PDA

View Full Version : 17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #32


Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5

imamaze
04-23-2012, 11:24 AM
Please continue here.

Remember the rules: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=159
Remember the "ignore" feature on your profile page.
Please stick with the facts as reported by LE or MSM, and link them. Link them often if necessary.
Please clearly state when it is your opinion. If you are making an inference please clearly outline and link the facts and evidence that have led you to form that inference. Wild speculation about any case player has no place here.
Please PM a mod with any questions or concerns and alert any TOS violations or offensive posts.
And finally, PLEASE address one another respectfully. Last reminder.

We are allowing MSM links only at this time...
Blogs and Twitter links and discussion of them are allowed only if it's an approved WS link.
The only approved links at this time are:
Huffington Post
Examiner - Isabelle Zehnder
Richard Hornsby's site
Hinky Meter


Thread #1 (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=165269&highlight=Trayvon)
Thread #2 (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=166351&highlight=Trayvon+martin)
Thread #3 (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=166513&highlight=Trayvon+martin)
Thread #4 (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=166660&highlight=Trayvon+martin)
Thread #5
Thread #6 (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=166872&highlight=Trayvon+Martin)
Thread #7 (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=167001&highlight=Trayvon+Martin)
Thread #8 (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=167151&highlight=y%2Fo+teen)
Thread #9
Thread #10
Thread #11
Thread #12
Thread #13
Thread #14
Thread #15
Thread #16
Thread #17
Thread #18
Thread #19
Thread #20
Thread #21
Thread #22
Thread #23
Thread #24
Thread #25
Thread #26
Thread #27
Thread #28
Thread #29
Thread #30
Thread #31

Just a reminder:
WS does not permit links that request or suggest sending donations without the clear permission of the owners . This is to protect our members and for no other reason.
__________________

In this public forum, we need to stick to the facts of this case and that's our discussion here. Please, we ask that you do what you do best - SLEUTH THE CASE.

Looking for news links? Have you found a good MSM story you'd like to share? Please post these links in the Media Links No Discussion thread

SOUND OFF Private Forum Companion Thread
Anyone feeling overheated or wishing to discuss the demonstrations, political, religious or racial aspects of the Trayvon Martin case, please check out our new forum in the private area of Websleuths accessible only to Websleuths members, called SOUND OFF.
Warning: Be sure to read the Required Read sticky post. Link to Trayvon Martin Sound Off

elementary
04-24-2012, 03:22 PM
Kimberlyd125 (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/member.php?u=44396) http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/statusicon/user_online.gif
Softball is for everyone. Fast pitch is for athletes.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 12,825


Quote:
Originally Posted by Adrienne37 http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7828102#post7828102)
Let's not forget that he was sued by Capitol One for default on a credit card.
Snipped by me

What does defaulting on a credit card have to do with this case?
Well, when you take it out of context, not much. But within the context that the OP laid out, it shows a pattern of irresponsible and, IMO, narcissistic behaviour.

HiHater
04-24-2012, 03:24 PM
Well, when you take it out of context, not much. But within the context that the OP laid out, it shows a pattern of irresponsible and, IMO, narcissistic behaviour.

I kind of agree with the irresponsible part and it may mean he has problems with accountability of some sort, but not narcissism. There are millions of people who default on credit cards, and his was a relatively small amount.

JMO

LolaMoon08
04-24-2012, 03:27 PM
Well, when you take it out of context, not much. But within the context that the OP laid out, it shows a pattern of irresponsible and, IMO, narcissistic behaviour.

It also goes to the history he has with not wanting to pay for things he is responsible for paying. He didn't want to pay rent to a landlord (called cops), didn't want to pay someone for their services (call cops), now the credit card, and also him throwing himself a nice little party for a degree he didn't have. It's a pattern. Everything in his life these past few years shows a pattern of a man who imo, was a ticking time bomb. His sense of self-entitlement is, IMO, off the charts!

MOO

Kimster
04-24-2012, 03:27 PM
So, how did you like my opening post? When Imamaze wasn't even around? Scary what my ray gun can do, isn't it?

:saber:

LolaMoon08
04-24-2012, 03:29 PM
So, how did you like my opening post? When Imamaze wasn't even around? Scary what my ray gun can do, isn't it?

:saber:

A very smooth transistion! :rocker:

tehcloser
04-24-2012, 03:32 PM
So, how did you like my opening post? When Imamaze wasn't even around? Scary what my ray gun can do, isn't it?

:saber:

i'mamazed.........:floorlaugh:

cityslick
04-24-2012, 03:35 PM
It also goes to the history he has with not wanting to pay for things he is responsible for paying. He didn't want to pay rent to a landlord (called cops), didn't want to pay someone for their services (call cops), now the credit card, and also him throwing himself a nice little party for a degree he didn't have. It's a pattern. Everything in his life these past few years shows a pattern of a man who imo, was a ticking time bomb. His sense of self-entitlement is, IMO, off the charts!

MOO

Maybe the folks who attended the party knew the circumstances of what he was celebrating (that he was close to getting a degree). Although I guess that would be assuming things we don't know.

LolaMoon08
04-24-2012, 03:35 PM
OT: But just found out my new Niece or Nephew is due on December 11th (Caylee :cry:) 2012!! But with my sisters history, the baby will be born closer to the 1st of December!!

LolaMoon08
04-24-2012, 03:38 PM
Maybe the folks who attended the party knew the circumstances of what he was celebrating (that he was close to getting a degree). Although I guess that would be assuming things we don't know.

Maybe? But, according to the "friend" that reported this story, he said George had informed them all that he had gotten his AA in criminal justice? Whatever floats his boat, I guess? I personally think he was trying to get his parents approval, as it seems he and his brother were not really raised by them? The same way I feel he wanted the approval of LE? I just think he has problem? Like serious problems!

MOO

elementary
04-24-2012, 03:39 PM
I kind of agree with the irresponsible part and it may mean he has problems with accountability of some sort, but not narcissism. There are millions of people who default on credit cards, and his was a relatively small amount.

JMO

I can understand that if you take it out of context. The totality of his behaviour suggests to me a narcissistic component. For example, I think he fancies himself as the hero of his high flying fantasies, superior to others and special; he is grandiose. He acts above the law- the rules don't apply to him. He showed no remorse until it was convenient and useful. He seems to be paranoid as well. He doesn't have a stable job history either and possesses a cleaned up record of aggressive behaviour. He's skilled enough to get others to cover up for him or fix things for him and is weak in accountability. I wouldn't be surprised to find that the bad things that happen due to his behaviour are always someone else's fault and that he portrays himself as the eternal victim. He even has cultivated a meek and mild persona (yet carries a gun with hollow point bullets). Makes me go hmmmm.

Kimberlyd125
04-24-2012, 03:41 PM
Do you know how many under 23 year olds default on credit cards? A ton.

Reason: the credit card companies target that age range because they know they are irresponsible.

They set up booths at colleges. They practically beg for the young people sign on the dotted line.

elementary
04-24-2012, 03:45 PM
Do you know how many under 23 year olds default on credit cards? A ton.

Reason: the credit card companies target that age range because they know they are irresponsible.

They set up booths at colleges. They practically beg for the young people sign on the dotted line.

Again, it is the totality of behaviour that needs to be examined, IMO.

Kimberlyd125
04-24-2012, 03:47 PM
Again, it is the totality of behaviour that needs to be examined, IMO.

His financial "behavior" at 21 has nothing to do with this case.


JMO

Karmady
04-24-2012, 03:48 PM
Do you know how many under 23 year olds default on credit cards? A ton.

Reason: the credit card companies target that age range because they know they are irresponsible.

They set up booths at colleges. They practically beg for the young people sign on the dotted line.

and, just 'sayin, that is Capitol One's niche market. That company, in particular, is notorious for offering very low limit/ver high interest rate cards to people with no credit or bad credit, and going after them immediately at the first late payment. It's their bread-and-butter. Whenever anyone asks me if they should accept a Capitol One credit offer, I say no. No matter how badly they need it. jmo

cityslick
04-24-2012, 03:49 PM
I can understand that if you take it out of context. The totality of his behaviour suggests to me a narcissistic component. For example, I think he fancies himself as the hero of his high flying fantasies, superior to others and special; he is grandiose. He acts above the law- the rules don't apply to him. He showed no remorse until it was convenient and useful. He seems to be paranoid as well. He doesn't have a stable job history either and possesses a cleaned up record of aggressive behaviour. He's skilled enough to get others to cover up for him or fix things for him and is weak in accountability. I wouldn't be surprised to find that the bad things that happen due to his behaviour are always someone else's fault and that he portrays himself as the eternal victim. He even has cultivated a meek and mild persona (yet carries a gun with hollow point bullets). Makes me go hmmmm.

It's amazing you can get all that from what you read on tv and bits and pieces of past incidents that to me doesn't tell how a person really is. I do think he seems somewhat paranoid based on his 911 calls but their are alot of paranoid people in the world. I think that he did have a huge interest in the justice system based on taking a LE class and majoring in criminal justice, but a lot of other people do too.

I think there are tons of folks with credit card issues, much worse than his debt issues. I think his past incidents are minor in the grand scheme of things. And I don't think owning a CCV means someone is scared or trying to act big.

All IMO.

Elley Mae
04-24-2012, 03:50 PM
Again, it is the totality of behaviour that needs to be examined, IMO.

I honestly don't see GZ's credit history coming into play at trial. I really don't. I don't think bad of him for it either. It's something that happens to lots of people. iirc reading about it he did settle which is more then I beat most do.jmo

suzihawk
04-24-2012, 03:50 PM
Do you know how many under 23 year olds default on credit cards? A ton.

Reason: the credit card companies target that age range because they know they are irresponsible.

They set up booths at colleges. They practically beg for the young people sign on the dotted line.

How many of them are up on second degree murder charges?

cityslick
04-24-2012, 03:52 PM
How many of them are up on second degree murder charges?

A lot more than you think. Not all of those are guilty either.

Kimberlyd125
04-24-2012, 03:53 PM
How many of them are up on second degree murder charges?

That is completely irrelevant.
His financial history has nothing to do with this case.

Donjeta
04-24-2012, 03:55 PM
< mod snip > :eek: ?
Did MOM say enough is enough?


ORLANDO, Fla. -
A website created by George Zimmerman, the neighborhood watchman who shot and killed Trayvon Martin in Sanford, has gone dark.

The website -- ******.com -- now takes users to a GoDaddy.com page that asks if anyone would like to purchase the domain name.
http://www.clickorlando.com/news/George-Zimmerman-website-goes-dark/-/1637132/11783042/-/9egxsl/-/index.html

Kimster
04-24-2012, 03:56 PM
Remember these posts I made this morning on Thread #31. I meant to post these up yonder when I made the new thread but work got away from me.

This is not a warning to one poster, but to many:

I am on duty (off and on) during the day today and I will NOT put up with the personal jabs like the mods did yesterday. If you guys want to get personal with each other, expect a time out because it will happen. I am not here to edit and remove posts. :saber:

Everyone has now been forewarned. Continue on and play nice!

Stop discussing what other posters should be posting NOW. If you see victim bashing, alert the post. Mods don't read every post and by bringing this up on the thread, you are merely going to start problems.

Karmady
04-24-2012, 03:57 PM
How many of them are up on second degree murder charges?

I don't know. I'm pretty confident you don't, either. But if you do know, I'd love to hear the statistics.

Etilema
04-24-2012, 04:06 PM
Maybe? But, according to the "friend" that reported this story, he said George had informed them all that he had gotten his AA in criminal justice? Whatever floats his boat, I guess? I personally think he was trying to get his parents approval, as it seems he and his brother were not really raised by them? The same way I feel he wanted the approval of LE? I just think he has problem? Like serious problems!

MOO

BBM

Who were they raised by?

annalia
04-24-2012, 04:07 PM
Bringing belle3's post over from closed thread.


belle3 http://www.scribd.com/charisse_horn_...-Collison-Case

The above linkisthe administrative investigation intothe collison case. Is that the same officer timothy smith that arrived onscene in the tm killing?



Officer Anthony Raimondo was another officer that was involved in that case who was also on the scene the night of Trayvon's killing.

There was some discussion about it here;
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=167001&page=9

JMHO

Aedrys
04-24-2012, 04:07 PM
I can understand that if you take it out of context. The totality of his behaviour suggests to me a narcissistic component. For example, I think he fancies himself as the hero of his high flying fantasies, superior to others and special; he is grandiose. He acts above the law- the rules don't apply to him. He showed no remorse until it was convenient and useful. He seems to be paranoid as well. He doesn't have a stable job history either and possesses a cleaned up record of aggressive behaviour. He's skilled enough to get others to cover up for him or fix things for him and is weak in accountability. I wouldn't be surprised to find that the bad things that happen due to his behaviour are always someone else's fault and that he portrays himself as the eternal victim. He even has cultivated a meek and mild persona (yet carries a gun with hollow point bullets). Makes me go hmmmm.

ITA. And at least he's run up his own credit cards, not run up other people's credits cards and stolen money and checks from people like someone in another case. I don't see nearly as much narcissism here. I see more of a sense of entitlement. A lot of people act entitled, but narcissism doesn't necessarily go along with it. I don't think he's sociopathic either, unlike Casey Anthony. He desperately wants approval and to see himself as better than he is. He sees himself as a hero because that makes him feel good and feel like he is doing something good with his life. He needs to be the hero or what else is he? Narcisstic people don't care about approval - they ARE the approval and everyone knows it. They do what they want and everyone just has to deal with the fallout. Casey didn't care what anyone though and people just had to deal with her, and mom and dad just had to cover for her.

I think he has a lot of mental problems, cultivated for years by his family who probably thought it might be a good thing at first, and didn't realize what it was growing into. I hope he's getting help for it. I think he can get help and be better, unlike Casey A. There's no help for her. I just don't put him in the same category at her. Casey is evil. GZ is paranoid and entitled, but not necessarily evil. I think he shouldn't run around armed ever again, that's for sure.

cityslick
04-24-2012, 04:08 PM
< mod snip > :eek: ?
Did MOM say enough is enough?



http://www.clickorlando.com/news/George-Zimmerman-website-goes-dark/-/1637132/11783042/-/9egxsl/-/index.html

I still question whether he was ever really behind it or not.

annalia
04-24-2012, 04:11 PM
I still question whether he was ever really behind it or not.

Didn't GZ's wife say at the bond hearing, when asked about how much was in there, that her brother-in-law, GZ's brother, knows or would know? I can't imagine that the family did it without GZ's knowledge.

JMHO

Aedrys
04-24-2012, 04:13 PM
Didn't GZ's wife say at the bond hearing, when asked about how much was in there, that her brother-in-law, GZ's brother, knows or would know? I can't imagine that the family did it without GZ's knowledge.

JMHO

I think they were told to distance themselves from that website. I think they were behind it along with GZ, or he may have been at the forefront and it seemed like a good idea at the time, but then it wasn't, and maybe MOM told them to distances themselves from it. And then it was just in GZ's best interest to shut it down. I think MOM was behind that, and that is a smart thing to do. MOM, thought annoying, seems to be a pretty good lawyer for GZ so far.

suzihawk
04-24-2012, 04:13 PM
I don't know. I'm pretty confident you don't, either. But if you do know, I'd love to hear the statistics.

You're right. Don't know. Don't care.

However, GZ IS up on second degree murder charges. So his level of responsibility and accountability is of interest to me. It helps me to form an opinion as to his character (or lack thereof).

GZ has made himself a public figure by shooting a young black man to death. His history is now up for public discussion and scrutiny <modsnip>

suzihawk
04-24-2012, 04:18 PM
I still question whether he was ever really behind it or not.

His former attorneys confirmed it was his. FT confirmed it was created and owned by him. His family has acknowledged it belonged to him. His brother confirmed it was his on one of the shows he appeared on.

wncgal
04-24-2012, 04:19 PM
IMO, there's only one question in this case. Why did GZ get out of his vehicle? Seriously, why? The police had been informed and were on their way. So WHY DID HE GET OUT OF HIS VEHICLE?????? Trayvon was not committing a crime. Even GZ said only that TM "looked suspicious." I think he's going to have a heck of a time trying to explain that one and that goes to the entire case against him. JMHO, etc.

LinasK
04-24-2012, 04:19 PM
Still have 3 more pages to catch up from the last thread, but wanted to pop in for a moment to respond from the old thread: LinasK - Have you ever been in a position where you identified yourself with your Neighborhood Watch? TIA.
The answer is no, because I have never followed nor questioned a suspicious person. When I have spotted one, like a break-in I thought was occurring 2 houses down from me because noone was living there, I called LE. They immediately followed up and found out that it had been temporarily rented, but this chick left the front doors wide open and had the doors to her van open, and was new to the area.

ladonna
04-24-2012, 04:20 PM
I believe it was yesterday when it was posted the # of crime reports that were documented in GZ's community in a year's period. Does anyone recall the #? I believe it was over 400.

suzihawk
04-24-2012, 04:27 PM
I believe it was yesterday when it was posted the # of crime reports that were documented in GZ's community in a year's period. Does anyone recall the #? I believe it was over 400.

You may be referring to a video Concerned Papa posted. It said the police had been called to the 260 unit complex 402 times between 1/1/2011 and 2/26/2012.

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - 17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #31

cityslick
04-24-2012, 04:28 PM
His former attorneys confirmed it was his. FT confirmed it was created and owned by him. His family has acknowledged it belonged to him. His brother confirmed it was his on one of the shows he appeared on.

His former attorneys are not credible to me. One of his family members may have been running it, doesn't mean GZ was though.

Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. We'll never know if it doesn't come back online.

Concerned Papa
04-24-2012, 04:30 PM
I believe it was yesterday when it was posted the # of crime reports that were documented in GZ's community in a year's period. Does anyone recall the #? I believe it was over 400.

This short vid will answer that for you ladonna.

Sanford PD Smoke & Mirrors 1 - YouTube

Donjeta
04-24-2012, 04:33 PM
Is Mark O'Mara credible?

But his attorney, Mark O'Mara, said the site has been shut down as of today.

“I’ve started the process to properly authorize his legal fund," O'Mara said. "I do not want him to have any Internet presence and that site has been taken down.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/04/24/george-zimmerman-website-to-raise-funds-for-legal-costs-shut-down/#ixzz1szYujS5I

It was George Zimmerman's Internet presence.

Karmady
04-24-2012, 04:33 PM
You're right. Don't know. Don't care.

However, GZ IS up on second degree murder charges. So his level of responsibility and accountability is of interest to me. It helps me to form an opinion as to his character (or lack thereof).

GZ has made himself a public figure by shooting a young black man to death. His history is now up for public discussion and scrutiny as is allowed<modsnip>.

<modsnip>

Personally, I like to consider both sides of the story when I'm voicing an opinion, particularly a very strong opinion, regarding whether a citizen of this country should spend the rest of their natural life behind bars or where, even if they do not, they have been destroyed in the media and in the court of public opinion so that their lives will never be the same, regardless.

I get Trayvon and his family's side, here. But that doesn't mean there isn't another perfectly valid side of the story, or that it shouldn't be sought or brought out elsewhere, or that judgment shouldn't be reserved until it has been. jmo

Kimster
04-24-2012, 04:40 PM
Remember, we have some very lively conversations about this case in our SOUND OFF forum. That forum is not moderated.

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

elementary
04-24-2012, 04:52 PM
ITA. And at least he's run up his own credit cards, not run up other people's credits cards and stolen money and checks from people like someone in another case. I don't see nearly as much narcissism here. I see more of a sense of entitlement. A lot of people act entitled, but narcissism doesn't necessarily go along with it. I don't think he's sociopathic either, unlike Casey Anthony. He desperately wants approval and to see himself as better than he is. He sees himself as a hero because that makes him feel good and feel like he is doing something good with his life. He needs to be the hero or what else is he? Narcisstic people don't care about approval - they ARE the approval and everyone knows it. They do what they want and everyone just has to deal with the fallout. Casey didn't care what anyone though and people just had to deal with her, and mom and dad just had to cover for her.

I think he has a lot of mental problems, cultivated for years by his family who probably thought it might be a good thing at first, and didn't realize what it was growing into. I hope he's getting help for it. I think he can get help and be better, unlike Casey A. There's no help for her. I just don't put him in the same category at her. Casey is evil. GZ is paranoid and entitled, but not necessarily evil. I think he shouldn't run around armed ever again, that's for sure.

Great post! It will be interesting to see what else we learn about him.

suzihawk
04-24-2012, 04:55 PM
<modsnip>

Personally, I like to consider both sides of the story when I'm voicing an opinion, particularly a very strong opinion, regarding whether a citizen of this country should spend the rest of their natural life behind bars or where, even if they do not, they have been destroyed in the media and in the court of public opinion so that their lives will never be the same, regardless.

I get Trayvon and his family's side, here. But that doesn't mean there isn't another perfectly valid side of the story, or that it shouldn't be sought or brought out elsewhere, or that judgment shouldn't be reserved until it has been. jmo

As do I.

Now I'm going to do as Mr. Zimmerman, Sr said his son does and turn the other cheek.

:seeya:

LambChop
04-24-2012, 05:00 PM
BBM

Who were they raised by?

