"The lawmaker called for a full investigation into the death of Trayvon, a Florida teenager shot last month by a neighborhood watch volunteer. The 17-year-old's death has become a cause celebre, sparking a national conversation about racial profiling and "Stand Your Ground" self-defense laws." USA Today
-----------------------------------
Does Rush not think a "full investigation" is underway? The "Stand Your Ground" law is really not a factor in what happened to Martin. Zimmerman was carrying a pistol that he lawfully possessed and carried without regard to that law. The issue is whether or not he lawfully shot Martin in self defense.
The SYG law is a Florida law. The US federal government has no ability to change that law unless it wishes to claim that the law is unconsitutional country wide.
I found the statement of the acting Sanford chief of police to be a hopeful thing. He said that the Sanford PD would not allow the integrity of the investigayion to be corrupted by the media and public. I suppose we will hear him called an "Uncle Tom." pl
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2012/03/trayvon-martin-hoodie-bobby-rush-/1
Two decades in Congress and this is the best leadership he can provide? Maybe he should leave that safe seat in Chicago and move to Sanford. Then he'll find out whether the people of that part of Florida want his style of leadership representing them in Congress.
Posted by: Fred | 28 March 2012 at 02:10 PM
Col. Lang,
While we're quoting official Sanford PD officers, it's worth noting that the investigating detective on the scene was skeptical of Zimmerman's story and recommended his arrest. This has been widely reported in the last day or two, but here's one link out of many:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/trayvon-martin-detective-wanted-charge-george-zimmerman-manslaughter/story?id=16011674
I once again wish to reiterate that I do not know all the facts in this case, but I feel that there's more than enough evidence to precipitate the normal investigative process that normally follows a shooting death. I'm not calling anyone racist, I just think that it looks like normal police procedures were rather conspicuously not followed in this case.
Posted by: Dongo | 28 March 2012 at 02:36 PM
Dongo
The State's Attorney has the power of decision as to whether or not a case should be prosecuted, not the police. If the State's Attorney said that there was not enough evidence to prosecute the case, what was the Sanford, PD supposed to do? pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 28 March 2012 at 02:49 PM
Although the Sanford Police Chief might have stated that the Sanford PD would not allow the process "to be corrupted by the media", the local news paper reports that his PD was the source of 2 recent unauthorized "leaks" (both presenting a negative image of the youth killed). This per the questioning on CNN the other night of the reporter as to where the "leaks" directly came from.
Everyone needs to hold their mud and let the grand jury process take hold. As of yesterday I refused to follow the story (except for the Col.'s blog!)
Posted by: Al Spafford | 28 March 2012 at 03:02 PM
I think the Federal government can get involved if they think Trayvon's Civil Rights were violated, but I could be wrong on that. I think everyone needs to stand back and let the legal system work. I also am only following this story on SST.
Posted by: Nancy K | 28 March 2012 at 03:20 PM
This year, my home precinct was redistricted back into Bobby Rush's congressional district.
As I had mentioned in a much earlier post on this blog. Barack Obama ran and lost the Democratic primary against this former Black Panther because, according to the Congressman, "... Barack wasn't black enough...". Obama did win in my precinct, which is majority white. Ironic....
Anyway, "divide and conquer" per the powers that be.....distract the masses...
Posted by: Ramojus | 28 March 2012 at 03:45 PM
There's quite a bit of contradictory information concerning the Zimmerman case. First, the news was the police let him go without fully interrogating him. Today, an article by Zimmerman's father says he was taken to the police station for questioning. It's impossible to form an unprejudiced opinion of his guilt or innocence based on the available information.
What is important is to understand how destructive to a society the uninformed public's over reaction can be. The peoples repressed demand for a lynching is resurfacing with a vengeance. Before the Civil War most lynching victims were white, afterwards most were black. The actors keep changing but the hanging tree remains.
