking themselves in the eyes to avoid seeing the truth so they can continue to fit things into their agenda. I especially love someone thinking the slide stop was a safety.

    I will forever bookmark the video from this post as it is one of the BEST rational and reasoned explanations of why SYG is a good and just law. Everyone should send this video to Sanford.florida@usdoj.gov, the Zimmerman witch hunt email address, as Mr. Ayoob identifies how civil rights are involved in this case.

  24. Mas,

    Thanks for this great series of articles! Your words are direct, clear and full of a commodity sorely lacking in the media today: TRUTH. When I was in your MAG40 class back a few years ago, I remember you speaking about how often the media got it wrong when it came to guns. Ever since then I have read all the gun related news in the papers and watched the news on tv and been horrified at the abysmal levels of error presented. I kept thinking to myself “How the hell can they write this **** without even knowing the most basic things about firearms?”

    …And this was BEFORE the Zimmerman case!

    Just goes to show that no matter how bad something is now it can always be worse!

  26. I thought George Zimmerman was in hiding. But I heard on the news today that he stopped to help a family get out of their SUV which had rolled over. He must still be helping people in the Sanford area. I fear for his safety. I hope the police or concerned citizens are protecting him. Actually, I should volunteer to help him myself. Does anyone know if GZ is being protected from Trayvon’s avengers?

  27. ‘What if’.
    The ‘news’ media did not blow the Rodney King all out of proportion leading to the persecution of the police who arrested him.
    Appeasement does not end with just one episode, like blackmail it just keeps going on like an innocent ‘”motorist” on an evening drive.

  28. The real reason for all of the racial bias in the MSM,is to keep us divided,so we can’t unite and see what the government is doing with our freedom.It is also being used to try to take away our God given right And legal right to protect our families and ourselves,which in turn will lead to more gun control,Obama’s agenda includes gun registration and gun confiscation,that was why he pushed so hard before the April vote in the Senate for the background checks as that would have started gun registration.Obama was a member of the communist party of America back in the 1990’s,most of ya’ll know and understand what the communist agenda is,and one of the first objectives is to disarm the people,so you can move forward to total control.This is the path that Obama has planned for this country.Be prepared and ready.Keep your powder dry.

  29. Dennis, got to one up you on that one; What if the school police chief had pursued charges on the stolen jewelry Trayvon Martin was caught with?

    The media, politicians, and prosecution have sought so desperately to make this about race… But it turns out, the truth is that Mr. Zimmerman not only wasn’t racist but was very involved in his community — specifically in helping disadvantaged youth who were quite often black.

    On top of all that, it comes out during trial that Trayvon was the racist!

    To add insult to injury, Trayvon should have been in jail — or, at the very least, under house arrest. But, he wasn’t. Why? Because he was black.

  30. I saw the surveilance video of Zimmerman taking the voice stress test. It was posted on WFTV’s website. Interesting but the results were not shown.

    I should think that at that time in GZ’s life the stress would be so high that a lie would be indistinguishable from the truth.

  31. @gun-totin mama
    It was rainy and dark. Lost of reasons for people to not be outside or paying much attention. Despite that we still had several eye and ear witnesses, once the screaming started.By then, thougg, it was almost too late to intervene anyway. If someone HAD come outm likely GZ would not have been forced to shoot ro protect his own well-being.

  32. The more I have learned about this case, the more I believe GZ did the right thing all the way around. If we want to live in safe community the members of that community must be alert and aware and willing to get involved. I’ve had a few of those “what if,” moments and come through them unscathed with honor intact. GZs tactics could of been tweeked a little but his intentions, watching out for his neighbors, were correct.

  33. Mas, no, you mistake my intent. I was just hoping that you would stand by your prior position — most typified by your $20-bill-on-matchbox advice — that it is unwise for an armed civilian to expose himself to a potential confrontation when he could take steps to avoid it. I’ve always admired you for taking that courageous stance against “handgun machismo” as you called it and I am disappointed to see you apparently walk away from it now.