They were raised by their parents. The grandmother lived with them while the parents worked but they all lived in the same home. Grandma didn't have custody she just "babysat". jmo

Elley Mae
04-24-2012, 05:01 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/04/24/george-zimmerman-website-to-raise-funds-for-legal-costs-shut-down/

I’ve started the process to properly authorize his legal fund," O'Mara said. "I do not want him to have any Internet presence and that site has been taken down.

Kimster
04-24-2012, 05:01 PM
Remember, we have some very lively conversations about this case in our SOUND OFF forum. That forum is not moderated.

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=484)

BTW, there are topic guidelines in the SOUND OFF forum, so be sure to read the Opening Posts first. :tyou:

suzihawk
04-24-2012, 05:09 PM
They were raised by their parents. The grandmother lived with them while the parents worked but they all lived in the same home. Grandma didn't have custody she just "babysat". jmo

http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1204/11/pmt.01.html

"And that's what -- you know, we consider our grandmother one of our parents. We have two parents, but we were raised by our -- helped out by our maternal grandmother at home."

KateNY
04-24-2012, 05:15 PM
So what's this mean, in the scheme of things.....

I thought that was what it was all about for GZ


:waitasec:

His attorney said he still hasn't decided if he will use the "Stand Your Ground" law to justify the killing.



http://www.wftv.com/news/news/sanford-police-chief-will-resign/nMf7R/

i.b.nora
04-24-2012, 05:23 PM
Dispatcher: Are you following him?
George Zimmerman: Yeah
Dispatcher: Ok, we don't need you to do that.
George Zimmerman: Okay.

Mark O'Mara: “I’ve started the process to properly authorize his legal fund."
"I do not want him to have any Internet presence and that site has been taken down.

Tic, toc, tic, toc, tic, toc ...

LambChop
04-24-2012, 05:24 PM
http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1204/11/pmt.01.html

"And that's what -- you know, we consider our grandmother one of our parents. We have two parents, but we were raised by our -- helped out by our maternal grandmother at home."

My mother divorced when I was two and went to work. I lived with her and my grandmother. My grandmother did not work but stayed home with me. She was there when I left for school in the morning and was there when I returned home from school in the afternoon. I feel she raised me but she was fulfilling the job my mother would be doing if my mother did not have to work. It would have been different if I lived only with my grandmother and she did not live with my mother. In that case I would have felt I was raised solely by my grandmother. Many children today are raised solely by their grandparents and the parents have little to do with the children.

So grandmother was within the household and was their caregiver doing the day while the parents worked. And you do consider grandmother is an authority figure when she lives with you, makes sure you have your mittens with you and your head is covered on a cold day, take that umbrella it looks like rain...and for heaven sakes keep your elbows off the table, it's not ladylike. lol

jjenny
04-24-2012, 05:25 PM
So what's this mean, in the scheme of things.....

I thought that was what it was all about for GZ


:waitasec:





http://www.wftv.com/news/news/sanford-police-chief-will-resign/nMf7R/

I don't know what he means by that at all. What other defense is available to him? He admitted to the shooting. I guess he could claim he didn't intentionally shot the gun and it went off during the struggle, but that would not work if he told police otherwise.

LambChop
04-24-2012, 05:27 PM
So what's this mean, in the scheme of things.....

I thought that was what it was all about for GZ


:waitasec:





http://www.wftv.com/news/news/sanford-police-chief-will-resign/nMf7R/

I don't think MOM wants the SA to question GZ on the stand and in a SYG hearing the SA can do that. jmo

Reader
04-24-2012, 05:27 PM
Is Mark O'Mara credible?


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/04/24/george-zimmerman-website-to-raise-funds-for-legal-costs-shut-down/#ixzz1szYujS5I

It was George Zimmerman's Internet presence.

Plus, one of the articles I read yesterday pointed out that his internet presence could let someone find his location through his ISP..

flourish
04-24-2012, 05:28 PM
Maybe the folks who attended the party knew the circumstances of what he was celebrating (that he was close to getting a degree). Although I guess that would be assuming things we don't know.

IMO, saying "maybe" and offering some wondering thoughts you're having isn't assuming--it's pondering and looking at things from different perspectives and throwing out ideas. Assuming something would be saying, "I'm sure the folks..." or even just plain "The folks who attended..."

That particular post of your that I quoted seemed fine (to me) as far as not making assumptions:)

FWIW and IMO

I've been behind on this case, and mostly lurking. I do have a few other thoughts that I may share later when I'm not at work.
:seeya:

LynnM
04-24-2012, 05:29 PM
Maybe the folks who attended the party knew the circumstances of what he was celebrating (that he was close to getting a degree). Although I guess that would be assuming things we don't know.

They may have in which case it isn't dishonesty but self-aggrandizement. I know others may not see it this way, but education is very important to me and to claim a degree he didn't have or even throw a party for himself for almost getting an AA degree just doesn't sit right with me. I'm not an ogre. When I taught there was an occasional student who attended graduation ceremonies even though he or she was sick and missed a final in a class they were passing. it was fine with me and I'm sure their parents didn't cancel a party until they could make up the exam. But George wasn't virtually finished; he didn't have to make an exam up. He had more course work to do. Just try to tell an employer that you almost have a degree that your resume said you did have.

I also take financial responsibilities seriously. I pay my bills. If I want to spend more money than I have, I take on extra work. If I lost my job and couldn't pay my bills, I would ask for more time and pay them slowly with interest.

I don't think these things make George more likely to commit murder but I do think they make it more likely that he would feel like whatever he does is okay and I think they make it more likely that he would lie to get himself out of trouble (except he'd call it stretching the truth).

suspicious1
04-24-2012, 05:35 PM
So what's this mean, in the scheme of things.....

I thought that was what it was all about for GZ


:waitasec:





http://www.wftv.com/news/news/sanford-police-chief-will-resign/nMf7R/

LOL

When I read that comment I thought the same thing!

uvamerica
04-24-2012, 05:39 PM
So what's this mean, in the scheme of things.....

I thought that was what it was all about for GZ


:waitasec:





http://www.wftv.com/news/news/sanford-police-chief-will-resign/nMf7R/



Interesting, I wonder if they will try to go with some kind of mental deficiency defense? If it is proven that GZ has lied about how the shooting went down, along with his stories about graduating, organizing the community to get an arrest in the Collison case, etc..
I think O'Mara is keeping it open as he learns more about his client and waits for discovery. MOO

Elley Mae
04-24-2012, 05:42 PM
http://www.wftv.com/news/news/sanford-police-chief-will-resign/nMf7R/
Zimmerman claims he shot and killed 17-year-old Martin in self-defense.

tehcloser
04-24-2012, 05:44 PM
I sense a problem in GZ's defense.........SYG, self-defense, throw something against the wall and hope it sticks defense..........

annalia
04-24-2012, 05:50 PM
So what's this mean, in the scheme of things.....

I thought that was what it was all about for GZ


:waitasec:





http://www.wftv.com/news/news/sanford-police-chief-will-resign/nMf7R/

Could possibly be nothing more than he doesn't want to show his hand yet?

Gin
04-24-2012, 05:50 PM
His former attorneys are not credible to me. One of his family members may have been running it, doesn't mean GZ was though.

Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. We'll never know if it doesn't come back online.
JMO/IMO

All I heard to day per MOM is that Zimmerman won't be working on it anymore. Good tactic.

LynnM
04-24-2012, 05:51 PM
I don't think MOM wants the SA to question GZ on the stand and in a SYG hearing the SA can do that. jmo

I bet you're right about that. And I think I remember one of the lawyers here posting that even if GZ had lost his SYG hearing he could still present that defense to a jury, so I would imagine even if he didn't ask for the SYG hearing he still has the option of mounting an SYG defense in a trial.

jjenny
04-24-2012, 05:53 PM
Could possibly be nothing more than he doesn't want to show his hand yet?

Most likely. I don't see any reason for him not to use SYG defense.

jjenny
04-24-2012, 05:54 PM
I bet you're right about that. And I think I remember one of the lawyers here posting that even if GZ had lost his SYG hearing he could still present that defense to a jury, so I would imagine even if he didn't ask for the SYG hearing he still has the option of mounting an SYG defense in a trial.

He could, but why would he want to? If judge grants immunity then Zimmerman will not go on trial and will be immune from civil lawsuits too.

LambChop
04-24-2012, 05:57 PM
I bet you're right about that. And I think I remember one of the lawyers here posting that even if GZ had lost his SYG hearing he could still present that defense to a jury, so I would imagine even if he didn't ask for the SYG hearing he still has the option of mounting an SYG defense in a trial.

I think the idea of the SYG hearing is so he would not have a trial. When he does go to trial he can still claim self defense, yes. jmo

Reader
04-24-2012, 05:59 PM
I bet you're right about that. And I think I remember one of the lawyers here posting that even if GZ had lost his SYG hearing he could still present that defense to a jury, so I would imagine even if he didn't ask for the SYG hearing he still has the option of mounting an SYG defense in a trial.

He doesn't have to present his case so the SA can see what it is before trial, in case GZ does not get immunity, and also maybe he thinks GZ would have a better chance before a jury, especially if it stays in his home county.

jjenny
04-24-2012, 06:00 PM
I think the idea of the SYG hearing is so he would not have a trial. When he does go to trial he can still claim self defense, yes. jmo

Unless his lawyer wants some plea deal I don't see any reason for him not to request SYG hearing. It gives GZ a shot at walking away completely free and I believe he can demand that state paid his lost wages, etc, if judge were to grant him immunity.

LynnM
04-24-2012, 06:05 PM
He could, but why would he want to? If judge grants immunity then Zimmerman will not go on trial and will be immune from civil lawsuits too.

I don't know, I'm wondering if it's a cost/benefit thing. If he goes to the hearing and wins, then there's no trial, clearly the most desirable outcome for Zimmerman. But if he goes to the hearing and has to testify and he loses, would he be at a disadvantage during the trial?

Does anyone know about these kinds of hearings?

Reader
04-24-2012, 06:08 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/24/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html?eref=rss_mostpopular

This link about the meeting on Chief Lee resigning also says this:

But Bonaparte said he and Lee "determined that with the vote of no confidence, it would be very challenging for him to continue as the police chief" and worked out a severance plan.

Bonaparte said the review will "take time" and there will be a lot of evidence emerging since the case is a criminal matter. He has said an interim chief -- who would replace Scott, the current acting chief -- could be in place early next week.

"While I asked for a review, it seems as though it will be some time before I can get that information, maybe as much as three months or more," Bonaparte said. "And rather than staying in this limbo, it would be better for us to have a separation. Chief Lee and I talked and came to an agreement it would be best if he separate from the Sanford Police Department."

Velouria
04-24-2012, 06:11 PM
Unless his lawyer wants some plea deal I don't see any reason for him not to request SYG hearing. It gives GZ a shot at walking away completely free and I believe he can demand that state paid his lost wages, etc, if judge were to grant him immunity.


Would that include the wages lost when from the time he moved out of his house and disappeared immediately after the shooting up to his arrest and brief incarceration, or just what period, exactly? GZ hasn't spent any significant time behind bars (unfortunately).

Reader
04-24-2012, 06:19 PM
I don't know, I'm wondering if it's a cost/benefit thing. If he goes to the hearing and wins, then there's no trial, clearly the most desirable outcome for Zimmerman. But if he goes to the hearing and has to testify and he loses, would he be at a disadvantage during the trial?

Does anyone know about these kinds of hearings?

Only what I've read here, lol....but I do think it would be a disadvantage to GZ to have the SYG hearing and lose, since the SA can use all his testimony in the trial and will know what the defense's case is...the better to fight it. That's what I understand so far.

Yesterday I brought up that the SA and prosecutor have both talked about going to trial...either they are very confident of winning an SYG hearing, or they know there won't be one...IMO...

Only MOM knows at this point and I will be watching to see if a filing is posted for the hearing...

Sensei
04-24-2012, 06:19 PM
I don't know, I'm wondering if it's a cost/benefit thing. If he goes to the hearing and wins, then there's no trial, clearly the most desirable outcome for Zimmerman. But if he goes to the hearing and has to testify and he loses, would he be at a disadvantage during the trial?

Does anyone know about these kinds of hearings?

Exactly, If MOM feels that they have a really good chance after seeing the discovery then there will most likely be a SYG hearing, but they do NOT want to have this hearing if there is a significant chance that they will lose because first George will HAVE to testify at that hearing, in a trial he would not have to but in that he has no shot at getting the immunity if he does not testify and what he says is then information that the SA could cross him on at trial if he were to choose to testify. A SYG hearing will give the Prosecutor a preview of exactly what his defense is going to be at trial and precisely what story she is going to have to discredit....so if there is a chance that they stand to lose that hearing it will very likely not happen. IMO JMHO and stuff.

jjenny
04-24-2012, 06:22 PM
[/B]

Only what I've read here, lol....but I do think it would be a disadvantage to GZ to have the SYG hearing and lose, since the SA can use all his testimony in the trial and will know what the defense's case is...the better to fight it. That's what I understand so far.

Yesterday I brought us that the SA and prosecutor have both talked about going to trial...either they are very confident of winning an SYG hearing, or they know there won't be one...IMO...
I don't read much into it.
I wouldn't expect the prosecutors to be saying they expect to lose the SYG hearing even if they did have concerns that they could lose it.

Phoenixfla
04-24-2012, 06:23 PM
<modsnip>

Personally, I like to consider both sides of the story when I'm voicing an opinion, particularly a very strong opinion, regarding whether a citizen of this country should spend the rest of their natural life behind bars or where, even if they do not, they have been destroyed in the media and in the court of public opinion so that their lives will never be the same, regardless.

I get Trayvon and his family's side, here. But that doesn't mean there isn't another perfectly valid side of the story, or that it shouldn't be sought or brought out elsewhere, or that judgment shouldn't be reserved until it has been. jmo

Great post. Thank you.

Sensei
04-24-2012, 06:24 PM
Would that include the wages lost when from the time he moved out of his house and disappeared immediately after the shooting up to his arrest and brief incarceration, or just what period, exactly? GZ hasn't spent any significant time behind bars (unfortunately).

I don't think so, since he was not under arrest or in fact under any restrictions by the PD. He voluntarily quit his job and moved and the State nor the local PD had anything to do with that, he would be entitled to lost wages (and that may be dependant on whether or not he even had a job.) You can't collect lost wages from a job you didn't have. IMO JMHO and stuff.

jjenny
04-24-2012, 06:28 PM
I don't think so, since he was not under arrest or in fact under any restrictions by the PD. He voluntarily quit his job and moved and the State nor the local PD had anything to do with that, he would be entitled to lost wages (and that may be dependant on whether or not he even had a job.) You can't collect lost wages from a job you didn't have. IMO JMHO and stuff.

Yea, in his case he might not get lost wages back (since he appears to have quit his job even before he was arrested and charged)-but that is probably the last thing on his mind right now.

Just K
04-24-2012, 06:31 PM
It was a Sunday evening at about dinnertime (7:00 PM)

People have friends and relatives that visit and especially on Sunday evenings for dinner. People have pet-sitters, especially on weekends. Teenagers go for walks because they often don't have a car.

Burglars generally don't hang out, check out or approach anyone who might have seen them. They tend to turn their head away from possible witnesses to their presence in the the area. They do not want to be identified. They do not want to be seen.

If a burglar sees headlights or a person they tend to hide until a car passes. They are looking out for a time to strike when they will not be seen.

Burglaries tend to occur when people/residents are at work/away or asleep.

Burglars often wear dark clothes and shoes not brand new white tennis shoes that can be seen in the dark.

IF a police officer had come up on the "scuffle" they most likely would not have shot & killed either person. They would have broken up the fight, asked questions and most likely arrested the person with the gun. If anyone would have been shot by a police officer, because of a physical fight, it would have been the person pointing the gun.

Sensei
04-24-2012, 06:32 PM
I bet you're right about that. And I think I remember one of the lawyers here posting that even if GZ had lost his SYG hearing he could still present that defense to a jury, so I would imagine even if he didn't ask for the SYG hearing he still has the option of mounting an SYG defense in a trial.



He does, he has the option of using the defense but not requesting the hearing if he chooses.

I said it before though and I will say it again, I will NOT be at all surprised if the defense they decide to use will be based on the story about GZ and Trayvon both struggling for the gun, and it just went off....Accidental and all that....don't know why but they have done dry runs on several different stories so who knows what might come up, but I think that is possible. IMO JMHO and stuff.

MaryAnn
04-24-2012, 06:33 PM
I don't think so, since he was not under arrest or in fact under any restrictions by the PD. He voluntarily quit his job and moved and the State nor the local PD had anything to do with that, he would be entitled to lost wages (and that may be dependant on whether or not he even had a job.) You can't collect lost wages from a job you didn't have. IMO JMHO and stuff.

You would think he would be worried about supporting his family. Instead of Patroling he should have been on the internet looking for a job!

Why didn't he join the Service if he wanted to play with guns so much! :banghead:

LambChop
04-24-2012, 06:34 PM
Unless his lawyer wants some plea deal I don't see any reason for him not to request SYG hearing. It gives GZ a shot at walking away completely free and I believe he can demand that state paid his lost wages, etc, if judge were to grant him immunity.

GZ would have to answer questions I don't think MOM wants him to answer. Once he testifies in a hearing and loses he is stuck with those answers before MOM can even look at what the state has. The State has already admitted that GZ's statements to LE conflict with some of their evidence. If GZ lied on his statement a SYG hearing would not be a walk in the park for him. jmo

HiHater
04-24-2012, 06:37 PM
I don't know what he means by that at all. What other defense is available to him? He admitted to the shooting. I guess he could claim he didn't intentionally shot the gun and it went off during the struggle, but that would not work if he told police otherwise.

Is there a traditional self-defense law, just plain old justifiable homicide, or in FL is it Stand Your Ground?

Sorry, hope that makes sense...

Sensei
04-24-2012, 06:37 PM
You would think he would be worried about supporting his family. Instead of Patroling he should have been on the internet looking for a job!

Why didn't he join the Service if he wanted to play with guns so much! :banghead:

Amen to that, My son is just recently back from Afganistan, and I have seen videos and know for sure that he would be able to shoot all he wanted to over there, but the problem with that is that there are people shooting BACK

And trust me there is nothing like videos of people shooting at your kid, even if they are Army and have a hairline like the coast of Florida....

HiHater
04-24-2012, 06:38 PM
You would think he would be worried about supporting his family. Instead of Patroling he should have been on the internet looking for a job!

Why didn't he join the Service if he wanted to play with guns so much! :banghead:

Well, you don't play with guns in the service...You definitely don't get to chase people down and kill them. I think he needed more action than what the military would give him...

Oh, and there's that whole authority thing...he might have had a problem with that too.

JMO

Just K
04-24-2012, 06:39 PM
< mod snip > :eek: ?
Did MOM say enough is enough?



http://www.clickorlando.com/news/George-Zimmerman-website-goes-dark/-/1637132/11783042/-/9egxsl/-/index.html

having donations probably messes too much with the indigent filing/status.

HiHater
04-24-2012, 06:40 PM
It was a Sunday evening at about dinnertime (7:00 PM)

People have friends and relatives that visit and especially on Sunday evenings for dinner. People have pet-sitters, especially on weekends. Teenagers go for walks because they often don't have a car.

Burglars generally don't hang out, check out or approach anyone who might have seen them. They tend to turn their head away from possible witnesses to their presence in the the area. They do not want to be identified. They do not want to be seen.

If a burglar sees headlights or a person they tend to hide until a car passes. They are looking out for a time to strike when they will not be seen.

Burglaries tend to occur when people/residents are at work/away or asleep.

Burglars often where dark clothes and shoes not brand new white tennis shoes that can be seen in the dark.

IF a police officer had come up on the "scuffle" they most likely would not have shot & killed either person. They would have broken up the fight, asked questions and most likely arrested the person with the gun. If anyone would have been shot by a police officer, because of a physical fight, it would have been the person pointing the gun.

Good post..the biggest thing GZ doesn't understand: HE IS NOT A COP. JMO

HiHater
04-24-2012, 06:42 PM
Most likely. I don't see any reason for him not to use SYG defense.

He wasn't standing his ground...that's the #1 reason not to use it IMO

I hope the defense throws us for a loop and uses insanity....

MaryAnn
04-24-2012, 06:43 PM
Amen to that, My son is just recently back from Afganistan, and I have seen videos and know for sure that he would be able to shoot all he wanted to over there, but the problem with that is that there are people shooting BACK

And trust me there is nothing like videos of people shooting at your kid, even if they are Army and have a hairline like the coast of Florida....

Sensei
I'm so glad your Son is home from Afganistan. God Bless him. He is a hero!! I can't even imagine what those poor boys go through. I will pray he doesn't get another military deployment to one of those horrible countries.

Maybe if GZ had served he would have a whole new outlook on who his enemy really is!!!!

Just K
04-24-2012, 06:46 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/04/24/george-zimmerman-website-to-raise-funds-for-legal-costs-shut-down/

I’ve started the process to properly authorize his legal fund," O'Mara said. "I do not want him to have any Internet presence and that site has been taken down.
In other words: George is his own worst enemy. We need him to be seen as a victim and not the way he might present himself online.

