View Full Version : What evidence does the prosecution have?
wishuwerehere
05-06-2012, 03:38 PM
I thought this thread was needed so that we may debate the prosecution's case against Zimmerman, for better or worse.
wishuwerehere
05-06-2012, 04:22 PM
For starters, the prosecution has Zimmerman’s own words on the 911 recording and I believe they will be used to show Zimmerman’s intent.
The State also has Trayvon’s girlfriend’s testimony about what she heard over the phone. (I believe she is going to be a key witness in this case and will be used to show Trayvon’s fear.)
jmo
songline
05-06-2012, 04:39 PM
I believe that they have nothing.
The 911 call has nothing on it that is in anyway going to hurt GZ.
1) OK - They 911 oporator said "we do not need you to do that" (follow the guy) but it is still legal for him to do that.
2) Some want to hear that there is a racial slur on the tape. I do not hear that at all.
But even if he did say a racial slur, we have all said a slur which does not mean we are racists.
3) TM is no child as it was falsely portrayed, he was IMO giving the impression of a thug, and GZ had a right to suspect him based on the history of that area.
iluvmua
05-06-2012, 04:51 PM
I don't think they have anything at all because everything so far backs up George's and the eye witnesses claims.
Karmady
05-06-2012, 05:02 PM
I don't think they have anything at all because everything so far backs up George's and the eye witnesses claims.
I think they have a dead black teenager, an admitted shooter, a law/2nd amendment issue/gun lobby that a lot of folks really can't stand, a prosecutor known for being a hard a**, and more public pressure (at least initially) than is typically seen, and that's quite an understatement, imo.
I think when they made the arrest they had all of the above, and THOUGHT they had a hate crime element, too. jmo
wishuwerehere
05-06-2012, 05:03 PM
I believe that they have nothing.
The 911 call has nothing on it that is in anyway going to hurt GZ.
1) OK - They 911 oporator said "we do not need you to do that" (follow the guy) but it is still legal for him to do that.
2) Some want to hear that there is a racial slur on the tape. I do not hear that at all.
But even if he did say a racial slur, we have all said a slur which does not mean we are racists.
3) TM is no child as it was falsely portrayed, he was IMO giving the impression of a thug, and GZ had a right to suspect him based on the history of that area.
BBM - He can suspect him all day long. Call the cops. Call Trayvon names, if he likes. But what he had no authority to do was to pursue Trayvon in an effort to detain him. That is exactly what I think transpired. Trayvon stood his ground. Zimmerman killed him for it. I believe the prosecution will set out to prove this.
jmo
iluvmua
05-06-2012, 05:06 PM
BBM - He can suspect him all day long. Call the cops. Call Trayvon names, if he likes. But what he had no authority to do was to pursue Trayvon in an effort to detain him. That is exactly what I think transpired. Trayvon stood his ground. Zimmerman killed him for it. I believe the prosecution will set out to prove this.
jmo
We have NO idea if he pursed him or not. Everybody is just assuming he did.
they don't have enough evidence to prove with out a resonable doubt that GZ set out to kill Trayvon.
wishuwerehere
05-06-2012, 05:07 PM
I think they have a dead black teenager, an admitted shooter, a law/2nd amendment issue/gun lobby that a lot of folks really can't stand, a prosecutor known for being a hard a**, and more public pressure (at least initially) than is typically seen, and that's quite an understatement, imo.
I think when they made the arrest they had all of the above, and THOUGHT they had a hate crime element, too. jmo
There may be a hate crime element to this case. But it is so subjective. This case already is a lightening rod as you stated above. There would be no way they would list hate crime with the charges, not in that climate.
jmo
wishuwerehere
05-06-2012, 05:10 PM
We have NO idea if he pursed him or not. Everybody is just assuming he did.
they don't have enough evidence to prove with out a resonable doubt that GZ set out to kill Trayvon.
I disgree. I believe Zimmerman's 911 call will be used to show intent. Zimmerman exited his vehicle before the end of the call. IMO this demonstrates that he never had any intention to wait for the cops. Zimmerman was going to be the cop that day.
jmo
KateNY
05-06-2012, 05:13 PM
Tossing a question out ...
do all cell phones have GPS, and if so, would be any value to LE in determining , who actually was where
iluvmua
05-06-2012, 05:18 PM
I disgree. I believe Zimmerman's 911 call will be used to show intent. Zimmerman exited his vehicle before the end of the call. IMO this demonstrates that he never had any intention to wait for the cops. Zimmerman was going to be the cop that day.
jmo
which 911 call did you listen to?
how long was it?
iluvmua
05-06-2012, 05:19 PM
I disgree. I believe Zimmerman's 911 call will be used to show intent. Zimmerman exited his vehicle before the end of the call. IMO this demonstrates that he never had any intention to wait for the cops. Zimmerman was going to be the cop that day.
jmo
intent on what? That he was going to kill Trayvon?
JMO.
wishuwerehere
05-06-2012, 05:23 PM
intent on what? That he was going to kill Trayvon?
JMO.
In my previous post above I stated he set out to detain Trayvon before the police arrived. Trayvon stood his ground. Zimmerman killed him for it.
jmo
wishuwerehere
05-06-2012, 05:24 PM
which 911 call did you listen to?
how long was it?
I'm speaking about the 911 call that George Zimmerman placed.
iluvmua
05-06-2012, 05:28 PM
I'm speaking about the 911 call that George Zimmerman placed.
I know, there is a two minute one and a 4 minute one. the four minure one is the whole call.
wishuwerehere
05-06-2012, 05:31 PM
I know, there is a two minute one and a 4 minute one. the four minure one is the whole call.
What is your point? I think I've been clear in my explanation, and yes it was the call which has been released to the public.
suzihawk
05-06-2012, 05:31 PM
I believe that they have nothing.
The 911 call has nothing on it that is in anyway going to hurt GZ.
1) OK - They 911 oporator said "we do not need you to do that" (follow the guy) but it is still legal for him to do that.
2) Some want to hear that there is a racial slur on the tape. I do not hear that at all.
But even if he did say a racial slur, we have all said a slur which does not mean we are racists.
3) TM is no child as it was falsely portrayed, he was IMO giving the impression of a thug, and GZ had a right to suspect him based on the history of that area.
1) While it may be 'legal' to follow someone, it will be VERY hurtful to GZ with SYG or self-defense. There is no doubt in my mind that he continued to follow TM after the dispatcher told him not to. Every piece of evidence points in that direction.
2) While he may not have said racial slurs (and I'm not convinced he didn't), his preconceived notion of these f'ing punk" a$$holes" always getting away shows that he was profiling TM in itself. The REAL f'ing a$$holes that were always getting away were, in fact, younger black males. That will be incriminating to GZ at trial as well
3) TM is not a thug and GZ knew absolutely zero about him before that night. That will never wash in a court of law. On the contrary, it will only make #2 point against him stronger.
Karmady
05-06-2012, 05:43 PM
There may be a hate crime element to this case. But it is so subjective. This case already is a lightening rod as you stated above. There would be no way they would list hate crime with the charges, not in that climate.
jmo
I understand what you mean, I think, but I also think it depends on what you mean by "hate" crime. For it to be a true hate crime, the bias would have to be against a protected class and they don't have the racial slur anymore, or, afaik, any other evidence of bias against black people. Imo, now it would have to be bias against those "expletives" who always get away -- and also afaik, bias against suspected criminals isn't a hate crime even if your suspicion is completely unreasonable. I definitely think they would never have put punks in the APC if they had a choice. jmo.
LambChop
05-06-2012, 05:45 PM
I believe that they have nothing.
The 911 call has nothing on it that is in anyway going to hurt GZ.
1) OK - They 911 oporator said "we do not need you to do that" (follow the guy) but it is still legal for him to do that.
2) Some want to hear that there is a racial slur on the tape. I do not hear that at all.
But even if he did say a racial slur, we have all said a slur which does not mean we are racists.
3) TM is no child as it was falsely portrayed, he was IMO giving the impression of a thug, and GZ had a right to suspect him based on the history of that area.
So do you think the dispatcher just told GZ that in lieu of "have a nice day?" GZ knews from his training he was not to follow. It was not a "legal" matter. LE's directions were not to, NWP training was not to, just call it in. He was wrong, morally and ethically wrong in doing what he did since TM had every right to be where he was.
How was TM giving the impression of a thug? Would that not be in GZ eyes, his mind, his thought process? Isn't that profiling when you have no reason to think a person is up to no good but because he fits a description of a normal black male you need to call it in??? That would have been fine had he stopped right there.
GZ had not rights after he stepped out of that truck. He had already called LE and once he left his truck he was taking matters into his own hands putting everyone's life in jeopardy around him because he was carrying a gun. jmo
sleonardelli
05-06-2012, 05:50 PM
Per FT “I think any time you use a weapon, there are certain anger issues working,” Taaffe said. “I think he had fed-up issues. He was mad as hell and wasn't going to take it anymore.”
IMO, sounds like "depraved mind".
http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/21/10791755-neighbor-comes-to-defense-of-trayvon-martins-shooter?lite
JBean
05-06-2012, 05:52 PM
so what evidence does the prosecution have? That's the topic.
sleonardelli
05-06-2012, 05:53 PM
Does anyone have a link to the NWP training in Sep 11? Or a link to the Retreat of Twin Lakes NWP guidelines?
IMO, I think the fact GZ chose to follow in the first place would violate those guidelines; that he chose to carry a weapon violates those guidelines; that he played a role in scuffle and acted like LE violated CCW protocol. The NWP guidelines and CCW protocol might end up as part of the prosecution.
sleonardelli
05-06-2012, 05:54 PM
so what evidence does the prosecution have? That's the topic.
They now have a potential witness (FT) as to GZ's state of mind.
i.b.nora
05-06-2012, 06:01 PM
Does anyone have a link to the NWP training in Sep 11? Or a link to the Retreat of Twin Lakes NWP guidelines?
IMO, I think the fact GZ chose to follow in the first place would violate those guidelines; that he chose to carry a weapon violates those guidelines; that he played a role in scuffle and acted like LE violated CCW protocol. The NWP guidelines and CCW protocol might end up as part of the prosecution.
I think links to those items got posted in the Timeline thread. Today or last night.
suspicious1
05-06-2012, 07:07 PM
Trayvon's Autopsy Report.
IMO, it seems GZ wants us to believe that TM was shot while on top of GZ...but what if the bullet trajectory do not match that?
csziggy
05-06-2012, 08:47 PM
Trayvon's Autopsy Report.
IMO, it seems GZ wants us to believe that TM was shot while on top of GZ...but what if the bullet trajectory do not match that?
Also if there are no indications of any injuries to TM that could have been associated with the 'attack' on GZ, that would indicate that GZ's stories are not true. Or if TM's autopsy only has defensive wounds.
I presume the prosecution has medical reports and hopefully police documented photographs on GZ's injuries that show they do not match his stories. As in no broken nose, no 'gashes' on the back of his head, the small wounds on his head not in the correct position for someone whose head was "beaten" against concrete. No dirt or debris on or in the head injuries or on his head at all.
Maybe other injuries on GZ that could indicate that he was the aggressor?
I'd expect there are crime scene photographs - could they show indications that GZ's stories are not true? No blood on any of the concrete? Position of TM's body no where it could have been from any of GZ's variations on how TM was positioned when shot and how TM fell?
The problem is that we have so little so far, so anything we think of now is pure supposition. We need a document dump!
IMO, JMO, etc.
diesel
05-06-2012, 09:01 PM
I thought this thread was needed so that we may debate the prosecution's case against Zimmerman, for better or worse.
I would hope they have fingerprinted GZ's gun to see if it is only his prints on it. I would hope they DNA'd Trayvon's hand that supposedly covered GZ's mouth while the blood was pouring out of his nose.
Rubys
05-06-2012, 09:03 PM
I have been lurking on WS for quite some time but this is my first post. I can't see that this has been brought up yet but I have to admit I did not read everything (it would take weeks :).
If TM was on top of GZ (as he and a witness claim) when he was shot, why isn't his blood all over GZ? He had a chest wound and was unable to be resuscitated even though emergency workers were on scene within a minute of him being shot. I speculate that he was shot in the heart for this to be the case. It had to be an obviously fatal wound for them not to transport to the hospital and declare death on scene. If he was shot while sitting/straddling GZ, uttered some words, then fell over, surely GZ would have had a noticeable amount of blood on him.
I would think this would be useful for the prosecution.
Emma Peel
05-06-2012, 09:06 PM
so what evidence does the prosecution have? That's the topic.
I'll tell ya after the doc dump tomorrow. :moo:
csziggy
05-06-2012, 09:12 PM
I have been lurking on WS for quite some time but this is my first post. I can't see that this has been brought up yet but I have to admit I did not read everything (it would take weeks :).
If TM was on top of GZ (as he and a witness claim) when he was shot, why isn't his blood all over GZ? He had a chest wound and was unable to be resuscitated even though emergency workers were on scene within a minute of him being shot. I speculate that he was shot in the heart for this to be the case. It had to be an obviously fatal wound for them not to transport to the hospital and declare death on scene. If he was shot while sitting/straddling GZ, uttered some words, then fell over, surely GZ would have had a noticeable amount of blood on him.
I would think this would be useful for the prosecution.
Welcome! :welcome4:
The blood is one of the big questions. Not only does GZ not show any of the blood that might be expected from a bloody, broken nose and multiple head wounds when he enters the police station less than an hour after the killing, he doesn't show and blood from his victim.
In fact, GZ is tidier that I am when I am freshly dressed for a special occasion! And that, after he supposedly was in a life and death struggle that involved a lot of wrestling around on wet ground. I really wish I knew how he did it. :waitasec:
It's a puzzle I am anxious to learn more about! IMO, JMO, etc.
saguaro
05-06-2012, 09:15 PM
I'll tell ya after the doc dump tomorrow. :moo:
Tomorrow?
suzihawk
05-06-2012, 09:16 PM
I have been lurking on WS for quite some time but this is my first post. I can't see that this has been brought up yet but I have to admit I did not read everything (it would take weeks :).
If TM was on top of GZ (as he and a witness claim) when he was shot, why isn't his blood all over GZ? He had a chest wound and was unable to be resuscitated even though emergency workers were on scene within a minute of him being shot. I speculate that he was shot in the heart for this to be the case. It had to be an obviously fatal wound for them not to transport to the hospital and declare death on scene. If he was shot while sitting/straddling GZ, uttered some words, then fell over, surely GZ would have had a noticeable amount of blood on him.
I would think this would be useful for the prosecution.
:Welcome1:
Rubys
05-06-2012, 09:19 PM
Welcome! :welcome4:
The blood is one of the big questions. Not only does GZ not show any of the blood that might be expected from a bloody, broken nose and multiple head wounds when he enters the police station less than an hour after the killing, he doesn't show and blood from his victim.
In fact, GZ is tidier that I am when I am freshly dressed for a special occasion! And that, after he supposedly was in a life and death struggle that involved a lot of wrestling around on wet ground. I really wish I knew how he did it. :waitasec:
It's a puzzle I am anxious to learn more about! IMO, JMO, etc.
Thanks for the welcome! I usually just read but I thought I might actually have something to add this time :)
AngelWings444
05-06-2012, 09:23 PM
I think they have a whole lot, and we aren't privy to any of it yet. :banghead:
suzihawk
05-06-2012, 09:25 PM
I would hope they have fingerprinted GZ's gun to see if it is only his prints on it. I would hope they DNA'd Trayvon's hand that supposedly covered GZ's mouth while the blood was pouring out of his nose.
Unfortunately, I have little faith in the investigative abilities of the SPD seeing as how they had made up their minds that GZ acted in self defense a few short hours after the shooting. (With Wolfinger's influence and blessing.)
I hope I'm wrong.
csziggy
05-06-2012, 09:28 PM
Thanks for the welcome! I usually just read but I thought I might actually have something to add this time :)
Great first post - you jumped right to one of the core difficulties with what we know so far! IMO, of course.
AngelWings444
05-06-2012, 09:29 PM
GZ's statements. I believe he may have cooked his own goose, not knowing the non-911 call was being recorded, and Trayvon was on his own phone talking to his girlfriend.
suspicious1
05-06-2012, 09:49 PM
The videotaped re-enactment.
Not only do they have GZ statements they have him walking them through the events that evening. Should be interesting....
Karmady
05-06-2012, 09:56 PM
GZ's statements. I believe he may have cooked his own goose, not knowing the non-911 call was being recorded, and Trayvon was on his own phone talking to his girlfriend.
Doesn't everyone know that all 911 calls are recorded? I would think George would certainly have known it given the number of calls he has made and his father's background.
diesel
05-06-2012, 09:58 PM
Unfortunately, I have little faith in the investigative abilities of the SPD seeing as how they had made up their minds that GZ acted in self defense a few short hours after the shooting. (With Wolfinger's influence and blessing.)
I hope I'm wrong.
I hope you are wrong, too, and doubt Trayvon's hands were checked for DNA.
But they still have the gun, right?
Emma Peel
05-06-2012, 10:02 PM
Tomorrow?
okay, wishful thinking.
But ... maybe we could start a pool?
diesel
05-06-2012, 10:05 PM
Ruby, I agree GZ should have had blood spatter all over his upper body and clothes. And I can't figure out how Trayvon ended up on his stomach with his hands under him.
I guess there would be no booking picture of GZ either showing his face? He was arrested, is a picture taken when one is arrested and then released?
suzihawk
05-06-2012, 10:14 PM
Ruby, I agree GZ should have had blood spatter all over his upper body and clothes. And I can't figure out how Trayvon ended up on his stomach with his hands under him.
I guess there would be no booking picture of GZ either showing his face? He was arrested, is a picture taken when one is arrested and then released?
GZ wasn't arrested on 2/26. He was detained for questioning for a short period of time. He wasn't arrested until 4/11. And only then because of a massive call to justice for authorities to look into a crime that was being swept under the rug by the SPD.
AngelWings444
05-06-2012, 10:26 PM
Doesn't everyone know that all 911 calls are recorded? I would think George would certainly have known it given the number of calls he has made and his father's background.
GZ did not call 911 at the beginning. He called the non-emergency line, which is why I said the non-911 call. Or, am I getting mixed up again. :floorlaugh:
We have NO idea if he pursed him or not. Everybody is just assuming he did.
they don't have enough evidence to prove with out a resonable doubt that GZ set out to kill Trayvon.
The prosecution is not arguing that GZ "set out to kill Trayvon", so they don't need to prove that.
I have been lurking on WS for quite some time but this is my first post. I can't see that this has been brought up yet but I have to admit I did not read everything (it would take weeks :).
If TM was on top of GZ (as he and a witness claim) when he was shot, why isn't his blood all over GZ? He had a chest wound and was unable to be resuscitated even though emergency workers were on scene within a minute of him being shot. I speculate that he was shot in the heart for this to be the case. It had to be an obviously fatal wound for them not to transport to the hospital and declare death on scene. If he was shot while sitting/straddling GZ, uttered some words, then fell over, surely GZ would have had a noticeable amount of blood on him.
I would think this would be useful for the prosecution.
One would certainly expect all of the above. Good post and welcome to WS!
