Self Defense or Murder? From [HERE] A white SWAT officer serving an early morning “no-knock” search warrant was killed after being shot in the head during the raid.

Officer Shaun Diamond, 45, succumbed to his injuries Wednesday in a Pasadena hospital. David Martinez, of San Gabriel, was arrested on suspicion of attempted murder of an officer.

On Thursday he was charged with capital murder. [next day delivery of justice when white folks are killed. Grand Juries are reserved for non-white victims.] Prosecutors are still deciding whether they will pursue the death penalty against Martinez. [MORE]. There is no allegation that he possessed the firearm illegally or that contraband was found in the home.

During the hearing Thursday, Martinez’s attorney Tom Medrano told the court his client was being held inside a cell naked, and asked that clothing be provided to Martinez. [MORE]

Diamond was wounded as he attempted to lead fellow officers into the home around 4 a.m. Tuesday, Los Angeles County sheriff’s Lt. Eddie Hernandez said. Diamond was struck above his bullet-proof vest, possibly in the back of the head, according to Chief Paul J. Capraro of the Pomona Police Department. The 46-year-old officer was wearing a Kevlar helmet, Capraro said. 

Investigators said the shot may have been a ricochet. [MORE] 

As is the case in most of these military-style raids on homes, it took place in the middle of the night, when the homeowners are usually asleep. Martinez apparently lives with his wife, both parents, disabled sister and three young children (a newborn and an 8- and a 10-year-old) all who were home asleep at the time. 

Had police simply knocked on the door perhaps this entire incident could have been avoided.

The warrant was being served to investigate Martinez’s involvement in an alleged “outlaw motorcycle gang.” Instead of gathering evidence through a peaceful and announced search and possibly making an arrest by conducting an actual investigation, SWAT goes in, without knocking and the situation is immediately escalated and prone to violence.

Once we take a closer look at this incident, we can see some inconsistencies as well.

According to the police, Diamond was shot in the back of the head as he lead the SWAT team through the door of Martinez’s house.

“When Officer Diamond was attempting to breach the outer door of the location, the interior door opened and he was met with gunfire,” Hernandez told reporters at a news conference.

Martinez then surrendered without incident, Hernandez said. Officers did not return fire because the suspect’s father was in the way, he said.

This implies that Martinez was waiting at the door as SWAT came in, was somehow to able maneuver a shotgun behind Diamond’s head, got off one shot, and then managed to move back behind his father before any of these highly trained SWAT officers got off one shot.

If this official recount is true, it is fairly obvious that Martinez was simply defending his home from would-be intruders and only fired one shot because he then realized it was the police.

If it’s not true and the shot wasn’t fired by Martinez, it implies that the shotgun round to the back of Diamond’s head was friendly fire, referred to by police as an Accidental Discharge, or AD.

The AD scenario seems much more likely. 

How often have police shown restraint when they are NOT shot at?

We’ve seen SWAT teams shoot people ranging from the very young to the very old, who’ve posed no threat. Martinez was supposedly at point blank range holding and having just fired a shotgun at them, killing one of them, and they did not shoot back? [MORE]

What is Stand Your Ground? 

Stand your ground is simply a self-defense criminal defense that allows for the use of deadly force when it is reasonable to do so.

Specifically, it is a criminal defense raised at trial that allows for the use of deadly force when it is reasonable for a non-aggressor/victim to do so. In states which have variations of this law a person does not have a legal duty to retreat before using self defense to defend themselves under life threatening conditions that are reasonably apparent to the victim. Most states, including D.C. have a version of the law. [MORE]

Consider the Stand Your Ground law in Florida:

§ 776.012 (2012). Use of force in defense of person

A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if: (1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or (2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.

§ 776.013. Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm (3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

Consider the Stand Your Ground law in so called "liberal" and "black", Washington, DC. The D.C. Jury Instruction states,

"The law does not require a person to retreat or consider retreating when s/he actually and reasonably believes that s/he is in danger of death or serious bodily harm and that deadly force is necessary to repel that danger. But the law does say that a person should take reasonable steps, such as stepping back or walking away, to avoid the necessity of taking a human life, so long as those steps are consistent with the person's own safety. In deciding whether [name of defendant] acted reasonably, you should therefore consider whether s/he could have taken those steps, consistent with his/her own safety."

The comment states, this instruction represents the "middle ground" between "the right to stand and kill, and the duty to retreat to the wall before killing," Gillis v. U.S., 400 A.2d 311, 313 (D.C. 1979), and may be given "when there is a truly relevant question as to whether a defendant could have safely retreated." Broadie v. U.S., 925 A.2d 605, 621 (D.C. 2007).

There is nothing racial about the above. The plain meaning of so-called Stand Your Ground Laws is not racist."

The operating system (OS) of White supremacy is the cause and effect of white people's genocidal conduct towards non-whites; recent incidents are part of this observable pattern.

Neely Fuller explains that a "non-law" is any law that is used in such a manner as to promote injustice. Stand Your Ground is such a law or policy. It's application or inapplication by racist police, prosecutors, jurors, judges and lawyers along with the collective support or lack therof from white media and white people in general is what causes or creates injustice for non-whites. Racism/white supremacy is the problem in such situations - not a self defense law. 

To a racist, the application of non-laws such as Stand Your Ground is about justifying psychopathic or racist behavior that enables white genetic survival in a world in which the vast majority is non-white.