TRAYVON MARTIN WASN'T THE FIRST

Here’s a strange and worrying story I picked up from a newspaper in Florida, the West Palm Beach News. It is dated 30 December 2011. The incident described predates the tragic death in Florida of the young black man Trayvon Martin, whose killer has recently been found not guilty of murder.  

The piece starts, ‘A 19 year old man, one Benjy ‘Peewee’ Young, of West Palm Beach, was found dead on the pavement. He had been shot. He had allegedly been trying to steal a motorbike from a parking lot.’ 

The newspaper went on to say that his accomplices had fled. Later in the piece we are told that during the shooting 15 year old Marvin Crowley Jnr was hit several times in the chest and once in the leg; Tavaris Fox, 15, was shot in the foot and Bernard Jones, 17, was shot in the knee. The newspaper doesn’t attempt to reconcile its claim that the alleged accomplices ‘had fled’ with its ability to quote specific knowledge of their names and, indeed, their injuries.  

The Sheriff’s 'office spokesman', told the paper that ‘The attempted-theft victim called 911 after hearing his dog growl and looking outside saw someone backing up his yellow Susuki motorcycle and attempting to put it in a Dodge Ram pickup truck. He yelled out to the group of three. One man reached down to his waist, held something that appeared to be a gun and pointed it at the bedroom window where the motorcycle owner was standing. The motorcycle owner then fired his gun, fatally striking Young. The other men fled the scene and were still at large as of Thursday night’ (No mention is made of the other injuries received by Young’s accomplices yet, one must observe, the injured men managed to convey the extent of their wounds to someone or other so that the newspaper was informed). 

It’s a minor point but the newspaper appears to believe that four men were involved and names them all. The police spokesman believes there were three. Surely a fact that is worth establishing? 

The newspaper goes on to tell us that ‘A man who lives in the vicinity of the shooting says he was awakened when he heard several shots at 4.32 am. “It was really loud,” he said, “I heard pop, pop, pop, pop, silence … and then pop, pop, pop. At first I thought it was New Year’s Eve or something”.’  

The paper adds ‘But Thursday morning’s shooting won’t soon be forgotten by the would-be victim of Young’s latest criminal attempt, or the man’s neighbours. The pock marks in the trees and parking lot near the scene are clear reminders.’ 

What struck me about this account (apart from appearing to be written by a young person on work experience) was the number of shots produced by the ‘would-be victim’. Add them up. We have Young, shot dead – assume one bullet hit its mark; Crowley hit several times in the chest, let’s say three times and once in the leg, that would be four times; Fox shot in the foot and Jones shot in knee. Seven shots. That matches the number of pops heard by the neighbour. But then we have the ‘pock marks in the trees and parking lot’. That has to be more than seven. What kind of weapon was the ‘would be victim’ using? I’m no expert in guns but given that people under fire probably move fairly quickly to avoid being shot this suggests a weapon capable firing many rounds very fast. The ‘hit rate’ also suggests an accomplished marksman, perhaps even a trained marksman (which makes me suspicious as to the shooter’s professional occupation and affiliation).  

The police report says the ‘would be victim’ saw one man holding something that appeared to be a gun and pointed it where he was standing.’ This would be the ‘would be victim’s’ justification for blasting off , with considerable accuracy and, it seems likely, considerable speed, at least seven rounds – they are the ones that hit their marks, of course; and there were others that missed; think about those ‘pock marks’. 

Had this event occurred in the UK how would such an incident  have been treated by the police? Here in the UK we are not allowed to own guns and the penalty for doing so is huge, whether they are fired or not. So here Mr ‘would be victim’ would have a lot of explaining to do in court and would probably go to prison. Here you don’t get off by saying you thought you saw a gun if self-defence is offered as a plea. Here, when threatened with serious violence you are expected to use only ‘reasonable and appropriate’ force and only then where there is actual evidence of threat. On the basis of what the newspaper said it doesn’t appear that there was any evidence of threat, only what Mr ‘would be victim’ claimed he saw, and no firearm was recovered from the scene. 

What was the conclusion of all this? Well, here it is, in the words of the newspaper: ‘The man who shot Young in the torso will not face criminal charges because he fired his gun out of fear', the sheriff’s office spokesman said. The sheriff’s office did not release the ‘would be victim’s’ identity.  

The newspaper did go into some details about the dead man. It’s clear enough he was a bad ‘un. There had been several run-ins with local law enforcement over recent years which culminated in a July 2010 grand jury indictment for his role in a drive-by shooting. Since 2007 he had been arrested on charges including aggravated assault, robbery, fleeing and eluding police, vehicle theft and possession of burglary tools.  

So, to quote the song from the musical, ‘Chicago’, He Had It Coming. And he got it. Won’t be any more trouble from that 19 year old scoundrel will there? 

In Florida you may own a gun, so that’s OK, but discharging it, killing one man and wounding three more must surely be worthy of a bit of a serious investigation? This didn’t seem to happen.  

The good people of this small town must be disconcerted by the knowledge that someone living in their midst killed one and wounded three men and all he had to do to escape any charges and the publication of his name was to say that he thought he saw a gun and was frightened. And nobody knows who he is. Nobody knows who he is ...

A Final word
Neither the newspaper, nor the Sheriff’s office spokesman, nor I have mentioned the colour of the victims of this appalling incident yet I’m pretty sure we all know what it is.

(I posted a blog on this story many months ago. Recent events in the US make me think it is time to bring it to your attention once more. The above is a slightly edited version of the original.)