Karmady
05-06-2012, 10:39 PM
GZ did not call 911 at the beginning. He called the non-emergency line, which is why I said the non-911 call. Or, am I getting mixed up again. :floorlaugh:
I was including non-emergency in my use of "911." Sorry.
LynnM
05-06-2012, 11:01 PM
Doesn't everyone know that all 911 calls are recorded? I would think George would certainly have known it given the number of calls he has made and his father's background.
It never occurred to me that non-emergency calls to the police station would be recorded. I called once to get information on how local crime statistics are reported to the FBI when I was teaching and another time regarding someone with dementia whom I knew the police were trying to hook up with services. I think I would have been very self conscious if I'd thought about being recorded but looking back, I bet I was.
Concerned Papa
05-07-2012, 04:05 AM
GILBREATH:
We have Mr. Zimmerman's statements
We have the shell casing(s)
We had Mr. Martin's body
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1204/20/cnr.02.html
IMHO, a successful prosecution will need very little else.
LiveLaughLuv
05-07-2012, 08:25 AM
intent on what? That he was going to kill Trayvon?
JMO.
BBM
To not let another A**hole get away...GZ did not wait for authorities to arrive, continued to follow Trayvon, lost sight of him, continued to look for where Trayvon was and I believe cut him off at that footpath..startled Trayvon and since TM didn't answer GZ's question of 'what are you doing here', he pushed the 'mouthy' teen who had the gall not to answer HIM...it appears to be all about authority and GZ felt he had that authority over his community...
If GZ would have stayed in his vehicle, Trayvon wouldn't be dead and he wouldn't be facing a murder charge...
I believe he disregarded police saying, we don't need you to do that, when asked if he was following this person..
If GZ was that 'fearful' of a lone teen walking at 7pm ( still pretty light out ) he should haved stayed put...but he's the sheriff of Twin Lakes Retreat...
I also believe this became a personal vendetta with GZ, who had his own property stolen off his porch. I believe GZ has the means, the motive and used the NW as his opportunity...if not Trayvon, it would have been someone elses child...
I also believe he studied the SYG statute and misinterpeted it like others have..He is using the law thinking it's on his side..:banghead:
lauriej
05-07-2012, 09:11 AM
It never occurred to me that non-emergency calls to the police station would be recorded. I called once to get information on how local crime statistics are reported to the FBI when I was teaching and another time regarding someone with dementia whom I knew the police were trying to hook up with services. I think I would have been very self conscious if I'd thought about being recorded but looking back, I bet I was.
--the call begins, Dispatcher: "Sanford Police Depaertment, this line is being recorded...."
George Zimmerman 911 Call To Stanford Police Department - YouTube
--george's call to SPD--
LynnM
05-07-2012, 09:21 AM
--the call begins, Dispatcher: "Sanford Police Depaertment, this line is being recorded...."
George Zimmerman 911 Call To Stanford Police Department - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zj7qEcD8R-8)
--george's call to SPD--
Thanks! I have listened to that call over and over and had not made out that that was what the dispatcher was saying.
Concerned Papa
05-07-2012, 10:28 AM
The out of focus location of the body may be getting a little bit more clear. I ran across this article while looking for something else:
Mora, who’s also 31, takes me to the patio on Thursday afternoon to share what they could and couldn’t see. The homes in the Retreat are connected, with small front yards and bigger, shared backyards. The problem, on the night of Feb. 26, was that it was dark and raining.
The only real illumination on Zimmerman was a neighbor’s porch light, which, according to Mora, “is always on.” When you survey the yard, you’re looking at one of the least likely places to shoot somebody. The patch of grass that Martin died on is visible from at least 20 porches. Mora’s porch, for example, is only around 19 feet away.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2012/04/witnesses_mary_cutcher_and_selma_mora_offer_their_ account_of_what_happened_the_night_trayvon_martin_ died_.html
This backyard is also where SFD Fire and Rescue said the body was located and the location given by the SPD's report overlaps this as well. The 70 yard point mentioned by O'Mara at the bond hearing is not too far away and could be needing placement adjustment.
The image below has 19' radius lines from the center of this porch.
As I've said before, I realize we don't have GPS coordinates or statements signed in blood at this point, but if they keep feeding us a few bits and pieces, we'll soon be able to give THEM GPS for the body's position :rocker:
BiancaS
05-07-2012, 11:11 AM
The videotaped re-enactment.
Not only do they have GZ statements they have him walking them through the events that evening. Should be interesting....
One point that has not been discussed much is that the re-enactment included GZ repeatedly yelling for help (at the request of LE). While the person doing the voice analysis for the Orlando Sentinel said it is the tone that they compare, I would think this will help the analysis further.
Hopefully they have also been able to get samples of Treyvon's voice and the FBI is analyzing everything. I know some thought that the investigator said the voice testing was not conclusive, based on his testimony. I heard it as meaning that the results are not in yet, they therefore don't have enough info at this time. MOO.
LiveLaughLuv
05-07-2012, 11:12 AM
One point that has not been discussed much is that the re-enactment included GZ repeatedly yelling for help (at the request of LE). While the person doing the voice analysis for the Orlando Sentinel said it is the tone that they compare, I would think this will help the analysis further.
Hopefully they have also been able to get samples of Treyvon's voice and the FBI is analyzing everything. I know some thought that the investigator said the voice testing was not conclusive, based on his testimony. I heard it as meaning that the results are not in yet, they therefore don't have enough info at this time. MOO.
They'd have to recreate that same fear...it's a feaful, devasting scream that would need to be recreated for the pupose of telling who..
I believe the state will play it and the jurors will decide, if it comes down to that...
I disgree. I believe Zimmerman's 911 call will be used to show intent. Zimmerman exited his vehicle before the end of the call. IMO this demonstrates that he never had any intention to wait for the cops. Zimmerman was going to be the cop that day.
jmo
As GZ has (allegedly) stated, he got out of the car to to find an address. Further, according to GZ, he was on his way back to his car when TM attacked him.
Although I disagree with the supposition you have presented, even if GZ had not intended to wait for the cops, that does not equal an intent to kill TM.
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
Doesn't everyone know that all 911 calls are recorded? I would think George would certainly have known it given the number of calls he has made and his father's background.
I've never thought much about it, but it only makes sense.
Regardless, the one thing I do know is that if I were planning to kill someone, I would not call 911, identify myself, identify my location, and identify my victim minutes before killing them.
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
IMHO, a successful prosecution will need very little else.
Morning Papa! :)
Just one comment. A few times here (and in your above quote) it has been mentioned there *may* be another shell casing. (Why I assume you put the plural in parentheses).
There was one shell casing found. That was noted by a direct question by O'Mara at about 1:25.
O'MARA: How many shells?
GILBREATH: One.
http://www.wral.com/news/video/11004815/#/vid11004815
This was another area where they had cut away to commercial, so it's not in the transcript.
Just wanted to clear that up. Love all your posts!
Trayvon's Autopsy Report.
IMO, it seems GZ wants us to believe that TM was shot while on top of GZ...but what if the bullet trajectory do not match that?
We're all anxiously awaiting the gun forensics, bullet trajectory, shooting distance, and entry wound.
IMO, there is a good chance they were fighting over the gun. And I think that both TM and GZ were screaming at different points during the struggle.
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
I know very little about gun mechanics but I've read much speculation that because of the state the gun was found in, something about the casing and the loaded chamber, that this suggests the gun was being fought over. Are there any gun experts here who could explain this bit of speculative evidence to me?
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
IMHO, a successful prosecution will need very little else.
I disagree. I think the prosecution needs to prove that GZ did not shoot TM in an act of self-defense. And I'm not sure they have the evidence to prove this point.
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
I'd like to add this to the record. At 1:34:30 Here: http://www.wral.com/news/video/11004815/#/vid11004815
is where the confronted portion comes up again. I think the following is important.
DE LA RIONDA: Why did you use the word “confronted” sir?
GILBREATH: Because Zimmerman met with Martin and it was compiling the facts that we had along with the witness statements of the argumentative voices and the authoritative voice being given from one of the witnesses and then the struggle that ensued that came from several witnesses.
------------------
The above part is in the transcript provided and readily available. What follows, this part in maroon below
-1:35:17 is where they cut away, so no transcript of this portion was provided.
I transcribed the following myself:
DE LA RIONDA: Isn’t it true, sir, that at least one witness described a person chasing another person in the back of that area where that murder occurred?
GILBREATH: Yes.
O’MARA: A couple of questions...The continued to follow that Mr. Zimmerman continued to follow
what evidence do you have to support that?
GILBREATH: He was told not to follow him, he continued on for a period of time.
O’MARA: How long?
GILBREATH: I don't know … I would say less than a minute before he hung up, which is prior to the encounter between the two,
O’MARA: Okay. Any other evidence besides that there was a phone call that he was on for a minute? Any other evidence, any other witnesses?
GILBREATH: To?
O’MARA: To the fact that he quote continued to follow.
GILBREATH: We have a witness statement who observed, that was on the perimeter of this, who observed shadows or figures, excuse me, running by her residence.
This is where it is picked up again by the formal transcript:
O’MARA: Do you know which way or who they were, or anything?
GILBREATH: They...I cannot identify who they were, but it was at the same time frame this occurred.
O’MARA: Ok. Besides that - any other evidence to support your conclusion that Mr. Zimmerman continued to follow?
GILBREATH: Other than his call and that witness?
O’MARA: Yes.
GILBREATH: And the fact that where it ended up. No.
O’MARA: Well you do have some other evidence don’t you? We had Zimmerman’s statement, don’t you?
GILBREATH: We have Mr. Zimmerman’s statements, we have the shell casings and we had Mr. Martin’s body at the scene.
==================
http://emptysuit.wordpress.com/2012/04/21/george-zimmerman-bond-hearing-transcript/
http://www.wral.com/news/video/11004815/#/vid11004815
AJ Noiter
05-07-2012, 12:52 PM
<snipped for relevance>
-1:35:17 is where they cut away, so no transcript of this portion was provided.
<snipped for relevance>
I'm not sure if there's a complete transcript of it, but you can watch the full 2hr+ video here, the video is direct from the courtroom:
https://www.wral.com/news/video/11004815/#/vid11004815
I'm not sure if there's a complete transcript of it, but you can watch the full 2hr+ video here, the video is direct from the courtroom:
https://www.wral.com/news/video/11004815/#/vid11004815
Did you happen to notice the two links I gave were exactly that video?
:)
That's what I used to transcribe what had not been transcribed.
I'd like to add this to the record. At 1:34:30 Here: http://www.wral.com/news/video/11004815/#/vid11004815
is where the confronted portion comes up again. I think the following is important.
DE LA RIONDA: Why did you use the word “confronted” sir?
GILBREATH: Because Zimmerman met with Martin and it was compiling the facts that we had along with the witness statements of the argumentative voices and the authoritative voice being given from one of the witnesses and then the struggle that ensued that came from several witnesses.
------------------
The above part is in the transcript provided and readily available. What follows, this part in maroon below
-1:35:17 is where they cut away, so no transcript of this portion was provided.
I transcribed the following myself:
DE LA RIONDA: Isn’t it true, sir, that at least one witness described a person chasing another person in the back of that area where that murder occurred?
GILBREATH: Yes.
O’MARA: A couple of questions...The continued to follow that Mr. Zimmerman continued to follow
what evidence do you have to support that?
GILBREATH: He was told not to follow him, he continued on for a period of time.
O’MARA: How long?
GILBREATH: I don't know … I would say less than a minute before he hung up, which is prior to the encounter between the two,
O’MARA: Okay. Any other evidence besides that there was a phone call that he was on for a minute? Any other evidence, any other witnesses?
GILBREATH: To?
O’MARA: To the fact that he quote continued to follow.
GILBREATH: We have a witness statement who observed, that was on the perimeter of this, who observed shadows or figures, excuse me, running by her residence.
This is where it is picked up again by the formal transcript:
O’MARA: Do you know which way or who they were, or anything?
GILBREATH: They...I cannot identify who they were, but it was at the same time frame this occurred.
O’MARA: Ok. Besides that - any other evidence to support your conclusion that Mr. Zimmerman continued to follow?
GILBREATH: Other than his call and that witness?
O’MARA: Yes.
GILBREATH: And the fact that where it ended up. No.
O’MARA: Well you do have some other evidence don’t you? We had Zimmerman’s statement, don’t you?
GILBREATH: We have Mr. Zimmerman’s statements, we have the shell casings and we had Mr. Martin’s body at the scene.
==================
http://emptysuit.wordpress.com/2012/04/21/george-zimmerman-bond-hearing-transcript/
http://www.wral.com/news/video/11004815/#/vid11004815
IMO, this witness statement can also be used to support GZ's story that he was heading back to his truck (perhaps even jogging because it was raining) and TM suddenly attacked him from behind.
Unless it can be clearly identified who was "running" after who, then we end up where we've always been with way too much room for reasonable doubt.
IMO, that's what has bothered me the most about this whole case: it's riddled with reasonable doubt. GZ's story matches up so well with almost all the evidence presented. The only evidence we have yet to see that could change that is 1) the gun forensics and 2) the autopsy report. (And I have a sneaking suspicion that we'll find ourselves right back where we started from.)
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
AJ Noiter
05-07-2012, 12:57 PM
Did you happen to notice the two links I gave were exactly that video?
:)
That's what I used to transcribe what had not been transcribed.
I do apologize, I thought you were just copy/pasting a transcript to show a point. I did not even notice the links, perhaps I subconsciously ignored them as a signature.
Concerned Papa
05-07-2012, 01:01 PM
I disagree. I think the prosecution needs to prove that GZ did not shoot TM in an act of self-defense. And I'm not sure they have the evidence to prove this point.
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
When his story is that he was walking back to his car and was attacked by Trayvon "where the sidewalks meet", I'm not so sure the prosecution will need to do much more than show the jury a dead body with his bullet in it 150-175 feet away in the OPPOSITE direction.
Liars tend to not get very much benefit of the doubt from a jury.
Every supporter of Zimmerman seems to want to ignore what more than one attorney has come to this forum and told us. If he's going to claim he was "standing his ground", he's the one that's got to prove the self defense aspect. That's hard to do when the body is found over half a football field away from where you were supposedly "standing".
Read the various accounts that have come out as to George's path of movement and actions for that night.
Read what he told LE in the "leaked" article at the Orlando Sentinel as VERIFIED by the City Manager of Sanford.
Read or listen to RZ Sr's detailed account for his son's movements that night in his Sean H. interview.
Read what his brother said in his Piers Morgan interview.
Read what HIS OWN ATTORNEY said in his re direct of Investigator Gilbreath at the Bond Hearing.
Each one of those stories say some version of:
George was walking down the main sidewalk....following Trayvon until the dispatcher told him "we don't need you to do that"......continued to the next street over for an address/street sign.....was walking back to his vehicle when attacked by Trayvon
Not a one of these stories ever have George Zimmerman doing anything except walking on that sidewalk. Not a one of them has ever said he set foot elsewhere.
Now read where HIS OWN ATTORNEY said the body was located during the Bond Hearing. Look at where that point actually is in relation to "where the sidewalks meet".
The problem for George Zimmerman is, he can't drag that boy's dead body down to the sidewalk where he says he was at.
IMO, this witness statement can also be used to support GZ's story that he was heading back to his truck (perhaps even jogging because it was raining) and TM suddenly attacked him from behind.
Unless it can be clearly identified who was "running" after who, then we end up where we've always been with way too much room for reasonable doubt.
IMO, that's what has bothered me the most about this whole case: it's riddled with reasonable doubt. GZ's story matches up so well with almost all the evidence presented. The only evidence we have yet to see that could change that is 1) the gun forensics and 2) the autopsy report. (And I have a sneaking suspicion that we'll find ourselves right back where we started from.)
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
I think it's easy to have reasonable doubt when you have only seen 1/10th of the evidence the state has collected.
When his story is that he was walking back to his car and was attacked by Trayvon "where the sidewalks meet", I'm not so sure the prosecution will need to do much more than show the jury a dead body with his bullet in it 150-175 feet away in the OPPOSITE direction.
Liars tend to not get very much benefit of the doubt from a jury.
Every supporter of Zimmerman seems to want to ignore what more than one attorney has come to this forum and told us. If he's going to claim he was "standing his ground", he's the one that's got to prove the self defense aspect. That's hard to do when the body is found over half a football field away from where you were supposedly "standing".
Read the various accounts that have come out as to George's path of movement and actions for that night.
Read what he told LE in the "leaked" article at the Orlando Sentinel as VERIFIED by the City Manager of Sanford.
Read or listen to RZ Sr's detailed account for his son's movements that night in his Sean H. interview.
Read what his brother said in his Piers Morgan interview.
Read what HIS OWN ATTORNEY said in his re direct of Investigator Gilbreath at the Bond Hearing.
Each one of those stories say some version of:
George was walking down the main sidewalk....following Trayvon until the dispatcher told him "we don't need you to do that"......continued to the next street over for an address/street sign.....was walking back to his vehicle when attacked by Trayvon
Not a one of these stories ever have George Zimmerman doing anything except walking on that sidewalk. Not a one of them has ever said he set foot elsewhere.
Now read where HIS OWN ATTORNEY said the body was located during the Bond Hearing. Look at where that point actually is in relation to "where the sidewalks meet".
The problem for George Zimmerman is, he can't drag that boy's dead body down to the sidewalk where he says he was at.
It was dark, it was rainy, and IMO GZ could have thought he was near the spot the sidewalks intersected. Just as TM could have thought he was running toward home instead of in the opposite direction. Given that this is a condo community, and all the buildings look similar, add to that the terrible visibility, and IMO it's not a point I would call someone a "liar" on.
Now, if GZ said that he was nowhere near the shooting and/or he never called 911 and/or his gun had just been stolen, then I would call him a liar. IMO, the lies some people see can easily be chalked up to simple confusion on a dark, rainy night after a traumatic confrontation that involved a head injury. I realize that you're very interested in the logistics of this case, but IMO I don't find them as sinister as you do.
FTR, if I had shot my attacker, it would not have been where the attack began as I was being flung around like a rag doll. I don't think that's what happened here (the flinging part), but IMO a violent confrontation (especially one that involves wrestling over a gun) is not a static, freeze-frame event. It's a jumble of motion, reaction, and counter-reaction.
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
I think it's easy to have reasonable doubt when you have only seen 1/10th of the evidence the state has collected.
I agree. But what makes you think we only have 1/10th of the evidence? IMO, the most pertinent evidence will be the gun forensics and the autopsy. If that evidence fits GZ's story, then I think the State's in a lot of trouble.
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
Donjeta
05-07-2012, 02:11 PM
They could have moved after the confrontation began but I do not believe that GZ didn't know his way around the complex even in the dark. He's lived there since 2009 and there are three streets or so.
Also, if he truly was returning from where he checked for an address he'd know exactly where he was coming from and which route he was taking.
They could have moved after the confrontation began but I do not believe that GZ didn't know his way around the complex even in the dark. He's lived there since 2009 and there are three streets or so.
Also, if he truly was returning from where he checked for an address he'd know exactly where he was coming from and which route he was taking.
I don't agree. I easily get confused in the dark, especially in areas where the buildings all look the same. IMO, it depends on the individual's innate sense of direction. Mine's not the best.
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
AngelWings444
05-07-2012, 02:25 PM
GZ lived in the area since 2005. He patrolled the neighborhood. He sure did know exactly where he was that evening.