    You say, above, “Indeed, had it not ended in death, most would have appreciated him taking notice and calling the authorities…as people had done earlier, when the head of the homeowner’s association in that community had chased down and captured a burglary suspect.” You also said as much when you wrote about Larry Lindsey in 2006: “Often, there is a successful conclusion. Thanks to that concerned citizen’s diligence and willingness to ‘get involved,’ the person wo did the bad act is captured by the police … and then the newspapers lionize that good citizen as a hero. Well, I think that’s a good thing, in the moral sense.” BUT then you go on to add, “HOWEVER … there’s almost always a quote from a police spokesman who says … ‘we have to urge the public not to go after people’ … THEY AIN’T JUST BLOWING POLITICALLY CORRECT SMOKE.” (Emphasis added.) You seem entirely reluctant here to add that “however.”

    I’ve been waiting for that other, “however” shoe to drop, but your response to me, above, makes it clear that it is not coming. Not to put words in your mouth, but perhaps you feel that the lesson is sufficiently clear from what happened here: Zimmerman did nothing, at least so far as the evidence available to us indicates, which was outside his legal rights yet, like Larry Lindsey, he was put through a legal wringer which utterly disrupted his life and pocketbook. Why that happened can be debated endlessly, but the fact is that it did. And, even at that, Zimmerman was lucky: If the suspect had himself been carrying a deadly weapon and had ambushed an unsuspecting Zimmerman, there would be at least a reasonably good chance Zimmerman would have been defending himself to Saint Peter at the Pearly Gates instead of defending himself in court.

    From your prior comments I suspect that you may think that I’m one going around wearing a hoodie with “I am Trayvon Martin” on it. I’m not. I am not Trayvon Martin (who, I believe the evidence strongly suggests, both initiated the confrontation and took the first action requiring Zimmerman to defend himself), but neither am I George Zimmerman, not by a long shot, because I stand by your prior advice to armed citizens and, had I been in Zimmerman’s position, I would not have left my vehicle and this tragedy for both Zimmerman and Martin would not have occurred. Do you still stand by it, Mas, or have you rejected your prior position and become an advocate for handgun machismo?

    That’s an important question, Mas, because if you have not then we must confront the fact that Zimmerman did something foolish — not legally wrong, but foolish — and that brings us to an examination of the question of whether Florida’s stand your ground and, in my opinion more important, self-defense immunity laws may have played a part in that foolish decision. Those laws, combined with universal-access concealed carry laws, and crossbred with the kind of handgun machismo and paranoia sold to the public by some gun advocates, embolden fools, delusional thinkers, individuals driven by machismo, and other irresponsible people, to do things in a thoughtless, ill-considered manner. I would believe, Mas, that if people practice self-defense in the manner in which you promote that these laws are of little benefit or utility to them. Indeed, a couple of installments back you said, “It is hard to imagine a situation in which one WOULD kill another person if they could have simply walked away unscathed.” Why, then, do you support these laws which embolden fools and the ill-trained and machismo-driven to rush in, when they supply so little benefit to those who do it right?

    You’ve always been one my heroes, Mas, for your willingness to stand up to those kinds of people and promote responsible gun ownership and thinking, but I’ve begun to believe that you have feet of clay.

  34. Not feet of clay, Dave, just feet planted in legal reality. Thank you for quoting my previous work in which I said you’re treated like a hero if nobody dies in situations like this and treated like a criminal if someone does. You’re also correct in saying that the Zimmerman case underscores this unpleasant fact of life. The fact remains that Zimmerman appears to have been trying to do the right thing, and his actions were legal.

  35. Mas, I’d like to say one thing and then, as they say in disputes at Wikipedia, drop the stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass.