Sensei
04-24-2012, 06:46 PM
GZ would have to answer questions I don't think MOM wants him to answer. Once he testifies in a hearing and loses he is stuck with those answers before MOM can even look at what the state has. The State has already admitted that GZ's statements to LE conflict with some of their evidence. If GZ lied on his statement a SYG hearing would not be a walk in the park for him. jmo

OHHHH never thought of that, but I bet you are right. The SA is legally obligated to surrender all discovery within a reasonable time before trial...not a reasonable time before this SYG hearing so he would have to go into that blind, not knowing what the SA has as far as conflicting evidence and so forth. That is not a decision to be taken lightly...IMO

Marigold
04-24-2012, 06:47 PM
Is there a traditional self-defense law, just plain old justifiable homicide, or in FL is it Stand Your Ground?

Sorry, hope that makes sense...

Richard Hornsby wrote an excellent post explaining Florida laws about self-defense, provocation, etc. and how it pertains to this case: http://blog.richardhornsby.com/2012/04/who-was-the-first-aggressor/

grammieto5
04-24-2012, 06:47 PM
So what's this mean, in the scheme of things.....

I thought that was what it was all about for GZ


:waitasec:

His attorney said he still hasn't decided if he will use the "Stand Your Ground" law to justify the killing.



http://www.wftv.com/news/news/sanford-police-chief-will-resign/nMf7R/

This is what I was asking earlier today. I do wonder if GZ and his attorney will use the SYG law.

This is my post from earlier today....Does anyone else wonder if GZ and his attorney will use the SYG law as their defense? I've done alot of reading about this law, I understand more then when this case started, I have not seen any true evidence in favor of GZ. I'm thinking the only true evidence will be from Trayvon's autoposy, unless there was evidence taken at the crime scene, but it appears as though LE believed there was no crime committed, so why would they take evidence.

Sensei
04-24-2012, 06:49 PM
Sensei
I'm so glad your Son is home from Afganistan. God Bless him. He is a hero!! I can't even imagine what those poor boys go through. I will pray he doesn't get another military deployment to one of those horrible countries.

Maybe if GZ had served he would have a whole new outlook on who his enemy really is!!!!

Thank you very much....It was a tough year, I would jump anytime their was a strange number on the phone...and I am sure there are a lot of Mothers and wives out there doing the same thing tonight...God Bless them All.

Just K
04-24-2012, 06:49 PM
So what's this mean, in the scheme of things.....

I thought that was what it was all about for GZ


:waitasec:





http://www.wftv.com/news/news/sanford-police-chief-will-resign/nMf7R/

Maybe they will try to go for not guilty by reason of insanity.... (eg: paranoia, schizoid personality disorder, schizophrenia or something of that nature)

grandmaj
04-24-2012, 06:50 PM
The warning shot has been fired. MOM was fishing for information at the bond hearing. He now knows that there are 5 reports and conflicting information. I don't possibly see how George could win a SYG without being the chief source of testimony. The State would get a crack at George which probably won't happen in a trial. His testimony will be locked in. And the State would be able to impeach his testimony at SYG IMO if he has told different versions. I see this as a major risk for GZ.

impatientredhead
04-24-2012, 06:50 PM
Exactly, If MOM feels that they have a really good chance after seeing the discovery then there will most likely be a SYG hearing, but they do NOT want to have this hearing if there is a significant chance that they will lose because first George will HAVE to testify at that hearing, in a trial he would not have to but in that he has no shot at getting the immunity if he does not testify and what he says is then information that the SA could cross him on at trial if he were to choose to testify. A SYG hearing will give the Prosecutor a preview of exactly what his defense is going to be at trial and precisely what story she is going to have to discredit....so if there is a chance that they stand to lose that hearing it will very likely not happen. IMO JMHO and stuff.

Prosecution already knows what GZs story is, it can't change too much. Defense can't spring a witness on them, they have to be on the witness list and depose by the state if they request it. The standards for evidence are different in the SYG hearing because it is in front of a judge and he in theory should not be swayed by a bright light distraction show like a jury might be. Things said by defense at the SYG hearing won't necessarily be heard word for word by a jury. And a judge may not want to give him immunity even with a preponderence of the evidence. He may pass it along to a jury, especially if he has an upcoming election. That won't be a popular decision no matter were it comes from.

Sensei
04-24-2012, 06:53 PM
Maybe they will try to go for not guilty by reason of insanity.... (eg: paranoia, schizoid personality disorder, schizophrenia or something of that nature)

I don't know about that since I'm not sure he fits the one in three rule

You know one in three people are mentally unstable, so look at two friends and if they are all right you're it....Except look at two friends, he has Oliver and Taefe, and with Taefe on his team I am not sure that he is the IT.
IMO JMHO and stuff

impatientredhead
04-24-2012, 06:53 PM
The warning shot has been fired. MOM was fishing for information at the bond hearing. He now knows that there are 5 reports and conflicting information. I don't possibly see how George could win a SYG without being the chief source of testimony. The State would get a crack at George which probably won't happen in a trial. His testimony will be locked in. And the State would be able to impeach his testimony at SYG IMO if he has told different versions. I see this as a major risk for GZ.

Several examples have been given of defendants who lied thru their teeth, multiple times, denied being the killer or involved at all, destroyed evidence, and changed the story a few more times. GZ having deviations in his story is hardly going to rattle the judges cage. Might carry more weight with a jury in all actuality.

The benefits versus the risks on an SYG hearing..... I cannot imagine a scenario where they don't have one.

annalia
04-24-2012, 06:54 PM
Amen to that, My son is just recently back from Afganistan, and I have seen videos and know for sure that he would be able to shoot all he wanted to over there, but the problem with that is that there are people shooting BACK

And trust me there is nothing like videos of people shooting at your kid, even if they are Army and have a hairline like the coast of Florida....

God Bless your son! I know what you must have gone though while he was away serving, my ds is an Iraq war veteran. There is no better blessing than the day that they return home safe and sound.

Sensei
04-24-2012, 06:57 PM
Prosecution already knows what GZs story is, it can't change too much. Defense can't spring a witness on them, they have to be on the witness list and depose by the state if they request it. The standards for evidence are different in the SYG hearing because it is in front of a judge and he in theory should not be swayed by a bright light distraction show like a jury might be. Things said by defense at the SYG hearing won't necessarily be heard word for word by a jury. And a judge may not want to give him immunity even with a preponderence of the evidence. He may pass it along to a jury, especially if he has an upcoming election. That won't be a popular decision no matter were it comes from.

The Prosecution knows what some of his story is, but it came out in the bail hearing that there are different statements and some of them contradict the physical evidence and I bet some of them contradict each other...the prosecution would find out exactly which version they are going with at the hearing. IMO JMHO and stuff.

TorisMom003
04-24-2012, 06:59 PM
Originally posted by Sherryk

Is there a document that I have not seen that shows that he did NOT follow orders, as in not to persue? Is that speculation. There have been described as witnesses that have confirmed that Zimmerman was approaching his vechicle. I just would like to see witness statements in writing that he did not retreat.. I could them fairly base an informed decision as to rather that is in fact accurate or not accurate. One witness the youngster that stated that Martin was on top of Zimmerman.. parent hired attorney and now stating that the witness statement was somehow incorrect.

Alot of people that do not know the facts that could either ruin a innocent mans life and an injustice to Travon's parents by NOT knowing what DID or DID not happen that night assuming they want to know the truth and not have a notion that they will believe what they choose to.

The entire matter is so sad when a life is lost, that being any human.
I repectfully respect your opinion on the matter.
Much thanks for the input.
End of Sherryk post

Below is the link to the single post for this post that I am responding to. The post was on thread 31 which is closed and I have no idea how to bring a post over from a closed thread.
Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - 17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #31


In the post of mine that was responded to I stated that there is a fact that glares at me as if it were a bright neon sign. That fact is that if Zimmerman had followed the instructions he had been given then he would not be charged with 2nd degree murder and Trayvon would not have been killed that night. I stand by that fact considering that Zimmerman, along with all of the other neighborhood watch volunters in that neighborhood, had previously taken a training class by someone in LE that told them what to do, what not to do, when to call 911, when to call the non emergancy number, etc. In case any of the neighorhood watch volunters forgot what they learned during that training class they were given a neighborhood watch handbook that explained everything to them in clear language. For example, just one portion taken from said handbook:

You will add your “eyes and ears” to
those of the Police Department which
cannot be everywhere, all the time, by
keeping a watchful eye and open ear to
what is happening in your
neighborhood. You will extend their
ability to provide security by reporting
anything unusual or suspicious, 24 hours
a day, seven days a week, so they can
follow up on your leads. What you will
not do is get physically involved with
any activity you report or
apprehension of any suspicious
persons. This is the job of the law
enforcement agency.

I have bolded the part above that is also bolded in the neighborhood watch handbook. So, based on the above section and from reading the rest of the neighborhood watch handbook (which I will link at the end of this post) it is very clear to me that Zimmerman did in fact ignore instructions that were given to him. Even if one considers the dispatcher as not being an "instruction" but instead a "suggestion", I find it difficult to argue the same when it comes to the clear instructions detailed in the handbook.

MOO

http://sanfordfl.gov/investigation/trayvon_martin.html
click on Neighborhood Watch Handbook which will load the handbook information

grandmaj
04-24-2012, 07:00 PM
Several examples have been given of defendants who lied thru their teeth, multiple times, denied being the killer or involved at all, destroyed evidence, and changed the story a few more times. GZ having deviations in his story is hardly going to rattle the judges cage. Might carry more weight with a jury in all actuality.

The benefits versus the risks on an SYG hearing..... I cannot imagine a scenario where they don't have one.

BBM I don't see any judge getting his cage rattled. But I do see a judge throwing out SYG in this case if George's stories and the evidence don't match up. Or the stories are so different that his credibility is lost. I think this is a huge risk to let the State get a chance to interview George under oath.

Karmady
04-24-2012, 07:01 PM
I don't think so, since he was not under arrest or in fact under any restrictions by the PD. He voluntarily quit his job and moved and the State nor the local PD had anything to do with that, he would be entitled to lost wages (and that may be dependant on whether or not he even had a job.) You can't collect lost wages from a job you didn't have. IMO JMHO and stuff.

I think it may depend on how the statutory definition of "criminal prosecution" from which GZ would be immune is applied.

The definition is this:

As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

So even the initial detention in custody would trigger the immunity. Not sure if the release and subsequent arrest breaks the chain for purposes of damages flowing from immunity.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/STATUTES/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.032.html

PaperDoll
04-24-2012, 07:02 PM
IMO, there's only one question in this case. Why did GZ get out of his vehicle? Seriously, why? The police had been informed and were on their way. So WHY DID HE GET OUT OF HIS VEHICLE?????? Trayvon was not committing a crime. Even GZ said only that TM "looked suspicious." I think he's going to have a heck of a time trying to explain that one and that goes to the entire case against him. JMHO, etc.


I so agree with your post. He "looked suspicious?" He was simply walking back to his place, he wasn't breaking into anyone's home, nor hurting anyone, simply coming back from the store with candy and a ice tea, talking on the phone with his girlfriend. :banghead: Again, if I were on the jury I would really question GZ's behavior and not TM's.

This case really bothers me, I'm so saddened by this :frown:

Etilema
04-24-2012, 07:03 PM
You would think he would be worried about supporting his family. Instead of Patroling he should have been on the internet looking for a job!

Why didn't he join the Service if he wanted to play with guns so much! :banghead:

Probably because then he'd have to go up against guys who also have guns.

JMO

Sensei
04-24-2012, 07:05 PM
I think it may depend on how the statutory definition of "criminal prosecution" from which GZ would be immune is applied.

The definition is this:

As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

So even the initial detention in custody would trigger the immunity. Not sure if the release and subsequent arrest breaks the chain for purposes of damages flowing from immunity.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/STATUTES/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.032.html

Thank you that's very interesting, it may be that the original custody would be the one that they would use, or it may be that they would not, so that would be interesting if we could find out but not crucial, just a piece of information that it would be interesting to note. Thanks again.

Etilema
04-24-2012, 07:05 PM
IMO, there's only one question in this case. Why did GZ get out of his vehicle? Seriously, why? The police had been informed and were on their way. So WHY DID HE GET OUT OF HIS VEHICLE?????? Trayvon was not committing a crime. Even GZ said only that TM "looked suspicious." I think he's going to have a heck of a time trying to explain that one and that goes to the entire case against him. JMHO, etc.

He got out of his vehicle because "these @ssholes always get away" and he wanted to make sure that didn't happen this time.

JMO

Sensei
04-24-2012, 07:08 PM
BBM I don't see any judge getting his cage rattled. But I do see a judge throwing out SYG in this case if George's stories and the evidence don't match up. Or the stories are so different that his credibility is lost. I think this is a huge risk to let the State get a chance to interview George under oath.

ITA, in a trial, George himself cannot be forced to testify, and the conflicting statements would only be testified to by the interviewing officers, but in the SYG hearing he would HAVE to testify and be crossed on anything he testifys to and his statements about the incident, that will be a tough call for MOM I think.

impatientredhead
04-24-2012, 07:09 PM
I don't know, I'm wondering if it's a cost/benefit thing. If he goes to the hearing and wins, then there's no trial, clearly the most desirable outcome for Zimmerman. But if he goes to the hearing and has to testify and he loses, would he be at a disadvantage during the trial?

Does anyone know about these kinds of hearings?

He does not have to testify if he chooses not to. The right to not testify against yourself is always in effect. If he chooses to not testify would that harm his chances, probably, but considering he is facing criminal charges it still can't be compelled to.

After the bond hearing I would imagine he would testify on his own behalf, but they SYG hearing is just the judge and evaluation of the evidence as presented. If the judge feels there is a preponderance of evidence that will lead to an acquittal he can pull the plug on the whole show, or he can send them on to trial.

But it is not every witness and every shred of evidence being presented at a jury level. Mostly sworn statements of the witnesses that will be called, the physical evidence to be presented, the state can explain what they expect to show or ask the witnesses about. And then the judge makes a call.

If it sounds unfair, keep in mind SYG was written from the point of view of an elderly/retired couple that shoots a home intruder and then spends the next year in poor health and financial strain defending themselves or worrying about going to jail or leaving behind a destitute spouse. That is literally the poster child case they used when selling the bill. Made sense in that case, elderly couple, in their home, not reasonable for them to flee, but without the SYG law the standard said they were required to flee. It took over a year for the state to announce they were not pursuing charges, by then the seventy year old shooter in a motor home with one exit (no realistic flight option present) had worried himself sick and a full blown defense at trial would have ruined them financially. My point being if it sounds like the SYG hearing is unfair to the victims side of the story with little to no risk to the shooter, it does, that is how it was written.

wncgal
04-24-2012, 07:13 PM
He got out of his vehicle because "these @ssholes always get away" and he wanted to make sure that didn't happen this time.

JMO
Oh, I know what he said. But how will he explain it to the judge/jury? You know that's going to be a big part of the prosecution's case, is why did he get out of the vehicle especially when the dispatcher told him "we don't need you to do that." I dunno, I think that's going to be hard for him to justify. IMO.

impatientredhead
04-24-2012, 07:17 PM
BBM I don't see any judge getting his cage rattled. But I do see a judge throwing out SYG in this case if George's stories and the evidence don't match up. Or the stories are so different that his credibility is lost. I think this is a huge risk to let the State get a chance to interview George under oath.

My point was two hundred cases have had SYG hearings so far, MANY MANY of them involved defendants with sketchy statements to flat out obstruction and destruction of evidence (if the defendant doesn't call 911 and hides the weapon used, even he knows it is not self defense) they STILL won their SYG hearings, or were acquitted by the jury.

And George does not have to testify to have an SYG hearing, and even if he does the statements given there, outside of a jury, would not necessarily be heard by a jury. More like a sidebar, the judge rules and the jury doesn't get to hear the argument about whether it should be admissible.

Sensei
04-24-2012, 07:18 PM
He does not have to testify if he chooses not to. The right to not testify against yourself is always in effect. If he chooses to not testify would that harm his chances, probably, but considering he is facing criminal charges it still can't be compelled to.

After the bond hearing I would imagine he would testify on his own behalf, but they SYG hearing is just the judge and evaluation of the evidence as presented. If the judge feels there is a preponderance of evidence that will lead to an acquittal he can pull the plug on the whole show, or he can send them on to trial.

But it is not every witness and every shred of evidence being presented at a jury level. Mostly sworn statements of the witnesses that will be called, the physical evidence to be presented, the state can explain what they expect to show or ask the witnesses about. And then the judge makes a call.

If it sounds unfair, keep in mind SYG was written from the point of view of an elderly/retired couple that shoots a home intruder and then spends the next year in poor health and financial strain defending themselves or worrying about going to jail or leaving behind a destitute spouse. That is literally the poster child case they used when selling the bill. Made sense in that case, elderly couple, in their home, not reasonable for them to flee, but without the SYG law the standard said they were required to flee. It took over a year for the state to announce they were not pursuing charges, by then the seventy year old shooter in a motor home with one exit (no realistic flight option present) had worried himself sick and a full blown defense at trial would have ruined them financially. My point being if it sounds like the SYG hearing is unfair to the victims side of the story with little to no risk to the shooter, it does, that is how it was written.

Theoretically the right to not testify is always in effect, but realistically there is very little chance that a Judge would be convinced that he was standing his ground and defending himself unless he does actually testify, since he is the only one who was there. IMO JMHO and stuff.

jaded cat
04-24-2012, 07:20 PM
He does not have to testify if he chooses not to. The right to not testify against yourself is always in effect. If he chooses to not testify would that harm his chances, probably, but considering he is facing criminal charges it still can't be compelled to.

After the bond hearing I would imagine he would testify on his own behalf, but they SYG hearing is just the judge and evaluation of the evidence as presented. If the judge feels there is a preponderance of evidence that will lead to an acquittal he can pull the plug on the whole show, or he can send them on to trial.

But it is not every witness and every shred of evidence being presented at a jury level. Mostly sworn statements of the witnesses that will be called, the physical evidence to be presented, the state can explain what they expect to show or ask the witnesses about. And then the judge makes a call.

If it sounds unfair, keep in mind SYG was written from the point of view of an elderly/retired couple that shoots a home intruder and then spends the next year in poor health and financial strain defending themselves or worrying about going to jail or leaving behind a destitute spouse. That is literally the poster child case they used when selling the bill. Made sense in that case, elderly couple, in their home, not reasonable for them to flee, but without the SYG law the standard said they were required to flee. It took over a year for the state to announce they were not pursuing charges, by then the seventy year old shooter in a motor home with one exit (no realistic flight option present) had worried himself sick and a full blown defense at trial would have ruined them financially. My point being if it sounds like the SYG hearing is unfair to the victims side of the story with little to no risk to the shooter, it does, that is how it was written.

Would it have been smarter to just expand on the Castle Doctrine rather than open up this can of worms? It really does seem like a license to start a fight, then when you're losing, whip out your gun and let them have it. (not referring to this case, just in general)

impatientredhead
04-24-2012, 07:27 PM
Theoretically the right to not testify is always in effect, but realistically there is very little chance that a Judge would be convinced that he was standing his ground and defending himself unless he does actually testify, since he is the only one who was there. IMO JMHO and stuff.

I will go thru and pull the numbers of how many of the 200 cases the defendant didn't have to testify and still ended up winning. I know it is not the majority but he would be far from the first. I agree it would hurt his chances, and expect that he will testify, but I will be far from shocked if he isn't even there (presence in court waived by his defense team). I said that many threads back when we were discussing why he was being allowed to leave the state I said this very may well be his last court appearance. If they let him out of state it is very costly to transport him back and forth, which if he wins will be the state's problem financially, but MOM wants as little fanfare as possible. GZ not being there will bring less viewers and protesters, which would make it easier for the judge to grant the immunity with public pressure dying down.

I would have said I think this high profile enough that I think a judge is going to let it go to trial just to avoid the heat and craziness, but now that the police chiefs resignation was declined by the board that indicates some real political splits down there. There was no down side that I can think of to taking his resignation. When compared to the appearance it gives, and having a police chief with even a significant portion of people have shown a lack of confidence in.... well I don't see how that person is suppose to lead a community under this kind of stress.

Ninety5rpm
04-24-2012, 07:31 PM
IMO, there's only one question in this case. Why did GZ get out of his vehicle? Seriously, why? The police had been informed and were on their way. So WHY DID HE GET OUT OF HIS VEHICLE?????? Trayvon was not committing a crime. Even GZ said only that TM "looked suspicious." I think he's going to have a heck of a time trying to explain that one and that goes to the entire case against him. JMHO, etc.

What do you think is the reason he got out of his vehicle? He obviously had a reason, because he did get out. What do you think it might have been?


Do you think he was thinking this might be his chance to shoot someone? Maybe he planned to follow him, hoped for a confrontation, so he could have an excuse to shoot him. Is that what you're thinking?

Or, maybe he took his (unpaid) "security" job a little too seriously? Maybe he saw it as his duty to figure out why someone unfamiliar/suspicious is in the gated community? Maybe he was telling the truth when he was talking to the police dispatcher about being concerned the suspicious looking person would get away before the police got there, so he decided to follow him. Maybe that's why he started running when Trayvon started running?

Seems to me that the latter explanation is much more likely to be true. Gated communities are very different from public communities. One of the main reasons people live in gated communities is for the security, and much of that security stems from treating anyone who is unfamiliar as being suspicious.