JMO
Concerned Papa
05-07-2012, 02:31 PM
It was dark, it was rainy, and IMO GZ could have thought he was near the spot the sidewalks intersected. Just as TM could have thought he was running toward home instead of in the opposite direction. Given that this is a condo community, and all the buildings look similar, add to that the terrible visibility, and IMO it's not a point I would call someone a "liar" on.
Now, if GZ said that he was nowhere near the shooting and/or he never called 911 and/or his gun had just been stolen, then I would call him a liar. IMO, the lies some people see can easily be chalked up to simple confusion on a dark, rainy night after a traumatic confrontation that involved a head injury. I realize that you're very interested in the logistics of this case, but IMO I don't find them as sinister as you do.
FTR, if I had shot my attacker, it would not have been where the attack began as I was being flung around like a rag doll. I don't think that's what happened here (the flinging part), but IMO a violent confrontation (especially one that involves wrestling over a gun) is not a static, freeze-frame event. It's a jumble of motion, reaction, and counter-reaction.
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
"simple confusion on a dark, rainy night".........:waitasec:
"simple confusion on a dark, rainy night".........:waitasec:
Yep. And after having his head banged up (head trauma). As I've mentioned before, my ex-DIL got out of a hit-and-run offense by having a doctor write a letter that having a concussion can make one not think clearly. She got off. As in, free as bird after hitting a parked car so hard that she and her friend had to jump up and down on the bumper to break it free from the car she hit before she could drive off.
GZ lived in the area since 2005. He patrolled the neighborhood. He sure did know exactly where he was that evening.
JMO
I've been driving the same route to work for about 10 years and I still have trouble recognizing similar exits (and I've driven the beltway all my adult life). Even after almost two years in our new home, I still have to catch myself from turning onto the street before ours (the turn looks similar). People like me exist and IMO if someone like me is on the jury, they will relate to any logistical confusion GZ may have had.
As a matter of fact, I had to call 911 to report a bicyclist hit by a car and I had to drive to where I could check the street sign on the corner of the grocery store that I've been going to for almost 10 years. I had no idea what the cross street was named (and couldn't even tell you now without looking it up). ETA: "The corner that (store's name) is on" didn't cut it with the dispatcher. By the time I'd returned to the corner to get the street name, someone else had already called it in.
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
AJ Noiter
05-07-2012, 02:49 PM
I've been driving the same route to work for about 10 years and I still have trouble recognizing similar exits (and I've driven the beltway all my adult life). Even after almost two years in our new home, I still have to catch myself from turning onto the street before ours (the turn looks similar). People like me exist and IMO if someone like me is on the jury, they will relate to any logistical confusion GZ may have had.
As a matter of fact, I had to call 911 to report a bicyclist hit by a car and I had to drive to where I could check the street sign on the corner of the grocery store that I've been going to for almost 10 years. I had no idea what the cross street was named (and couldn't even tell you now without looking it up).
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
Agreed. I got my house from my parents when they passed on so I've lived here quite some time and I can't tell you the names of the streets one block East or West. Some people are good with streets and addresses, others aren't.
Donjeta
05-07-2012, 02:51 PM
I don't agree. I easily get confused in the dark, especially in areas where the buildings all look the same. IMO, it depends on the individual's innate sense of direction. Mine's not the best.
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
If CPapa's drawings are anywhere near correct there is imo no way to confuse the place where the sidewalks meet with the spot between the buildings where the body was imo.
Even if the buildings all look similar it is not completely dark, there are lighted windows and it should be fairly evident that at the star he was between the two parallel rows of buildings and at the place where the sidewalks meet there are also buildings perpendicularly to the longer corridor between the two rows of buildings.
See the pictures in
Timeline - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community
If GZ walked from where the two red cars are parked (which I assume to be the place where he got the address from) to the direction of his own vehicle it's hard for him to get so lost so that he'd be at the star and think that he was where the sidewalks meet.
Even the people with lousy memory for street names and a bad sense of direction generally know the difference between walking straight along the same path and making a right angle turn, and the difference between being on a path between buildings and at a crossing of two paths.
He seems to have no trouble giving the dispatcher directions to his vehicle so based on that evidence I am not inclined to think that he has a bad sense of direction.
LambChop
05-07-2012, 02:57 PM
Agreed. I got my house from my parents when they passed on so I've lived here quite some time and I can't tell you the names of the streets one block East or West. Some people are good with streets and addresses, others aren't.
There were only three streets in the whole community. Long Oak Way, Twin Trees and Retreat View Circle. Even I can remember that. lol
Donjeta
05-07-2012, 03:13 PM
There were only three streets in the whole community. Long Oak Way, Twin Trees and Retreat View Circle. Even I can remember that. lol
I think we can conclude for a fact that GZ remembers Retreat View Circle. :) That's the address he gives for the clubhouse on the call and he's called the police to that address many times before.
http://www.documentcloud.org/documents/327330-george-zimmerrman-911-call-history.html
If CPapa's drawings are anywhere near correct there is imo no way to confuse the place where the sidewalks meet with the spot between the buildings where the body was imo.
Even if the buildings all look similar it is not completely dark, there are lighted windows and it should be fairly evident that at the star he was between the two parallel rows of buildings and at the place where the sidewalks meet there are also buildings perpendicularly to the longer corridor between the two rows of buildings.
See the pictures in
Timeline - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7878219#post7878219)
If GZ walked from where the two red cars are parked (which I assume to be the place where he got the address from) to the direction of his own vehicle it's hard for him to get so lost so that he'd be at the star and think that he was where the sidewalks meet.
Even the people with lousy memory for street names and a bad sense of direction generally know the difference between walking straight along the same path and making a right angle turn, and the difference between being on a path between buildings and at a crossing of two paths.
He seems to have no trouble giving the dispatcher directions to his vehicle so based on that evidence I am not inclined to think that he has a bad sense of direction.
First, and most importantly, I commend everyone for their effort trying to make sense of this case. But, for me, I find this logistical speculation very confusing. For one thing, the link posted says:
"ZIMMERMAN: He was walking back to his vehicle.
Trayvon came from his left side…from that area where the sidewalks meet…and started beating him. "
IMO, coming from "that area" and the beginning of the beating are two separate things. It doesn't sound to me like he's saying that's where the attack starts.
Also, I've seen mock-ups from various sources with GZ's car in different places which leads me to believe that it is not confirmed where the car actually was parked. Or has that been confirmed and I missed it?
ETA: When I ask if I've missed something, please do not take offense. I am not being snarky. I am truly asking if I missed something that has already been confirmed. There are so many facts flying about and I readily admit that there's a lot I may have missed.
Donjeta
05-07-2012, 03:20 PM
He gives a pretty good idea in the 911 call. Through the gate, past the clubhouse, make a left turn, go past the mailboxes, the truck is parked at or near a cut-through.
Dispatcher
Alright, where you going to meet with them at?
...
Zimmerman
Um, if they come in through the, uh, (knocking sound) gate, tell them to go straight past the club house, and uh, (knocking sound) straight past the club house and make a left, and then they go past the mailboxes, that's my truck...[unintelligible]
Dispatcher
What address are you parked in front of?
Zimmerman
I don't know, it's a cut through so I don't know the address.
pcrum12
05-07-2012, 03:26 PM
Agreed. I got my house from my parents when they passed on so I've lived here quite some time and I can't tell you the names of the streets one block East or West. Some people are good with streets and addresses, others aren't.
Have to agree with you guys. I'm actually very good at directions but I couldn't tell you a street name to save my life lol. "go to deadend, turn right then go to 2nd light turn left, etc..... They want street names, I haven't a clue.
LambChop
05-07-2012, 03:40 PM
If CPapa's drawings are anywhere near correct there is imo no way to confuse the place where the sidewalks meet with the spot between the buildings where the body was imo.
Even if the buildings all look similar it is not completely dark, there are lighted windows and it should be fairly evident that at the star he was between the two parallel rows of buildings and at the place where the sidewalks meet there are also buildings perpendicularly to the longer corridor between the two rows of buildings.
See the pictures in
Timeline - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community (http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=7878219#post7878219)
If GZ walked from where the two red cars are parked (which I assume to be the place where he got the address from) to the direction of his own vehicle it's hard for him to get so lost so that he'd be at the star and think that he was where the sidewalks meet.
Even the people with lousy memory for street names and a bad sense of direction generally know the difference between walking straight along the same path and making a right angle turn, and the difference between being on a path between buildings and at a crossing of two paths.
He seems to have no trouble giving the dispatcher directions to his vehicle so based on that evidence I am not inclined to think that he has a bad sense of direction.
I was also thinking about the circling statement GZ made. He first calls from the clubhouse and it is possible when GZ said he's coming to check me out he was talking about GZ who may have moved further down onto Twin Trees and parked while he watched TM and since there are no sidewalks in this area TM would have had to have passed by GZ's car at some point just to get past him so is that the reason for GZ stating TM was circling the car? How did GZ think TM was suppose to get past him? jmo
LambChop
05-07-2012, 03:48 PM
Have to agree with you guys. I'm actually very good at directions but I couldn't tell you a street name to save my life lol. "go to deadend, turn right then go to 2nd light turn left, etc..... They want street names, I haven't a clue.
I think that is why there are often differences in witness statements because some people are more likely to pay attention to the details and some just have better memories. lol I learned to remember the street names because people would always get lost when coming to my house in Connecticut so I'd have to talk them in to get them back into the woods where I was living. Plus it's good to notice, even occassional mile markers in case you ever need help while driving. Watch those street signs, not every one it helps 911 if you are in trouble. It's a good habit to get into. Also helps the memory. lol jmo
LambChop
05-07-2012, 03:51 PM
Another thing that the state has to question. Why did GZ feel it was necessary for him to get out of his car to check for an address when TM was moving and according to GZ....towards the back gate. TM would have been LONG GONE by the time LE arrived with the address GZ was trying to get. Why didn't he just tell LE he's headed for the back gate meet me there???? jmo
He gives a pretty good idea in the 911 call. Through the gate, past the clubhouse, make a left turn, go past the mailboxes, the truck is parked at or near a cut-through.
But it looks to me like there are two cut-throughs, which is why I find this so confusing. Any place that the buildings are not connected is a cut-through.
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
Reader
05-07-2012, 06:51 PM
I was also thinking about the circling statement GZ made. He first calls from the clubhouse and it is possible when GZ said he's coming to check me out he was talking about GZ who may have moved further down onto Twin Trees and parked while he watched TM and since there are no sidewalks in this area TM would have had to have passed by GZ's car at some point just to get past him so is that the reason for GZ stating TM was circling the car? How did GZ think TM was suppose to get past him? jmo
It's very strange to me that this account about 'circling the car' has just been added recently to the GZ narrative, and there is nothing to back this up on the LE call that night. GZ was obviously giving the dispatcher a play by play of everything suspicious in his mind about Trayvon. I wonder if it was in his first LE statements...and why add this now...just to offer more 'proof' that he was 'in fear' of Trayvon?..might be another discrepancy the prosecutor can use to question what he says....
All IMO
Reader
05-07-2012, 06:57 PM
Another thing that the state has to question. Why did GZ feel it was necessary for him to get out of his car to check for an address when TM was moving and according to GZ....towards the back gate. TM would have been LONG GONE by the time LE arrived with the address GZ was trying to get. Why didn't he just tell LE he's headed for the back gate meet me there???? jmo
IMO, after the dispatcher told him not to follow, he had to give some reason for continuing to be out of his truck and walking...when he was really still following/searching for Trayvon....I don't think he looked for an address at this 3 street community he had been patrolling and walking with his dog for the past several years....GMAB
Reader
05-07-2012, 07:18 PM
The out of focus location of the body may be getting a little bit more clear. I ran across this article while looking for something else:
This backyard is also where SFD Fire and Rescue said the body was located and the location given by the SPD's report overlaps this as well. The 70 yard point mentioned by O'Mara at the bond hearing is not too far away and could be needing placement adjustment.
The image below has 19' radius lines from the center of this porch.
As I've said before, I realize we don't have GPS coordinates or statements signed in blood at this point, but if they keep feeding us a few bits and pieces, we'll soon be able to give THEM GPS for the body's position :rocker:
True! good sleuthing!
I'm wondering where MOM got that '70 yards' figure from?
AJ Noiter
05-07-2012, 07:22 PM
True! good sleuthing!
I'm wondering where MOM got that '70 yards' figure from?
This was being discussed somewhere, on this website, and the last post I read about it stated it came from Police Chief Lee, I do believe.
LambChop
05-07-2012, 07:49 PM
True! good sleuthing!
I'm wondering where MOM got that '70 yards' figure from?
Why from Papa, of course. No, just kidding. Or, then again, maybe not. lol jmo
IMO, after the dispatcher told him not to follow, he had to give some reason for continuing to be out of his truck and walking...when he was really still following/searching for Trayvon....I don't think he looked for an address at this 3 street community he had been patrolling and walking with his dog for the past several years....GMAB
I think it's a huge leap to assume that GZ knew the address of every condo in the community. Sorry, it just doesn't jibe with my real life. There's no way I could tell you the street number of every house in my neighborhood. Even the houses to either side of me, I'd take a guess on which way the numbers run.
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
Reader
05-07-2012, 08:19 PM
I think it's a huge leap to assume that GZ knew the address of every condo in the community. Sorry, it just doesn't jibe with my real life. There's no way I could tell you the street number of every house in my neighborhood. Even the houses to either side of me, I'd take a guess on which way the numbers run.
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
That wasn't my point: I don't believe he was looking for an address at all.
Concerned Papa
05-07-2012, 08:32 PM
This was being discussed somewhere, on this website, and the last post I read about it stated it came from Police Chief Lee, I do believe.
It was from Chief Lee and apparently is part of the case evidence as stated by Zimmerman's attorney at the Bond Hearing.
From the Bond Hearing recording at the [1:19:55] mark:
O’MARA: How do you know he was trying to return to his home?
GILBREATH: Because the location he was found in….is probably….and I don’t have the exact measurements….it’s in the path to the back door of the house where he was staying.
O’MARA: I think the evidence suggested it was 70 yards away, right?
GILBREATH: He came from there; I’m assuming he was going back there.
O’MARA: OK.
http://www.wral.com/news/video/11004815/#/vid11004815
Concerned Papa
05-07-2012, 08:48 PM
Probably a little O/T, but maybe not so much I hope. Sanford has a new interim Chief of Police.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-mct-trayvon-martin-case-michigan-native-named-interim-20120507,0,2178469.story
That wasn't my point: I don't believe he was looking for an address at all.
You are certainly entitled to that opinion. But GZ's claim to be looking for an address is still plausible. I get that some consider it an excuse, but it's a plausible excuse.
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
Reader
05-07-2012, 09:17 PM
It was from Chief Lee and apparently is part of the case evidence as stated by Zimmerman's attorney at the Bond Hearing.
O’MARA: I think the evidence suggested it was 70 yards away, right?
GILBREATH: He came from there; I’m assuming he was going back there.
BBM....and I notice Gilbreath did not answer MOM's question about the 70 yards either....lol...altho taken by surprise at this hearing, he was pretty good at not giving MOM much of what he wanted....IMO
ILikeToBendPages
05-07-2012, 11:22 PM
Also if there are no indications of any injuries to TM that could have been associated with the 'attack' on GZ, that would indicate that GZ's stories are not true. Or if TM's autopsy only has defensive wounds.
I presume the prosecution has medical reports and hopefully police documented photographs on GZ's injuries that show they do not match his stories. As in no broken nose, no 'gashes' on the back of his head, the small wounds on his head not in the correct position for someone whose head was "beaten" against concrete. No dirt or debris on or in the head injuries or on his head at all.
Maybe other injuries on GZ that could indicate that he was the aggressor?
I'd expect there are crime scene photographs - could they show indications that GZ's stories are not true? No blood on any of the concrete? Position of TM's body no where it could have been from any of GZ's variations on how TM was positioned when shot and how TM fell?
The problem is that we have so little so far, so anything we think of now is pure supposition. We need a document dump!
IMO, JMO, etc.
I wonder if the rain "washed" the blood off the sidewalk?
It sure didn't look like it had "diluted" the blood on the back of his head much.
I would think with the rain that the the blood would of been fluid? and running down his head. I can see a small amount on the top cut that looks a little diluted, but not on the funny looking trails of blood on on the right side of his head. You know the one with the blood that just stops . Not flowing down his head but to the right and they just stop in the same place.
I wonder why neither wound was "seeping"during the ride to the police station.
Phoenixfla
05-08-2012, 01:11 AM
When his story is that he was walking back to his car and was attacked by Trayvon "where the sidewalks meet", I'm not so sure the prosecution will need to do much more than show the jury a dead body with his bullet in it 150-175 feet away in the OPPOSITE direction.
Liars tend to not get very much benefit of the doubt from a jury.
Every supporter of Zimmerman seems to want to ignore what more than one attorney has come to this forum and told us. If he's going to claim he was "standing his ground", he's the one that's got to prove the self defense aspect. That's hard to do when the body is found over half a football field away from where you were supposedly "standing".
Read the various accounts that have come out as to George's path of movement and actions for that night.
Read what he told LE in the "leaked" article at the Orlando Sentinel as VERIFIED by the City Manager of Sanford.
Read or listen to RZ Sr's detailed account for his son's movements that night in his Sean H. interview.
Read what his brother said in his Piers Morgan interview.
Read what HIS OWN ATTORNEY said in his re direct of Investigator Gilbreath at the Bond Hearing.
Each one of those stories say some version of:
George was walking down the main sidewalk....following Trayvon until the dispatcher told him "we don't need you to do that"......continued to the next street over for an address/street sign.....was walking back to his vehicle when attacked by Trayvon
Not a one of these stories ever have George Zimmerman doing anything except walking on that sidewalk. Not a one of them has ever said he set foot elsewhere.
Now read where HIS OWN ATTORNEY said the body was located during the Bond Hearing. Look at where that point actually is in relation to "where the sidewalks meet".
The problem for George Zimmerman is, he can't drag that boy's dead body down to the sidewalk where he says he was at.
Is this a possibility?
GZ circles the condo when getting the address and then passes between that building and the next one making his way back to the sidewalk and then while heading back to the T encounters TM?
Phoenixfla
05-08-2012, 01:20 AM
There were only three streets in the whole community. Long Oak Way, Twin Trees and Retreat View Circle. Even I can remember that. lol
Are you POSITIVE there are only three streets in the whole community?
Are you POSITIVE there are only three streets in the whole community?
Er, Yes.
suspicious1
05-08-2012, 03:15 AM
You are certainly entitled to that opinion. But GZ's claim to be looking for an address is still plausible. I get that some consider it an excuse, but it's a plausible excuse.
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
I just don't think it's plausible because he could've gotten an address from the homes he passed walking toward the " T". Why would he need the address from a home on the other side? That makes no sense to me. He needed a reason to continue following Trayvon. JMO
LambChop
05-08-2012, 07:55 AM
Are you POSITIVE there are only three streets in the whole community?
Yes, one of those roads GZ lives on. That leave a whole two to remember. jmo
Concerned Papa
05-08-2012, 08:29 AM
Is this a possibility?