Posted by: optimax | 28 March 2012 at 06:33 PM
This incident triggered a nationwide hysteria over issues far beyond what happened on that rainy night in Sanford. There's everything involved with the "driving while black" issue and perceived/actual unequal justice. Then there's the frustration of being able to legally protect one's life and property against the predations of antisocial thugs. Beyond the immediate families of Martin and Zimmerman, the American public are far more concerned about these issues than the fates of those two individuals. And everyone is pushing their own agendas rather than talking about the issues.
At the eye of this storm, it does look like the Sanford PD was acting professionally. Now we see the film of Zimmerman arriving at the police station in handcuffs. Seeing what he looked like that night, I would have jumped his ass if he was following me on a rainy night. I would assume that he was up to no good. I would probably have incapacitated Zimmerman quickly if I spotted his pistol in his belt. Then I would have been in handcuffs at the Sanford police station. And i would have claimed SYG as a defense.
Posted by: The Twisted Genius | 28 March 2012 at 09:39 PM
There is now released video of Zimmerman as he's transferred from the squad car after he's booked. He looks on the tape unscathed contrary to what his lawyer claims. But that's just a tape. It remains to be determined what happened, but I assume if there isn't a criminal prosecution there will be a public inquiry. A sad tragedy and a needless death no matter what rationalization.
Posted by: sd nadh | 28 March 2012 at 11:16 PM
ABC news has a surviellance video of Zimmermans arrival at the police station.
From what I could see, there are no apparent head injuries, scuff marks or bleeding, and a broken nose often bleeds a lot. He appears perfectly composed. I would have thought that if he had just successfully defended himself from a lethal attack by a Black man, there would be some evidence remaining of the adrenalin that should have kicked in.
To me, he looks like someone who has just killed an untermenschen in cold blood, although I stand to be corrected.
http://abcnews.go.com/WN/trayvon-martin-case-exclusive-surveillance-video-george-zimmerman/story?id=16022897#.T3PgFh0nYz0
Posted by: Walrus | 29 March 2012 at 12:18 AM
We are all playing into the hands of media who is driving this story. The video of Zimmerman arriving at the police station say absolutely nothing, except that Zimmerman was indeed arrested and questioned. So much for the cops not doing there jobs. As Colonel Lang pointed out. The States Attorney is the one who made the decision not to prosecute not Sanford PD.
By the way, in my opinion, even Rush in a Hoodie looks like a hood... Politically speaking he is a gangster not a hood. I am sickened by this showmanship on the floor of the House when it applies to only one race.
Posted by: Jake | 29 March 2012 at 08:44 AM
Sanford PD bites the press... http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/03/29/2720590/sanford-police-threaten-to-arrest.html
Posted by: Jake | 29 March 2012 at 09:05 AM
Largely having avoided paying attention to the story outside of discussions at SST, I am reminded about how while Rashomon has not had a Hollywood remake (according to wiki, its influenced many); as with many great films, reality is paralleling that timeless classic.
Whether Zimmerman did or did not murder Trayvon doesn't particularly interest me one way or the other (there are 14000 murders annually in the US, so why this one) as Trayvon is dead and that is not going to change.
In contrast, whether the investigative process was aborted is important and that is where I hope the investigations lead.
Posted by: ISL | 29 March 2012 at 09:19 AM
The last time I was on a jury, we had about 20 experts, the participants form a multi-vehicle accident and one salt of the earth mechanic good samaritan who witnessed and stopped and rendered help.
The participants and experts all contradicted each other. We relied on the salt of the earth mechanic as the real key to the case. He had no axe to grind and spoke with a down home honesty.
In this case the key seems to be the 911 operator who told Zimmerman to not get out of the car and not confront Trayvon Martin. But Zimmerman got out with a loaded gun to confront someone who has not been suggested at all to have been doing anything illegal. Confronting someone with a loaded gun in that case puts all of the burden on you to act wisely and not precipitously. So far, all the rest is imply 'he said' vs. 'he said'.