If you don't know what I mean, try putting on a hoodie and sneaking into a gated community, especially one with a security team (paid or voluntary), and see what happens. Then, when you get followed by a security guard or security watch person, try to lose him. Then, after you lose him, sneak up behind him, confront him for following you and harassing you, hit him in the face with such force that his nose breaks and he's knocked to the ground, jump on him, and start bashing his head on the sidewalk (note: a photo showing bleeding on the back of Zimmerman's head minutes after the shooting has been released).

Think you won't get shot? <mod snip>

annalia
04-24-2012, 07:34 PM
What do you think is the reason he got out of his vehicle? He obviously had a reason, because he did get out. What do you think it might have been?


Do you think he was thinking this might be his chance to shoot someone? Maybe he planned to follow him, hoped for a confrontation, so he could have an excuse to shoot him. Is that what you're thinking?

Or, maybe he took his (unpaid) "security" job a little too seriously? Maybe he saw it as his duty to figure out why someone unfamiliar/suspicious is in the gated community? Maybe he was telling the truth when he was talking to the police dispatcher about being concerned the suspicious looking person would get away before the police got there, so he decided to follow him. Maybe that's why he started running when Trayvon started running?

Seems to me that the latter explanation is much more likely to be true. Gated communities are very different from public communities. One of the main reasons people live in gated communities is for the security, and much of that security stems from equating anyone who is unfamiliar with being suspicious, and treating them accordingly.

If you don't know what I mean, try putting on a hoodie and sneaking into a gated community, especially one with a security team (paid or voluntary), and see what happens. Then, when you get followed, try to lose him. Then, after you lose him, sneak up behind them, confront him for following you and harassing you, hit him in the face with such force that his nose breaks and he's knocked to the ground, jump on him, and start bashing his head on the sidewalk.

Think you won't get shot? <mod snip>?

BBM

Trayvon was an invited guest of a resident of that community. No different than other invited guests of other residents in that community.

He didn't sneak in anywhere and he had every right to be there, as that invited guest.

impatientredhead
04-24-2012, 07:34 PM
Would it have been smarter to just expand on the Castle Doctrine rather than open up this can of worms? It really does seem like a license to start a fight, then when you're losing, whip out your gun and let them have it. (not referring to this case, just in general)

Yep, but no one asked me :blushing:

My state doesn't have this law and I would vote against it if it came up.
I don't think you should be required to flee your place of residence. Someone kicks in my door, they intend harm, no question in my mind, and having to flee my home while in shock and fear puts my reaction in question and possibly has me fleeing my home into more danger outside my window. If you are in a shared space retreat when possible is just common sense for public safety. I don't want your average citizen deciding what is criminal and what isn't, and they certainly shouldn't be confronting anyone. Just from a public safety stand point if GZ had been approaching someone else, say a 25 year old with priors and warrant for his arrest and gun on him GZ pursuing him might have got a bystander killed in the crossfire.

Sensei
04-24-2012, 07:36 PM
I will go thru and pull the numbers of how many of the 200 cases the defendant didn't have to testify and still ended up winning. I know it is not the majority but he would be far from the first. I agree it would hurt his chances, and expect that he will testify, but I will be far from shocked if he isn't even there (presence in court waived by his defense team). I said that many threads back when we were discussing why he was being allowed to leave the state I said this very may well be his last court appearance. If they let him out of state it is very costly to transport him back and forth, which if he wins will be the state's problem financially, but MOM wants as little fanfare as possible. GZ not being there will bring less viewers and protesters, which would make it easier for the judge to grant the immunity with public pressure dying down.

I would have said I think this high profile enough that I think a judge is going to let it go to trial just to avoid the heat and craziness, but now that the police chiefs resignation was declined by the board that indicates some real political splits down there. There was no down side that I can think of to taking his resignation. When compared to the appearance it gives, and having a police chief with even a significant portion of people have shown a lack of confidence in.... well I don't see how that person is suppose to lead a community under this kind of stress.

I really wonder if it comes down to dollars and cents, if the severance package is so generous that it is financially feasible to keep him until they can find a way to accept that resignation without having to spend as much money. This whole thing is just crazy IMO, I agree though how is Lee supposed to lead the department after the no confidence vote, and yet they refuse his resignation...I don't get it.

Elley Mae
04-24-2012, 07:39 PM
What do you think is the reason he got out of his vehicle? He obviously had a reason, because he did get out. What do you think it might have been?


Do you think he was thinking this might be his chance to shoot someone? Maybe he planned to follow him, hoped for a confrontation, so he could have an excuse to shoot him. Is that what you're thinking?

Or, maybe he took his (unpaid) "security" job a little too seriously? Maybe he saw it as his duty to figure out why someone unfamiliar/suspicious is in the gated community? Maybe he was telling the truth when he was talking to the police dispatcher about being concerned the suspicious looking person would get away before the police got there, so he decided to follow him. Maybe that's why he started running when Trayvon started running?

Seems to me that the latter explanation is much more likely to be true. Gated communities are very different from public communities. One of the main reasons people live in gated communities is for the security, and much of that security stems from treating anyone who is unfamiliar as being suspicious.

If you don't know what I mean, try putting on a hoodie and sneaking into a gated community, especially one with a security team (paid or voluntary), and see what happens. Then, when you get followed by a security guard or security watch person, try to lose him. Then, after you lose him, sneak up behind him, confront him for following you and harassing you, hit him in the face with such force that his nose breaks and he's knocked to the ground, jump on him, and start bashing his head on the sidewalk (note: a photo showing bleeding on the back of Zimmerman's head minutes after the shooting has been released).

Think you won't get shot? ,<mod snip>?

Wow Welcome to Websleuths

Montjoy
04-24-2012, 07:41 PM
Several examples have been given of defendants who lied thru their teeth, multiple times, denied being the killer or involved at all, destroyed evidence, and changed the story a few more times. GZ having deviations in his story is hardly going to rattle the judges cage. Might carry more weight with a jury in all actuality.

Perhaps, but let's not forget that if a jury does not find part of a person's testimony credible, or believes that s/he has lied, they are allowed to ignore all of that person's testimony. That would make multiple versions of a story very risky for someone using an affirmative defense like SYG.

MaryAnn
04-24-2012, 07:43 PM
What do you think is the reason he got out of his vehicle? He obviously had a reason, because he did get out. What do you think it might have been?


Do you think he was thinking this might be his chance to shoot someone? Maybe he planned to follow him, hoped for a confrontation, so he could have an excuse to shoot him. Is that what you're thinking?

Or, maybe he took his (unpaid) "security" job a little too seriously? Maybe he saw it as his duty to figure out why someone unfamiliar/suspicious is in the gated community? Maybe he was telling the truth when he was talking to the police dispatcher about being concerned the suspicious looking person would get away before the police got there, so he decided to follow him. Maybe that's why he started running when Trayvon started running?

Seems to me that the latter explanation is much more likely to be true. Gated communities are very different from public communities. One of the main reasons people live in gated communities is for the security, and much of that security stems from treating anyone who is unfamiliar as being suspicious.

If you don't know what I mean, try putting on a hoodie and sneaking into a gated community, especially one with a security team (paid or voluntary), and see what happens. Then, when you get followed by a security guard or security watch person, try to lose him. Then, after you lose him, sneak up behind him, confront him for following you and harassing you, hit him in the face with such force that his nose breaks and he's knocked to the ground, jump on him, and start bashing his head on the sidewalk (note: a photo showing bleeding on the back of Zimmerman's head minutes after the shooting has been released).

Think you won't get shot? <mod snip>

I guess I never want to live in a gated community if I can't have guests over who innocently want to take a walk and heaven forbid if it's raining and they decide to cover their heads. I'm sorry but this reminds me of the old Western Cowboy shoot em up movies. This is utterly ridiculous to me that you can't have a guest over because they are strangers and they might get shot when they go outside your home because they are unfamiliar to the NW Captain. :please: help me to understand because I truly don't!!! RIP Trayvon. I have to believe you will get Justice even in Florida!

highflyer
04-24-2012, 07:44 PM
His former attorneys are not credible to me. One of his family members may have been running it, doesn't mean GZ was though.

Maybe it was, maybe it wasn't. We'll never know if it doesn't come back online.

His Brother said it was GZ and his former lawyer said it was GZ's. I hope it is investigated. In my opinion it was a peek into GZ's thoughts.

Sensei
04-24-2012, 07:46 PM
What do you think is the reason he got out of his vehicle? He obviously had a reason, because he did get out. What do you think it might have been?


Do you think he was thinking this might be his chance to shoot someone? Maybe he planned to follow him, hoped for a confrontation, so he could have an excuse to shoot him. Is that what you're thinking?

Or, maybe he took his (unpaid) "security" job a little too seriously? Maybe he saw it as his duty to figure out why someone unfamiliar/suspicious is in the gated community? Maybe he was telling the truth when he was talking to the police dispatcher about being concerned the suspicious looking person would get away before the police got there, so he decided to follow him. Maybe that's why he started running when Trayvon started running?

Seems to me that the latter explanation is much more likely to be true. Gated communities are very different from public communities. One of the main reasons people live in gated communities is for the security, and much of that security stems from treating anyone who is unfamiliar as being suspicious.

If you don't know what I mean, try putting on a hoodie and sneaking into a gated community, especially one with a security team (paid or voluntary), and see what happens. Then, when you get followed by a security guard or security watch person, try to lose him. Then, after you lose him, sneak up behind him, confront him for following you and harassing you, hit him in the face with such force that his nose breaks and he's knocked to the ground, jump on him, and start bashing his head on the sidewalk (note: a photo showing bleeding on the back of Zimmerman's head minutes after the shooting has been released).

Think you won't get shot? Wanna try it and find out?



BBM, Except that GZ was not LE...he's not a cop, so even if he did see Trayvon breaking into a car or a house, he has NO authority beyond the authority of the average citizen He had no authority to detain anyone, and in fact detaining Trayvon would have been a CRIME. So while it may be true that he thought Trayvon was suspicious, he was not empowered to legally do anything other than call LE, and following Trayvon was superflous since he had no power or authority to do anything else no matter what he saw and whether or not Trayvon "got away".

Just because I take the speed limit in front of my house a bit too seriously, does not give me the right to stop motorists and issue speeding tickets or set spike strips in the road...I am not a cop...GZ was not a cop, and he had fulfilled his duty to his neighborhood watch when he called LE,.

wncgal
04-24-2012, 07:49 PM
What do you think is the reason he got out of his vehicle? He obviously had a reason, because he did get out. What do you think it might have been?


Do you think he was thinking this might be his chance to shoot someone? Maybe he planned to follow him, hoped for a confrontation, so he could have an excuse to shoot him. Is that what you're thinking?

Or, maybe he took his (unpaid) "security" job a little too seriously? Maybe he saw it as his duty to figure out why someone unfamiliar/suspicious is in the gated community? Maybe he was telling the truth when he was talking to the police dispatcher about being concerned the suspicious looking person would get away before the police got there, so he decided to follow him. Maybe that's why he started running when Trayvon started running?

Seems to me that the latter explanation is much more likely to be true. Gated communities are very different from public communities. One of the main reasons people live in gated communities is for the security, and much of that security stems from treating anyone who is unfamiliar as being suspicious.

If you don't know what I mean, try putting on a hoodie and sneaking into a gated community, especially one with a security team (paid or voluntary), and see what happens. Then, when you get followed by a security guard or security watch person, try to lose him. Then, after you lose him, sneak up behind him, confront him for following you and harassing you, hit him in the face with such force that his nose breaks and he's knocked to the ground, jump on him, and start bashing his head on the sidewalk (note: a photo showing bleeding on the back of Zimmerman's head minutes after the shooting has been released).

Think you won't get shot? <mod snip>

First of all, Trayvon did not "sneak" into a gated community with a "security team". He was an invited guest. My point still stands: why did he get out of his vehicle WHEN HE WAS TOLD BY THE POLICE DISPATCHER "WE DON'T NEED YOU TO DO THAT", i.e., follow him. Do I think he was itching for a fight, heck yes I do, and that's what led to him shooting a 17 year old kid who was doing nothing wrong. JMO.

jaded cat
04-24-2012, 07:51 PM
Yep, but no one asked me :blushing:

My state doesn't have this law and I would vote against it if it came up.
I don't think you should be required to flee your place of residence. Someone kicks in my door, they intend harm, no question in my mind, and having to flee my home while in shock and fear puts my reaction in question and possibly has me fleeing my home into more danger outside my window. If you are in a shared space retreat when possible is just common sense for public safety. I don't want your average citizen deciding what is criminal and what isn't, and they certainly shouldn't be confronting anyone. Just from a public safety stand point if GZ had been approaching someone else, say a 25 year old with priors and warrant for his arrest and gun on him GZ pursuing him might have got a bystander killed in the crossfire.

That's exactly what my husband thinks! We do have guns in our house and he wouldn't hesitate to use them. He was a sharpshooter in the Army.

LynnM
04-24-2012, 07:52 PM
What do you think is the reason he got out of his vehicle? He obviously had a reason, because he did get out. What do you think it might have been?


Do you think he was thinking this might be his chance to shoot someone? Maybe he planned to follow him, hoped for a confrontation, so he could have an excuse to shoot him. Is that what you're thinking?

Or, maybe he took his (unpaid) "security" job a little too seriously? Maybe he saw it as his duty to figure out why someone unfamiliar/suspicious is in the gated community? Maybe he was telling the truth when he was talking to the police dispatcher about being concerned the suspicious looking person would get away before the police got there, so he decided to follow him. Maybe that's why he started running when Trayvon started running?

Seems to me that the latter explanation is much more likely to be true. Gated communities are very different from public communities. One of the main reasons people live in gated communities is for the security, and much of that security stems from treating anyone who is unfamiliar as being suspicious.

If you don't know what I mean, try putting on a hoodie and sneaking into a gated community, especially one with a security team (paid or voluntary), and see what happens. Then, when you get followed by a security guard or security watch person, try to lose him. Then, after you lose him, sneak up behind him, confront him for following you and harassing you, hit him in the face with such force that his nose breaks and he's knocked to the ground, jump on him, and start bashing his head on the sidewalk (note: a photo showing bleeding on the back of Zimmerman's head minutes after the shooting has been released).

Think you won't get shot? <mod snip>

Wow! If Zimmerman wanted to find out why Trayvon was there, then why didn't he identify himself and ask him? He certainly didn't do it when Trayvon was supposedly walking up to his vehicle to check him out and the friend on the phone reports that he didn't answer Trayvon's question about why he was following him or identify himself as a watch volunteer and ask if he lived there.

Trayvon didn't sneak into this community. He was staying there.

Yes, I know about the photo but if Zimmerman was the aggressor then Trayvon had every right to defend himself. We have only Zimmerman's word that he was defending himself after being jumped from behind and I don't believe him.

And no, I don't want to sneak into a gated community. But if I am an invited guest or staying with relatives, I expect to be able to put my hoodie on and walk down the street and not be shot. If a security person in uniform or in a marked patrol asks me what I am doing there I will tell him. If a watch volunteer identifies himself I will tell him. But if a strange man follows me in a car, I am going to run and if he runs after me I am going to be sure he's a bad guy.

Sensei
04-24-2012, 07:54 PM
That's exactly what my husband thinks! We do have guns in our house and he wouldn't hesitate to use them. He was a sharpshooter in the Army.

I am an elderly female and I live alone, and I don't have a gun, but my reasons are simple, I don't know anything about guns, and I am more likely to be shot with my own gun because I have no knowlege or training. Someone wants to shoot me they have to bring their own gun...

What I do have is an alarm system, and a very little yappy dog and a very Big dog who wants to bite anyone who touches me. I have deadbolts and chain locks and double lock windows, and lastly, I have a cattle prod that will make someone sit up and take notice quite quickly....I am not afraid.

jaded cat
04-24-2012, 07:56 PM
What do you think is the reason he got out of his vehicle? He obviously had a reason, because he did get out. What do you think it might have been?


Do you think he was thinking this might be his chance to shoot someone? Maybe he planned to follow him, hoped for a confrontation, so he could have an excuse to shoot him. Is that what you're thinking?

Or, maybe he took his (unpaid) "security" job a little too seriously? Maybe he saw it as his duty to figure out why someone unfamiliar/suspicious is in the gated community? Maybe he was telling the truth when he was talking to the police dispatcher about being concerned the suspicious looking person would get away before the police got there, so he decided to follow him. Maybe that's why he started running when Trayvon started running?

Seems to me that the latter explanation is much more likely to be true. Gated communities are very different from public communities. One of the main reasons people live in gated communities is for the security, and much of that security stems from treating anyone who is unfamiliar as being suspicious.

If you don't know what I mean, try putting on a hoodie and sneaking into a gated community, especially one with a security team (paid or voluntary), and see what happens. Then, when you get followed by a security guard or security watch person, try to lose him. Then, after you lose him, sneak up behind him, confront him for following you and harassing you, hit him in the face with such force that his nose breaks and he's knocked to the ground, jump on him, and start bashing his head on the sidewalk (note: a photo showing bleeding on the back of Zimmerman's head minutes after the shooting has been released).

Think you won't get shot? <mod snip>


BBM

Since I don't believe that's what happened, I'll pass on that experiment. It still does not explain why GZ couldn't have approached TM in a guarded, yet calm manner and ask him if he needed help. Better yet, why didn't GZ just stay in his truck until LE arrives.

momshrink
04-24-2012, 07:57 PM
He wasn't standing his ground...that's the #1 reason not to use it IMO

I hope the defense throws us for a loop and uses insanity....

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

Elley Mae
04-24-2012, 07:58 PM
I am an elderly female and I live alone, and I don't have a gun, but my reasons are simple, I don't know anything about guns, and I am more likely to be shot with my own gun because I have no knowlege or training. Someone wants to shoot me they have to bring their own gun...

What I do have is an alarm system, and a very little yappy dog and a very Big dog who wants to bite anyone who touches me. I have deadbolts and chain locks and double lock windows, and lastly, I have a cattle prod that will make someone sit up and take notice quite quickly....I am not afraid.

I want to be on your team:woohoo:

Nova
04-24-2012, 07:59 PM
It also goes to the history he has with not wanting to pay for things he is responsible for paying. He didn't want to pay rent to a landlord (called cops), didn't want to pay someone for their services (call cops), now the credit card, and also him throwing himself a nice little party for a degree he didn't have. It's a pattern. Everything in his life these past few years shows a pattern of a man who imo, was a ticking time bomb. His sense of self-entitlement is, IMO, off the charts!

MOO

I don't know why GZ called the police rather than a lawyer or legal aid service, but I can understand his thinking about the defaulting landlord.

GZ was in danger of losing his home because of the impending foreclosure. He knew or thought he knew the landlord wasn't using the rent to pay the mortgage.

Although the law wasn't on his side, I can understand GZ thinking, "Why am I paying him rent money that won't actually get to the institution holding title on the house?"

This strikes me as typical human thinking and not a sign of special irresponsibility or narcissism.

jaded cat
04-24-2012, 08:00 PM
I am an elderly female and I live alone, and I don't have a gun, but my reasons are simple, I don't know anything about guns, and I am more likely to be shot with my own gun because I have no knowlege or training. Someone wants to shoot me they have to bring their own gun...

What I do have is an alarm system, and a very little yappy dog and a very Big dog who wants to bite anyone who touches me. I have deadbolts and chain locks and double lock windows, and lastly, I have a cattle prod that will make someone sit up and take notice quite quickly....I am not afraid.

:floorlaugh: I will NEVER even think of discovering your identity and coming to rob you! That all sounds pretty serious but I'm glad you feel safe. I don't much about guns other than how to load them and aim at a target so I'll leave the gun handling to my spouse. :woohoo:

suzihawk
04-24-2012, 08:00 PM
I really wonder if it comes down to dollars and cents, if the severance package is so generous that it is financially feasible to keep him until they can find a way to accept that resignation without having to spend as much money. This whole thing is just crazy IMO, I agree though how is Lee supposed to lead the department after the no confidence vote, and yet they refuse his resignation...I don't get it.

That's pretty much what Bonaparte said on O'Donnell's show last night.

impatientredhead
04-24-2012, 08:01 PM
BBM, Except that GZ was not LE...he's not a cop, so even if he did see Trayvon breaking into a car or a house, he has NO authority beyond the authority of the average citizen He had no authority to detain anyone, and in fact detaining Trayvon would have been a CRIME. So while it may be true that he thought Trayvon was suspicious, he was not empowered to legally do anything other than call LE, and following Trayvon was superflous since he had no power or authority to do anything else no matter what he saw and whether or not Trayvon "got away".

Just because I take the speed limit in front of my house a bit too seriously, does not give me the right to stop motorists and issue speeding tickets or set spike strips in the road...I am not a cop...GZ was not a cop, and he had fulfilled his duty to his neighborhood watch when he called LE,.

I posted a link in the last thread with a shooter who takes his speed limits quite seriously, in Florida, defended under SYG. Shooter felt his neighbor was speeding thru the neighborhood and posed a danger to his children. He went inside to get his gun, followed them to their house, had a confrontation with the passenger (who wasn't speeding in the first place, and the car was safely parked, a call to 911 would more than have handled the situation at its given state) Speed enforcement resident shot the passenger twice in the head, killing him. Went free under this very law last year.