GZ circles the condo when getting the address and then passes between that building and the next one making his way back to the sidewalk and then while heading back to the T encounters TM?
Certainly it's a possibility. It seems a much more likely explanation, considering where it appears the body was found, than any other, IMO.
The glaring question for me, however, is why has no one ever mentioned it in any of their dialogue?
If it actually happened as you have suggested, why did Robert Zimmerman Sr. feel it necessary say the following in his Sean Hannity interview?
When the dispatcher said we know longer need you to do that, and George acknowledged OK. He no longer knew where Trayvon was. So he continued walking down the sidewalk directly in front of him to the next street to get an address. He got an address.
As he was walking back to his vehicle, there was a sidewalk that goes to his left and Trayvon came from that area where the sidewalks meet. He asked my son if he had a problem, and George said, no, I don't have a problem. Trayvon said, well, you do now. He punched him in the face, broke his nose, knocked him to the sidewalk, and got on him and started beating him.
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/2012/04/05/exclusive-george-zimmermans-father-defends-son-trayvon-martin-shooting?page=2#ixzz1uHPDI4wG
Why has every spoken word accounting for George's path of movement that night failed to mention his being anywhere but on that sidewalk?
Concerned Papa
05-08-2012, 08:50 AM
One KEY piece of evidence the State has is a gun; George Zimmerman's 8 shot, 9 mm, Kel Tek PF 9.
An AUTOMATIC 8 shot weapon that was recovered with a FULL 7 shot magazine and an empty chamber:
Police found a single shell casing at the scene, and when they seized George Zimmerman's handgun, a Kel Tec 9 mm, its magazine was full, according to a source close to the investigation. The only bullet missing was the one in the chamber, the source said.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-19/news/os-trayvon-martin-shooting-students-20120319_1_warning-shot-college-students-single-shell-casing
All the gun aficionados I've seen posting here about the mechanical workings of a gun should consider what that could be telling us.
AJ Noiter
05-08-2012, 09:03 AM
One KEY piece of evidence the State has is a gun; George Zimmerman's 8 shot, 9 mm, Kel Tek PF 9.
An AUTOMATIC 8 shot weapon that was recovered with a FULL 7 shot magazine and an empty chamber:
All the gun aficionados I've seen posting here about the mechanical workings of a gun should consider what that could be telling us.
One possibility is the slide mechanism being obstructed somehow. Another might be an obstruction between the chamber and the next round, though I'd expect police to identify this if that were the case (and they noticed it).
Concerned Papa
05-08-2012, 09:07 AM
One possibility is the slide mechanism being obstructed somehow. Another might be an obstruction between the chamber and the next round, though I'd expect police to identify this if that were the case (and they noticed it).
Wouldn't you agree that the slide mechanism being obstructed in some manner would be the more likely of the two scenarios you have accurately suggested?
LiveLaughLuv
05-08-2012, 09:08 AM
It's very strange to me that this account about 'circling the car' has just been added recently to the GZ narrative, and there is nothing to back this up on the LE call that night. GZ was obviously giving the dispatcher a play by play of everything suspicious in his mind about Trayvon. I wonder if it was in his first LE statements...and why add this now...just to offer more 'proof' that he was 'in fear' of Trayvon?..might be another discrepancy the prosecutor can use to question what he says....
All IMO
IMO, after the dispatcher told him not to follow, he had to give some reason for continuing to be out of his truck and walking...when he was really still following/searching for Trayvon....I don't think he looked for an address at this 3 street community he had been patrolling and walking with his dog for the past several years....GMAB
I just don't think it's plausible because he could've gotten an address from the homes he passed walking toward the " T". Why would he need the address from a home on the other side? That makes no sense to me. He needed a reason to continue following Trayvon. JMO
BBM
So that another A&&hole wound't get away...
Why is he adding these little comments now, because he has to have the self defense on his side, when in all actuality, it was TM in the greatest fear, is my belief.
I truly doubt the circuling the vehicle due to TM wanting to get away from this guy who he noticed was following him..I believe GZ and his family and friends are embellishing and diminishing GZ's actions/behaviors knowing he's facing murder charges. They all thought this would all go away..
I also doubt the extent of his injuries since he didn't go to the hospital that night. I wonder WHEN he made the trip to the hospital...would he be the type to have someone else hit him, after the fact to make it appear it was TM who did damage to him? I don't trust a word from GZ's mouth, his family's mouths or his advocates...they will stand by GZ as they stand by the SYG statute.
I believe SPD dropped the ball that night not arresting him, which is why there is such a divide on who is the true victim in this. For me, I believe the only victim is TM..It doesn't compute that an adult with a loaded weapon with bullets meant to do damage was in this great fear...
BERNARDO DE LA RIONDA, ASSISTANT STATE ATTORNEY: Sir, you were asked about the next paragraph here that Zimmerman confronted Martin and a struggle ensued and you were asked a lot about what "confronted" means. If Mr. Martin was minding his own business and was going home and somebody comes up to him and starts accusing him (inaudible), wouldn't you consider that a confrontation?
GILBREATH: Yes.
DE LA RIONDA: That is, Mr. Martin didn't turn around and start -- he was minding his own business and Mr. Zimmerman's the one that approached Mr. Martin, correct?
O'MARA: Let me object at this point you honor. Though great leeway is given and I guess this is cross-examination, the concern is that he's talking now about evidence that is completely not in evidence.
JUDGE KENNETH LESTER, JR., FLORIDA CIRCUIT COURT: What's the objection?
O'MARA: The objection is he is presenting facts that are not in evidence to the witness.
LESTER: Sustained.
DE LA RIONDA: Why did you use the word "confronted" sir?
GILBREATH: Because Zimmerman met with Martin and it was compiling the facts that we had along with the witness statements of the argumentative voices and the authoritative voice being given from one of the witnesses and then the struggle that ensued that came from several witnesses.
DE LA RIONDA: But prior to that confrontation, Mr. Martin was minding his own business? Is that correct?
O'MARA: Again, your honor, we point to -- and this is not in evidence and he cannot present it that way to the witness.
LESTER: Sustained.
DE LA RIONDA: Mr. Martin, the route he was taking was towards his house, correct?
GILBREATH: Yes.
DE LA RIONDA: And he was unarmed?
GILBREATH: Yes.
(later)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So do you know who started the fight?
GILBREATH: Do I know?
O'MARA: Right.
GILBREATH: No.
O'MARA: Do you have any evidence that supports who may have started the fight?
GILBREATH: No.
(later)
O'MARA: That statement that he had given you -- sorry, law enforcement that day, that we just talked about, turning around and that he was assaulted, do you have any evidence in your investigation to date that specifically contradicts either of those two pieces of evidence that were in his statement given several hours after the event?
GILBREATH: Which two?
O'MARA: That he turned back to his car. We'll start with that one.
GILBREATH: I have nothing to indicate he did not or did not to that.
O'MARA: My question was do you have any evidence to contradict or that conflicts with his contention given before he knew any of the evidence that would conflict with the fact that he stated I walked back to my car?
GILBREATH: No.
O'MARA: No evidence. Correct?
GILBREATH: Understanding -- are you talking about at that point in time?
O'MARA: Since. Today. Do you have any evidence that conflicts with his suggestion that he had turned around and went back to his car?
GILBREATH: Other than his statement, no.
O'MARA: Any evidence that conflicts with that.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He answered it. He said no.
O'MARA: Any evidence that conflicts any eyewitnesses, anything that conflicts with the contention that Mr. Martin assaulted first?
GILBREATH: That contention that was given to us by him, other than filling in the figures being one following or chasing the other one, as to who threw the first blow, no.
(later)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And he gave -- he the defendant gave numerous interviews to the police did he not.
GILBREATH: Yes.
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.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: But -- and I'm going to get into every little contradiction but wouldn't you agree that a lot of his statements can be contradicted by the evidence either witnesses or just based on what he says himself?
GILBREATH: Yes.
http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_columnists_ezorn/2012/04/from-cnns-transcript-of-the-george-zimmerman-bond-hearing-this-morning-zimmermans-attorney-omara-zimmerman-confronted-mart.html?cid=6a00d83451b4ba69e20167658b18f2970b
This was to be a hearing on bond. I believe MOM ambushed the state when he started talking evidence, they weren't prepared for it and possibly didn't want to give the defense the information on what evidence contradicts GZ's different statements at that time. It appears DG didn't have his reports needed to give more details on what evidence contradicts GZ's statements..and feel GZ added these details in an effort to give him SYG defense status, embellished to the point of disbelief. His injuries didn't match the evidence given or taken from the crime scene or from TM's body, itself..
I await a document dump to put this all to rest...but as it stands now, I believe GZ set out to do harm to the next a&&hole he came upon..for the police always let them get away...
Excited utterances will be hard for GZ to explain away...
I believe excited utterances to be the same as a drunk man who speaks a sober mind! It tells it true...:maddening:
Justice for Trayvon Martin
AJ Noiter
05-08-2012, 09:14 AM
Wouldn't you agree that the slide mechanism being obstructed in some manner would be the more likely of the two scenarios you have accurately suggested?
I'd rather not say definitively, to be honest.
If it were something obstructing the slide, it would be something obstructing from the rear, as if the weapon were up against something. This would make me wonder if there are any injuries to Mr. Martin's hand - if so, this could show that he was trying to pull the weapon away from Mr. Zimmerman.
Concerned Papa
05-08-2012, 09:41 AM
I'd rather not say definitively, to be honest.
If it were something obstructing the slide, it would be something obstructing from the rear, as if the weapon were up against something. This would make me wonder if there are any injuries to Mr. Martin's hand - if so, this could show that he was trying to pull the weapon away from Mr. Zimmerman. BBM
Once again, an accurate observation that I tend to agree with. I found this at a gun site that supports what you are saying:
One thing that can cause that is another man’s hand wrapped around the pistol, retarding its slide mechanism. This would indicate, as could certain gunshot residue patterns or cuts in certain places if found on Trayvon Martin’s hand(s), that a struggle for a gun was taking place when the fatal shot was fired.
http://backwoodshome.com/blogs/MassadAyoob/2012/03/23/george-zimmerman-and-trayvon-martin-what-we-dont-know/
As small as this model is, a hand could easily surround the slide mechanism during a struggle and retard it's function.
http://i941.photobucket.com/albums/ad257/Papa813_bucket/TMKelTek.jpg
I'd rather not say definitively, to be honest.
If it were something obstructing the slide, it would be something obstructing from the rear, as if the weapon were up against something. This would make me wonder if there are any injuries to Mr. Martin's hand - if so, this could show that he was trying to pull the weapon away from Mr. Zimmerman.
However, we have been informed the gun struggle does not corroborate with the evidence.
Zimmerman also told police, the source told the Sentinel, that while the two were on the ground, Trayvon reached for Zimmerman's gun, and the two struggled over it.
Those portions of Zimmerman's account are not corroborated by other evidence, the source said.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-05-03/news/os-trayvon-martin-circles-george-zimmerman-20120503_1_special-prosecutor-angela-corey-source-police-department
AJ Noiter
05-08-2012, 10:17 AM
However, we have been informed the gun struggle does not corroborate with the evidence.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-05-03/news/os-trayvon-martin-circles-george-zimmerman-20120503_1_special-prosecutor-angela-corey-source-police-department
I'd assume the source to be part of the prosecution, I haven't read the article. If we are to believe everything they state then there is no reason to investigate this case as they've already done it for us.
LiveLaughLuv
05-08-2012, 10:18 AM
However, we have been informed the gun struggle does not corroborate with the evidence.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-05-03/news/os-trayvon-martin-circles-george-zimmerman-20120503_1_special-prosecutor-angela-corey-source-police-department
I believe the ME report, TM's body were tested and doesn't stand up to what GZ's claim is...the SP is privy to those reports and believe they tested and found it inconsistent with GZ's words and the evidence from the crime scene...which is a good thing for Trayvon Martin's justice...
I'd assume the source to be part of the prosecution, I haven't read the article. If we are to believe everything they state then there is no reason to investigate this case as they've already done it for us.
<modsnip>
Isn't investigating the case pretty much their job?
RANCH
05-08-2012, 10:30 AM
I believe the ME report, TM's body were tested and doesn't stand up to what GZ's claim is...the SP is privy to those reports and believe they tested and found it inconsistent with GZ's words and the evidence from the crime scene...which is a good thing for Trayvon Martin's justice...
I think that I will wait until the ME report itself is released before I try to draw any conclusions from it.
The state can come to whatever conclusion they want, but sometimes evidence is open to interpretation. JMO.
AJ Noiter
05-08-2012, 10:39 AM
<modsnip> Isn't investigating the case pretty much their job?
According to many, the investigators did ignore the facts initially. They can do it initially but not after that?
LiveLaughLuv
05-08-2012, 10:48 AM
Here is what Robert Zimmerman said is his son’s explanation: Trayvon was on top, punching and slamming his head into the paved sidewalk. When nobody answered his calls for help, he tried to slide onto the grass. But in doing so, the holstered gun in his waistband became visible.
“It is a little bit cloudy,” the father said. “But George believes Trayvon saw the pistol, was going to get it, and said, ‘You are going to die tonight.’ Shortly after that, George drew the pistol and shot him.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/02/us/trayvon-martin-shooting-prompts-a-review-of-ideals.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
Now it turns into a struggle for the weapon...when he told his father, he believes TM saw his gun and was going to get it...
LiveLaughLuv
05-08-2012, 10:49 AM
I think that I will wait until the ME report itself is released before I try to draw any conclusions from it.
The state can come to whatever conclusion they want, but sometimes evidence is open to interpretation. JMO.
BBM
Evidence doesn't lie, people do...
Phoenixfla
05-08-2012, 11:03 AM
Wouldn't you agree that the slide mechanism being obstructed in some manner would be the more likely of the two scenarios you have accurately suggested?
Actually, if the next round was not chambered, but the last casing was ejected, I would think that the most likely scenario was that the slide was not able to move back far enough to pick up the edge of the next round to load it inter the chamber.
If the spent casing was still lodged in the slide, then I think the more likely scenario was that something was covering the ejection port.
Concerned Papa
05-08-2012, 11:15 AM
However, we have been informed the gun struggle does not corroborate with the evidence.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-05-03/news/os-trayvon-martin-circles-george-zimmerman-20120503_1_special-prosecutor-angela-corey-source-police-department
I believe the ME report, TM's body were tested and doesn't stand up to what GZ's claim is...the SP is privy to those reports and believe they tested and found it inconsistent with GZ's words and the evidence from the crime scene...which is a good thing for Trayvon Martin's justice...
Let me tell the reason I brought this up. Of the bits and pieces of information that we have about this case, it seems to me that two things are becoming more and more apparent.
George Zimmerman nor anyone else's story places him a single step off that "main" sidewalk at the cut through.
The body, however, appears to have been located half a football field away from that point.
If George Zimmerman was truly "standing his ground" why wouldn't something as logical as this comment be a part of what they told LE and the rest of the world?
Is this a possibility?
GZ circles the condo when getting the address and then passes between that building and the next one making his way back to the sidewalk and then while heading back to the T encounters TM?
I'm trying to come to grips with what seems obvious to me as being an intentional omission of what actually happened. If George's version of being attacked by Trayvon, causing him to fear for his life were true, what difference would it make where he "stood his ground" UNLESS......he was actually chasing his ground?
The ONLY evidence of "walking back to his car and being attacked by Trayvon" came from the story presented by an accused murderer and/or his agents. The "picture" that came out the morning of the bond hearing proves only that whatever it actually represents wasn't shown for two months after the incident. Do you have any idea how many posts exist at this forum saying the girlfriend's statements are meaningless because her story didn't come out for THREE WEEKS?
Give me two months and I'll show you a pic of the exact same injury on the back of anyone's head AND I'll even go into the advanced properties tab and put a date on it that shows December 7, 1941.
I'm fully aware of what circumstantial evidence actually is, and IMO, the murder weapon having a mechanical failure of this nature seems to point toward a strong possibility that someone had a gun drawn out of their pants and another's hand was surrounding the failed slide mechanism in a desperate struggle for their life.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if the struggle's survivor picked up a few boo boo's along the way, but whether this happened or not, the defense is going to have to face the location of that body being so far from where the accused has said it all went down.
RANCH
05-08-2012, 11:28 AM
Let me tell the reason I brought this up. Of the bits and pieces of information that we have about this case, it seems to me that two things are becoming more and more apparent.
George Zimmerman nor anyone else's story places him a single step off that "main" sidewalk at the cut through.
The body, however, appears to have been located half a football field away from that point.
If George Zimmerman was truly "standing his ground" why wouldn't something as logical as this comment be a part of what they told LE and the rest of the world?
I'm trying to come to grips with what seems obvious to me as being an intentional omission of what actually happened. If George's version of being attacked by Trayvon, causing him to fear for his life were true, what difference would it make where he "stood his ground" UNLESS......he was actually chasing his ground?
The ONLY evidence of "walking back to his car and being attacked by Trayvon" came from the story presented by an accused murderer and/or his agents. The "picture" that came out the morning of the bond hearing proves only that whatever it actually represents wasn't shown for two months after the incident. Do you have any idea how many posts exist at this forum saying the girlfriend's statements are meaningless because her story didn't come out for THREE WEEKS?
Give me two months and I'll show you a pic of the exact same injury on the back of anyone's head AND I'll even go into the advanced properties tab and put a date on it that shows December 7, 1941.
I'm fully aware of what circumstantial evidence actually is, and IMO, the murder weapon having a mechanical failure of this nature seems to point toward a strong possibility that someone had a gun drawn out of their pants and another's hand was surrounding the failed slide mechanism in a desperate struggle for their life.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if the struggle's survivor picked up a few boo boo's along the way, but whether this happened or not, the defense is going to have to face the location of that body being so far from where the accused has said it all went down.
BBM
The way I see it at this point is if forensics show that Trayvon's hand was on the gun's slide at some point, it can be interpreted two ways. One is that GZ fired his gun in self-defense to prevent Trayvon from getting control of the gun and using it against GZ. Two would be that Trayvon was trying to get control of the gun in self-defense to prevent GZ from shooting him. I would need to see some additional evidence to support one view over another. JMO.
Concerned Papa
05-08-2012, 11:54 AM
BBM
The way I see it at this point is if forensics show that Trayvon's hand was on the gun's slide at some point, it can be interpreted two ways. One is that GZ fired his gun in self-defense to prevent Trayvon from getting control of the gun and using it against GZ. Two would be that Trayvon was trying to get control of the gun in self-defense to prevent GZ from shooting him. I would need to see some additional evidence to support one view over another. JMO.
Normally I would agree, but after two months of the following from George and his agents, it's hard to give the benefit of the doubt without considering a reason for apparent deceit.
When the dispatcher said we know longer need you to do that, and George acknowledged OK. He no longer knew where Trayvon was. So he continued walking down the sidewalk directly in front of him to the next street to get an address. He got an address.
As he was walking back to his vehicle, there was a sidewalk that goes to his left and Trayvon came from that area where the sidewalks meet. He asked my son if he had a problem, and George said, no, I don't have a problem. Trayvon said, well, you do now. He punched him in the face, broke his nose, knocked him to the sidewalk, and got on him and started beating him.
