Is physical assault justified if you're being followed?[W:263]

[ric27]

I can think of a lot of reasons. When I was getting followed by a car full of guys, the last thing I wanted to do was go home so they'd know where I live.

So, what did you do?

Did you go ape**** :giggling: on them?

 

[ttwtt78640]

I can think of a lot of reasons. When I was getting followed by a car full of guys, the last thing I wanted to do was go home so they'd know where I live.

More fantasy scenarios? Such great fear while holding a cellphone and yet no call for help?

 

[CRUE CAB]

If someone followed you at 7pm roadside in a residential community, in which you were a recent visitor, would you go to a dark place and attack them?

Nope, I probably would ask them for directions. Getting old, so getting lost is a real possibility.
Now when I was 17 I would have asked whats up, and if the dude as an asshole. I would have told him to go pound sand and gone home. Or if he was cool, and told me about the neighborhood watch, I probably would of asked how to join.

 

[Captain Adverse]

The answer to the OP's poll question, taken alone without any other information is NO! There is no legal justification for assaulting someone simply because they were following you.

Now, you do have a right to defend yourself using reasonable force if you have a rational belief that you are facing a credible threat of harm. You can escalate this defense to the use of deadly force if you have a rational belief that you are in imminent peril of death or serious bodily harm.

To address parties on both sides of the case people keep citing, here is a HYPOTHETICAL scenario.

You are a young individual visiting a location you are not very familiar with, although you have a right to be there. It is night time, and raining, and as a typical youth you would be experiencing a heightened awareness of your surroundings because you are alone in unfamiliar territory. Compound this perhaps by prior nighttime encounters with other aggressive kids, and/or perhaps being rousted by cops or other adults.

Now you notice someone seems to be following you. You begin to make efforts to lose this tail, cutting across lawns and through yards. You don't think the person following you is a policeman because you know they are more open and aggressive, usually shining lights or turning on their flashers and using a loudspeaker to ask you to halt. Your apprehension is increasing because you don't know who it is or why you are being followed.

NOTE: the person following is a concerned resident who thinks the teen's evasive actions are very suspicious. This increases HIS alarm, and his desire to make certain the individual is not a threat to his neighborhood. He keeps following.

After a period of "cat and mouse" the two meet. Question: What if the concerned citizen steps up and grabs the arm of the nervous teenager to try to stop and question him? Can the teenager strike out in honest fear he is being assaulted?

My point is, we don't know exactly how this particular confrontation started, right? I have not followed the case so I ask; was there any other eye-witness to the start of the fight besides the survivor? My understanding is that the survivor of the confrontation never testified on his own behalf, so we only have his statements during his police interviews for what happened initially, correct?

So I ask again, would any teenager caught up in such a situation have the right to strike a person who has been following him if that person grabs him first?

 

[ecofarm]

Right...and I would agree with you if Zimmerman was minding his own business and got randomly jumped and shot Trayvon.

There is nothing wrong with checking out (including following, to see what he's up to) a 6' male stranger in ones community.

 

[Buckworth]

So, what did you do?

Did you go ape**** :giggling: on them?

Is it really so hard for you to believe that Trayvon wasn't afraid? Do you have any idea what it's like to get followed?

 

[Buckworth]

More fantasy scenarios? Such great fear while holding a cellphone and yet no call for help?

How is that possibly relevant. What's your explanation...that he was using being stalked as an excuse to beat somebody to death?

 

[Buckworth]

There is nothing wrong with checking out (including following, to see what he's up to) a 6' male stranger in ones community.

Yes, yes there is. That's called profiling, and it violates your civil rights.

 

[year2late]

A 6 foot male visiting a community should not be surprised when he is checked out by a neighbor. Many people in my community will check out or even follow a stranger to see what they are up to. There is nothing wrong with that. It in no way justifies an attack no removes their right to self defense.

Have you shown any evidence yet that 6 foot males are not crime victims?

You certainly have a distinct preoccupation with 6 foot males.

 

[opendebate]

Oh, please. I've had neighbors check me out. I've had plenty of people follow me, some probably with bad intentions. And I've never needed to attack someone just for following me, not even in developing countries.

Don't you think though that some situations warrant concern while others may not? Also, that if you are a woman or an young man you may be more inclined to feel threatened than if you are a big man?

 

[ecofarm]

Yes, yes there is. That's called profiling, and it violates your civil rights.

There is nothing wrong with following a stranger in ones community to see what they are up to. The fact that it was a 6' male and not a female only makes your claim more ridiculous.

If one chooses to check out a 6' male stranger in ones community, to follow him and to see what he is up to, one does not give up ones right to self defense.

 

[ecofarm]

Have you shown any evidence yet that 6 foot males are not crime victims?

You certainly have a distinct preoccupation with 6 foot males.

There is nothing wrong with checking out a stranger in ones community.

 

[Buckworth]

The answer to the OP's poll question, taken alone without any other information is NO! There is no legal justification for assaulting someone simply because they were following you.

Now, you do have a right to defend yourself using reasonable force if you have a rational belief that you are facing a credible threat of harm. You can escalate this defense to the use of deadly force if you have a rational belief that you are in imminent peril of death or serious bodily harm.

To address parties on both sides of the case people keep citing, here is a HYPOTHETICAL scenario.

You are a young individual visiting a location you are not very familiar with, although you have a right to be there. It is night time, and raining, and as a typical youth you would be experiencing a heightened awareness of your surroundings because you are alone in unfamiliar territory. Compound this perhaps by prior nighttime encounters with other aggressive kids, and/or perhaps being rousted by cops or other adults.