    We agree on this: I, too, now believe that Zimmerman was trying to do the right thing and with proper motives. In saying that, I must make a confession: In the process of posting here I was forced by a prior comment to take a harder look at the actual evidence than what I had seen in the media. In doing so, I changed from the belief that Zimmerman was a cowboy out to approach Martin and demand to know why he was there (which I’ve always conceded was his legal right to do) to the belief that it is at least credible and perhaps even probable that (a) all Zimmerman was doing was trying to keep Martin in sight and (b) that Martin approached Zimmerman, not the other way around. I further began with the belief that there was merely no evidence to contradict Zimmerman’s testimony that he did nothing to — legally — cause the fight. I have come around to the the belief that there is positive evidence, in addition to Zimmerman’s lone-witness statements, to believe that Martin started the fight.

    In short, I believe that Zimmerman was trying to do the right thing in leaving his truck and that all that happened afterwards was caused, at least legally, by Martin’s actions. (I also don’t believe, let me say just in passing, that there is any evidence, except perhaps one muttered word which no one can agree about, that race motivated Zimmerman, but that’s another debate for another place and time.) None of that, however, contradicts my belief that Zimmerman was a fool and that his foolish actions put both himself and Martin’s lives and futures at unnecessary risk. Nor does not contradict my belief that the greater moral fault was his, simply because he had the greater responsibility in leaving his vehicle while armed.

  36. Repeal hard-won legal protections of good citizens to protect themselves, i.e. SYG, CD, and CC, because some few may be afflicted by the old cop disease of firearm/badge machismo? Bullshit Dave, you’re parroting the anti lines for them, to deny MY rights because SOMEDOOD may abuse his? Never.

    Still, Mr. Ayoob, you have not addressed the logic of comparing the actions and training (or lack thereof) to LE pursuit criteria. As I’ve said, I believe if such training, restraint, and reason had been employed, TM would ultimately have joined the legions of thugs-in-training who die at by own hand (drugs), or by someone else’s under circumstances that would not have cost GZ his defacto life, the taxpayers untold millions, and without lending ammunition as it were, to those who would take away ours.

    Yes, Zimmerman appears to have been trying to do the right thing, and as someone else above said, he had good intentions. But like the road to hell, the road to the cemetery is paved with those. In some ways, Dave is correct; you do appear to have diverged from your historical teachings of using training and reason to avoid the last resort of gunowners who are prepared to take another life in defense of one’s own, but pray to God that they never have to. Am I wrong, or will there be a final installment to this series dealing with that?

  37. I have a question, Mas, and I apologize if it has already come up. Ladywest mentioned above how “brave” Zimmerman was to talk freely to SPD after the shooting, and we all know that it wasn’t smart in theory. The prosecution jumped at every opportunity to point out (slight) discrepancies in his various statements, calling him repeatedly a “liar”, and that showed well how our words can be used against us. The same attempt at manipulation took place with witness John Good.
    Yet, I have a feeling that this, along with his willingness to take polygraphs, earned Zimmerman a lot of goodwill when it came to SPD and the jurors. He felt he had nothing to hide and it showed. In contrast, just look at how his refusal to take the stand, although perfectly legal and advisable, was viewed by many.

    So what are your thoughts on the generic advice to be polite to PD, but to clam up and lawyer up after a critical incident? This still seems like the wise course of action, but cooperation and openness can also look good. I’m (a little) swayed toward the latter due to this case, I’ll admit, and would love to hear from you on this.

  38. Alonzo Gomez, I’ll be touching on that in due course.

    jtc, there’s nothing in the evidence to show that Zimmerman was in any kind of “pursuit” or otherwise seeking contact with Martin. Pursuit is a long way from simply trying to see where someone went.

  39. “Are you following him right now?”

    “Puff puff, yes”

    “We don’t need you to do that.”

    Pursuit…against the advice of the 911 contact, and certainly, as evidenced by what came after, ill-advised for anyone for the situation and set of facts that existed for Z at that time.

  40. jtc, I respectfully disagree. It’s in the connotation.