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/2012/04/05/exclusive-george-zimmermans-father-defends-son-trayvon-martin-shooting?page=2#ixzz1uHPDI4wG
AJ Noiter
05-08-2012, 12:03 PM
Normally I would agree, but after two months of the following from George and his agents, it's hard to give the benefit of the doubt without considering a reason for apparent deceit.
"That area where the sidewalks meet" isn't very specific. He could be talking about the area in general where the T is formed, he could be talking about the "courtyard" area itself. Also, I don't think his words mean a whole lot just as I don't think the Martin's words mean a whole lot.
Edit: Example of what I mean by their words not meaning a whole lot: Ms. Green stated that Trayvon was sitting on the porch. I'm sure she just misunderstood something, but still, it's not factual.
tehcloser
05-08-2012, 12:10 PM
Zimmerman to be arraigned today in Trayvon Martin case
A brief digital recording of the arraignment will be posted on the court's website, said court spokeswoman Michelle Kennedy. New court documents may also be available.
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2012/05/alleged-killer-of-trayvon-martin-to-be-arraigned/1
Let me tell the reason I brought this up. Of the bits and pieces of information that we have about this case, it seems to me that two things are becoming more and more apparent.
George Zimmerman nor anyone else's story places him a single step off that "main" sidewalk at the cut through.
The body, however, appears to have been located half a football field away from that point.
If George Zimmerman was truly "standing his ground" why wouldn't something as logical as this comment be a part of what they told LE and the rest of the world?
I'm trying to come to grips with what seems obvious to me as being an intentional omission of what actually happened. If George's version of being attacked by Trayvon, causing him to fear for his life were true, what difference would it make where he "stood his ground" UNLESS......he was actually chasing his ground?
The ONLY evidence of "walking back to his car and being attacked by Trayvon" came from the story presented by an accused murderer and/or his agents. The "picture" that came out the morning of the bond hearing proves only that whatever it actually represents wasn't shown for two months after the incident. Do you have any idea how many posts exist at this forum saying the girlfriend's statements are meaningless because her story didn't come out for THREE WEEKS?
Give me two months and I'll show you a pic of the exact same injury on the back of anyone's head AND I'll even go into the advanced properties tab and put a date on it that shows December 7, 1941.
I'm fully aware of what circumstantial evidence actually is, and IMO, the murder weapon having a mechanical failure of this nature seems to point toward a strong possibility that someone had a gun drawn out of their pants and another's hand was surrounding the failed slide mechanism in a desperate struggle for their life.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if the struggle's survivor picked up a few boo boo's along the way, but whether this happened or not, the defense is going to have to face the location of that body being so far from where the accused has said it all went down.
The things that I find confusing about this whole logistics speculation:
1. Whether or not GZ strayed from the sidewalk. AFAIK, no one has ever stated that GZ never left the sidewalk. IMO, what path GZ took (whether on the sidewalk or veering onto the grass) is all speculation at this point. Further speculation is that GZ could have been walking toward a break in the buildings to cut through to his car, i.e., that he intended to leave the sidewalk and take a shortcut.
2. Where the body was found and whether the body's location fits into GZ's version of events. If GZ is standing at the body and says, pointing in one direction, TM came from that way and attacked me, then IMO GZ's location (as well as the location of TM's body) are a given. IMO, I really don't see how he could have lied about this as LE would have called him on it immediately. If they felt there was this lack of continuity then IMO the first question they'd ask would be "well, if he attacked you over there, how'd the body get over here?" I just can't believe that something as obvious as that would have been overlooked. But then, I don't believe LE intentionally bungled this case.
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
marlame
05-08-2012, 12:45 PM
Zimmerman to be arraigned today in Trayvon Martin case
A brief digital recording of the arraignment will be posted on the court's website, said court spokeswoman Michelle Kennedy. New court documents may also be available.
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2012/05/alleged-killer-of-trayvon-martin-to-be-arraigned/1
UPDATE:
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-05-08/news/os-george-zimmerman-arraignment-motions-20120508_1_speedy-trial-motions-arraignment-today
George Zimmerman waives right to speedy trial
"...Zimmerman — charged with second degree murder in the Feb. 26 shooting of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin — is scheduled for arraignment this afternoon, but is not expected to attend.
O'Mara waived Zimmerman's appearance at the hearing and filed a written not-guilty plea, a court administration official said. Zimmerman, O'Mara and the lead prosecutor in the case are not expected to attend arraignment."
tehcloser
05-08-2012, 01:06 PM
MOM seems to want to drag this out IMO.
In a motion to continue the case, Zimmerman's attorney Mark O'Mara explains simply that he "needs additional time to prepare." The motion also indicates that the state is not objecting to the request.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-05-08/news/os-george-zimmerman-arraignment-motions-20120508_1_speedy-trial-motions-arraignment-today
MOM seems to want to drag this out IMO.
In a motion to continue the case, Zimmerman's attorney Mark O'Mara explains simply that he "needs additional time to prepare." The motion also indicates that the state is not objecting to the request.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-05-08/news/os-george-zimmerman-arraignment-motions-20120508_1_speedy-trial-motions-arraignment-today
Yep. As I've posted before, if this makes it to trial, it will be another epic "battle of the chemists."
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
Phoenixfla
05-08-2012, 02:17 PM
MOM seems to want to drag this out IMO.
In a motion to continue the case, Zimmerman's attorney Mark O'Mara explains simply that he "needs additional time to prepare." The motion also indicates that the state is not objecting to the request.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-05-08/news/os-george-zimmerman-arraignment-motions-20120508_1_speedy-trial-motions-arraignment-today
I don't think it is unusual at all for a defendant in a high profile case to waive their right to a speedy trial. Thats all I took from "he needs additional time to prepare".
tehcloser
05-08-2012, 02:20 PM
I don't think it is unusual at all for a defendant in a high profile case to waive their right to a speedy trial. Thats all I took from "he needs additional time to prepare".
It's not unusual. He' not the first lawyer to drag his feet when he knows his case has issues he might not can over come. But I still think MOM n is dragging his feet, getting the most out of the donations, and then......BOOM, plea deal, case closed.
Phoenixfla
05-08-2012, 02:25 PM
It's not unusual. He' not the first lawter to drag his feet when he knows his case has issues he might not can over come. But I still think MOM n is dragging his feet, getting the most out of the donations, and then......BOOM, plea deal, case closed.
We will have to disagree on this. MOM is well funded to put on a good case, and that is what he intends to do (IMO).
I believe a plea is the last thing on MOMs or GZs mind.
RANCH
05-08-2012, 02:29 PM
I don't think it is unusual at all for a defendant in a high profile case to waive their right to a speedy trial. Thats all I took from "he needs additional time to prepare".
It looks like in Florida a speedy trial is 180 days after arrest. O'Mara could have forced the prosecution to rush their investigation in order to be ready for trial. I don't believe that there's a lot more for them to investigate so there's not much of an advantage for the defense to rush toward trial. JMO.
Zimmerman has a right to a speedy trial -- within 180 days from his April 11 arrest. Zimmerman’s attorney, Mark O’Mara, may decide to fast-track the case for trial, which means it could happen later this year.
In Florida, however, defense attorneys routinely waive the right to a speedy trial, which pushes it past the 180-day deadline. If O’Mara does waive the right to a speedy trial, he will probably do it in the next month or two. And that means the trial would likely be next year.
http://www.hlntv.com/article/2012/04/26/when-will-zimmerman-go-trial
ILikeToBendPages
05-08-2012, 03:26 PM
As GZ has (allegedly) stated, he got out of the car to to find an address. Further, according to GZ, he was on his way back to his car when TM attacked him.
Although I disagree with the supposition you have presented, even if GZ had not intended to wait for the cops, that does not equal an intent to kill TM.
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
Why would George need to get an address?
He patrolled that neighborhood quite a bit. I believe neighbor said he patrolled with his dog and packing heat.
I'm sure he walked his dog on more than just his street each day. I'm sure he knew all the street names and how the houses were numbered. So why would he need an address?
Especially on a street that he wasn't on? You know, so police officers could meet him at his truck.
George was making up a story of why he was still out of his truck and where he was walking when he was "attacked" from behind.
In the bond hearing George says that he didn't know how young Trayvon was, that he thought he was closer to his age. What does that have to do with him making the assumption that Trayvon was acting weird, that he was up to no good and on drugs, then follow and confront Trayvon? Would of made Trayvon less up to no good and on drugs?
AJ Noiter
05-08-2012, 03:34 PM
Why would George need to get an address?
He patrolled that neighborhood quite a bit. I believe neighbor said he patrolled with his dog and packing heat.
I'm sure he walked his dog on more than just his street each day. I'm sure he knew all the street names and how the houses were numbered. So why would he need an address?
Especially on a street that he wasn't on? You know, so police officers could meet him at his truck.
George was making up a story of why he was still out of his truck and where he was walking when he was "attacked" from behind.
In the bond hearing George says that he didn't know how young Trayvon was, that he thought he was closer to his age. What does that have to do with him making the assumption that Trayvon was acting weird, that he was up to no good and on drugs, then follow and confront Trayvon? Would of made Trayvon less up to no good and on drugs?
Police officers tend to like to know where they're going to. There have been reports that once the officers arrived in the complex it still took them a couple minutes to make it to the scene because they didn't know where they were going. Imagine if they had shown up 2 minutes earlier.
As for knowing street names/house numbers, we've discussed this and many of us have issues with addresses on a daily basis. I personally stated that I have lived here a long time (I got this house from my parents when they passed) and I can not tell you the names of the streets one block East or West of here.
Lets assume that his story about getting out to get an address is false. Does that prove murder? I find this point to be highly irrelevant. He got out of his vehicle so he could watch Mr. Martin.. ok, now what? That doesn't make him a murderer.
Mr. Zimmerman said 3 things at the bond hearing. "I'm sorry for the loss of your son.", "I did not know how old he was.", "I did not know if he was armed or not." The bold are specifically to answer questions that Mr. Martin's mother had asked and wanted answers to in the media.
LambChop
05-08-2012, 04:02 PM
Police officers tend to like to know where they're going to. There have been reports that once the officers arrived in the complex it still took them a couple minutes to make it to the scene because they didn't know where they were going. Imagine if they had shown up 2 minutes earlier.
As for knowing street names/house numbers, we've discussed this and many of us have issues with addresses on a daily basis. I personally stated that I have lived here a long time (I got this house from my parents when they passed) and I can not tell you the names of the streets one block East or West of here.
Lets assume that his story about getting out to get an address is false. Does that prove murder? I find this point to be highly irrelevant. He got out of his vehicle so he could watch Mr. Martin.. ok, now what? That doesn't make him a murderer.
Mr. Zimmerman said 3 things at the bond hearing. "I'm sorry for the loss of your son.", "I did not know how old he was.", "I did not know if he was armed or not." The bold are specifically to answer questions that Mr. Martin's mother had asked and wanted answers to in the media.
Officers had the exact location from the 911 calls before TM was even shot. They arrived at the scene which would be where TM body would have been. There were a number of 911 calls giving the exact location. Officer Smith reported he arrived at the scene at 7:17, removed GZ gun and placed GZ in handcuffs and waited until the other officer arrived at 7:19 before attending to TM. If you have that link that reported it took LE a couple of minutes to make it to the scene once they arrived in the complex I'd like to see it. They could have driven around the complex 5 times in two minutes. It's not that big a place. They report their location to headquarters when they get to the crime scene and it is recorded via their radio. Their reports are based on what they record. His exact time arriving at the scene would be when he called it in to tell dispatch what he found and what he needed and whether or not the area was secure for SFD to come to TM's aid.
Staying with his truck would have made it a lot easier for LE to find GZ and TM would still be alive. And why did GZ get out? TM would have been moving by the time LE got there and away from the address GZ walked all the way over to the next street to get. He could have easily driven to that location. Still TM would not have been there. If TM were headed to the back gate, as GZ stated to LE, why didn't GZ go there and wait for the patrol cars?
It makes no sense that GZ followed TM. I can't make any sense to it at all. Why go to all the trouble to get an address for a location TM would no longer be? To me it would have made more sense if GZ just circled the block. Getting out of the car makes no sense unless GZ intended to keep TM from going any further than he already was. jmo
AJ Noiter
05-08-2012, 04:10 PM
Officers had the exact location from the 911 calls before TM was even shot. They arrived at the scene which would be where TM body would have been. There were a number of 911 calls giving the exact location. Officer Smith reported he arrived at the scene at 7:17, removed GZ gun and placed GZ in handcuffs and waited until the other officer arrived at 7:19 before attending to TM. If you have that link that reported it took LE a couple of minutes to make it to the scene once they arrived in the complex I'd like to see it. They could have driven around the complex 5 times in two minutes. It's not that big a place. They report their location to headquarters when they get to the crime scene and it is recorded via their radio. Their reports are based on what they record. His exact time arriving at the scene would be when he called it in to tell dispatch what he found and what he needed and whether or not the area was secure for SFD to come to TM's aid.
I remember reading it in some report, I didn't pay much attention to it but I will try to find that report.
Staying with his truck would have made it a lot easier for LE to find GZ and TM would still be alive. And why did GZ get out? TM would have been moving by the time LE got there and away from the address GZ walked all the way over to the next street to get. He could have easily driven to that location. Still TM would not have been there. If TM were headed to the back gate, as GZ stated to LE, why didn't GZ go there and wait for the patrol cars?
I'm not a mind reader. People dispute Mr. Zimmerman's words for the specific cause to call him a liar. I haven't seen such a lie so I would have to default to "so he could get an address," if those were his words. To be honest I haven't read any of his statements to the police for myself.
It makes no sense that GZ followed TM. I can't make any sense to it at all. Why go to all the trouble to get an address for a location TM would no longer be? To me it would have made more sense if GZ just circled the block. Getting out of the car makes no sense unless GZ intended to keep TM from going any further than he already was. jmo
Under this logic, it made no sense for him to watch Mr. Martin at all - from his vehicle or not. Logical or not I would've watched someone I thought was suspicious.
BiancaS
05-08-2012, 04:35 PM
Yep. As I've posted before, if this makes it to trial, it will be another epic "battle of the chemists."
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
Not so much, IMO. In that other case, the biggest problem was the body was reduced to a skeleton and there was little forensic evidence. The crime was not even reported when it happened. On this one, although the original "investigation" may not be as complete as we would like, IMO the evidence will give us the answers.
TorisMom003
05-08-2012, 04:40 PM
The state has the recorded screams from the 911 call. The state has the video tape of Zimmerman at the police station that seems to contradict his own words as to what occured that night. The state has Trayvon's autopsy report (even though we don't yet) that will either prove or disprove Zimmerman's claims for the events that night. I'd have to say that since A Corey has seen the report that she feels that it does not prove Zimmerman's claims. The state also has the non-emergancy call from Zimmerman that night that will prove his state of mind (those a-holes always get away).
MOO
Emma Peel
05-08-2012, 04:42 PM
IMHO, a successful prosecution will need very little else.
:yes:
sleonardelli
05-08-2012, 04:52 PM
Officers had the exact location from the 911 calls before TM was even shot. They arrived at the scene which would be where TM body would have been. There were a number of 911 calls giving the exact location. Officer Smith reported he arrived at the scene at 7:17, removed GZ gun and placed GZ in handcuffs and waited until the other officer arrived at 7:19 before attending to TM. If you have that link that reported it took LE a couple of minutes to make it to the scene once they arrived in the complex I'd like to see it. They could have driven around the complex 5 times in two minutes. It's not that big a place. They report their location to headquarters when they get to the crime scene and it is recorded via their radio. Their reports are based on what they record. His exact time arriving at the scene would be when he called it in to tell dispatch what he found and what he needed and whether or not the area was secure for SFD to come to TM's aid.
Staying with his truck would have made it a lot easier for LE to find GZ and TM would still be alive. And why did GZ get out? TM would have been moving by the time LE got there and away from the address GZ walked all the way over to the next street to get. He could have easily driven to that location. Still TM would not have been there. If TM were headed to the back gate, as GZ stated to LE, why didn't GZ go there and wait for the patrol cars?
It makes no sense that GZ followed TM. I can't make any sense to it at all. Why go to all the trouble to get an address for a location TM would no longer be? To me it would have made more sense if GZ just circled the block. Getting out of the car makes no sense unless GZ intended to keep TM from going any further than he already was. jmo
IMO, he wasn't acting reasonable/rational at that time. He was apparently frustrated about the recent breakins, Frank Taffe even alluded to it: “I think any time you use a weapon, there are certain anger issues working,” Taaffe said. “I think he had fed-up issues. He was mad as hell and wasn't going to take it anymore.” http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/03/21/10791755-neighbor-comes-to-defense-of-trayvon-martins-shooter?lite
GZ apparently didn't want another a-hole to get away so why wouldn't he continue following?
Dr.Fessel
05-08-2012, 07:31 PM
Another piece of evidence they have is Consciousness of Guilt I believe. From the bond hearing we learned the state does not believe Zimmerman's story lines up with the evidence. What they will probably say is he lied about the events because he knew he was guilty. It is evidence. IMO
LambChop
05-08-2012, 08:11 PM
There is no evidence TM was doing anything other than walking home while he was talking to his friend who he had been on the phone with all day. Sort of obvious that talking to her was an important event for him. We also know he walked to the store to get some Skittles and ice tea to watch the game that would be starting around the time he was due home. What incentive would he have to deliberately track someone down when he didn't know who this person was and certainly did not know this person would follow him. What incentive did TM have????
What was GZ's incentive? We've discussed it numerous times, no need to repeat. Mr. Taaffe's statement about GZ's reasoning for tracking TM down can only hurt GZ. FT constant and continual appearance on media programs and GZ's lack of trying to control FT through his attorneys will also hurt him. GZ will appear exactly the way he was. Bound to take the law into his own hands without any consideration of what those consequences might be. He was reckless in his behavior and judgment and it cost a young man his life. I think the State will have no problem proving their case. jmo
AJ Noiter
05-08-2012, 08:16 PM
LambChop: As per your request for a source earlier on my stating that police could have arrived 2min earlier, this was based on some work that the user named "Who" did. It's in the witness thread.
LambChop
05-08-2012, 08:23 PM
LambChop: As per your request for a source earlier on my stating that police could have arrived 2min earlier, this was based on some work that the user named "Who" did. It's in the witness thread.
But it's speculation not based on fact. Everything LE does is documented for their reports. LE can't arrive on the scene and describe his findings if he still riding around in his patrol car. jmo
AJ Noiter
05-08-2012, 08:28 PM
But it's speculation not based on fact. Everything LE does is documented for their reports. LE can't arrive on the scene and describe his findings if he still riding around in his patrol car. jmo
I think it's safe to say that nearly everything posted here right now is speculation, but I wouldn't say it's not based on fact because the 911 calls are time stamped (or should be).
suspicious1
05-08-2012, 08:32 PM
The state has the recorded screams from the 911 call. The state has the video tape of Zimmerman at the police station that seems to contradict his own words as to what occured that night. The state has Trayvon's autopsy report (even though we don't yet) that will either prove or disprove Zimmerman's claims for the events that night. I'd have to say that since A Corey has seen the report that she feels that it does not prove Zimmerman's claims. The state also has the non-emergancy call from Zimmerman that night that will prove his state of mind (those a-holes always get away).
MOO
ITA.