ScubaTwinn
04-24-2012, 08:01 PM
Still have 3 more pages to catch up from the last thread, but wanted to pop in for a moment to respond from the old thread:
The answer is no, because I have never followed nor questioned a suspicious person. When I have spotted one, like a break-in I thought was occurring 2 houses down from me because noone was living there, I called LE. They immediately followed up and found out that it had been temporarily rented, but this chick left the front doors wide open and had the doors to her van open, and was new to the area.

Thank you again! I have another 4 pages to read and something has come up - I can't right now. I really appreciate your responding to my question.

Ninety5rpm
04-24-2012, 08:04 PM
BBM

Trayvon was an invited guest of a resident of that community. No different than other invited guests of other residents in that community.

He didn't sneak in anywhere and he had every right to be there, as that invited guest.
Yes, but did Zimmerman know that? If not, what difference does it make?

So, instead of sneaking in.... get invited as a guest to a private gated community. Then, go for a walk. Leave the community, maybe going to a convenience store to get some candy. Then return to the gated community, making sure your hoodie is on before you re-enter, making sure you walk around slowly, "checking stuff out", and see what happens. Then, when you get followed by a security guard or security watch person, try to lose him. Then, after you lose him, sneak up behind him, confront him for following you and harassing you, hit him in the face with such force that his nose breaks and he's knocked to the ground, jump on him, and start bashing his head on the sidewalk.

Another way to go is to thank the security person for his diligence, and politely and respectfully explain why you're there.

Do you think one of these approaches might be more likely to get you shot?

wncgal
04-24-2012, 08:04 PM
This case is so sad for me. I grew up in the 50s and 60s in a small Southern town where there were separate water fountains, etc. So I saw racism up close and personal you might say. I thought we had come so much further from that time, but we apparently haven't and that makes me sad. It makes me sad that someone would assume that because a black kid is walking down a street wearing a hoodie or whatever, that that kid is suspicious just because he's black. This case is ABSOLUTELY about right and wrong, but it is also about black and white no matter how much people deny it. The vitriol and hate directed at Trayvon and his family and their attorneys makes me sick. <mod snip>And it is all just so sad. JMHO. :(

tehcloser
04-24-2012, 08:07 PM
Yes, but did Zimmerman know that? If not, what difference does it make?

So, instead of sneaking in.... get invited as a guest to a private gated community. Then, go for a walk. Leave the community, maybe going to a convenience store to get some candy. Then return to the gated community, making sure your hoodie is on before you re-enter, making sure you walk around slowly, "checking stuff out", and see what happens. Then, when you get followed by a security guard or security watch person, try to lose him. Then, after you lose him, sneak up behind him, confront him for following you and harassing you, hit him in the face with such force that his nose breaks and he's knocked to the ground, jump on him, and start bashing his head on the sidewalk.

Another way to go is to thank the security person for his diligence, and politely and respectfully explain why you're there.
Do you think one of these approaches might be more likely to get you shot?

BBM

Yer forgetting one very important piece of the puzzle.......hth was Tray supposed to know who GZ was??? He could have been a crazy person for all Tray knew.

jaded cat
04-24-2012, 08:08 PM
I posted a link in the last thread with a shooter who takes his speed limits quite seriously, in Florida, defended under SYG. Shooter felt his neighbor was speeding thru the neighborhood and posed a danger to his children. He went inside to get his gun, followed them to their house, had a confrontation with the passenger (who wasn't speeding in the first place, and the car was safely parked, a call to 911 would more than have handled the situation at its given state) Speed enforcement resident shot the passenger twice in the head, killing him. Went free under this very law last year.

Oh, for the love of God, how is this possible? I know, I know, it's how the law works but that's a horrible abuse of it. Judge only or jury trial? I'd like to know how many bozos participated in that decision. :what:

Ninety5rpm
04-24-2012, 08:10 PM
BBM

Since I don't believe that's what happened, I'll pass on that experiment. It still does not explain why GZ couldn't have approached TM in a guarded, yet calm manner and ask him if he needed help. Better yet, why didn't GZ just stay in his truck until LE arrives.
If you don't believe that's what happened, what do you believe happened?

How do you know GZ did not approach TM in a guarded, yet calm manner? For all we know, based on what we learned from the recording of the call to the police dispatcher, he was merely following him, calmly, until TM noticed him and started running, trying to ditch him, apparently successfully.

As to why he didn't stay in his truck, I already answered that. He was concerned he would lose TM, and he wanted to make sure the police would question him. It was perfectly natural for someone like that to treat an unfamiliar person in a gated community as suspicious, and to follow him so as not to lose him before the police got there.

Again, why do you think he got out of the truck?

Nova
04-24-2012, 08:10 PM
I don't know what he means by that at all. What other defense is available to him? He admitted to the shooting. I guess he could claim he didn't intentionally shot the gun and it went off during the struggle, but that would not work if he told police otherwise.

Depending on the facts, GZ could claim self-defense before a jury without specifically invoking the SYG provisions and asking for immunity.

He can also do both, but it isn't required, as far as I know.

He could also in theory claim insanity. Maybe his lawyer is having GZ evaluated.

ianal

impatientredhead
04-24-2012, 08:11 PM
I really wonder if it comes down to dollars and cents, if the severance package is so generous that it is financially feasible to keep him until they can find a way to accept that resignation without having to spend as much money. This whole thing is just crazy IMO, I agree though how is Lee supposed to lead the department after the no confidence vote, and yet they refuse his resignation...I don't get it.

Do you get severance if you resign in a no confidence vote? I know some severance packages are costly but I am not sure if the no confidence and/or him being a public official changes that. I would like to think our local police chief doesn't get a severance package if he is outed in a no confidence vote. The outcry right now might be about TM, but the residence of Sanford were talking about longterm internal problems and a lack of trust in the police. Fresh blood couldn't have hurt, even just a fresh face that could say I can't right the wrongs that happened in the past, but lets work together going forward. What is the public suppose to say to a chief they wanted out and one that tried to quit? And how can he possibly do his job sucessfully? Seems like a no win.

annalia
04-24-2012, 08:11 PM
Yes, but did Zimmerman know that? If not, what difference does it make?

So, instead of sneaking in.... get invited as a guest to a private gated community. Then, go for a walk. Leave the community, maybe going to a convenience store to get some candy. Then return to the gated community, making sure your hoodie is on before you re-enter, making sure you walk around slowly, "checking stuff out", and see what happens. Then, when you get followed by a security guard or security watch person, try to lose him. Then, after you lose him, sneak up behind him, confront him for following you and harassing you, hit him in the face with such force that his nose breaks and he's knocked to the ground, jump on him, and start bashing his head on the sidewalk.

Another way to go is to thank the security person for his diligence, and politely and respectfully explain why you're there.

Do you think one of these approaches might be more likely to get you shot?

What security person? What security guard? :waitasec:

GZ had no security uniform on, he was not in a marked security car. Trayvon had no idea that GZ was anything but a strange adult following him. Since Trayvon had no idea who this strange person was, his running away was to get away from a stranger not a security person.

So I think that makes the rest of the scenario moot.

Again, Trayvon had every right to be in that development, yes he even had the right to put his hoodie up in the rain.

Re the bolded, that may be the story that has been given by GZ but it is far from an established fact.

JMHO

MaryAnn
04-24-2012, 08:11 PM
What do you think is the reason he got out of his vehicle? He obviously had a reason, because he did get out. What do you think it might have been?


Do you think he was thinking this might be his chance to shoot someone? Maybe he planned to follow him, hoped for a confrontation, so he could have an excuse to shoot him. Is that what you're thinking?

Or, maybe he took his (unpaid) "security" job a little too seriously? Maybe he saw it as his duty to figure out why someone unfamiliar/suspicious is in the gated community? Maybe he was telling the truth when he was talking to the police dispatcher about being concerned the suspicious looking person would get away before the police got there, so he decided to follow him. Maybe that's why he started running when Trayvon started running?

Seems to me that the latter explanation is much more likely to be true. Gated communities are very different from public communities. One of the main reasons people live in gated communities is for the security, and much of that security stems from treating anyone who is unfamiliar as being suspicious.

If you don't know what I mean, try putting on a hoodie and sneaking into a gated community, especially one with a security team (paid or voluntary), and see what happens. Then, when you get followed by a security guard or security watch person, try to lose him. Then, after you lose him, sneak up behind him, confront him for following you and harassing you, hit him in the face with such force that his nose breaks and he's knocked to the ground, jump on him, and start bashing his head on the sidewalk (note: a photo showing bleeding on the back of Zimmerman's head minutes after the shooting has been released).Think you won't get shot? <mod snip>

BBM There is not one ounce of proof that any of that happened. Even the investigator that took the stand at the bond hearing said his injuries weren't consistent with his head being bashed on concrete. He said they were more like scrape marks. If someone unidentified was following me suspiciously like GZ was doing and snuck up behind me believe you me I'd do anything to protect myself. Even if Trayvon did punch GZ I think it was Trayvon's right to defend himself. Plus Trayvon is the one dead. Why wouldn't GZ make up any story to save his own butt, Trayvon can't defend himself and that's what is so sad in this case.

Sensei
04-24-2012, 08:12 PM
Yes, but did Zimmerman know that? If not, what difference does it make?

So, instead of sneaking in.... get invited as a guest to a private gated community. Then, go for a walk. Leave the community, maybe going to a convenience store to get some candy. Then return to the gated community, making sure your hoodie is on before you re-enter, making sure you walk around slowly, "checking stuff out", and see what happens. Then, when you get followed by a security guard or security watch person, try to lose him. Then, after you lose him, sneak up behind him, confront him for following you and harassing you, hit him in the face with such force that his nose breaks and he's knocked to the ground, jump on him, and start bashing his head on the sidewalk.

Another way to go is to thank the security person for his diligence, and politely and respectfully explain why you're there.

Do you think one of these approaches might be more likely to get you shot?

your hypothetical is disingenuous since there was NO way for Trayvon to know that George Zimmerman was neighborhood watch...he did not have a t-shirt or a hat or a reflective vest to show that he was anything other than some random stranger who was following him for some nefarious purpose.
he never claims, nor did anyone who heard anything on the phone hear GZ identify himself as neighborhood watch, and I don't know about anyone else, but I would not if followed on a deserted street at night by some random guy who seemed to be too interested in what I was doing, I just would not be inclined to go up to them and politely and respectfully explain why I was walking on the street.

As far as the jumping on and bashing of head...well all that remains to be discovered, since there are various stories and at this point I tend to discount all of them, since at least one of them is a lie....GZ claims he was attacked from behind, then he was attacked after asking a question, then he was attacked at a point when he would have still been on the phone with the LE dispatch...no no no, I will just wait and see what actual evidence says since GZ says too much and all of it can't be true. IMO JMHO and stuff.

LynnM
04-24-2012, 08:14 PM
Yes, but did Zimmerman know that? If not, what difference does it make?

So, instead of sneaking in.... get invited as a guest to a private gated community. Then, go for a walk. Leave the community, maybe going to a convenience store to get some candy. Then return to the gated community, making sure your hoodie is on before you re-enter, making sure you walk around slowly, "checking stuff out", and see what happens. Then, when you get followed by a security guard or security watch person, try to lose him. Then, after you lose him, sneak up behind him, confront him for following you and harassing you, hit him in the face with such force that his nose breaks and he's knocked to the ground, jump on him, and start bashing his head on the sidewalk.

Another way to go is to thank the security person for his diligence, and politely and respectfully explain why you're there.

Do you think one of these approaches might be more likely to get you shot?

There is no evidence that George Zimmerman ever identified himself as any kind of security person or neighborhood watchman so why would Trayvon thank him for following him? As for the rest of it, I don't believe Trayvon sneaked up behind him at all.

impatientredhead
04-24-2012, 08:14 PM
Oh, for the love of God, how is this possible? I know, I know, it's how the law works but that's a horrible abuse of it. Judge only or jury trial? I'd like to know how many bozos participated in that decision. :what:

Let me go find my link. The stabbing of the radio thief was a judge not a jury, but there was a real mix of them. I don't remember if the speed enforcement guy was judge or jury. BRB

Phoenixfla
04-24-2012, 08:14 PM
BBM, Except that GZ was not LE...he's not a cop, so even if he did see Trayvon breaking into a car or a house, he has NO authority beyond the authority of the average citizen He had no authority to detain anyone, and in fact detaining Trayvon would have been a CRIME. So while it may be true that he thought Trayvon was suspicious, he was not empowered to legally do anything other than call LE, and following Trayvon was superflous since he had no power or authority to do anything else no matter what he saw and whether or not Trayvon "got away".

Just because I take the speed limit in front of my house a bit too seriously, does not give me the right to stop motorists and issue speeding tickets or set spike strips in the road...I am not a cop...GZ was not a cop, and he had fulfilled his duty to his neighborhood watch when he called LE,.

But there is no evidence that George tried to "detain" Trayvon. I believe that George was just observing Trayvon, in all likelyhood to be able to report to the police once they arrived. He may have walked to the alleyway, but I believe it was just to continue to keep an eye on the person whom was acting suspiciously. I say suspiciously based on the fact that George felt he may have been on drugs. In my opinion George must have seen something that made him consider the possibly that Trayvon could be under the influence of drugs.

Sensei
04-24-2012, 08:16 PM
Do you get severance if you resign in a no confidence vote? I know some severance packages are costly but I am not sure if the no confidence and/or him being a public official changes that. I would like to think our local police chief doesn't get a severance package if he is outed in a no confidence vote. The outcry right now might be about TM, but the residence of Sanford were talking about longterm internal problems and a lack of trust in the police. Fresh blood couldn't have hurt, even just a fresh face that could say I can't right the wrongs that happened in the past, but lets work together going forward. What is the public suppose to say to a chief they wanted out and one that tried to quit? And how can he possibly do his job sucessfully? Seems like a no win.

Since he is in effect under contract, I believe that they have to buy him out of the time on his contract or pay him his salary...so either come up with a severance that is acceptable, or pay him anyway, and that could get costly.. and even more costly if they have to hire someone to replace him and still pay him also but there may be a morals clause or some form of clause for non performance that they can use to save them from having to negotiate, and this is all just from what I gathered listening to various news media so I do not stand by it as totally accurate. I do agree however that it does appear to be a no win situation.

uvamerica
04-24-2012, 08:19 PM
Yes, but did Zimmerman know that? If not, what difference does it make?

So, instead of sneaking in.... get invited as a guest to a private gated community. Then, go for a walk. Leave the community, maybe going to a convenience store to get some candy. Then return to the gated community, making sure your hoodie is on before you re-enter, making sure you walk around slowly, "checking stuff out", and see what happens. Then, when you get followed by a security guard or security watch person, try to lose him. Then, after you lose him, sneak up behind him, confront him for following you and harassing you, hit him in the face with such force that his nose breaks and he's knocked to the ground, jump on him, and start bashing his head on the sidewalk.

Another way to go is to thank the security person for his diligence, and politely and respectfully explain why you're there.

Do you think one of these approaches might be more likely to get you shot?

Seriously ?
GZ is NOT a security person for 1. GZ had no right to follow TM or to carry a gun under the rules of NW. GZ crossed the line by leaving his truck with his gun and not listening to the dispatcher. Blaming the victim has no place here. :banghead:

momshrink
04-24-2012, 08:20 PM
I really wonder if it comes down to dollars and cents, if the severance package is so generous that it is financially feasible to keep him until they can find a way to accept that resignation without having to spend as much money. This whole thing is just crazy IMO, I agree though how is Lee supposed to lead the department after the no confidence vote, and yet they refuse his resignation...I don't get it.

I wonder how much this has to do with the ongoing justice dept investigation?
I wonder if they prefer to fire him rather than allow him to resign?
I also think money will be the deciding factor. How much will he get if fired vs. resigning?
JMO I really have no idea.

Nova
04-24-2012, 08:21 PM
He could, but why would he want to? If judge grants immunity then Zimmerman will not go on trial and will be immune from civil lawsuits too.

True, but based on the discussion we had many threads ago, it seemed the burden of proof was much higher at a SYG hearing than when pleading self-defense in a trial-in-chief. Maybe MO'M doesn't want the bad p.r. of losing a SYG hearing when he thinks he can make the lower standard of pleading self-defense later.

But the poster who said MO'M is probably just keeping his cards to himself is probably right.

jjenny
04-24-2012, 08:21 PM
BBM There is not one ounce of proof that any of that happened. Even the investigator that took the stand at the bond hearing said his injuries weren't consistent with his head being bashed on concrete. He said they were more like scrape marks. If someone unidentified was following me suspiciously like GZ was doing and snuck up behind me believe you me I'd do anything to protect myself. Even if Trayvon did punch GZ I think it was Trayvon's right to defend himself. Plus Trayvon is the one dead. Why wouldn't GZ make up any story to save his own butt, Trayvon can't defend himself and that's what is so sad in this case.

But when defense attorney questioned him he said the injuries were consistent.

Sensei
04-24-2012, 08:22 PM
But there is no evidence that George tried to "detain" Trayvon. I believe that George was just observing Trayvon, in all likelyhood to be able to report to the police once they arrived. He may have walked to the alleyway, but I believe it was just to continue to keep an eye on the person whom was acting suspiciously. I say suspiciously based on the fact that George felt he may have been on drugs. In my opinion George must have seen something that made him consider the possibly that Trayvon could be under the influence of drugs.

And that would be a very reasonable theory, except that we have Chief Lee stating that GZ got bashed because he asked a question, something like what are you doing here, and we have the girlfriend who heard him ask a similar question....and that pretty much blows the keep an eye on him from a distance theory out of the water, since he obviously made a statement to PD that he asked that question for the Police Chief to have made that ridiculous statement, and the girlfriend heard it, so he was NOT at a distance keeping an eye on Trayvon he was up close and personal and asking questions...IMO JMHO and stuff.

Ninety5rpm
04-24-2012, 08:24 PM
BBM

Yer forgetting one very important piece of the puzzle.......hth was Tray supposed to know who GZ was??? He could have been a crazy person for all Tray knew.
I'm not forgetting that at all. It has no relevance whatsoever, since GZ was breaking no laws for simply following someone, especially in a private gated community.

Being followed by a crazy person is a pretty unlikely situation in a gated community. Much more likely is it's someone like a busybody on the board of the HOA, or some other do-gooder resident snooping around to make sure nobody unauthorized is in the community (as GZ turned out to be).

But the more important point is that noticing someone unfamiliar walking around, thinking they're suspicious, calling the police to report them, and getting out of one's vehicle to follow them, even if told by the police dispatcher that that is unnecessary, is all perfectly legal. As far as I know, there is absolutely nothing legally wrong with doing any and all of that, and it's a perfectly normal and reasonable thing to do in a private gated community, especially by the neighborhood watch dude.

momshrink
04-24-2012, 08:25 PM
What do you think is the reason he got out of his vehicle? He obviously had a reason, because he did get out. What do you think it might have been?


Do you think he was thinking this might be his chance to shoot someone? Maybe he planned to follow him, hoped for a confrontation, so he could have an excuse to shoot him. Is that what you're thinking?

Or, maybe he took his (unpaid) "security" job a little too seriously? Maybe he saw it as his duty to figure out why someone unfamiliar/suspicious is in the gated community? Maybe he was telling the truth when he was talking to the police dispatcher about being concerned the suspicious looking person would get away before the police got there, so he decided to follow him. Maybe that's why he started running when Trayvon started running?

Seems to me that the latter explanation is much more likely to be true. Gated communities are very different from public communities. One of the main reasons people live in gated communities is for the security, and much of that security stems from treating anyone who is unfamiliar as being suspicious.

If you don't know what I mean, try putting on a hoodie and sneaking into a gated community, especially one with a security team (paid or voluntary), and see what happens. Then, when you get followed by a security guard or security watch person, try to lose him. Then, after you lose him, sneak up behind him, confront him for following you and harassing you, hit him in the face with such force that his nose breaks and he's knocked to the ground, jump on him, and start bashing his head on the sidewalk (note: a photo showing bleeding on the back of Zimmerman's head minutes after the shooting has been released).

Think you won't get shot? <mod snip>

:wagon:

Dr.Fessel
04-24-2012, 08:27 PM
But when defense attorney questioned him he said the injuries were consistent.

He did not say it was consistent with getting his head beat over and over on cement.

Nova
04-24-2012, 08:28 PM
Exactly, If MOM feels that they have a really good chance after seeing the discovery then there will most likely be a SYG hearing, but they do NOT want to have this hearing if there is a significant chance that they will lose because first George will HAVE to testify at that hearing, in a trial he would not have to but in that he has no shot at getting the immunity if he does not testify and what he says is then information that the SA could cross him on at trial if he were to choose to testify. A SYG hearing will give the Prosecutor a preview of exactly what his defense is going to be at trial and precisely what story she is going to have to discredit....so if there is a chance that they stand to lose that hearing it will very likely not happen. IMO JMHO and stuff.

Are we SURE that GZ will have to testify if there is a SYG hearing?

I know it sounds logical, but when we were researching SYG many threads back, there was an actual legal source that discussed how the defendant does NOT have to take the stand to assert SYG. His lawyer may argue SYG based on the known facts of the case without the defendant's testimony.

I admit I don't know whether that point applied to the SYG hearing, a SYG defense at trial or both.

Sensei
04-24-2012, 08:29 PM
But when defense attorney questioned him he said the injuries were consistent.