    “Pursuit” connotes an intent to seize, capture, or possess. A police pursuit is intended to end with the officer(s) in physical control of the suspect(s). Pursuit of game in the hunting field is intended to end with the creature turned into our meat. Pursuit of happiness hopefully ends with us possessing that happiness.

    Any intent of George Zimmerman to gain control of Trayvon Martin exists only in the conjecture of his critics, not in the facts in evidence after trial. The evidence supports the defense theory that Zimmerman was merely following, to keep track of Martin’s location. A subtle difference, but I think a distinct one.

  41. jtc, that leaves out much of the call and sounds like NBC’s edited version. The events went more like this:

    “He’s running.”

    “He’s running? Which way is he running?”

    *gets out of car, follows* “down towards the entrance of the neighborhood.”

    “Okay. Which entrance is that that he’s heading towards?”

    “The back entrance. #%@&#!”

    “Are you following him right now?”

    “Puff puff, yes”

    “We don’t need you to do that.”

    “Okay.”

    1 minute and 10 seconds later, long enough for TM to walk home according to the map of the area…Puffing and ambient wind from GZ each long gone.

    “What’s your apartment number?”

    *Starts giving address*, “aw crap. I don’t want to give that out. I don’t know where this kid is.”

    The full call as played in the trial is here: http://abcnews.go.com/US/video/george-zimmermans-911-call-played-in-court-19473559

    Note the timestamps for the call at 2:10-2:13 in the video.

    The dispatcher also gave his testimony on the 311 call during the trial: http://youtu.be/eKeP9xFT7eU

  42. Cue Brother Bill (raspy Southern twang) “Well if you’re gonna parse my words, it depends on what your definition of “pursuit” is…” (gag)

    You are right of course, but I did say in my first comment that it is an imperfect parallel.

    There is no way, however, that a different series of actions on the part of Zimmerman, based on the actual (not possible or anticipated) actions of Martin, wouldn’t have resulted in a different outcome. There are lessons to be learned here, and I’m sure GZ learned them, albeit too late. But it’s not too late for others who have followed this case -and who follow you- to learn from his mistakes. What mistakes? What could/should he have done differently, and more importantly, what could/should others do differently if a similar situation presents itself?

    I have spent 35 years in relatively high-risk businesses where various levels of confrontation are inescapable; I would like to think that how I dealt with it (along with God’s grace and a good amount of luck) was largely responsible for never having had to draw the weapon that my hand was quite often gripping under the counter or behind my back.

    But Monday quarterbacking is not my job; quite literally it is yours; you are the acknowledged expert in how to avoid and/or deal with deadly confrontations; I and I’m sure many others would like to see you break down this series of events and decisions and advise what could and should have been done differently. I truly believe lives could be saved by doing so.

  43. Thanks for the update. And the real difference was actual evidence vs. emotion and ‘desire’…

  44. I agree with Mas’ distinction between following and pursuing. It was made in court and while it may sound like wordplay I think it goes to intent. You follow to maintain visual – you pursue to apprehend. The fact that Zimmerman may have had to run because he lost sight of Martin is irrelevant to me.

    And Zimmerman’s explanation was perfectly rational to me, maybe because of my background in private security. I couldn’t help but put myself in his shoes during the trial. Because a whole segment of society, from punk wannabes to serious criminals object vehemently to being looked at, which runs counter to the observe and report mission of every security officer and neighborhood watchman. They really want you to look the other way and will get in your face if you don’t.
    While I ‘might’ (shoulda, coulda, easy, right?) have handled things differently, I think that Zimmerman’s only ‘mistake’ was to cross paths with Martin, period. And I place the responsibility for the actual contact and its outcome squarely on the latter, from experience.

  45. Mr. Ayoob,

    You wrote:
    “What if Zimmerman had avoided any danger by not getting involved at all?” Well, if the nineteen firefighters killed last month in Arizona hadn’t “gotten involved,” they wouldn’t have died either.