The SA most likely have the same evidence that had Serino wanting to charge GZ with manslaughter that night. And because she chose to charge him with 2nd degree murder tells me she uncovered a lot more evidence. JMO
LambChop
05-08-2012, 08:38 PM
I think it's safe to say that nearly everything posted here right now is speculation, but I wouldn't say it's not based on fact because the 911 calls are time stamped (or should be).
A patrol officer is not talking to 911 once he arrives on the scene. He's talking to dispatch and they are recording the information for his report, such as the time of arrival at the scene, securing the shooter, securing the scene and clearing SFD to come in and give medical attention. There were many 911 calls about the shot so one of the callers would have thought LE was coming in from the wrong direction because they were unaware of the other callers. I would believe what is on the police report is correct. jmo
AJ Noiter
05-08-2012, 08:39 PM
A patrol officer is not talking to 911 once he arrives on the scene. He's talking to dispatch and they are recording the information for his report, such as the time of arrival at the scene, securing the shooter, securing the scene and clearing SFD to come in and give medical attention. There were many 911 calls about the shot so one of the callers would have thought LE was coming in from the wrong direction because they were unaware of the other callers. I would believe what is on the police report is correct. jmo
You'd have to ask Who about the specifics of how he came to the conclusion that he did, I was just using him as the source of the information. Sorry I can't debate this further with you.
LambChop
05-08-2012, 08:41 PM
ITA.
The SA most likely have the same evidence that had Serino wanting to charge GZ with manslaughter that night. And because she chose to charge him with 2nd degree murder tells me she uncovered a lot more evidence. JMO
Would you mean, as in Gilbreath's answer to what evidence there was and his last comment was something similar to...."and we have the body." TM didn't lay out in the elements for 6 months so his body will tell us a lot about what really happened. jmo
LambChop
05-08-2012, 08:42 PM
You'd have to ask Who about the specifics of how he came to the conclusion that he did, I was just using him as the source of the information. Sorry I can't debate this further with you.
That's fine. I believe the police report speaks for itself. jmo
AJ Noiter
05-08-2012, 08:48 PM
ITA.
The SA most likely have the same evidence that had Serino wanting to charge GZ with manslaughter that night. And because she chose to charge him with 2nd degree murder tells me she uncovered a lot more evidence. JMO
I thought that was a false claim. (http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-04-02/news/os-trayvon-martin-federal-review-justice-letter-20120402_1_chief-bill-lee-federal-review-federal-agency)
zenreaper
05-08-2012, 09:01 PM
Trayvon's Autopsy Report.
IMO, it seems GZ wants us to believe that TM was shot while on top of GZ...but what if the bullet trajectory do not match that?
What if it DOES? I mean we are hearing from quite a few people that the evidence that HASN'T come in yet will prove GZ was guilty. And I will admit that I am a GZ supporter, but if the evidence indicates he is guilty, I say fry him. The problem I have is that when confronted with the as yet unreleased evidence, if it shows that GZ is telling the TRUTH< these people will have nowhere to go. We have seen things such as:
So what if TM attacked him, he shouldn't have shot him
TM was defending himself, so he had a RIGHT to attack GZ
The only thing GZ's injuries show is that TM should have hit him harder
These people have already convicted GZ, with a SCANT amount of evidence against him and have negated ANY actions by TM to have escalated the situation.
Yes, GZ followed TM. NOT against the law. But some are using GZ's following as a CAUSE for the shooting. Lets face FACTS here, GZ is not claiming he shot TM because he was following him, he shot him because, as he claims, he was attacked. Using their logic, if a person robs a STORE, it was the STORE OWNERS fault, because he decided to OPEN A STORE.
LambChop
05-08-2012, 09:13 PM
What if it DOES? I mean we are hearing from quite a few people that the evidence that HASN'T come in yet will prove GZ was guilty. And I will admit that I am a GZ supporter, but if the evidence indicates he is guilty, I say fry him. The problem I have is that when confronted with the as yet unreleased evidence, if it shows that GZ is telling the TRUTH< these people will have nowhere to go. We have seen things such as:
So what if TM attacked him, he shouldn't have shot him
TM was defending himself, so he had a RIGHT to attack GZ
The only thing GZ's injuries show is that TM should have hit him harder
These people have already convicted GZ, with a SCANT amount of evidence against him and have negated ANY actions by TM to have escalated the situation.
Yes, GZ followed TM. NOT against the law. But some are using GZ's following as a CAUSE for the shooting. Lets face FACTS here, GZ is not claiming he shot TM because he was following him, he shot him because, as he claims, he was attacked. Using their logic, if a person robs a STORE, it was the STORE OWNERS fault, because he decided to OPEN A STORE.
GZ was not in his store. GZ was not in his vehicle. GZ was not at home. GZ did not follow the specific instructions he knew to follow when reporting a suspect, who FYI was indeed not a suspect. GZ took matters into his own hands by following someone....first with his car, then on foot. GZ was pursing TM, there is no other explanation for GZ to have been following TM. What was GZ goal, what did he hope to accomplish? There is only one answer. He did not want TM to get away. TM told his GF someone was following him and he was fearful. We know from the tapes GZ never identified himself. We know from the GF's statement about what she heard that GZ never identified himself. We will soon learn if he bothered to identify himself ever from his statement to LE. How would anyone expect a young 17 year old to know what this man was up to?
It was always GZ who knew why he was following TM. It was always GZ who knew he had a gun. It was always GZ who knew LE was on the way. It was always GZ who was mature enough to know he should have never left his vehicle. TM had no advantage whatsoever. If TM was in fear for his life, he was correct wasn't he???? jmo
GZ was not in his store. GZ was not in his vehicle. GZ was not at home. GZ did not follow the specific instructions he knew to follow when reporting a suspect, who FYI was indeed not a suspect. GZ took matters into his own hands by following someone....first with his car, then on foot. GZ was pursing TM, there is no other explanation for GZ to have been following TM. What was GZ goal, what did he hope to accomplish? There is only one answer. He did not want TM to get away. TM told his GF someone was following him and he was fearful. We know from the tapes GZ never identified himself. We know from the GF's statement about what she heard that GZ never identified himself. We will soon learn if he bothered to identify himself ever from his statement to LE. How would anyone expect a young 17 year old to know what this man was up to?
It was always GZ who knew why he was following TM. It was always GZ who knew he had a gun. It was always GZ who knew LE was on the way. It was always GZ who was mature enough to know he should have never left his vehicle. TM had no advantage whatsoever. If TM was in fear for his life, he was correct wasn't he???? jmo
BBM.
I'm not sure. IMO, one of the nagging questions about the timeline is why wasn't TM at home? If he'd headed straight home, he and GZ would never have crossed paths. It makes me wonder if, in a display of youthful bravado, TM decided to turn the tables on the man following him. It seems to me something a teenager might do.
wishuwerehere
05-08-2012, 10:14 PM
The police dispatcher asks Zimmerman to meet the responding officer at the mailboxes. First Zimmerman replies in the affirmative. But then he immediately changes his mind and says for the responding officer to call him and he’ll tell him where he is. IMO this shows Zimmerman’s frame of mind and the action he intends to take: He is going after Trayvon to detain him, he will not wait for the police to arrive to do their job, he will do it for them. This is another example to show that Zimmerman does not have any self-restraint.
jmo
Dr.Fessel
05-08-2012, 10:24 PM
BBM.
I'm not sure. IMO, one of the nagging questions about the timeline is why wasn't TM at home? If he'd headed straight home, he and GZ would never have crossed paths. It makes me wonder if, in a display of youthful bravado, TM decided to turn the tables on the man following him. It seems to me something a teenager might do.
I don't think so. He was not on his own turf and he was alone. A normal teen would have nothing to prove to anyone with bravado.
SCgal
05-08-2012, 10:32 PM
BBM.
I'm not sure. IMO, one of the nagging questions about the timeline is why wasn't TM at home? If he'd headed straight home, he and GZ would never have crossed paths. It makes me wonder if, in a display of youthful bravado, TM decided to turn the tables on the man following him. It seems to me something a teenager might do.
I have to agree with your post here, I have seen plenty of teens thinking they are Billy Badazz, and have no fear of trying to get in a grown mans face.. I am still on fence, til I see more facts about this case..
Dr.Fessel
05-08-2012, 10:53 PM
I have to agree with your post here, I have seen plenty of teens thinking they are Billy Badazz, and have no fear of trying to get in a grown mans face.. I am still on fence, til I see more facts about this case..
From the evidence on the 911 tape we know who was projecting the machismo, going after the possibly armed and messed up on drugs teen who was up to no good.
SCgal
05-08-2012, 11:00 PM
From the evidence on the 911 tape we know who was projecting the machismo, going after the possibly armed and messed up on drugs teen who was up to no good.
That does not mean that TM was not being aggressive neither, Like I stated need to see and hear more facts on the case.. I do not think TM deserved to be shot and Dead, My prayers go out to his family... JMO,
zenreaper
05-08-2012, 11:04 PM
GZ was not in his store. GZ was not in his vehicle. GZ was not at home. GZ did not follow the specific instructions he knew to follow when reporting a suspect, who FYI was indeed not a suspect. GZ took matters into his own hands by following someone....first with his car, then on foot. GZ was pursing TM, there is no other explanation for GZ to have been following TM. What was GZ goal, what did he hope to accomplish? There is only one answer. He did not want TM to get away. TM told his GF someone was following him and he was fearful. We know from the tapes GZ never identified himself. We know from the GF's statement about what she heard that GZ never identified himself. We will soon learn if he bothered to identify himself ever from his statement to LE. How would anyone expect a young 17 year old to know what this man was up to?
It was always GZ who knew why he was following TM. It was always GZ who knew he had a gun. It was always GZ who knew LE was on the way. It was always GZ who was mature enough to know he should have never left his vehicle. TM had no advantage whatsoever. If TM was in fear for his life, he was correct wasn't he???? jmo
Yes, TM was SO in fear for his life that he continued bopping along talking to his GIRLFRIEND, right? Why didn't he call the police? Oh, yeah, he was YOUNG and made a bad choice. So maybe he made a bad choice and attacked GZ as well, right? NOOO, he wouldn't have done THAT, right?
And FTR (and I will say this EVERYTIME the TM Supporters claim it) there is NOTHING ILLEGAL ABOUT FOLLOWING SOMEONE.
Dr.Fessel
05-08-2012, 11:09 PM
Yes, TM was SO in fear for his life that he continued bopping along talking to his GIRLFRIEND, right? Why didn't he call the police? Oh, yeah, he was YOUNG and made a bad choice. So maybe he made a bad choice and attacked GZ as well, right? NOOO, he wouldn't have done THAT, right?
And FTR (and I will say this EVERYTIME the TM Supporters claim it) there is NOTHING ILLEGAL ABOUT FOLLOWING SOMEONE.
The following Zimmerman did was a crime, it is all part of the murder charge against him.
zenreaper
05-08-2012, 11:13 PM
The following Zimmerman did was a crime, it is all part of the murder charge against him.
Nope, if he had followed him with the INTENT of killing him, it would be murder one. The murder two charge is based on the idea that he created a situation in which someone died. Him FOLLOWING someone did not create the situation, per his claims. It was the attack by TM that created the situation in which he used lethal force.
Again, it is NOT illegal to follow someone.
Dr.Fessel
05-08-2012, 11:15 PM
Nope, if he had followed him with the INTENT of killing him, it would be murder one. The murder two charge is based on the idea that he created a situation in which someone died. Him FOLLOWING someone did not create the situation, per his claims. It was the attack by TM that created the situation in which he used lethal force.
Again, it is NOT illegal to follow someone.
No, not according to the state and the charges. His following was part of the depraved mind.
AJ Noiter
05-08-2012, 11:21 PM
No, not according to the state and the charges. His following was part of the depraved mind.
A man, in a community he's authorized to be in, sees someone suspicious and follows them while on the phone with a 911 dispatcher and reporting every movement isn't quite my opinion of a depraved mind.
vlpate
05-08-2012, 11:28 PM
The following Zimmerman did was a crime, it is all part of the murder charge against him.
I don't agree. I don't know how the prosecution can make that assertion when their investigator admitted they don't know whether GZ continued to follow TM or not.
"O'MARA: Since. Today. Do you have any evidence that conflicts with his suggestion that he had turned around and went back to his car?
GILBREATH: Other than his statement, no.
LINK (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1204/20/cnr.02.html)
vlpate
05-08-2012, 11:31 PM
No, not according to the state and the charges. His following was part of the depraved mind.
Would you mind providing a source for this? TIA
vlpate
05-08-2012, 11:38 PM
A patrol officer is not talking to 911 once he arrives on the scene. He's talking to dispatch and they are recording the information for his report, such as the time of arrival at the scene, securing the shooter, securing the scene and clearing SFD to come in and give medical attention. There were many 911 calls about the shot so one of the callers would have thought LE was coming in from the wrong direction because they were unaware of the other callers. I would believe what is on the police report is correct. jmo
I'm glad to hear that, I respect your opinion, even though we don't agree on every case. So many have said the police report was fabricated.
TorisMom003
05-09-2012, 02:54 AM
A man, in a community he's authorized to be in, sees someone suspicious and follows them while on the phone with a 911 dispatcher and reporting every movement isn't quite my opinion of a depraved mind.
This is not true though. Zimmerman gave a play by play (allegedly) while he was in his truck and the first few seconds after he exited his truck. After Zimmerman said that Trayvon ran, the dispatcher asked "are you following him?", Zimmerman said yea, was told that he didn't need to do that. At that point and for the rest of the call there was no more play by play from Zimmerman. Zimmerman said that he didn't know where this kid was at. So then that would mean that Zimmerman was not following Trayvon to give a play by play to the dispatcher of Trayvon's every movement.
I think it is important to remember that Trayvon, a 17 year old teen, was also in a community that he was authorized to be in. Trayvon was followed by someone that was suspicious. Trayvon also could be covered by the Stand Your Ground law, unfortunately Trayvon was killed so he can not tell his side of the story.
MOO
TorisMom003
05-09-2012, 03:01 AM
Yes, TM was SO in fear for his life that he continued bopping along talking to his GIRLFRIEND, right? Why didn't he call the police? Oh, yeah, he was YOUNG and made a bad choice. So maybe he made a bad choice and attacked GZ as well, right? NOOO, he wouldn't have done THAT, right?
And FTR (and I will say this EVERYTIME the TM Supporters claim it) there is NOTHING ILLEGAL ABOUT FOLLOWING SOMEONE.
Trayvon was worried about a strange man watching him, following him. When Trayvon lost Zimmerman I see no reason for him to not slow down and finish talking with his girlfriend on the phone. Do most teens call police in situations that most adults would? That is similiar to expecting Trayvon to behave and think like an adult, IMO.
I would say that Zimmerman made a deadly choice that night. He disregarded advice that had been given to him, not only by the dispatcher that night but also during the neighborhood watch training class, took a loaded weapon with him and followed a possibly armed teen knowing full well that SPD were already on their way. Unfortunately Trayvon was the one that paid for Zimmerman's choice.
MOO
vlpate
05-09-2012, 03:04 AM
This is not true though. Zimmerman gave a play by play (allegedly) while he was in his truck and the first few seconds after he exited his truck. After Zimmerman said that Trayvon ran, the dispatcher asked "are you following him?", Zimmerman said yea, was told that he didn't need to do that. At that point and for the rest of the call there was no more play by play from Zimmerman. Zimmerman said that he didn't know where this kid was at. So then that would mean that Zimmerman was not following Trayvon to give a play by play to the dispatcher of Trayvon's every movement.
I think it is important to remember that Trayvon, a 17 year old teen, was also in a community that he was authorized to be in. Trayvon was followed by someone that was suspicious. Trayvon also could be covered by the Stand Your Ground law, unfortunately Trayvon was killed so he can not tell his side of the story.
MOO
Exactly, he could no longer give him a play-by-play for two minutes after TM ran.
TorisMom003
05-09-2012, 03:07 AM
Exactly, he could no longer give him a play-by-play for two minutes after TM ran.
And yet he appeared to not have any desire to return to his truck and wait for SPD to arrive to talk to them. There was no reason to request that the officers call him on his cell phone if he was walking back to his truck. This tells me that Zimmerman fully intended to continue looking for Trayvon on his own, but he would not be on the phone with the dispatcher at that time since he hung up, so WHY was he not going back to his truck?
MOO
vlpate
05-09-2012, 03:17 AM
And yet he appeared to not have any desire to return to his truck and wait for SPD to arrive to talk to them. There was no reason to request that the officers call him on his cell phone if he was walking back to his truck. This tells me that Zimmerman fully intended to continue looking for Trayvon on his own, but he would not be on the phone with the dispatcher at that time since he hung up, so WHY was he not going back to his truck?
MOO
He was going to get the address so he could give it to them when they called back.
Donjeta
05-09-2012, 04:52 AM
He was going to get the address so he could give it to them when they called back.
Get the address for what, though? It was not the address to where TM was, since GZ would have seen him if they were in the same place and wouldn't have said he doesn't know where the suspicious young man was. It was not the address for his truck since he apparently says he walked to another street and then headed to his truck after getting the address. It was not the address to where he was going to wait for the police since he didn't stay there and wanted them to call him back so he could report his whereabouts later.
What did he think that the police would do with a random address at which nothing particular was going on at the time?
Concerned Papa
05-09-2012, 04:58 AM
He was going to get the address so he could give it to them when they called back.
So....he went to the next street over for an address and was walking back to his truck....so when they called he could give them an address for a street he wasn't at? :waitasec:
Wonder if they ever called him?
Concerned Papa
05-09-2012, 05:59 AM
He was going to get the address so he could give it to them when they called back.
Remember this?
ZIMMERMAN: When the dispatcher said we know longer need you to do that, and George acknowledged OK. He no longer knew where Trayvon was. [2:26]
He continued walking down the sidewalk directly in front of him to the next street to get an address.
He got an address.
He was walking back to his vehicle.
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/2012/04/05/exclusive-george-zimmermans-father-defends-son-trayvon-martin-shooting?page=2#ixzz1svJVUFyf
If at [2:26] he walked, approximately 140 feet, to the next street and got an address, any thoughts on why, a minute later, at [3:25], he told the dispatcher he didn't know an address?
911 dispatcher: Alright, what address are you parked in front of? [3:21]
Zimmerman: Um, I don’t know. It’s a cut-through so I don’t know the address. [3:25]
Concerned Papa
05-09-2012, 06:13 AM
He was going to get the address so he could give it to them when they called back.
After getting out of his truck at [2:08] and following TM for 18 seconds until the dispatcher said "we don't need you to do that", at [2:26], any thoughts on why, instead of continuing for 140 feet for an address that wasn't where he was at, he didn't just turn around and walk 20 or 30 feet back towards his truck and give them the address he was parked in front of?
I don't agree. I don't know how the prosecution can make that assertion when their investigator admitted they don't know whether GZ continued to follow TM or not.
"O'MARA: Since. Today. Do you have any evidence that conflicts with his suggestion that he had turned around and went back to his car?
GILBREATH: Other than his statement, no.
LINK (http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1204/20/cnr.02.html)
There is a witness who said GZ continued to follow, and even chased TM.DE LA RIONDA: Isn’t it true, sir, that at least one witness described a person chasing another person in the back of that area where that murder occurred?