Now you notice someone seems to be following you. You begin to make efforts to lose this tail, cutting accross lawns and through yards. You don't think the person following you is a policeman because you know they are more open and aggressive, usually shining lights or turning on their flashers and using a loudspeaker to ask you to halt. Your apprehension is increasing because you don't know who it is or why you are being followed. NOTE: the person following is a concerned resident who thinks the teen's evasive actions are very suspicious. This increases HIS alarm, and his desire to make certain the individual is not a threat to his neighborhood. He keeps following.

After a period of "cat and mouse" the two meet. Question: What if the concerned citizen steps up and grabs the arm of the nervous teenager to try to stop and question him? Can the teenager strike out in honest fear he is being assaulted?

My point is, we don't know exactly how this particular confrontation started, right? I have not followed the case so I ask; was there any other eye-witness to the start of the fight besides the survivor? My understanding is that the survivor of the confrontation never testified on his own behalf, so we only have his statements during his police interviews for what happened initially, correct?

So I ask again, would any teenager caught up in such a situation have the right to strike a person who has been following him if that person grabs him first?

It seems that the kid would certainly have met the requirements to reasonably evade confrontation and would be justified to use force to defence himself out of fear for his safety.

 

[ecofarm]

Don't you think though that some situations warrant concern while others may not?

Yes. When I was in Africa, alone, some followings warranted concern. I never attacked the follower. 7 pm, roadside, residential community, middle class America is not a big "oh crap" moment for me. If it was, I would call the cops - not go to a dark place and attack the concerned neighbor.

Also, that if you are a woman or an young man you may be more inclined to feel threatened than if you are a big man?

M was 6', Z was shorter.

 

[ecofarm]

It seems that the kid would certainly have met the requirements to reasonably evade confrontation and would be justified to use force to defence himself out of fear for his safety.

Attacking from the darkness is not an attempt to avoid confrontation. There was plenty of time for M to get home and he could have called the cops if he was so scared.

 

[opendebate]

Yes. When I was in Africa, alone, some followings warranted concern. I never attacked the follower. 7 pm, roadside, residential community, middle class America is not a big "oh crap" moment for me. If it was, I would call the cops - not go to a dark place and attack the concerned neighbor.



Martin was 6'.

This is really irrelevant. The question is did Trayvon feel threatened. If he did his so called "attack" would be justified for the same reasons Zimmerman was supposedly justified. Unfortunately we will never hear his side of the story.

 

[ric27]

Is it really so hard for you to believe that Trayvon wasn't afraid? Do you have any idea what it's like to get followed?

This is not what I assume...thats bs

Z to be the aggressor had to initially provoke the use of *physical force*a push/shove.

You need evidence that Z was about to attack M

 

[Aunt Spiker]

This is really irrelevant. The question is did Trayvon feel threatened. If he did his so called "attack" would be justified for the same reasons Zimmerman was supposedly justified. Unfortunately we will never hear his side of the story.

I have to ask - and I guess i just picked your post to ask this of for no reason at all - but why is Martin called by his first name while Zimmerman is called by his last name?

Is it because Treyvon sounds like a last name and Martin sounds like a first?

 

[ecofarm]

This is really irrelevant. The question is did Trayvon feel threatened. If he did his so called "attack" would be justified for the same reasons Zimmerman was supposedly justified. Unfortunately we will never hear his side of the story.

Being followed at 7 pm in a residential community roadside while a minute from home is not justification to attack someone (without even calling the police!). Especially not as a 6' male. We're not talking about a woman being followed late at night in a parking lot downtown. Let's keep context.

 

[ric27]

Yes, yes there is. That's called profiling, and it violates your civil rights.

Private individuals can profile so it violates squat.....meaning its not illegal

 

[opendebate]

I have to ask - and I guess i just picked your post to ask this of for no reason at all - but why is Martin called by his first name while Zimmerman is called by his last name?

Is it because Treyvon sounds like a last name and Martin sounds like a first?

I actually alternate and sometimes call them by their last names, by first names, by initials. I don't think it is really relevant. Honestly curious....are you making a point or is that just random curiosity,

 

[ttwtt78640]

How is that possibly relevant. What's your explanation...that he was using being stalked as an excuse to beat somebody to death?

My explanation, for what it is worth, is that Martin was upset that he was being personally disrespected or racially profiled; just as many have jumped to that conclusion for Zimmerman's initial interest in him. Martin related to his friend that he was being followed by a "creepy ass cracka". What does a "no_limit_nigga" normally do to a "creepy ass cracka"?

 

[opendebate]

Being followed at 7 pm in a residential community roadside while a minute from home is not justification to attack someone (without even calling the police!). Especially not as a 6' male. We're not talking about a woman being followed late at night in a parking lot downtown. Let's keep context.

But you must agree that this is speculation. Not having been there, neither one of us knows that actual circumstances. Z could have appeared very threatening to TM. You may find it unlikely, but that does not make it so.

 

[Josie]

Where were you people back when the trial was actually happening? What's the point in going through it all now after it's all over? Oy!

 

[Aunt Spiker]

I actually alternate and sometimes call them by their last names, by first names, by initials. I don't think it is really relevant. Honestly curious....are you making a point or is that just random curiosity,

Pointless, random curiosity - it's been like this since everything started and I never could figure out why it's first name and last name.

At first I thought it was because people thought that if you referred to someone by their first name you made them more 'of a person' (like - Silence of the Lambs type stuff) . . . but I don't think that's why people do it. I suppose at this point it's just sort of a picked-up habit, people do it without thinking about it.

I think I do it, too. LOL - not sure. It's passive.

Where were you people back when the trial was actually happening? What's the point in going through it all now after it's all over? Oy!

To be honest - I avoided discussing it much because so many 'facts' weren't known, yet- I figured everything relevant would come out during the trial or by this point we'd have a more solid picture of events.