    This is a terrible comparison, bordering on being disrespectful to the brave firefighters who lost their lives. George Zimmerman is a citizen with a concealed carry permit – nothing more. Firefighters and law enforcement officers are paid professionals. Their job is to stand in harm’s way for the safety of citizens. That’s what they get paid to do.

    As a concealed carry permit holder, it was Zimmerman’s responsibility and obligation to behave in a manner befitting a citizen that has gained that privilege. As a permit holder that was armed at the time, it was Zimmerman’s responsibility to not put himself into a situation that could potentially escalate, and require him to use deadly force. Zimmerman is not a law enforcement officer, but decided to follow Martin even after being advised not to do so. It would have been a law enforcement officer’s duty to do so, but not Zimmerman’s. In my opinion, this is a clear violation of the preclusion principle.

    Only after Zimmerman followed and the resulting confrontation did Martin have the ability and opportunity to put Zimmerman’s life in jeopardy. Yes, at this time, Zimmerman may have been justified to utilize deadly force. However, all this occurred after Zimmerman made a terrible decision to follow a young man, who at the time, was not posing a deadly threat to anyone.

    You also wrote:
    “What if Zimmerman had avoided any danger by not getting involved at all?” Well, if the nineteen firefighters killed last month in Arizona hadn’t “gotten involved,” they wouldn’t have died either. Does that make them responsible for their own deaths? Review the case of Kitty Genovese and then get back to me with your “Don’t get involved” argument.

    Well, here’s my argument. It was Zimmerman’s duty as an armed citizen NOT to get involved beyond calling the police – especially when Martin was not posing a threat to anyone. In the Genovese situation, a woman was screaming as she was being murdered. That makes a huge difference! If an armed citizen were to have witnessed her being murdered, they would have been fully justified in using deadly force. In the Zimmerman situation, nobody was being murdered. Martin did not pose a deadly threat to anyone at the time Zimmerman decided to follow him. Zimmerman should have “gotten involved” by calling 911 and reporting any suspicious behavior that he observed. That should have been the extent of his involvement as a citizen – PERIOD. It was only after Zimmerman made the irresponsible decision to follow someone (while armed), that the situation escalated into one in which Zimmerman had to use deadly force.

    The bottom line is Zimmerman made a terrible decision to follow Martin. It amazes me how many folks talk about this shooting meeting the ability-opportunity-jeopardy principles, but nobody speaks to the preclusion principle. As a concealed carry permit holder and strong advocate of the second amendment and self defense, I would have fully expected to go to prison if I were George Zimmerman. At this point, at a minimum, he should have his concealed carry permit revoked to prevent the possibility of him continuing to carry out his brand of vigilante justice. This whole Zimmerman case soils the reputation of law-abiding, responsible gun owners and concealed carry permit holders.

  46. I think that the question of whether Zimmerman chased down Trayvon or Trayvon attacked Zimmerman from behind can be determined from the evidence. When you look at the conversation with the police operator it is clear that Zimmerman was walking to his car in order to wait for the police. Furthermore, you can look at where the fight happened and the knowledge that Trayvon was close to his home. If Zimmerman had pursued/hunted Trayvon as many claim then the incident would have happened near their and it didn’t. Unless you believe that Zimmerman carried Trayvon from near his home to were Trayvon was shot you have to accept that Trayvon pursued Zimmerman and assaulted him.

  48. Oh please. CCL, maybe if you stamp your foot real hard and hold your breath, your interpretation of “Zimmerman followed Martin” will come true. A neighborhood watch guy is supposed to watch people. SUPPOSED to. The operator asked him where Martin was going, he got out of his car to look, then turned around and went back. And you think that’s enough to make him complicit in his own beat down? That this sequence somehow provoked Martin into beating Zimmerman? This is what is known as blaming the victim, CCL. Do you also believe that women deserve to be raped if they walk a street after dark?

