It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by KilrathiLG
reply to post by habitforming
well he did and you keep ignoring it its only stalking if you complain about it to authorities and it goes on for more then ONE incident seeing as the incident happened when they first met each other stalking harassment laws don't seem to apply so by all means keep yelling at some one who was trying to teach you something guess ignorance is bliss but to each their own
stalking is not relevant to the case in question perhaps some of the people who have been threatening mr Zimmerman will be up on stalking/cyberstalking charges if not harassment for the threats of violence against him and his family as those DO fall under the definitions of stalking laws federal aswell as state
Originally posted by Xcathdra
There is nothing illegal about following an individual, either on foot or by car.
Originally posted by butcherguy
Following a person repeatedly is not necessarily illegal. Private investigators do it for a living. If you follow a person after a restraining order has been issued regarding that person, you will be arrested for violating that order, and possibly anti-stalking laws.
Following a person onto private property can be illegal, but they don't arrest you for 'following', they arrest you for trespass.
Violating a court order is illegal.
Trespassing is illegal.
There are probably a lot of things a person could do while following someone that would be illegal, like doing it nude. In that case they probably would arrest the perpetrator for public nudity, not 'following'.
Anyone know of any arrests made with the charge being following?
And if they make following illegal, maybe the country would be rid of mimes!edit on 14-7-2012 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by butcherguy
If any rational members think that this post supports the contention that the act of 'following someone' is illegal, let me know.
The point I am making is that 'following' a person is legal to do.
If you break another law while 'following' someone, you are guilty of violating a different law.
The same can be said of eating birthday cake. If you do it while trespassing, you will be arrested on charges of trespassing, not charges of 'eating birthday cake'.edit on 15-7-2012 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)
So you are saying that when it comes to stalking, there are some things that are illegal about eating ice cream cake?
Originally posted by butcherguy
So you are saying that when it comes to stalking, there are some things that are illegal about eating ice cream cake?
And some members want to critique other members reading ability and comprehension.
Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Xcathdra
Something that remains to be seen will be how community organizers and the media will handle the resulting dismissed case or not guilty verdict.
It wouldn't take much to stir up riots when either happens.
I am curious when the motion to dismiss based on immunity will come....
Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Xcathdra
I am curious when the motion to dismiss based on immunity will come....
Statutory immunity based on Florida's Stand Your Ground law?
Zimmerman did not have repeated contact with Martin. He had one encounter and that was it. Zimmerman's actions dont even come close to stalking. As I said, if you don't know / understand the law, dont try to use it to support your position.
In the end, in this situation - which of these two men really had the most to fear?
Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Spiramirabilis
In the end, in this situation - which of these two men really had the most to fear?
In that they were both facing complete unknowns, that is a difficult question to answer.
If you follow the story that the evidence backs up, Martin probably had a lot of fear when Trayvon was on top of him on the sidewalk, pummeling Martin with his fists.
If there hadn't been a gun involved this would be a completely different story and we'd also have two versions of the story instead of just the one
Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
He absolutely did stalk him - but as it was just this one time it doesn't fit the definition of stalking we are all familiar with today.
Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
What he did do is follow, wait and watch for this young man until he finally decided to confront him. Who was the aggressor?
Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
It's all going to be about intent. He could have just waited for the cops to show up - but he decided to take matters into his own hands - possibly (and I say possibly for a reason) forcing the young man to feel he needed to defend himself.
Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
In the end, in this situation - which of these two men really had the most to fear?edit on 7/15/2012 by Spiramirabilis because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Spiramirabilis
If there hadn't been a gun involved this would be a completely different story and we'd also have two versions of the story instead of just the one
It definitely would have been a completely different story. There may not have been two versions though. One possible outcome would have been that George Zimmerman would have been beaten to death by Trayvon Martin.
It happens.