Yes, consistant with his head hitting something harder than his head, and that could have been but was not limited to concrete but he did not say that Trayvon caused the injuries and we have nothing except GZ's conflicting statements that this is so....he also said that there were inconsistant statements and physical evidence that did not match the statements that GZ gave, so that is no help either since I happen to have an injury consistant with burning myself with a curling iron, ( I don't really) but it actually happened when I stunned myself with my cattle prod....and if I get petulant with him I might tell the Police that my boyfriend burned me with his solder iron and the wound would be consistant...IMO JMHO and stuff.

impatientredhead
04-24-2012, 08:29 PM
Let me go find my link. The stabbing of the radio thief was a judge not a jury, but there was a real mix of them. I don't remember if the speed enforcement guy was judge or jury. BRB

It was a judge at the stand your ground hearing. Those details and much more in the longer linked article. As a reading note, the Garcia case referenced by the prosecutor who lost that case that would be the stabber who ran his victim down a full city block, didn't call the place to say the man was injured, went home and went to bed after cleaning up and hiding or destroying evidence.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/article1222930.ece

"Mr. Zimmerman's unnecessary pursuit and confrontation of Trayvon Martin elevated the prospect of a violent episode and does not seem to be an act of self-defense as defined by the castle doctrine" wrote state Rep. Dennis Baxley, the Ocala Republican who co-authored the law, in a column March 21 for FOXNews.com. "There is no protection in the 'stand your ground' law for anyone who pursues and confronts people."

Lawyers say the bill's supporters are either uninformed or politically motivated.

"That's not what the law says," said Steven Romine, a Tampa Bay lawyer who has invoked "stand your ground" successfully. "They might think that in their own heads, but it's just not true.

"If you're doing something legal, no matter what the act is, and you're attacked, it's in that moment that you have a right to stand your ground."

Prosecutors, who are generally critical of the law, agree.

"The real issue is what happens around the 60 seconds prior to the shooting," said Ed Griffith, a spokesman for the Miami-Dade State Attorney's Office, which brought the charges against Greyston Garcia. "Everything else has emotional content, but from a legal perspective, it all comes down to the 60 seconds before the incident."

One of Romine's cases is a prime example. In 2008, his client, Charles Podany, noticed a truck speeding past his house in Thonotosassa, where his children play in the front yard. Podany fetched his handgun and rode his bicycle down the street to the house where the truck was parked to get a license plate number.

He found himself in a confrontation with Casey Landes, 24, who had been a passenger in the truck. Landes, legally drunk, attacked the smaller Podany and wound up on top of him. Podany drew his weapon and fired twice. The second bullet entered Landes' left cheek and struck the back of his skull, killing him instantly.

Podany was charged with manslaughter. But before trial, a judge ruled that despite initiating the confrontation by arming himself and riding his bicycle to the speeder's house, Podany was in a place he had a legal right to be and he was carrying a weapon he had a legal right to carry. He found that Podany feared for his life and had the right to defend himself with deadly force.

"There is not an exception to the law that says if you're doing something stupid, or risky, or not in your best interest, that 'stand your ground' doesn't apply," Romine said.

suzihawk
04-24-2012, 08:30 PM
I'm not forgetting that at all. It has no relevance whatsoever, since GZ was breaking no laws for simply following someone, especially in a private gated community.

Being followed by a crazy person is a pretty unlikely situation in a gated community. Much more likely is it's someone like a busybody on the board of the HOA, or some other do-gooder resident snooping around to make sure nobody unauthorized is in the community (as GZ turned out to be).

But the more important point is that noticing someone unfamiliar walking around, thinking they're suspicious, calling the police to report them, and getting out of one's vehicle to follow them, even if told by the police dispatcher that that is unnecessary, is all perfectly legal. As far as I know, there is absolutely nothing legally wrong with doing any and all of that, and it's a perfectly normal and reasonable thing to do in a private gated community, especially by the neighborhood watch dude.

LOL What would prevent a nut or whacko from living in a gated community? Or a pedaphile? Or a rapist? They don't have signs on their foreheads, ya know.

jjenny
04-24-2012, 08:30 PM
Are we SURE that GZ will have to testify if there is a SYG hearing?

I know it sounds logical, but when we were researching SYG many threads back, there was an actual legal source that discussed how the defendant does NOT have to take the stand to assert SYG. His lawyer may argue SYG based on the known facts of the case without the defendant's testimony.

I admit I don't know whether that point applied to the SYG hearing, a SYG defense at trial or both.

He doesn't have to. When THs say "he has to" they mean if defense wants to win SYG hearing they should put GZ on the stand. But there is no law that says GZ has to testify as far as I can tell.

Nova
04-24-2012, 08:31 PM
Is there a traditional self-defense law, just plain old justifiable homicide, or in FL is it Stand Your Ground?

Sorry, hope that makes sense...

Yes, Florida has both. (In fact, that's why critics say SYG was entirely unnecessary.) You can find discussions on both laws in earlier threads, but you'll have to go a ways back...

uvamerica
04-24-2012, 08:33 PM
I'm not forgetting that at all. It has no relevance whatsoever, since GZ was breaking no laws for simply following someone, especially in a private gated community.

Being followed by a crazy person is a pretty unlikely situation in a gated community. Much more likely is it's someone like a busybody on the board of the HOA, or some other do-gooder resident snooping around to make sure nobody unauthorized is in the community (as GZ turned out to be).

But the more important point is that noticing someone unfamiliar walking around, thinking they're suspicious, calling the police to report them, and getting out of one's vehicle to follow them, even if told by the police dispatcher that that is unnecessary, is all perfectly legal. As far as I know, there is absolutely nothing legally wrong with doing any and all of that, and it's a perfectly normal and reasonable thing to do in a private gated community, especially by the neighborhood watch dude.

Well, Trayvon just happened to be followed by a crazy person (GZ) and lost his life because of him. It is not perfectly normal for a NW to follow and shoot a person they believe as suspicious, when it is in the rules NOT to !! MOO

jaded cat
04-24-2012, 08:33 PM
It was a judge at the stand your ground hearing. Those details and much more in the longer linked article.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/article1222930.ece

"Mr. Zimmerman's unnecessary pursuit and confrontation of Trayvon Martin elevated the prospect of a violent episode and does not seem to be an act of self-defense as defined by the castle doctrine" wrote state Rep. Dennis Baxley, the Ocala Republican who co-authored the law, in a column March 21 for FOXNews.com. "There is no protection in the 'stand your ground' law for anyone who pursues and confronts people."

Lawyers say the bill's supporters are either uninformed or politically motivated.

"That's not what the law says," said Steven Romine, a Tampa Bay lawyer who has invoked "stand your ground" successfully. "They might think that in their own heads, but it's just not true.

"If you're doing something legal, no matter what the act is, and you're attacked, it's in that moment that you have a right to stand your ground."

Prosecutors, who are generally critical of the law, agree.

"The real issue is what happens around the 60 seconds prior to the shooting," said Ed Griffith, a spokesman for the Miami-Dade State Attorney's Office, which brought the charges against Greyston Garcia. "Everything else has emotional content, but from a legal perspective, it all comes down to the 60 seconds before the incident."

One of Romine's cases is a prime example. In 2008, his client, Charles Podany, noticed a truck speeding past his house in Thonotosassa, where his children play in the front yard. Podany fetched his handgun and rode his bicycle down the street to the house where the truck was parked to get a license plate number.

He found himself in a confrontation with Casey Landes, 24, who had been a passenger in the truck. Landes, legally drunk, attacked the smaller Podany and wound up on top of him. Podany drew his weapon and fired twice. The second bullet entered Landes' left cheek and struck the back of his skull, killing him instantly.

Podany was charged with manslaughter. But before trial, a judge ruled that despite initiating the confrontation by arming himself and riding his bicycle to the speeder's house, Podany was in a place he had a legal right to be and he was carrying a weapon he had a legal right to carry. He found that Podany feared for his life and had the right to defend himself with deadly force.

"There is not an exception to the law that says if you're doing something stupid, or risky, or not in your best interest, that 'stand your ground' doesn't apply," Romine said.

Thank you for posting this! I'm going back to read the article. I'm also stunned at this decision and in shock that the judge could even think that way.

:what: :waitasec:

Sensei
04-24-2012, 08:33 PM
Are we SURE that GZ will have to testify if there is a SYG hearing?

I know it sounds logical, but when we were researching SYG many threads back, there was an actual legal source that discussed how the defendant does NOT have to take the stand to assert SYG. His lawyer may argue SYG based on the known facts of the case without the defendant's testimony.

I admit I don't know whether that point applied to the SYG hearing, a SYG defense at trial or both.

he will not HAVE to in the sense that it is required, and many SYG hearings could be conducted without having the shooter or the person who is asking for immunity take the stand, but all cases are different, and in this one there IS no other witness...the only other witness is dead, and so GZ does not have nearly as good a chance of convincing a Judge that he acted in self defense if he does not get on the stand and tell his story since there appears to be a scarcity of evidence to show that it was in fact self defense with his own words telling how he was following and how suspicious he thought this guy was....It is not a shoo in, but it seems to be very likely he will if there is actually a hearing IMO JMHO and stuff.

Adrienne37
04-24-2012, 08:33 PM
Boohoo, poor city of Sanford. It's hard to decide which one to feel more sorry for, Zimmerman or Sanford.


Sanford police dispute criticism over Trayvon Martin’s death...

“We are not that monster that they are showing on TV, in the newspaper,” O’Connor said. “That it's not true, in spite of what some people would say, it's not true.”

He said they have been financially and emotionally stretched.

O’Connor said they have maxed out overtime after having to add extra patrols for rallies and other events that have taken place. He said officers have been working six or seven days straight.



http://www.cfnews13.com/content/news/cfnews13/news/article.html/content/news/articles/cfn/2012/4/24/sanford_police_dispu.html

Ninety5rpm
04-24-2012, 08:35 PM
And that would be a very reasonable theory, except that we have Chief Lee stating that GZ got bashed because he asked a question, something like what are you doing here, and we have the girlfriend who heard him ask a similar question....and that pretty much blows the keep an eye on him from a distance theory out of the water, since he obviously made a statement to PD that he asked that question for the Police Chief to have made that ridiculous statement, and the girlfriend heard it, so he was NOT at a distance keeping an eye on Trayvon he was up close and personal and asking questions...IMO JMHO and stuff.
There is nothing unlawful about asking that question, and it certainly does not justify battery, so I don't understand why that's relevant.

Besides, GZ's story is that he was merely following him. After all, he knew the police were on their way, so it makes sense his goal was simply to not lose him. But he also says that he lost him, and so was returning to his vehicle when TM found him, and that's when the talking/questioning started.

So I don't see how the keep an eye on him from a distance theory is blown at all.

Remember, between having something like five minutes of recorded phone conversation with the police dispatcher, knowing that the police were about to arrive, and seeing that TM was himself using the phone, he did not have a whole lot of wiggle room to come up with some kind of diabolical plan, and GZ doesn't strike me as someone who could even do that with time to plan it, much less pulling it off on the fly like that. Minutes after the shooting the police did show up, and he had to answer questions. If his story was a lie, then it would be extremely unlikely that it wouldn't have the kinds of holes in it you think you found here.

Maybe it does have such holes, but this is not one.

Phoenixfla
04-24-2012, 08:36 PM
And that would be a very reasonable theory, except that we have Chief Lee stating that GZ got bashed because he asked a question, something like what are you doing here, and we have the girlfriend who heard him ask a similar question....and that pretty much blows the keep an eye on him from a distance theory out of the water, since he obviously made a statement to PD that he asked that question for the Police Chief to have made that ridiculous statement, and the girlfriend heard it, so he was NOT at a distance keeping an eye on Trayvon he was up close and personal and asking questions...IMO JMHO and stuff.

I agree they were face to face at some point, but that does not necessarily mean that GZ approached TM. I believe that Trayvon was angry that GZ was watching him and doubled back to teach GZ a lesson.

Dr.Fessel
04-24-2012, 08:39 PM
There is nothing unlawful about asking that question, and it certainly does not justify battery, so I don't understand why that's relevant.

Besides, GZ's story is that he was merely following him. After all, he knew the police were on their way, so it makes sense his goal was simply to not lose him. But he also says that he lost him, and so was returning to his vehicle when TM found him, and that's when the talking/questioning started.

So I don't see how the keep an eye on him from a distance theory is blown at all.

Remember, between having something like five minutes of recorded phone conversation with the police dispatcher, knowing that the police were about to arrive, and seeing that TM was himself using the phone, he did not have a whole lot of wiggle room to come up with some kind of diabolical plan, and GZ doesn't strike me as someone who could even do that with time to plan it, much less pulling it off on the fly like that. Minutes after the shooting the police did show up, and he had to answer questions. If his story was a lie, then it would be extremely unlikely that it wouldn't have the kinds of holes in it you think you found here.

Maybe it does have such holes, but this is not one.

BBM

We heard in the hearing George's story does not add up.

Adrienne37
04-24-2012, 08:40 PM
Florida shooter Zimmerman needs protection while out on bail, lawyer says..

Mark O'Mara also said he was considering seeking a taxpayer-funded bodyguard for Zimmerman if the threats continue, according to the report.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/24/11377134-florida-shooter-zimmerman-needs-protection-while-out-on-bail-lawyer-says?lite

Dr.Fessel
04-24-2012, 08:41 PM
I agree they were face to face at some point, but that does not necessarily mean that GZ approached TM. I believe that Trayvon was angry that GZ was watching him and doubled back to teach GZ a lesson.

From he slurring words on the 911 tape I believe it was George who was planning on teaching a lesson that night. IMO

jjenny
04-24-2012, 08:41 PM
Thank you for posting this! I'm going back to read the article. I'm also stunned at this decision and in shock that the judge could even think that way.

:what: :waitasec:

Reading about these other cases, I fail to see why GZ's lawyer would not request a SYG hearing.

Adrienne37
04-24-2012, 08:42 PM
LOL What would prevent a nut or whacko from living in a gated community? Or a pedaphile? Or a rapist? They don't have signs on their foreheads, ya know.

Well, we do know there are at least 2 nuts living in that particular gated community.



~jmo~

imamaze
04-24-2012, 08:42 PM
I'm not forgetting that at all. It has no relevance whatsoever, since GZ was breaking no laws for simply following someone, especially in a private gated community.

Being followed by a crazy person is a pretty unlikely situation in a gated community. Much more likely is it's someone like a busybody on the board of the HOA, or some other do-gooder resident snooping around to make sure nobody unauthorized is in the community (as GZ turned out to be).

But the more important point is that noticing someone unfamiliar walking around, thinking they're suspicious, calling the police to report them, and getting out of one's vehicle to follow them, even if told by the police dispatcher that that is unnecessary, is all perfectly legal. As far as I know, there is absolutely nothing legally wrong with doing any and all of that, and it's a perfectly normal and reasonable thing to do in a private gated community, especially by the neighborhood watch dude.

It does have relevance. Trayvon knew he belonged there, GZ knew he belonged but neither one knew if the other belonged. GZ was as much a stranger to Trayvon as Trayvon was to him.

GZ should have stayed in his vehicle, he should have never followed Trayvon IMO. It wasn't illegal for Trayvon to have went to the store to buy Skittles and Tea either. It wasn't illegal for him to be walking back home talking on the phone to his girlfriend, with his hoodie up in the rain. GZ should have never followed Trayvon, he should have waited for LE to get there.

elementary
04-24-2012, 08:42 PM
What do you think is the reason he got out of his vehicle? He obviously had a reason, because he did get out. What do you think it might have been?


Do you think he was thinking this might be his chance to shoot someone? Maybe he planned to follow him, hoped for a confrontation, so he could have an excuse to shoot him. Is that what you're thinking?

Or, maybe he took his (unpaid) "security" job a little too seriously? Maybe he saw it as his duty to figure out why someone unfamiliar/suspicious is in the gated community? Maybe he was telling the truth when he was talking to the police dispatcher about being concerned the suspicious looking person would get away before the police got there, so he decided to follow him. Maybe that's why he started running when Trayvon started running?

Seems to me that the latter explanation is much more likely to be true. Gated communities are very different from public communities. One of the main reasons people live in gated communities is for the security, and much of that security stems from treating anyone who is unfamiliar as being suspicious.

If you don't know what I mean, try putting on a hoodie and sneaking into a gated community, especially one with a security team (paid or voluntary), and see what happens. Then, when you get followed by a security guard or security watch person, try to lose him. Then, after you lose him, sneak up behind him, confront him for following you and harassing you, hit him in the face with such force that his nose breaks and he's knocked to the ground, jump on him, and start bashing his head on the sidewalk (note: a photo showing bleeding on the back of Zimmerman's head minutes after the shooting has been released).

Think you won't get shot? <mod snip>

Trayvon was just walking home. What is suspicious about that? The fact that he was a stranger? Yet his behaviour was not out of the norm. Why could it not occur to GZ that if there is an unfamiliar person he might be a guest? Guests are not called "a$%%^^s". He already had profiled, judged and tried Trayvon based on his own biases, not on reality.

Sensei
04-24-2012, 08:43 PM
There is nothing unlawful about asking that question, and it certainly does not justify battery, so I don't understand why that's relevant.

Besides, GZ's story is that he was merely following him. After all, he knew the police were on their way, so it makes sense his goal was simply to not lose him. But he also says that he lost him, and so was returning to his vehicle when TM found him, and that's when the talking/questioning started.

So I don't see how the keep an eye on him from a distance theory is blown at all.

Remember, between having something like five minutes of recorded phone conversation with the police dispatcher, knowing that the police were about to arrive, and seeing that TM was himself using the phone, he did not have a whole lot of wiggle room to come up with some kind of diabolical plan, and GZ doesn't strike me as someone who could even do that with time to plan it, much less pulling it off on the fly like that. Minutes after the shooting the police did show up, and he had to answer questions. If his story was a lie, then it would be extremely unlikely that it wouldn't have the kinds of holes in it you think you found here.

Maybe it does have such holes, but this is not one.

it actually does have such holes...lots of them. His Attorney had put forward on the record his story. The claim is that he was going to look for an address, He left his vehicle at 2:26, to go to the end of the walkway to get an address, approx 80 ft. If he went there and back it would be 160 ft. he through his attorney claims that he was attacked where the sidewalk between the buildings merge with the one he was on, about half way.

Using the most generous times and distances that I could, the best I could come up with is that if we believe this story GZ was attacked by Trayvon while he was still on the phone with LE dispatch....and this is the story his legal person locked in at the bond hearing....soooooo, no I really will wait and see if there is anything more than GZ's story or story(s) IMO JMHO and stuff.

Adrienne37
04-24-2012, 08:43 PM
BBM

We heard in the hearing George's story does not add up.

Don't you mean "stories" Doc? Was it 3 or 5 stories he's told according to the prosecution?


~jmo~

suzihawk
04-24-2012, 08:43 PM
Florida shooter Zimmerman needs protection while out on bail, lawyer says..

Mark O'Mara also said he was considering seeking a taxpayer-funded bodyguard for Zimmerman if the threats continue, according to the report.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/24/11377134-florida-shooter-zimmerman-needs-protection-while-out-on-bail-lawyer-says?lite

Oh FGS! He had perfectly good protection right where he was. :banghead:

Ninety5rpm
04-24-2012, 08:45 PM
From he slurring words on the 911 tape I believe it was George who was planning on teaching a lesson that night. IMO
Almost certainly. The question is whether "the lesson" planned was to get him in the hands of the police, or to shoot him dead.

It's not very likely for someone planning a murder to call the police right before the murder. I think you're giving GZ a little too much intellectual credit if you think that's what he did.

jaded cat
04-24-2012, 08:46 PM
Reading about these other cases, I fail to see why GZ's lawyer would not request a SYG hearing.

I have no idea what this post means.

Adrienne37
04-24-2012, 08:46 PM
Oh FGS! He had perfectly good protection right where he was. :banghead:

and yet again, here are Trayvon's parents and their attorneys asking for the vigilantism to stop. Such wonderful people.


An attorney representing the Martins also spoke to WESH to discourage any vigilantism against Zimmerman.
"They don't condone it. They don't want it," said Martin family attorney Natalie Jackson. "If that's what (others) are doing, please stop."

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/24/11377134-florida-shooter-zimmerman-needs-protection-while-out-on-bail-lawyer-says?lite

LambChop
04-24-2012, 08:47 PM
Yes, but did Zimmerman know that? If not, what difference does it make?

So, instead of sneaking in.... get invited as a guest to a private gated community. Then, go for a walk. Leave the community, maybe going to a convenience store to get some candy. Then return to the gated community, making sure your hoodie is on before you re-enter, making sure you walk around slowly, "checking stuff out", and see what happens. Then, when you get followed by a security guard or security watch person, try to lose him. Then, after you lose him, sneak up behind him, confront him for following you and harassing you, hit him in the face with such force that his nose breaks and he's knocked to the ground, jump on him, and start bashing his head on the sidewalk.

Another way to go is to thank the security person for his diligence, and politely and respectfully explain why you're there.

Do you think one of these approaches might be more likely to get you shot?

1. GZ was not security, not identified as security by wearing a uniform, ID, etc. and could not do so because he was not security and only a private citizen acting as a private citizen. At least if the community had a security officer on duty TM would have been able to identify him.

2. TM did not put his hoodie on until after he was inside the gated community near the club house and it was raining. Certainly not something that should be considered unusual.