GILBREATH: Yes.
...
O’MARA: A couple of questions...The continued to follow that Mr. Zimmerman continued to follow
what evidence do you have to support that?
GILBREATH: He was told not to follow him, he continued on for a period of time.
O’MARA: How long?
GILBREATH: I don't know … I would say less than a minute before he hung up, which is prior to the encounter between the two,
O’MARA: Okay. Any other evidence besides that there was a phone call that he was on for a minute? Any other evidence, any other witnesses?
GILBREATH: To?
O’MARA: To the fact that he quote continued to follow.
GILBREATH: We have a witness statement who observed, that was on the perimeter of this, who observed shadows or figures, excuse me, running by her residence.
O’MARA: Do you know which way or who they were, or anything?
GILBREATH: They...I cannot identify who they were, but it was at the same time frame this occurred.
O’MARA: Ok. Besides that - any other evidence to support your conclusion that Mr. Zimmerman continued to follow?
GILBREATH: Other than his call and that witness?
O’MARA: Yes.
GILBREATH: And the fact that where it ended up. No.
O’MARA: Well you do have some other evidence don’t you? We had Zimmerman’s statement, don’t you?
GILBREATH: We have Mr. Zimmerman’s statements, we have the shell casings and we had Mr. Martin’s body at the scene.
http://www.wral.com/news/video/11004815/#/vid11004815
LambChop
05-09-2012, 08:24 AM
There is a witness who said GZ continued to follow, and even chased TM.DE LA RIONDA: Isn’t it true, sir, that at least one witness described a person chasing another person in the back of that area where that murder occurred?
GILBREATH: Yes.
...
O’MARA: A couple of questions...The continued to follow that Mr. Zimmerman continued to follow
what evidence do you have to support that?
GILBREATH: He was told not to follow him, he continued on for a period of time.
O’MARA: How long?
GILBREATH: I don't know … I would say less than a minute before he hung up, which is prior to the encounter between the two,
O’MARA: Okay. Any other evidence besides that there was a phone call that he was on for a minute? Any other evidence, any other witnesses?
GILBREATH: To?
O’MARA: To the fact that he quote continued to follow.
GILBREATH: We have a witness statement who observed, that was on the perimeter of this, who observed shadows or figures, excuse me, running by her residence.
O’MARA: Do you know which way or who they were, or anything?
GILBREATH: They...I cannot identify who they were, but it was at the same time frame this occurred.
O’MARA: Ok. Besides that - any other evidence to support your conclusion that Mr. Zimmerman continued to follow?
GILBREATH: Other than his call and that witness?
O’MARA: Yes.
GILBREATH: And the fact that where it ended up. No.
O’MARA: Well you do have some other evidence don’t you? We had Zimmerman’s statement, don’t you?
GILBREATH: We have Mr. Zimmerman’s statements, we have the shell casings and we had Mr. Martin’s body at the scene.
http://www.wral.com/news/video/11004815/#/vid11004815
Thanks, Who. If this isn't already up in the media thread could you put it up there? It helps to have the whole statement and not just a portion. Thanks, again. jmo
There is a witness who said GZ continued to follow, and even chased TM.DE LA RIONDA: Isn’t it true, sir, that at least one witness described a person chasing another person in the back of that area where that murder occurred?
GILBREATH: Yes.
...
O’MARA: A couple of questions...The continued to follow that Mr. Zimmerman continued to follow
what evidence do you have to support that?
GILBREATH: He was told not to follow him, he continued on for a period of time.
O’MARA: How long?
GILBREATH: I don't know … I would say less than a minute before he hung up, which is prior to the encounter between the two,
O’MARA: Okay. Any other evidence besides that there was a phone call that he was on for a minute? Any other evidence, any other witnesses?
GILBREATH: To?
O’MARA: To the fact that he quote continued to follow.
GILBREATH: We have a witness statement who observed, that was on the perimeter of this, who observed shadows or figures, excuse me, running by her residence.
O’MARA: Do you know which way or who they were, or anything?
GILBREATH: They...I cannot identify who they were, but it was at the same time frame this occurred.
O’MARA: Ok. Besides that - any other evidence to support your conclusion that Mr. Zimmerman continued to follow?
GILBREATH: Other than his call and that witness?
O’MARA: Yes.
GILBREATH: And the fact that where it ended up. No.
O’MARA: Well you do have some other evidence don’t you? We had Zimmerman’s statement, don’t you?
GILBREATH: We have Mr. Zimmerman’s statements, we have the shell casings and we had Mr. Martin’s body at the scene.
http://www.wral.com/news/video/11004815/#/vid11004815
IMO, the important part of the testimony is this:
GILBREATH: They...I cannot identify who they were, but it was at the same time frame this occurred.
For all we, or the witness, know the "figures" or "shadows" that were seen could have been the kid running after his dog. IMO, unless this witness can identify GZ and TM as being involved in a chase, he/she will be easily refuted on cross.
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
From the evidence on the 911 tape we know who was projecting the machismo, going after the possibly armed and messed up on drugs teen who was up to no good.
Still, the timeframe keeps nagging at me. IMO, if TM had headed straight home, the two would not have crossed paths again.
LambChop
05-09-2012, 08:51 AM
IMO, the important part of the testimony is this:
GILBREATH: They...I cannot identify who they were, but it was at the same time frame this occurred.
For all we, or the witness, know the "figures" or "shadows" that were seen could have been the kid running after his dog. IMO, unless this witness can identify GZ and TM as being involved in a chase, he/she will be easily refuted on cross.
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
I don't think the dog was running on his hind legs (and he's not a big dog either) nor was this boy running after the dog towards where the body was found. jmo
cityslick
05-09-2012, 09:00 AM
Still, the timeframe keeps nagging at me. IMO, if TM had headed straight home, the two would not have crossed paths again.
According to the average running/walking speed of a human, TM should of been at his doorstep well before GZ ever caught sight of him the second time if TM continued in straight line to his house. Assuming GZ lost sight of TM at the cut through.
Dr.Fessel
05-09-2012, 09:08 AM
I don't think the dog was running on his hind legs (and he's not a big dog either) nor was this boy running after the dog towards where the body was found. jmo I wonder if they ever measured the distance apart of the wounds on zimmerman's head and the teeth of that dog?
LambChop
05-09-2012, 09:11 AM
I wonder if they ever measured the distance apart of the wounds on zimmerman's head and the teeth of that dog?
I was just wondering if this was the same dog that GZ complained about. lol
IMO, the important part of the testimony is this:
GILBREATH: They...I cannot identify who they were, but it was at the same time frame this occurred.
For all we, or the witness, know the "figures" or "shadows" that were seen could have been the kid running after his dog. IMO, unless this witness can identify GZ and TM as being involved in a chase, he/she will be easily refuted on cross.
JMO, OMO, and :moo:
Unless the dog is a two legged creature about the size of an adult, and has an authoritative voice, I doubt it.
Dr.Fessel
05-09-2012, 09:24 AM
I was just wondering if this was the same dog that GZ complained about. lol This picture is evidence the SA has now, so could that U shape the arrows are pointing to be the bottom jaw of a dog and the two wounds circled be his fang teeth getting a nip in on Georges's head?
http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg216/kensaroo/Georgesbooboobite.jpg
http://abcnews.go.com/topics/news/trayvon-martin.htm
IMO
cityslick
05-09-2012, 09:26 AM
This picture is evidence the SA has now, so could that U shape the arrows are pointing to be the bottom jaw of a dog and the two wounds circled be his fang teeth getting a nip in on Georges's head?
http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg216/kensaroo/Georgesbooboobite.jpg
That's a very small dog with the jawline that small if that U shape is an approximation of the size of the dogs jaw. I'd be surprised if that was even 1/2 of an inch across.
Dr.Fessel
05-09-2012, 09:32 AM
That's a very small dog with the jawline that small if that U shape is an approximation of the size of the dogs jaw. I'd be surprised if that was even 1/2 of an inch across.
What is that U shape I wonder if not from a bite? The dog loose while someone is screaming just bothers me. You would think a pitbull would run to the action.
Dr.Fessel
05-09-2012, 09:34 AM
That's a very small dog with the jawline that small if that U shape is an approximation of the size of the dogs jaw. I'd be surprised if that was even 1/2 of an inch across. I don't know, if you blew that picture up life size think how big that U would be.
Velouria
05-09-2012, 09:41 AM
I don't know, if you blew that picture up life size think how big that U would be.
Exactly, Doc. That mark is over half-an-inch on my monitor alone, and it is far from life-sized.
LiveLaughLuv
05-09-2012, 09:43 AM
What is that U shape I wonder if not from a bite? The dog loose while someone is screaming just bothers me. You would think a pitbull would run to the action.
I keep thinking GZ hit his head on those outside meters attached to the side of the townhomes..I believe they are too far up to be consistant with a head repeatedly beaten into cement...
If that was a pit, he would still be on him...they don't let go so easily..
AJ Noiter
05-09-2012, 09:44 AM
This picture is evidence the SA has now, so could that U shape the arrows are pointing to be the bottom jaw of a dog and the two wounds circled be his fang teeth getting a nip in on Georges's head?
http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg216/kensaroo/Georgesbooboobite.jpg
http://abcnews.go.com/topics/news/trayvon-martin.htm
IMO
So, the boy who went chasing after the dog.. when he returned with the dog was shortly after the gunshots. Did this dog attack Mr. Zimmerman before, during or after the scuffle? You'd think if the dog went to attack the man he saw laying on the ground he would've also seen Mr. Martin. Also, why would Mr. Zimmerman shoot Mr. Martin if he's being attacked by a dog?
I think the whole "the injuries were caused by a dog" angle is not evident in anything other than someone's mindset that Mr. Zimmerman MUST be guilty NO MATTER WHAT.
Dr.Fessel
05-09-2012, 09:45 AM
I can see Zimmerman having someone take that picture so when this all blew over he could sue the dog owner. Then for some reason saying the wound came from the sidewalk. Interesting evidence.
Dr.Fessel
05-09-2012, 09:46 AM
I keep thinking GZ hit his head on those outside meters attached to the side of the townhomes..I believe they are too far up to be consistant with a head repeatedly beaten into cement...
If that was a pit, he would still be on him...they don't let go so easily..Gunshots can scare them.
Emeralgem
05-09-2012, 09:48 AM
What is that U shape I wonder if not from a bite? The dog loose while someone is screaming just bothers me. You would think a pitbull would run to the action.
I suspect a pitbull would.. I have a Golden Retriever and I know she would..
Just wondering... Is this the young witness LE prompted into giving them the answers they wanted to hear? JMHO
Emeralgem
05-09-2012, 09:54 AM
So, the boy who went chasing after the dog.. when he returned with the dog was shortly after the gunshots. Did this dog attack Mr. Zimmerman before, during or after the scuffle? You'd think if the dog went to attack the man he saw laying on the ground he would've also seen Mr. Martin. Also, why would Mr. Zimmerman shoot Mr. Martin if he's being attacked by a dog?
I think the whole "the injuries were caused by a dog" angle is not evident in anything other than someone's mindset that Mr. Zimmerman MUST be guilty NO MATTER WHAT.
IMHO... Zimmerman IS guilty NO MATTER WHAT..JMHO.
Concerned Papa
05-09-2012, 09:56 AM
What is that U shape I wonder if not from a bite? The dog loose while someone is screaming just bothers me. You would think a pitbull would run to the action.
Gotta admit I never thought about a dog being in the mix, but if true, I'd probably have to change my thinking on George doing some screaming....
Dr.Fessel
05-09-2012, 09:56 AM
Remember this?
If at [2:26] he walked, approximately 140 feet, to the next street and got an address, any thoughts on why, a minute later, at [3:25], he told the dispatcher he didn't know an address?
According to all the statements we have seen Zimmerman claims he was hit in the nose at the spot of them meeting and knocked down and jumped on. The meeting was where 2 sidewalks met. How did they end up so far from the meeting of the sidewalks?:waitasec:
Concerned Papa
05-09-2012, 10:00 AM
According to all the statements we have seen Zimmerman claims he was hit in the nose at the spot of them meeting and knocked down and jumped on. The meeting was where 2 sidewalks met. How did they end up so far from the meeting of the sidewalks?:waitasec:
According to George's attorney it was only half a football field away.
Emeralgem
05-09-2012, 10:02 AM
Gotta admit I never thought about a dog being in the mix, but if true, I'd probably have to change my thinking on George doing some screaming....
That ONE shout out for "HELP" may have been GZ IF a dog became involved just as he was getting ready to pull the trigger but the wailing and the terrified moaning before the shout out for help IMHO came from TM..JMHO
gypsyblue
05-09-2012, 10:03 AM
the wounds look like they could be a nip of a dog to me. It looks like the upper and lower fangs of a dog could have nipped the surface of his head. A dog, if spooked will not neccessarily sink four teeth into someone ...it could be just two, upper and lower of either the right or left side of dogs mouth only.
I totally disagree with the statement that if it was a pit, it would not let go. Just because it is a pit does not mean it was out to kill, just as, being a black teen in a hoodie doesnt make you a criminal....it could have just simply been spooked and nipped....jmo
Sun48shine
05-09-2012, 10:04 AM
Yes, TM was SO in fear for his life that he continued bopping along talking to his GIRLFRIEND, right? Why didn't he call the police? Oh, yeah, he was YOUNG and made a bad choice. So maybe he made a bad choice and attacked GZ as well, right? NOOO, he wouldn't have done THAT, right?
And FTR (and I will say this EVERYTIME the TM Supporters claim it) there is NOTHING ILLEGAL ABOUT FOLLOWING SOMEONE.
Nope, if he had followed him with the INTENT of killing him, it would be murder one. The murder two charge is based on the idea that he created a situation in which someone died. Him FOLLOWING someone did not create the situation, per his claims. It was the attack by TM that created the situation in which he used lethal force.
Again, it is NOT illegal to follow someone.
Taking a gun out of the house shows intent to cause harm. Most states don't have a "Stand Your Ground" rule. What would GZ have done if he lived in other states, like Maryland? We had a similar case here with neighborhood watchmen who knocked down a 15 year old teen, banged his head with a radio/walkie talkie, and broke his wrist. The older brother/neighborhood watchman was convicted of false imprisonment and second-degree assault, and cleared of carrying a deadly weapon with intent to injure. The younger brother was acquitted of all three counts.
Read more: http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/1-brother-convicted-in-Md-neighborhood-watch-case-3532438.php#ixzz1uNgn3kST. http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/1-brother-convicted-in-Md-neighborhood-watch-case-3532438.php
AJ Noiter
05-09-2012, 10:05 AM
IMHO... Zimmerman IS guilty NO MATTER WHAT..JMHO.
So even if a surveillance camera video came out that proved that everything Mr. Zimmerman stated is 100% accurate, he's still guilty?
Lovelymountains
05-09-2012, 10:05 AM
Yes, TM was SO in fear for his life that he continued bopping along talking to his GIRLFRIEND, right? Why didn't he call the police? Oh, yeah, he was YOUNG and made a bad choice. So maybe he made a bad choice and attacked GZ as well, right? NOOO, he wouldn't have done THAT, right?
And FTR (and I will say this EVERYTIME the TM Supporters claim it) there is NOTHING ILLEGAL ABOUT FOLLOWING SOMEONE.
There is also nothing illegal about walking (I'm not sure what "Bopping" means, but does it call for execution?) along in the rain, wearing a hoodie, and talking on the telephone.
IMO the prosecution will prove that TM was doing nothing illegal. He was "Walking while black." That is not illegal. It is illegal to stalk someone and murder them, however because you don't like their looks.
LynnM
05-09-2012, 10:06 AM
Yes, TM was SO in fear for his life that he continued bopping along talking to his GIRLFRIEND, right? Why didn't he call the police? Oh, yeah, he was YOUNG and made a bad choice. So maybe he made a bad choice and attacked GZ as well, right? NOOO, he wouldn't have done THAT, right?
And FTR (and I will say this EVERYTIME the TM Supporters claim it) there is NOTHING ILLEGAL ABOUT FOLLOWING SOMEONE.
No, I don't think Trayvon was in fear for his life until Zimmerman confronted him on the walkway between the townhouses. I think he was initially anxious, then dismissed it. And no, IMO, he wouldn't have attacked Zimmerman. He was interested in talking to his friend and the game was going to start in another fifteen minutes. IMO opinion had Zimmerman left him alone, he would have finished his conversation - outside the presence of the Ms. Green's son - gone in, watched the game, and drunk his iced tea.
Look, you can say it until the cows come home. There may be nothing illegal about following someone per se but it can most certainly be the start of a crime - abduction, rape, robbery, assault, or murder.
Lovelymountains
05-09-2012, 10:10 AM
This picture is evidence the SA has now, so could that U shape the arrows are pointing to be the bottom jaw of a dog and the two wounds circled be his fang teeth getting a nip in on Georges's head?
http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg216/kensaroo/Georgesbooboobite.jpg
http://abcnews.go.com/topics/news/trayvon-martin.htm
IMO
They certainly look like puncture wounds, but wouldn't someone have mentioned that a dog attacked GZ if that's what happened?
Dr.Fessel
05-09-2012, 10:11 AM
No, I don't think Trayvon was in fear for his life until Zimmerman confronted him on the walkway between the townhouses. I think he was initially anxious, then dismissed it. And no, IMO, he wouldn't have attacked Zimmerman. He was interested in talking to his friend and the game was going to start in another fifteen minutes. IMO opinion had Zimmerman left him alone, he would have finished his conversation - outside the presence of the Ms. Green's son - gone in, watched the game, and drunk his iced tea.
Look, you can say it until the cows come home. There may be nothing illegal about following someone per se but it can most certainly be the start of a crime - abduction, rape, robbery, assault, or murder.
Following someone to stop them from getting away before the police get there is illegal.
Dr.Fessel
05-09-2012, 10:12 AM
They certainly look like puncture wounds, but wouldn't someone have mentioned that a dog attacked GZ if that's what happened?
Only a couple of people saw anything and that was just for small fractions of time.
Emeralgem
05-09-2012, 10:21 AM
So even if a surveillance camera video came out that proved that everything Mr. Zimmerman stated is 100% accurate, he's still guilty?
You mean NOW, almost three months later? No, I wouldn't trust it to be in anyway accurate or even the truth as to what happened.... Too too much CYA going on concerning this case.. IMHO.. He is guilty of killing a young man who wasn't doing anything but making his way back to his father's girlfriend's residence..JMHO..IMHO.. He did the crime.. Now, he needs to own up and take responsibilty for his actions that resulted in the untimely death of a teenager and do the time...JMHO
LiveLaughLuv
05-09-2012, 10:24 AM
the wounds look like they could be a nip of a dog to me. It looks like the upper and lower fangs of a dog could have nipped the surface of his head. A dog, if spooked will not neccessarily sink four teeth into someone ...it could be just two, upper and lower of either the right or left side of dogs mouth only.
I totally disagree with the statement that if it was a pit, it would not let go. Just because it is a pit does not mean it was out to kill, just as, being a black teen in a hoodie doesnt make you a criminal....it could have just simply been spooked and nipped....jmo
Pits are notorious for that enzyme and jaw structure once clamping down, they will not let go, even if you hit them..I know, I've owned a pit and as loving as we raised him, he'd jump at anyone who came near me with sudden moves...so, it's not that far fetched that once a pit latches on, it's difficult to get them to let go...