  49. Sarah,

    If you would take a deep breath and get your emotions under control, then maybe you could actually present a valid argument. Up to this point, you have failed to do so.

    My question to you is this: “Are you a concealed carry permit holder?” Based on your previous post which reeked of a glaring lack of knowledge on the subject, the obvious answer is NO. But I just want to confirm. If the answer is YES, then you must have slept thru your training.

    After teaching when to use deadly force, the second most critical subject taught in nearly every concealed carry course is avoiding dangerous situations. As a permit holder, you have been given a privilege to carry a firearm for self-defense. It is your duty and responsibility to NOT put yourself in a situation that could escalate to the point where you must use deadly force. This higher standard of responsibility does not directly apply to unarmed citizens because they’re not walking around with a loaded pistol. GZ, a permit holder, put himself in a dangerous situation when he followed TM. Had GZ merely been on a leisurely walk and was attacked, there’d be no question he was fully justified. However, GZ’s decision to follow TM was an unwise one.

    His status of “self-appointed neighborhood watch captain” did not give him law enforcement authority. Besides, from the information I’ve gathered, GZ was not even acting in his neighborhood watch role at the time of the shooting. As a concerned citizen, you observe and report, and hope to be a good witness. As long as someone is not in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm, there is no need for an armed citizen to follow a “suspicious person” and put themself into a potentially dangerous situation. Why do you think the 911 dispatcher stated, “We don’t need you to do that.”? Call 911, report what you see, and let the professionals (a.k.a. law enforcement) do the job that they are trained and paid to do. If imminent danger of death or great bodily harm exists, that’s a different story altogether.

    When it was all said and done, there was no way the jury could convict GZ of second degree murder or manslaughter within the instructions given them by the judge. An excerpt from the instructions read, “In deciding whether George Zimmerman was justified in the use of deadly force, you must judge him by the circumstances by which he was surrounded at the time the force was used.” With this excerpt alone, GZ’s irresponsible actions that led to the confrontation could not be taken into account by the jury! This was HUGE for his defense.

    GZ is not a hero. His intentions may have been for the good of his neighborhood. But, he made an unwise decision, and was lucky to be found not guilty.

    As far as believing a woman deserves to be raped if they walk a street after dark – My answer is absolutely not. But ask yourself this: Would walking down a street after dark be a wise decision on behalf of a woman, if that situation can easily be avoided? ……Hope to hear from you soon.

  50. Nice patronizing tone there, CCL. Not sure why you experienced my comments as being out of control, but perhaps it’s because you cannot tolerate someone disagreeing with you. I do indeed carry concealed, and you know nothing about me or my skill level, so I would appreciate it if you would keep your insults to yourself and stick to what I actually said.

    My point was this, and I will say it slowly this time since you appear to have missed it again: Zimmerman was acting as neighborhood watch, to which he was elected (he was NOT “self-appointed” and if you paid attention to what Mas has written you would know that.) He was not acting as a “regular” citizen at that time, and whether he was on duty officially or not is not the point. He was neighborhood watch, obviously felt that responsibility, and followed instructions from the dispatch operator. As a matter of evidence and FACT, Zimmerman was doing exactly what was expected of him: he followed Martin briefly, then turned back per instructions. You are repeatedly characterizing his actions as having been far more aggressive than they were, exactly as every Trayvon apologist out there has been doing. Zimmerman was not complicit in the attack by Martin, as the jury found. Martin and Martin alone made that choice. I can only surmise that you too have been blinded by your own personal narrative of the events. Go back and read what Mas has been writing.

    Furthermore CCL, I never once advocated for someone (like you, say) to ever get involved in any community incidents. Of course those who carry concealed should take care to avoid dangerous situations, as should those who carry no weapons at all. Your condescending tone is offensive, because you know absolutely zero about me or my philosophy on this point. Perhaps you are fond of hearing yourself speak, because you are arguing points I never made.

Newer Comments »