3. According to the timeline TM was walking straight home not sneaking around. GZ never identified himself which is evidenced on his call to dispatch. He left his vehicle when he had no obligation to do so.

4. There is no proof TM tried to sneak up on GZ and the SA's investigator said the evidence is to the contrary given the location of the body. Apparently other details GZ gave in his statement just do not line up with the evidence.

5. Why would TM thank someone when he did not know who he was, why he was following him and what he was after? The responsibility of that was with GZ to identify himself, he was the one who was following TM and tracking him down. There is no way GZ can deny that. Normal people do not thank others for harassing and terrorizing them. Had this man tried to follow me I can think of a few words I would have to say to him and they could not be thank you. People get very nervous when they are being followed for no apparent reason.

6. GZ stands alone in the having the responsibility to identify himself and apologize for detaining TM by asking him questions and it should have been done when GZ initially saw TM and he had LE on the line. It would have cleared the matter up without tying up a patrol car. IMO that is pretty clear to everyone by now.

I think the way to insure TM was not shot was for GZ to confront him when he had the chance with LE on the line. He did not do that so the question is why???? GZ went on the make one mistake after another with total disregard for the safety of others. TM was not the only person out walking that night. There was John and there was the young boy walking his dog. Both of them could have been shot. Very irresponsible behavior on GZ's part. jmo

badme102
04-24-2012, 08:47 PM
I'm just wondering how Trayvon was:

1) Pinning GZ down (takes 2 hands)
2) Covering GZ's mouth with BOTH hands with all his body weight (takes 2 hands)
3) Smashing GZ's head over and over on the sidewalk, one step away from being spoon fed and wearing diapers. (takes 2 hands)

How do you bash someone’s head into the sidewalk while you have them pinned, when that person outweighs you and is putting up a fight? Can’t be done. His head might bump the sidewalk as they are rolling about in a fight, but there is no way Trayvon would be able to purposefully “slam” his head into anything and still have enough arms free to keep him pinned.
Same can be said about the other ridiculous fabrication of Trayvon holding his mouth and nose with all his weight

Like I said before, just HOW MANY hands did this kid have? What a crock! :rolleyes:

Nope, I think its fairly obvious, when looking objectively at the real evidence and timeline in this case, that GZ stalked/pursued/chased and CAUGHT Trayvon. He was not going to another effing punk a**hole get away this time. No sir! He was wearing his cop wannabe "hat" and was desperately trying to be a hero to the REAL police, because he had failed miserably in becoming a REAL cop himself.

Trayvon Martin had every right to be in that community and was unjustifiably PROFILED. GZ should be ashamed of himself, not only for wrongly profiling an innocent child, but for chasing him, confronting him and murdering him.

The prosecutors are obviously going to prove that after being chased down and confronted by zimmerman, this unarmed kid was in fear of his life and attempted to protect himself, in any way he could. He stood his OWN ground, and unfortunately he wasn't successful. :(

Trayvon Martin is the only victim in this case, and frankly, seeing him being blamed for his own death is sickening me.

grammieto5
04-24-2012, 08:48 PM
Isn't the reason GZ was not arrested is because he was using the SYG law????

grandmaj
04-24-2012, 08:49 PM
Remember these posts I made this morning on Thread #31. I meant to post these up yonder when I made the new thread but work got away from me.
Quote:
This is not a warning to one poster, but to many:

I am on duty (off and on) during the day today and I will NOT put up with the personal jabs like the mods did yesterday. If you guys want to get personal with each other, expect a time out because it will happen. I am not here to edit and remove posts.

Everyone has now been forewarned. Continue on and play nice!
Quote:
Stop discussing what other posters should be posting NOW. If you see victim bashing, alert the post. Mods don't read every post and by bringing this up on the thread, you are merely going to start problems.

The above post was from Kimster this morning. It stands tonight as well and every other day!

Everyone read the opening post. Also refresh yourself on our TOS. And be forewarned. We are some 7 weeks into this case. THE RULES HAVE BEEN REPEATED OVER AND OVER AND OVER. From this point on I'm not going to continue to snip. If your post is out of line it goes in total. And anyone continuing to violate the respect policy here is going on a TO.

Dr.Fessel
04-24-2012, 08:49 PM
Almost certainly. The question is whether "the lesson" planned was to get him in the hands of the police, or to shoot him dead.

It's not very likely for someone planning a murder to call the police right before the murder. I think you're giving GZ a little too much intellectual credit if you think that's what he did.

I don't give him anything other then his due and I believe he was planning on stopping him from going out that back gate. IMO

Ninety5rpm
04-24-2012, 08:49 PM
LOL What would prevent a nut or whacko from living in a gated community? Or a pedaphile? Or a rapist? They don't have signs on their foreheads, ya know.
Nothing, of course. I was talking about likelihoods/probability.

While it's possible that you're being followed by a nutjob, it's more likely to be what I said - someone just suspicious of someone who is unfamiliar.

Besides, even if it is a nutjob, that doesn't justify breaking his nose and beating him.

jjenny
04-24-2012, 08:51 PM
I have no idea what this post means.

Why wouldn't GZ's lawyer ask for SYG hearing considering those other cases where judges granted SYG immunity? Posters here constantly point out that GZ put himself into the situation. And yet there appears to be plenty of other cases where people put themselves into the situations-and got SYG immunity. Some of those cases are pretty mind boggling to me yet those people got immunity just the same.

badme102
04-24-2012, 08:51 PM
BBM

We heard in the hearing George's story does not add up.
StorieS

Frankly, I wouldn't believe GZ if his tongue came notarized.

Ninety5rpm
04-24-2012, 08:55 PM
1. GZ was not security, not identified as security by wearing a uniform, ID, etc. and could not do so because he was not security and only a private citizen acting as a private citizen. At least if the community had a security officer on duty TM would have been able to identify him.

2. TM did not put his hoodie on until after he was inside the gated community near the club house and it was raining. Certainly not something that should be considered unusual.

3. According to the timeline TM was walking straight home not sneaking around. GZ never identified himself which is evidenced on his call to dispatch. He left his vehicle when he had no obligation to do so.

4. There is no proof TM tried to sneak up on GZ and the SA's investigator said the evidence is to the contrary given the location of the body. Apparently other details GZ gave in his statement just do not line up with the evidence.

5. Why would TM thank someone when he did not know who he was, why he was following him and what he was after? The responsibility of that was with GZ to identify himself, he was the one who was following TM and tracking him down. There is no way GZ can deny that. Normal people do not thank others for harassing and terrorizing them. Had this man tried to follow me I can think of a few words I would have to say to him and they could not be thank you. People get very nervous when they are being followed for no apparent reason.

6. GZ stands alone in the having the responsibility to identify himself and apologize for detaining TM by asking him questions and it should have been done when GZ initially saw TM and he had LE on the line. It would have cleared the matter up without tying up a patrol car. IMO that is pretty clear to everyone by now.

I think the way to insure TM was not shot was for GZ to confront him when he had the chance with LE on the line. He did not do that so the question is why???? GZ went on the make one mistake after another with total disregard for the safety of others. TM was not the only person out walking that night. There was John and there was the young boy walking his dog. Both of them could have been shot. Very irresponsible behavior on GZ's part. jmo

Thank you for the reasonable response. I still think there is too much speculation, and we know where the burden is.

Still, I'd like to know what the inconsistencies are in GZ's story and the evidence. That could make or break this case.

Gotta go. Nice chattin' with ya all.

jaded cat
04-24-2012, 08:55 PM
Nothing, of course. I was talking about likelihoods/probability.

While it's possible that you're being followed by a nutjob, it's more likely to be what I said - someone just suspicious of someone who is unfamiliar.

Besides, even if it is a nutjob, that doesn't justify breaking his nose and beating him.

We have no evidence that's what actually happened.

kimpage
04-24-2012, 08:55 PM
Yes, but did Zimmerman know that? If not, what difference does it make?

So, instead of sneaking in.... get invited as a guest to a private gated community. Then, go for a walk. Leave the community, maybe going to a convenience store to get some candy. Then return to the gated community, making sure your hoodie is on before you re-enter, making sure you walk around slowly, "checking stuff out", and see what happens. Then, when you get followed by a security guard or security watch person, try to lose him. Then, after you lose him, sneak up behind him, confront him for following you and harassing you, hit him in the face with such force that his nose breaks and he's knocked to the ground, jump on him, and start bashing his head on the sidewalk.

Another way to go is to thank the security person for his diligence, and politely and respectfully explain why you're there.

Do you think one of these approaches might be more likely to get you shot?
Then why didnt GZ just hey i am neighborhood watch can i ask who you are?/And why are you here??? I believe GZ is nothing more than a wanna be cop itching to use his gun.And poor TM was his target...And possibly GZ was alerted by Frank Taffee.I see no reason for TM to have attacked GZ.But GZ was itching to attack as is evidenced by his 911 call. IMHO JMHO and all that

jaded cat
04-24-2012, 08:56 PM
Why wouldn't GZ's lawyer ask for SYG hearing considering those other cases where judges granted SYG immunity? Posters here constantly point out that GZ put himself into the situation. And yet there appears to be plenty of other cases where people put themselves into the situations-and got SYG immunity. Some of those cases are pretty mind boggling to me yet those people got immunity just the same.

I didn't ask the question. I was asking about a case impatientredhead mentioned, nothing to do with GZ.

pcrum12
04-24-2012, 08:57 PM
What do you think is the reason he got out of his vehicle? He obviously had a reason, because he did get out. What do you think it might have been?


Do you think he was thinking this might be his chance to shoot someone? Maybe he planned to follow him, hoped for a confrontation, so he could have an excuse to shoot him. Is that what you're thinking?

Or, maybe he took his (unpaid) "security" job a little too seriously? Maybe he saw it as his duty to figure out why someone unfamiliar/suspicious is in the gated community? Maybe he was telling the truth when he was talking to the police dispatcher about being concerned the suspicious looking person would get away before the police got there, so he decided to follow him. Maybe that's why he started running when Trayvon started running?

Seems to me that the latter explanation is much more likely to be true. Gated communities are very different from public communities. One of the main reasons people live in gated communities is for the security, and much of that security stems from treating anyone who is unfamiliar as being suspicious.

If you don't know what I mean, try putting on a hoodie and sneaking into a gated community, especially one with a security team (paid or voluntary), and see what happens. Then, when you get followed by a security guard or security watch person, try to lose him. Then, after you lose him, sneak up behind him, confront him for following you and harassing you, hit him in the face with such force that his nose breaks and he's knocked to the ground, jump on him, and start bashing his head on the sidewalk (note: a photo showing bleeding on the back of Zimmerman's head minutes after the shooting has been released).

Think you won't get shot? <mod snip>

Hitting the Thanks button just wasn't enough. Bravo!

highflyer
04-24-2012, 08:58 PM
Florida shooter Zimmerman needs protection while out on bail, lawyer says..

Mark O'Mara also said he was considering seeking a taxpayer-funded bodyguard for Zimmerman if the threats continue, according to the report.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/24/11377134-florida-shooter-zimmerman-needs-protection-while-out-on-bail-lawyer-says?lite

While I want Mr. Zimmerman to be safe I fail to see why taxpayers should foot the bill for a bodyguard. Mr. Zimmerman wanted to be out on bail and he got his wish.

elementary
04-24-2012, 08:59 PM
I'm not forgetting that at all. It has no relevance whatsoever, since GZ was breaking no laws for simply following someone, especially in a private gated community.

Being followed by a crazy person is a pretty unlikely situation in a gated community. Much more likely is it's someone like a busybody on the board of the HOA, or some other do-gooder resident snooping around to make sure nobody unauthorized is in the community (as GZ turned out to be).

But the more important point is that noticing someone unfamiliar walking around, thinking they're suspicious, calling the police to report them, and getting out of one's vehicle to follow them, even if told by the police dispatcher that that is unnecessary, is all perfectly legal. As far as I know, there is absolutely nothing legally wrong with doing any and all of that, and it's a perfectly normal and reasonable thing to do in a private gated community, especially by the neighborhood watch dude.

You're promoting a double standard here. It's okay to be followed by a stranger (more likely to be benign), but it is not okay to be a stranger (more likely to be suspect) minding his own business.

Nova
04-24-2012, 09:02 PM
But when defense attorney questioned him he said the injuries were consistent.

No, he said the injuries were consistent with GZ's head striking a harder substance, including concrete. He specifically did NOT say the injuries were consistent with GZ's story of how the injuries occurred.

grammieto5
04-24-2012, 09:02 PM
ugh this thread is sooo interesting, but I have to stop reading and fix dinner.. hmmm wonder how hubby would feel about having pizza delivered :-)

momshrink
04-24-2012, 09:02 PM
StorieS

Frankly, I wouldn't believe GZ if his tongue came notarized.

:goodpost:
Post of the day!

Phoenixfla
04-24-2012, 09:05 PM
LOL What would prevent a nut or whacko from living in a gated community? Or a pedaphile? Or a rapist? They don't have signs on their foreheads, ya know.

Actually many community associations require the buyer apply to the association for approval. That generally involves a background search and the association can disapprove someone if they were convicted of one of those things.

highflyer
04-24-2012, 09:05 PM
Didn't GZ have flashlights with him too? Were they maglight hard or tactical? Could leave a nasty abrasion. Wonder if they were confiscated?

Sensei
04-24-2012, 09:07 PM
Didn't GZ have flashlights with him too? Were they maglight hard or tactical? Could leave a nasty abrasion. Wonder if they were confiscated?

I believe that I read somewhere that they were tactical, but I don't know if they were confiscated.

LambChop
04-24-2012, 09:07 PM
Nothing, of course. I was talking about likelihoods/probability.

While it's possible that you're being followed by a nutjob, it's more likely to be what I said - someone just suspicious of someone who is unfamiliar.

Besides, even if it is a nutjob, that doesn't justify breaking his nose and beating him.

Isn't it likely that GZ sustained those injuries when he fell. Isn't also likely that GZ was trying to keep TM from leaving the area where GZ knew his truck would be found and may have grabbed TM's arm or sleeve of his hoodie and that is how the argument started. A witness said she saw two figures run past her condo and since GZ never claimed he ran from TM would it not make more sense that GZ was running after TM to keep him from getting away. What would you expect TM to do in that case? Certainly not thank him for his diligence in tracking him down. GZ's story just does not add up. It's as strange as his call is to the LE dispatcher. jmo

Nova
04-24-2012, 09:07 PM
He doesn't have to. When THs say "he has to" they mean if defense wants to win SYG hearing they should put GZ on the stand. But there is no law that says GZ has to testify as far as I can tell.

Thank you, jenny. That's what I thought.

suzihawk
04-24-2012, 09:07 PM
StorieS

Frankly, I wouldn't believe GZ if his tongue came notarized.

:floorlaugh:

HiHater
04-24-2012, 09:07 PM
Boohoo, poor city of Sanford. It's hard to decide which one to feel more sorry for, Zimmerman or Sanford.


Sanford police dispute criticism over Trayvon Martin’s death...

“We are not that monster that they are showing on TV, in the newspaper,” O’Connor said. “That it's not true, in spite of what some people would say, it's not true.”

He said they have been financially and emotionally stretched.

O’Connor said they have maxed out overtime after having to add extra patrols for rallies and other events that have taken place. He said officers have been working six or seven days straight.



http://www.cfnews13.com/content/news/cfnews13/news/article.html/content/news/articles/cfn/2012/4/24/sanford_police_dispu.html

BBM

I don't know why anyone would care. If those officers would have just worked ONE night, Feb 26, they wouldn't be in this mess...JMO

Dr.Fessel
04-24-2012, 09:08 PM
Nothing, of course. I was talking about likelihoods/probability.

While it's possible that you're being followed by a nutjob, it's more likely to be what I said - someone just suspicious of someone who is unfamiliar.

Besides, even if it is a nutjob, that doesn't justify breaking his nose and beating him.

Justifies it if the nutjob carries his phone right next to his concealed weapon and in reaching for his waistband the person thought he was going for his gun.

HiHater
04-24-2012, 09:09 PM
But when defense attorney questioned him he said the injuries were consistent.

Not exactly

(you have to watch the video to get the full exchange)

GILBREATH: Managed to scoot away from the concrete sidewalk and that is at that point is when the shooting subsequently followed. That is not consistent with the evidence we found.

O'MARA: The injuries seem to be consistent with his story, though, don't they?

Gilbreath: The injuries are consistent with a harder object striking the back of his head than his head was.

O'MARA: Could that be cement?

GILBREATH: Could be.

O'MARA: Did you just say it was consistent or did you say it wasn't consistent?

GILBREATH: I said it was.


BBM
It's actually kind of confusing to tell what he's saying is consistent with what IMO

Nova
04-24-2012, 09:10 PM
There is nothing unlawful about asking that question, and it certainly does not justify battery, so I don't understand why that's relevant.

Besides, GZ's story is that he was merely following him. After all, he knew the police were on their way, so it makes sense his goal was simply to not lose him. But he also says that he lost him, and so was returning to his vehicle when TM found him, and that's when the talking/questioning started.

So I don't see how the keep an eye on him from a distance theory is blown at all.

Remember, between having something like five minutes of recorded phone conversation with the police dispatcher, knowing that the police were about to arrive, and seeing that TM was himself using the phone, he did not have a whole lot of wiggle room to come up with some kind of diabolical plan, and GZ doesn't strike me as someone who could even do that with time to plan it, much less pulling it off on the fly like that. Minutes after the shooting the police did show up, and he had to answer questions. If his story was a lie, then it would be extremely unlikely that it wouldn't have the kinds of holes in it you think you found here.

Maybe it does have such holes, but this is not one.

Much of what you say makes sense, but it doesn't take a "diabolical plan" to claim "he hit me first!". Even toddlers learn to tell that lie.

Nova
04-24-2012, 09:11 PM
I agree they were face to face at some point, but that does not necessarily mean that GZ approached TM. I believe that Trayvon was angry that GZ was watching him and doubled back to teach GZ a lesson.

Based on what evidence, may I ask?

Phoenixfla
04-24-2012, 09:11 PM
From he slurring words on the 911 tape I believe it was George who was planning on teaching a lesson that night. IMO

Could be. I just hope everyone keeps an open mind.

curl_in_progress
04-24-2012, 09:13 PM
I'm not forgetting that at all. It has no relevance whatsoever, since GZ was breaking no laws for simply following someone, especially in a private gated community.

Being followed by a crazy person is a pretty unlikely situation in a gated community. Much more likely is it's someone like a busybody on the board of the HOA, or some other do-gooder resident snooping around to make sure nobody unauthorized is in the community (as GZ turned out to be).

But the more important point is that noticing someone unfamiliar walking around, thinking they're suspicious, calling the police to report them, and getting out of one's vehicle to follow them, even if told by the police dispatcher that that is unnecessary, is all perfectly legal. As far as I know, there is absolutely nothing legally wrong with doing any and all of that, and it's a perfectly normal and reasonable thing to do in a private gated community, especially by the neighborhood watch dude.

Your expectation that a 17 year old would have the experience to think that a "crazy person" wouldn't be in a gated community and that the individual following him around was just a "busybody on the board of the HOA, or some other do-gooder resident" is absurd.<Mod Snip>Since you like to place expectations on others, lets put some expectations on George Zimmerman or anyone as overzealous as he is. Seeing a teenager walking in your neighborhood at 7:00pm could mean that he's just walking home or there to visit a friend and isn't suspicious at all. Don't expect the worst when the person has done nothing wrong. If you're the neighborhood watch, it is expected that you do not carry a loaded gun to follow behind someone to see what they are up to. And if you want to claim that you're not acting in that capacity in that moment when you decided to follow him, and you're so concerned for your safety and the safety of your community, then it is expected you call the cops and WAIT for them to arrive. And when dispatch tells you they don't need you to follow someone, it is expected that you keep your *** in your car. If they find that they can't follow the expectations above, then when the person that is being followed asks why, it is expected that you identify yourself from a distance and stay out of that person's personal space.

Had Zimmerman met basic expectations that night, Trayvon would not be dead. <Mod Snip>

MOO

rossva
04-24-2012, 09:13 PM
Are there any MSM links that have stated Zimmerman was "slurring" on the 911 call?



From he slurring words on the 911 tape I believe it was George who was planning on teaching a lesson that night. IMO

highflyer
04-24-2012, 09:13 PM
I've also been searching without luck for a video that showed Mr. Zimmerman leaning against the wall after getting out of the police car. It showed a slightly lower view and when he leaned briefly against the wall, his arms at shoulder height went to his sides. I tried that with my hands clasped together behind me and was unable to it and tied my spouses hands and spouse was unable to do it either. The video was from a news site out of the US and that is all I can remember but I'm gonna find that again, because it is driving me bananas.

Allusonz
04-24-2012, 09:14 PM
Why wouldn't GZ's lawyer ask for SYG hearing considering those other cases where judges granted SYG immunity? Posters here constantly point out that GZ put himself into the situation. And yet there appears to be plenty of other cases where people put themselves into the situations-and got SYG immunity. Some of those cases are pretty mind boggling to me yet those people got immunity just the same.

Richard Hornsby makes an interesting argument.

"As a result, the charge of Second Degree Murder would be subject to dismissal under Florida’s self-defense law"

http://blog.richardhornsby.com/2012/04/who-was-the-first-aggressor/

Nova
04-24-2012, 09:14 PM
I have no idea what this post means.