By the way, in the jury case above, attorneys from one side really tried to inject racism into the case and it did affect one juror very strongly, but we didn't need to be unanimous in a civil case.
Posted by: pj20 | 29 March 2012 at 04:18 PM
pj20
"who told Zimmerman to not get out of the car and not confront Trayvon Martin. But Zimmerman got out with a loaded gun to confront someone who has not been suggested at all to have been doing anything illegal."
Once again, you people are creating your own facts. Zimmerman called the 911 operator. At one point the operator asked him if he was following Martin. When told that he was, the operator said, "we don't need you to do that." Zimmerman was walking when he made the call. Look at the police report. Once again, there was nothing illegal about Zimmerman carrying his pistol on the street in a holster. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 29 March 2012 at 04:38 PM
Col. Lang,
'you people' is rather demeaning and unnecessary. I'm not even sure which 'you people' I belong to.
I admit I didn't listen to the tapes. But the operator calling him off is enough for me and is the key point here, just. After she called him off, he is no longer a responsible citizen, but just someone looking for trouble with a loaded gun.
One has to ask here - We hear about rights, but what is the responsibility of a someone publicly walking with a loaded gun. Yes you should defend yourself from attack, but what if you cause the attack by following someone after you have been called off?
Gun owners certainly have rights, but they have responsibilities as well.
Col. Lang, I appreciate your site, but indiscriminately calling someone, 'you people' is a little over the line, even for someone who has earned a little irascibility.
Posted by: pj20 | 29 March 2012 at 05:14 PM
pj20
"the operator calling him off is enough for me" Too bad. Making judgments from ignorant sentimentality is always "too bad." Gun owners have responsibilities? Yes, but did GZ meet his responsibilities' You have no idea. You just emote. If you don't like it here, don't come back. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 29 March 2012 at 05:32 PM
He called 911and 911 called him off following Martin. He disregarded that direction from a trained official and followed Martin with a loaded gun. I call that being irresponsible.
Posted by: pj20 | 29 March 2012 at 05:46 PM
pj20
Are you still here? You don't know that he continues following Martin? You haven't listened to the tapes or read the police report have you? How do you kow know anything, from Charles Blow or Lawrence O'Donnell? Do you own a pistol? pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 29 March 2012 at 05:51 PM
A 911 dispatcher has NO authority over anyone.
And my experience with them has left the impression of know-it-all knuckleheads who couldn't make it at Dunkin Donuts.
Posted by: Tim Vincent | 29 March 2012 at 09:56 PM
" The issue is whether or not he lawfully shot Martin in self defense."
I'd say the issue is also why the police tested Martin's body for drugs... but released Zimmerman w/out conducting such a test. I'd also be interested to whether the police knew about the complaints about Zimmerman's overzealousness from his neighbors, his 49 calls (mostly about suspicious persons) to the police in the previous few months or his past history of "resisting arrest with violence and battery on a police officer". If they did, did they actually tell Martin's parents that Zimmerman was "squeaky clean"? Did Zimmerman's last name and perfect English in any way influence the decision that deadly shooting of a black teen in a hoodie with an actual "squeaky clean" criminal record was unworthy of further investigation... and on and on.
Even w/the same conservative haircut I had 15 years ago in the military, I won't be walking through any gated communities until this is fully investigated and what appears to be reckless aggression is punished. Near as I can tell, extra-judicial killings are now "squeaky clean" if the shooter is white and the victim is wearing a hoodie.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/17/us/justice-department-investigation-is-sought-in-florida-teenagers-shooting-death.html
Posted by: Ben | 30 March 2012 at 09:56 AM
Thanks for making the point about the authority of a police dispatcher (none). Seems to have been lost in all the chatter. That said, my sister was a police dispatcher, and she's now a geophysicist. The dispatcher that night talked good sense; GZ decided not to listen.
Posted by: shepherd | 30 March 2012 at 06:28 PM