I don't speak for jenny, but I believe she means that SYG immunity is granted so easily and often, it seem unlikely that any attorney wouldn't take a shot at it.

HiHater
04-24-2012, 09:15 PM
Why wouldn't GZ's lawyer ask for SYG hearing considering those other cases where judges granted SYG immunity? Posters here constantly point out that GZ put himself into the situation. And yet there appears to be plenty of other cases where people put themselves into the situations-and got SYG immunity. Some of those cases are pretty mind boggling to me yet those people got immunity just the same.

I have read some pretty mind-boggling cases where the person didn't get SYG immunity. It's a 50/50 chance, and each case is different. To risk your client's freedom simply because someone else got off is not a winning strategy IMO

Sensei
04-24-2012, 09:16 PM
Not exactly

(you have to watch the video to get the full exchange)

GILBREATH: Managed to scoot away from the concrete sidewalk and that is at that point is when the shooting subsequently followed. That is not consistent with the evidence we found.

O'MARA: The injuries seem to be consistent with his story, though, don't they?

Gilbreath: The injuries are consistent with a harder object striking the back of his head than his head was.

O'MARA: Could that be cement?

GILBREATH: Could be.

O'MARA: Did you just say it was consistent or did you say it wasn't consistent?

GILBREATH: I said it was.


BBM
It's actually kind of confusing to tell what he's saying is consistent with what IMO

It is a bit confusing, IMO what he is saying is that GZ's statement is that he managed to scoot his head away from the cement sidewalk and that is when the shooting happened and that is NOT consistant with the evidence that they found


But that the injuries to GZ's head appear to be consistant with his head hitting an object that is harder than his head and that could be concrete or a bowling ball or the side of a building....but that the injuries could be consistant with hitting his head on concrete. IMO JMHO and stuff.

jaded cat
04-24-2012, 09:17 PM
Much of what you say makes sense, but it doesn't take a "diabolical plan" to claim "he hit me first!". Even toddlers learn to tell that lie.

I was a toddler once and I know I used that lie a lot! :floorlaugh:

HiHater
04-24-2012, 09:18 PM
ugh this thread is sooo interesting, but I have to stop reading and fix dinner.. hmmm wonder how hubby would feel about having pizza delivered :-)

Just order it, then tell him it's not delivery---it's DiGiorno...:floorlaugh:

suzihawk
04-24-2012, 09:19 PM
Actually many community associations require the buyer apply to the association for approval. That generally involves a background search and the association can disapprove someone if they were convicted of one of those things.

I wonder if Ted Bundy would've been approved before it was discovered he was a mass murder?

I don't think Denis Radar (BTK killer) had a prior record. Would he be approved?

What about Gary Ridgeway (Green River Killer)? He didn't have any priors, IIRC.

jaded cat
04-24-2012, 09:21 PM
I don't speak for jenny, but I believe she means that SYG immunity is granted so easily and often, it seem unlikely that any attorney wouldn't take a shot at it.

Thanks, Nova. I saw what she was asking but didn't understand how it related to me. I asked impatientredhead about a case of a man getting on his bike, riding to someone else's house and shooting a person. He got off on SYG and I can't for the life me understand why.

Dr.Fessel
04-24-2012, 09:22 PM
Are there any MSM links that have stated Zimmerman was "slurring" on the 911 call?

The night of Feb. 26, Zimmerman made a non-emergency call to police before fatally shooting Martin, in which he told a dispatcher, "This guy looks like he's up to no good, on drugs or something."

But law enforcement expert Rod Wheeler who listened to the tapes tells ABC News that Zimmerman, not Martin, sounded intoxicated in the police recordings of the 911 calls.

"When I listened to the 911 tape the first thing that came to my mind is this guy sounds intoxicated. Notice how he's slurring his words. We as trained law enforcement officers, we know how to listen for that right away and I think that's going to be an important element of this entire investigation," Wheeler said.

http://gma.yahoo.com/neighborhood-watchman-allegedly-shot-trayvon-martin-wanted-cop-211535382--abc-news.html

HiHater
04-24-2012, 09:22 PM
It is a bit confusing, IMO what he is saying is that GZ's statement is that he managed to scoot his head away from the cement sidewalk and that is when the shooting happened and that is NOT consistant with the evidence that they found


But that the injuries to GZ's head appear to be consistant with his head hitting an object that is harder than his head and that could be concrete or a bowling ball or the side of a building....but that the injuries could be consistant with hitting his head on concrete. IMO JMHO and stuff.

hmmm...maybe there was no blood in the grass? Also, where Trayvon's body and the shell casing were found could dispute GZ's story as well.


Oh, and about the website, I think the attempt to distance may have something to do with Crump pointing out that it contained no apology...

JMO MOO IMO

highflyer
04-24-2012, 09:25 PM
Are there any MSM links that have stated Zimmerman was "slurring" on the 911 call?

I personally have no links but IMO on the 911 tape it sounds like someone slurring their words. Mr. Zimmerman did not sound like that when he spoke in court. Still had a very soft voice but he did not sound the same. Some of that could be attributed to it being a prepared statement, but nevertheless it was different.

Nova
04-24-2012, 09:25 PM
Richard Hornsby makes an interesting argument.

"As a result, the charge of Second Degree Murder would be subject to dismissal under Florida’s self-defense law"

http://blog.richardhornsby.com/2012/04/who-was-the-first-aggressor/

It is interesting and the article as a whole is very helpful. But I think it's very important to remember that Hornsby writes from a defense attorney's point of view. He seems to take it for granted that the account attributed to GZ is true.

Of course, now we are hearing there are more than one GZ account.

Zak
04-24-2012, 09:27 PM
BBM There is not one ounce of proof that any of that happened. Even the investigator that took the stand at the bond hearing said his injuries weren't consistent with his head being bashed on concrete. He said they were more like scrape marks. If someone unidentified was following me suspiciously like GZ was doing and snuck up behind me believe you me I'd do anything to protect myself. Even if Trayvon did punch GZ I think it was Trayvon's right to defend himself. Plus Trayvon is the one dead. Why wouldn't GZ make up any story to save his own butt, Trayvon can't defend himself and that's what is so sad in this case.

BBM

Respectfully, the investigator said no such thing. You may want to go back and read the transcripts if you haven't already.

kimpage
04-24-2012, 09:28 PM
The night of Feb. 26, Zimmerman made a non-emergency call to police before fatally shooting Martin, in which he told a dispatcher, "This guy looks like he's up to no good, on drugs or something."

But law enforcement expert Rod Wheeler who listened to the tapes tells ABC News that Zimmerman, not Martin, sounded intoxicated in the police recordings of the 911 calls.

"When I listened to the 911 tape the first thing that came to my mind is this guy sounds intoxicated. Notice how he's slurring his words. We as trained law enforcement officers, we know how to listen for that right away and I think that's going to be an important element of this entire investigation," Wheeler said.

http://gma.yahoo.com/neighborhood-watchman-allegedly-shot-trayvon-martin-wanted-cop-211535382--abc-news.html
Thanks Doc for that article.I believe he was drinking that night. IMHO JMHO and all that

Sensei
04-24-2012, 09:32 PM
hmmm...maybe there was no blood in the grass? Also, where Trayvon's body and the shell casing were found could dispute GZ's story as well.


Oh, and about the website, I think the attempt to distance may have something to do with Crump pointing out that it contained no apology...

JMO MOO IMO

I am highly suspicious of the head injuries simply because of the location of them, and don't find that consistant with where the injury would be if you have your head slammed against concrete from a laying down position.

I also took note that the picture shows no splatter of the blood, no dirt, debris or grass, and there appears to be a lot of welling or pooling blood but that is not the best picture in the world...I find it interesting that the emphasis seems to be that there is evidence that GZ's story of what point and when after scooting his head off concrete the shooting occurred is contradicted by something that they found.

As far as the website, there may have been a variety of reasons, one that there was no apology, and the fact that many have charactarized the site as arrogant and showing no remorse for taking a life and that is off putting to many. Also, there is a chance that someone could track down GZ if he is posting to that site, by tracking down the IP address, so it was a security risk in that way too.

Nova
04-24-2012, 09:32 PM
Thanks, Nova. I saw what she was asking but didn't understand how it related to me. I asked impatientredhead about a case of a man getting on his bike, riding to someone else's house and shooting a person. He got off on SYG and I can't for the life me understand why.

IANAL, but I believe the judge in that case ruled that the shooter (the father on the bicycle) had a legal right to follow his speeding neighbor down the block to the speeder's house.

Apparently, the judge ruled that the confrontation didn't start until sometime during the conversation that ensued and that the speeder was the "First Aggressor" (see Hornsby) at that time. Therefore, the shooter had a right to use deadly force because at that time he feared for his life.

It probably didn't help that the speeder was drunk and the first to use physical force.

Allusonz
04-24-2012, 09:33 PM
It is interesting and the article as a whole is very helpful. But I think it's very important to remember that Hornsby writes from a defense attorney's point of view. He seems to take it for granted that the account attributed to GZ is true.

Of course, now we are hearing there are more than one GZ account.

Yes he does which is why I found it to be even more interesting based on the bond hearing and many of the facts we do not as of yet know.

Adrienne37
04-24-2012, 09:34 PM
As for the possibility of Zimmerman drinking and slurring words on the night of Trayvon's murder, we do know from at least one article that he liked to drink and hang with the girls. I believe his former coworker stated he was like Jekyll and Hyde and when he snapped, he snapped. to describe him were When the dude snapped, he snapped.”


~jmo~

Phoenixfla
04-24-2012, 09:36 PM
I'm just wondering how Trayvon was:

1) Pinning GZ down (takes 2 hands)
2) Covering GZ's mouth with BOTH hands with all his body weight (takes 2 hands)
3) Smashing GZ's head over and over on the sidewalk, one step away from being spoon fed and wearing diapers. (takes 2 hands)

How do you bash someone’s head into the sidewalk while you have them pinned, when that person outweighs you and is putting up a fight? Can’t be done. His head might bump the sidewalk as they are rolling about in a fight, but there is no way Trayvon would be able to purposefully “slam” his head into anything and still have enough arms free to keep him pinned.
Same can be said about the other ridiculous fabrication of Trayvon holding his mouth and nose with all his weight

Let me offer you one possible scenario.

TM approaches GZ and after words are exchanged TM strikes GZ in the face sending him to the ground, with GZ laying on his back. TM then drops to his knees straddling GZ at the waist and continues to strike him in the face. This causes a broken nose, busted lip, and lacerations to the back of his head. GZ screams for help which is recorded on the 911 call and witnessed by John. TM is then worried that he will be caught by whomever hears the call for help and decided he needed to silence GZ and placed his hands over GZs mouth and nose. GZ no longer being able to yell for help, possibly suffocating, and wanting to stop the assault he was receiving, wiggled his way up far enough to pull his gun from his holster and fired one shot into TM.

TM, still straddling GM fell on top of him. GZ slid out from under TMs body leaving TM face down at the scene.

Adrienne37
04-24-2012, 09:37 PM
Yes he does which is why I found it to be even more interesting based on the bond hearing and many of the facts we do not as of yet know.

Has Richard Hornsby seen what evidence there is in this case yet?



~jmo~

badme102
04-24-2012, 09:37 PM
Richard Hornsby makes an interesting argument.

"As a result, the charge of Second Degree Murder would be subject to dismissal under Florida’s self-defense law"

http://blog.richardhornsby.com/2012/04/who-was-the-first-aggressor/

All due respect to Mr. Hornsby, but 2 of the lawmakers that crafted the SYG said that GZ does not fall under this defense.

http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/Stand-Your-Ground-Authors-Say-Law-Doesnt-Apply-To-Trayvon-Martin-Shooter-143684626.html

"He has no protection under my law," said Former Sen. Durell Peaden, one of the law's authors, The Miami Herald reported. "They got the goods on him. They need to prosecute whoever shot the kid."

Peaden said that when George Zimmerman told dispatch that he was following Martin he lost his defense under the law.

Rep. Dennis Baxley said it on Anderson Cooper too, but I'm still looking for that video.

HiHater
04-24-2012, 09:39 PM
Let me offer you one possible scenario.

TM approaches GZ and after words are exchanged TM strikes GZ in the face sending him to the ground, with GZ laying on his back. TM then drops to his knees straddling GZ at the waist and continues to strike him in the face. This causes a broken nose, busted lip, and lacerations to the back of his head. GZ screams for help which is recorded on the 911 call and witnessed by John. TM is then worried that he will be caught by whomever hears the call for help and decided he needed to silence GZ and placed his hands over GZs mouth and nose. GZ no longer being able to yell for help, possibly suffocating, and wanting to stop the assault he was receiving, wiggled his way up far enough to pull his gun from his holster and fired one shot into TM.

TM, still straddling GM fell on top of him. GZ slid out from under TMs body leaving TM face down at the scene.

I didn't see a busted lip on the video where GZ was walking into the police station....

jaded cat
04-24-2012, 09:39 PM
IANAL, but I believe the judge in that case ruled that the shooter (the father on the bicycle) had a legal right to follow his speeding neighbor down the block to the speeder's house.

Apparently, the judge ruled that the confrontation didn't start until sometime during the conversation that ensued and that the speeder was the "First Aggressor" (see Hornsby) at that time. Therefore, the shooter had a right to use deadly force because at that time he feared for his life.

It probably didn't help that the speeder was drunk and the first to use physical force.

Ya know, it could be just me but I think the death penalty for speeding is a little on the tough side! :waitasec:

Logically, I understand it. Emotionally, I never will.

Adrienne37
04-24-2012, 09:40 PM
Let me offer you one possible scenario.

TM approaches GZ and after words are exchanged TM strikes GZ in the face sending him to the ground, with GZ laying on his back. TM then drops to his knees straddling GZ at the waist and continues to strike him in the face. This causes a broken nose, busted lip, and lacerations to the back of his head. GZ screams for help which is recorded on the 911 call and witnessed by John. TM is then worried that he will be caught by whomever hears the call for help and decided he needed to silence GZ and placed his hands over GZs mouth and nose. GZ no longer being able to yell for help, possibly suffocating, and wanting to stop the assault he was receiving, wiggled his way up far enough to pull his gun from his holster and fired one shot into TM.

TM, still straddling GM fell on top of him. GZ slid out from under TMs body leaving TM face down at the scene.

In your scenario, Trayvon's blood would be all over Zimmerman's clothes in addition to gunshot residue neither of which was present on the video of him at the police station.


~jmo~

badme102
04-24-2012, 09:40 PM
BBM

Respectfully, the investigator said no such thing. You may want to go back and read the transcripts if you haven't already.

You may want to do the same, because he DID say they were inconsistent with GZ's "story" (#348738)

O'MARA; OK. Did you identify what caused those lacerations?

GILBREATH: No.

O'MARA: Could it have been having his head bashed on the ground as he testified to?

GILBREATH: He suggested, I don't know about testified to, he mentioned that his head was being physically bashed against the concrete sidewalk, and that he...this was just prior to him firing the shot, and that he managed to scoot away from the concrete sidewalk, and that is at that point is when the shooting subsequently followed. That is not consistent with the evidence we found."

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1204/20/cnr.02.html

Adrienne37
04-24-2012, 09:41 PM
All due respect to Mr. Hornsby, but 2 of the lawmakers that crafted the SYG said that GZ does not fall under this defense.

http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/Stand-Your-Ground-Authors-Say-Law-Doesnt-Apply-To-Trayvon-Martin-Shooter-143684626.html



Rep. Dennis Baxley said it on Anderson Cooper too, but I'm still looking for that video.

In addition to Jeb Bush, the then governor of Florida who signed the bill into law.


~jmo~

Dr.Fessel
04-24-2012, 09:42 PM
BBM

Respectfully, the investigator said no such thing. You may want to go back and read the transcripts if you haven't already. That is exactly what the investigator said.
(Unidentified male is DE LA RIONDA)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And isn't it true that a lot of statements that he made do not make sense in terms of the injuries that he described. Did he not describe to the police that Mr. Martin had him on the ground and kept bashing his head on the concrete over and over and just physically beating him with his hands?


GILBREATH: He has said that, yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And isn't it true that there is evidence that indicates that's not true?

GILBREATH: Yes.


.................................................. ......................

then under questioning from OMara


.................................................. .....................

a commerical break then they pick back up on what is being said. ( ) are my words.



GILBREATH: Managed to scoot away from the concrete sidewalk and that is at that point is when the shooting subsequently followed. That is not consistent with the evidence we found.

O'MARA: The injuries seem to be consistent with his story, though, don't they?

Dale; The injuries are consistent with a harder object striking the back of his head than his head was. (he does not say they are consistent with Georges story of getting his head beat over and over on the cement which is Georges story.

O'MARA: Could that be cement?

GILBREATH: Could be.

O'MARA: Did you just say it was consistent or did you say it wasn't consistent?

GILBREATH: I said it was.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1204/20/cnr.02.html

grandmaj
04-24-2012, 09:43 PM
Florida shooter Zimmerman needs protection while out on bail, lawyer says..

Mark O'Mara also said he was considering seeking a taxpayer-funded bodyguard for Zimmerman if the threats continue, according to the report.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/24/11377134-florida-shooter-zimmerman-needs-protection-while-out-on-bail-lawyer-says?lite

Give me a few minutes. I know of a cowboy with a black hat that may like to take this detail. :what:

grandmaj
04-24-2012, 09:44 PM
That is exactly what the investigator said.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And isn't it true that a lot of statements that he made do not make sense in terms of the injuries that he described. Did he not describe to the police that Mr. Martin had him on the ground and kept bashing his head on the concrete over and over and just physically beating him with his hands?

(Unidentified male is DE LA RIONDA:)

GILBREATH: He has said that, yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And isn't it true that there is evidence that indicates that's not true?

GILBREATH: Yes.


.................................................. ......................

then under questioning from OMara


.................................................. .....................

a commerical break then they pick back up on what is being said. ( ) are my words.



GILBREATH: Managed to scoot away from the concrete sidewalk and that is at that point is when the shooting subsequently followed. That is not consistent with the evidence we found.

O'MARA: The injuries seem to be consistent with his story, though, don't they?

Dale; The injuries are consistent with a harder object striking the back of his head than his head was. (he does not say they are consistent with Georges story of getting his head beat over and over on the cement which is Georges story.?

O'MARA: Could that be cement?

GILBREATH: Could be.

O'MARA: Did you just say it was consistent or did you say it wasn't consistent?

GILBREATH: I said it was.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1204/20/cnr.02.html

and on cross

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And isn't it true that a lot of statements that he made do not make sense in terms of the injuries that he described. Did he not describe to the police that Mr. Martin had him on the ground and kept bashing his head on the concrete over and over and just physically beating him with his hands?

GILBREATH: He has said that, yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And isn't it true that there is evidence that indicates that's not true?

GILBREATH: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Did he also not state that at some point, he the defendant -- did he not state or claim that the victim in this case, Mr. Martin, put both hands one over his mouth and one over his nose so that he couldn't breathe?

GILBREATH: Yes.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And all of sudden that's when he was able to get free and grab the gun. Or I'm sorry, Martin was grabbing for the gun, did he not claim that too at some point. climb that?

GILBREATH: Yes.

Adrienne37
04-24-2012, 09:45 PM
Give me a few minutes. I know of a cowboy with a black hat that may like to take this detail. :what:

LOL Grandmaj!

badme102
04-24-2012, 09:45 PM
Give me a few minutes. I know of a cowboy with a black hat that may like to take this detail. :what:

:slap:

:angel:

Zak
04-24-2012, 09:46 PM
From he slurring words on the 911 tape I believe it was George who was planning on teaching a lesson that night. IMO

I have listened to the call over and over again and for the life of me I don't hear a slurring of words. In fact, I'm going to go listen one more time to see if I've missed something.

Phoenixfla
04-24-2012, 09:47 PM
Based on what evidence, may I ask?

Based partly on how much time elapsed between the call and the shooting leads me to believe that TM had no intention of just going home to safety. Also partly by knowing what its like to be a 17 year old male and a stage many males go through where they question authority and try to push limits.

jjenny
04-24-2012, 09:49 PM
I don't speak for jenny, but I believe she means that SYG immunity is granted so easily and often, it seem unlikely that any attorney wouldn't take a shot at it.
Yep, that's what I meant. And SYG has been granted in cases where one person actually pursued the other and then killed the person they pursued.

Adrienne37
04-24-2012, 09:50 PM
Based partly on how much time elapsed between the call and the shooting leads me to believe that TM had no intention of just going home to safety. Also partly by knowing what its like to be a 17 year old male and a stage many males go through where they question authority and try to push limits.


Zimmerman was not in authority so he had no right to be asking anything of Trayvon. Trayvon owed him ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.


~jmo~

jjenny
04-24-2012, 09:51 PM
In addition to Jeb Bush, the then governor of Florida who signed the bill into law.


~jmo~

Well then they should have looked at people who have been granted immunity under this law before they opened their mouths and said something like that.

Zak
04-24-2012, 09:56 PM
I believe that I read somewhere that they were tactical, but I don't know if they were confiscated.

If I remember correctly, Gilbreath said that GZ had 2 flashlights. One was a keyring flashlight and the other was about 6" long. When asked what type the bigger one was Gilbreath said he would call it a tactical flashlight.