Lovelymountains
05-09-2012, 10:26 AM
The state has the recorded screams from the 911 call. The state has the video tape of Zimmerman at the police station that seems to contradict his own words as to what occured that night. The state has Trayvon's autopsy report (even though we don't yet) that will either prove or disprove Zimmerman's claims for the events that night. I'd have to say that since A Corey has seen the report that she feels that it does not prove Zimmerman's claims. The state also has the non-emergancy call from Zimmerman that night that will prove his state of mind (those a-holes always get away).
MOO
And if one shoots someone in the chest with a hollow point bullet, someone who is on top of them, there would be mass amounts of blood on the shooter. As we have seen, GZ had no blood at all on his clothing in the SPD surveillance video taken a short time later. The force of the hollow point bullet exploding in TM's body would have sent blood flying. It indicates to me that TM was not on top of GZ when he was murdered and the prosecution will surely be able to explain from the autopsy the positions of both parties at the time of the shooting.
Lovelymountains
05-09-2012, 10:29 AM
There is no logical explanation that if, as GZ claims, TM was on top of him when he shot him, that TM's body was found lying face down with his hands under his body. Dead men don't turn over.
Elley Mae
05-09-2012, 10:31 AM
And if one shoots someone in the chest with a hollow point bullet, someone who is on top of them, there would be mass amounts of blood on the shooter. As we have seen, GZ had no blood at all on his clothing in the SPD surveillance video taken a short time later. The force of the hollow point bullet exploding in TM's body would have sent blood flying. It indicates to me that TM was not on top of GZ when he was murdered and the prosecution will surely be able to explain from the autopsy the positions of both parties at the time of the shooting.
Curious? Wouldn't the blood spatter have been contained in the sweat shirt (hoodie)? There would only be the hole from the bullet, no?
LiveLaughLuv
05-09-2012, 10:44 AM
Only a couple of people saw anything and that was just for small fractions of time.
And they each saw something at differnt times in this.
Eye witness accounts are faulty, which is why the forensic evidence will be what shows GZ depraved actions...besides GZ's ever changing accounts..tell the truth the first time and one doesn't have to remember their lies..lie once, you continue to lie with the snowball effect...I believe GZ's story has begun to unravel at the seams..and the prosecution is all over it...
Since the State believes that horrific scream/wail was TM, GZ killed him anyway, depraved mind..
GZ alleges he lunged on the back of TM due to not knowing how injured he was...never rendered aid...depraved actions in that as well...
His not retreating after being told by dispatcher from the NEN, to not do that, shows his intent as well...he was determined to stop this person who GZ suspected of being up to no good...
Why didn't he think, hmmm, older teen is taking a short cut so he must live here...let me just observe from a distance...no, that's not what GZ would do...he was determined, adamant to not let another ahole get away being so fed up with the amounts of break in's in his community..he was determined to stop the next person he felt LE would not get, since they always get away...and it becomes a personal vendetta learning his own property was stolen off his porch..they took a bicycle from GZ and how dare anyone steal from the NW self appointed captain of Twin Lakes Retreat...ironic his community has retreat in it..all he had to do was retreat and observe from a distance, he'd not be facing 2nd degree murder charge...
Sun48shine
05-09-2012, 10:46 AM
Nope, if he had followed him with the INTENT of killing him, it would be murder one. The murder two charge is based on the idea that he created a situation in which someone died. Him FOLLOWING someone did not create the situation, per his claims. It was the attack by TM that created the situation in which he used lethal force.
Again, it is NOT illegal to follow someone.
There is no real proof that TM attacked GZ. GZ's clothes were too clean.
gypsyblue
05-09-2012, 10:47 AM
Pits are notorious for that enzyme and jaw structure once clamping down, they will not let go, even if you hit them..I know, I've owned a pit and as loving as we raised him, he'd jump at anyone who came near me with sudden moves...so, it's not that far fetched that once a pit latches on, it's difficult to get them to let go...one would have to assume all pits are the same....granted they have the jaw locking ability, not all use it...I own and foster several...any dog can cause puncture wounds only, and imo this possibility cant be ruled out due to breedism
we can agree to disagree
LambChop
05-09-2012, 10:48 AM
And if one shoots someone in the chest with a hollow point bullet, someone who is on top of them, there would be mass amounts of blood on the shooter. As we have seen, GZ had no blood at all on his clothing in the SPD surveillance video taken a short time later. The force of the hollow point bullet exploding in TM's body would have sent blood flying. It indicates to me that TM was not on top of GZ when he was murdered and the prosecution will surely be able to explain from the autopsy the positions of both parties at the time of the shooting.
I think once the heart stops there is little blood flow and it appears TM was shot center chest area, not directly at the heart. Since it appears he died instantly and there was not immediate blood flow to cover GZ the hollow point splits and a piece hit his heart.
Now, if the shot entered TM's chest in the center area and the bullet traveled upwards and hit the heart, TM was trying to get away. If TM were sitting on top of GZ when he shot TM I would think the bullet would have passed through his chest and maybe hitting one of his lungs. TM was dead instantly. Finding him lying face down sounds more like he was trying to get away from the gun when GZ shot him and on impact he fell forward. If this is close to the truth TM's head was found facing away from the sidewalk with his feet being closer to the sidewalk edge. Either way GZ's head was no where near the sideway.
One has to wonder why GZ made no attempt to give TM CPR?
LynnM
05-09-2012, 10:54 AM
I think once the heart stops there is little blood flow and it appears TM was shot center chest area, not directly at the heart. Since it appears he died instantly and there was not immediate blood flow to cover GZ the hollow point splits and a piece hit his heart.
Now, if the shot entered TM's chest in the center area and the bullet traveled upwards and hit the heart, TM was trying to get away. If TM were sitting on top of GZ when he shot TM I would think the bullet would have passed through his chest and maybe hitting one of his lungs. TM was dead instantly. Finding him lying face down sounds more like he was trying to get away from the gun when GZ shot him and on impact he fell forward. If this is close to the truth TM's head was found facing away from the sidewalk with his feet being closer to the sidewalk edge. Either way GZ's head was no where near the sideway.
One has to wonder why GZ made no attempt to give TM CPR?
Or according to GZ, TM did not die right away and had time to utter, not once but twice, "You got it." In that case, why wasn't his blood all over Zimmerman?
Concerned Papa
05-09-2012, 10:55 AM
I think once the heart stops there is little blood flow and it appears TM was shot center chest area, not directly at the heart. Since it appears he died instantly and there was not immediate blood flow to cover GZ the hollow point splits and a piece hit his heart.
Now, if the shot entered TM's chest in the center area and the bullet traveled upwards and hit the heart, TM was trying to get away. If TM were sitting on top of GZ when he shot TM I would think the bullet would have passed through his chest and maybe hitting one of his lungs. TM was dead instantly. Finding him lying face down sounds more like he was trying to get away from the gun when GZ shot him and on impact he fell forward. If this is close to the truth TM's head was found facing away from the sidewalk with his feet being closer to the sidewalk edge. Either way GZ's head was no where near the sideway.
One has to wonder why GZ made no attempt to give TM CPR? BBM
CPR? I haven't heard this. I thought I read something about him saying he was on him because he didn't know he was dead? Am I mistaken?
Sun48shine
05-09-2012, 10:55 AM
And they each saw something at differnt times in this.
Eye witness accounts are faulty, which is why the forensic evidence will be what shows GZ depraved actions...besides GZ's ever changing accounts..tell the truth the first time and one doesn't have to remember their lies..lie once, you continue to lie with the snowball effect...I believe GZ's story has begun to unravel at the seams..and the prosecution is all over it...
Since the State believes that horrific scream/wail was TM, GZ killed him anyway, depraved mind..
GZ alleges he lunged on the back of TM due to not knowing how injured he was...never rendered aid...depraved actions in that as well...
His not retreating after being told by dispatcher from the NEN, to not do that, shows his intent as well...he was determined to stop this person who GZ suspected of being up to no good...
Why didn't he think, hmmm, older teen is taking a short cut so he must live here...let me just observe from a distance...no, that's not what GZ would do...he was determined, adamant to not let another ahole get away being so fed up with the amounts of break in's in his community..he was determined to stop the next person he felt LE would not get, since they always get away...and it becomes a personal vendetta learning his own property was stolen off his porch..they took a bicycle from GZ and how dare anyone steal from the NW self appointed captain of Twin Lakes Retreat...ironic his community has retreat in it..all he had to do was retreat and observe from a distance, he'd not be facing 2nd degree murder charge...
That's right!! Wasn't it raining and too dark for eyewitnesses to see anything?
We had a case in Maryland where a 15 year old boy was attacked by 2 brothers/neighborhood watchmen. They knocked him down, hit him in the head with a radio/walkie talkie and broke his wrist. One brother was convicted of false imprisonment and second-degree assault, and cleared of carrying a deadly weapon with intent to injure and the other brother was acquitted of all three counts.
http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/1-brother-convicted-in-Md-neighborhood-watch-case-3532438.php
LiveLaughLuv
05-09-2012, 11:01 AM
Or according to GZ, TM did not die right away and had time to utter, not once but twice, "You got it." In that case, why wasn't his blood all over Zimmerman?
I for one do not believe GZ...I do not believe TM uttered those riduculous words..GZ lost credibility...
I have no clue as to why GZ doesn't have TM's blood splattered all over his shirt or jacket..LE didn't take his clothes that evening, did they?
I believe SPD is responsible for this outrage they caused by not investigating further and dismissing it at Wolfingers level...he should have had a thorough investigation...especially since Serino (sp) had wanted a manslaughter charge...that tells me GZ was not believed by the homicide detective at first glance...
LiveLaughLuv
05-09-2012, 11:05 AM
Curious? Wouldn't the blood spatter have been contained in the sweat shirt (hoodie)? There would only be the hole from the bullet, no?
Good point, ElleyMae....very good point..I hadn't thought of that..there'd only be a gaping hole in TM's sweatshirt and chest..but the initial hit with the bullet, would blood splatter then? Maybe on the inside of TM's clothes..
I for one do not believe GZ...I do not believe TM uttered those riduculous words..GZ lost credibility...
I have no clue as to why GZ doesn't have TM's blood splattered all over his shirt or jacket..LE didn't take his clothes that evening, did they?
I believe SPD is responsible for this outrage they caused by not investigating further and dismissing it at Wolfingers level...he should have had a thorough investigation...especially since Serino (sp) had wanted a manslaughter charge...that tells me GZ was not believed by the homicide detective at first glance...
JMO/IMO
BBM
Maybe the homicide detective noted GZ's squeaky clean clothes. Hmmmmm......
LambChop
05-09-2012, 11:09 AM
BBM
CPR? I haven't heard this. I thought I read something about him saying he was on him because he didn't know he was dead? Am I mistaken?
No. I was saying GZ made no attempt to give TM CPR and one has to wonder why he didn't at least try. Too busy trying to get his story straight in his head, IMO. jmo
LambChop
05-09-2012, 11:13 AM
Good point, ElleyMae....very good point..I hadn't thought of that..there'd only be a gaping hole in TM's sweatshirt and chest..but the initial hit with the bullet, would blood splatter then? Maybe on the inside of TM's clothes..
Some bullet wounds do not bleed right away and apparently TM's didn't. I think because of the way he landed, TM died instantly. I think that bullet went straight to his heart. jmo
cityslick
05-09-2012, 11:16 AM
How would it be possible that no eyewitnesses (that we know of) heard of a dog. Seeing is one thing, but if a dog is attacking someone, odds are you are going to hear it. You are especially going to hear something if say 'John' heard the help scream because if you can hear someone yelling for help, you are going to hear a muffled sound of a dog attacking someone.
Second question, why would the dog only attack GZ? Why not TM?
Dr.Fessel
05-09-2012, 11:21 AM
How would it be possible that no eyewitnesses (that we know of) heard of a dog. Seeing is one thing, but if a dog is attacking someone, odds are you are going to hear it. You are especially going to hear something if say 'John' heard the help scream because if you can hear someone yelling for help, you are going to hear a muffled sound of a dog attacking someone.
Second question, why would the dog only attack GZ? Why not TM? I swear I saw a little white box on the dog collar I thought was a bark shocker but I can't find that pic now. Maybe Trayvon backed up right at that time?
LambChop
05-09-2012, 11:21 AM
How would it be possible that no eyewitnesses (that we know of) heard of a dog. Seeing is one thing, but if a dog is attacking someone, odds are you are going to hear it. You are especially going to hear something if say 'John' heard the help scream because if you can hear someone yelling for help, you are going to hear a muffled sound of a dog attacking someone.
Second question, why would the dog only attack GZ? Why not TM?
I don't think the dog did but dogs can sense aggression. jmo
cityslick
05-09-2012, 11:27 AM
The bite wing on the head doesn't match imo. If you took it that the 'u' was the lower jaw of the dog, then the right hand puncture shouldn't be directly above that U. It would be higher.
I still don't understand why GZ wouldn't say he was attacked by the dog. It would actually work in his favor. He can say the dog attacked him, he got scared and intended to shoot the dog instead of TM.
Dr.Fessel
05-09-2012, 11:30 AM
The bite wing on the head doesn't match imo. If you took it that the 'u' was the lower jaw of the dog, then the right hand puncture shouldn't be directly above that U. It would be higher.
I still don't understand why GZ wouldn't say he was attacked by the dog. It would actually work in his favor. He can say the dog attacked him, he got scared and intended to shoot the dog instead of TM. That would make him guilty of negligence, manslaughter at the least. The only legit reason he can pull that trigger is to kill the person. Anything else and you get out of the SYG and self defense. IMO
AJ Noiter
05-09-2012, 11:31 AM
You mean NOW, almost three months later? No, I wouldn't trust it to be in anyway accurate or even the truth as to what happened.... Too too much CYA going on concerning this case.. IMHO.. He is guilty of killing a young man who wasn't doing anything but making his way back to his father's girlfriend's residence..JMHO..IMHO.. He did the crime.. Now, he needs to own up and take responsibilty for his actions that resulted in the untimely death of a teenager and do the time...JMHO
I didn't necessarily mean some unknown source comes out today and says "lookie lookie what I found!" One possible, though not likely, source of this video might be discovery. It was a hypothetical, assume the video is authentic for the purpose of the question. Based on what was stated ("GZ IS guilty NO MATTER WHAT"), even if Mr. Martin signed a note in his own blood stating "I did initiate the fight" there is no possible way that Mr. Zimmerman could be innocent in all of this. That is a problem in my opinion. Not only because he has been judged without regard to the evidence, which still has yet to be seen, but also because the person is effectively stating that NO ONE has a right to defend themselves.
cityslick
05-09-2012, 11:36 AM
That would make him guilty of negligence, manslaughter at the least. The only legit reason he can pull that trigger is to kill the person. Anything else and you get out of the SYG and self defense. IMO
Does that apply also if an animal is attacking you though? If a dog starts chewing on your head, can you shoot the dog and claim SYG?
I understand it's a nice little talking point, but it's very odd to me that all of a sudden something as major as a dog getting in the middle of the fight was not alluded to by anyone up until now.
Dr.Fessel
05-09-2012, 11:44 AM
Does that apply also if an animal is attacking you though? If a dog starts chewing on your head, can you shoot the dog and claim SYG?
I understand it's a nice little talking point, but it's very odd to me that all of a sudden something as major as a dog getting in the middle of the fight was not alluded to by anyone up until now.
I am not sure on the dog shooting and SYG. I have been trying to guess about that horseshoe shape mark since i first saw it and yesterday I saw the interview of the 13yr old for the first time. I am not saying I am right and open to suggestions on that U shape. It might be important.
cityslick
05-09-2012, 11:53 AM
I am not sure on the dog shooting and SYG. I have been trying to guess about that horseshoe shape mark since i first saw it and yesterday I saw the interview of the 13yr old for the first time. I am not saying I am right and open to suggestions on that U shape. It might be important.
I can see him hitting his head on something with that shape. TBH, I think if it were some sort of dog, I think his head would look more messed up with scratches from the dogs teeth.
Phoenixfla
05-09-2012, 12:07 PM
Taking a gun out of the house shows intent to cause harm. Most states don't have a "Stand Your Ground" rule. What would GZ have done if he lived in other states, like Maryland? We had a similar case here with neighborhood watchmen who knocked down a 15 year old teen, banged his head with a radio/walkie talkie, and broke his wrist. The older brother/neighborhood watchman was convicted of false imprisonment and second-degree assault, and cleared of carrying a deadly weapon with intent to injure. The younger brother was acquitted of all three counts.
Read more: http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/1-brother-convicted-in-Md-neighborhood-watch-case-3532438.php#ixzz1uNgn3kST. http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/1-brother-convicted-in-Md-neighborhood-watch-case-3532438.php
That is absoultely not true.
Lovelymountains
05-09-2012, 12:10 PM
I think once the heart stops there is little blood flow and it appears TM was shot center chest area, not directly at the heart. Since it appears he died instantly and there was not immediate blood flow to cover GZ the hollow point splits and a piece hit his heart.
Now, if the shot entered TM's chest in the center area and the bullet traveled upwards and hit the heart, TM was trying to get away. If TM were sitting on top of GZ when he shot TM I would think the bullet would have passed through his chest and maybe hitting one of his lungs. TM was dead instantly. Finding him lying face down sounds more like he was trying to get away from the gun when GZ shot him and on impact he fell forward. If this is close to the truth TM's head was found facing away from the sidewalk with his feet being closer to the sidewalk edge. Either way GZ's head was no where near the sideway.
One has to wonder why GZ made no attempt to give TM CPR?
Could you please supply links to why it appears that TM was shot in the center chest area and the bullet traveled upwards, etc. I don't think the autopsy has been released, but if you have seen it I would certainly like to read it too. TIA
Phoenixfla
05-09-2012, 12:13 PM
Good point, ElleyMae....very good point..I hadn't thought of that..there'd only be a gaping hole in TM's sweatshirt and chest..but the initial hit with the bullet, would blood splatter then? Maybe on the inside of TM's clothes..
I just dont understand how he gets the "gaping hole". He would have a 9MM hole in his sweatshit and his chest. IF there was any gaping hole, it would be in his back where the bullet exited taking flesh with it.
I'll repeat - a bullet does not create a gaping hole upon ENTRY. If anyone has a link to prove otherwise I would like to see it.
I am not sure on the dog shooting and SYG. I have been trying to guess about that horseshoe shape mark since i first saw it and yesterday I saw the interview of the 13yr old for the first time. I am not saying I am right and open to suggestions on that U shape. It might be important.
JMO/IMO-- speculation, pondering follows....
Are we confident the photo is real, and not staged, or "assisted". I am still pondering the possible "u", haven't come up with anything, yet.
Another thing, don't know if it means anything...but....
I don't see in the photo where the "trails of blood" ever interact with GZ's clothing.
After the killing, GZ's clothes looked neat, clean and tidy as he walked into the police station.
I would love to know if folks who knew GZ (like the ex, maybe fellow students) would say that GZ is over the top particular about his clothing. I just find it odd that he seems to do a good job of avoiding getting dirty even when "fighting for his life". What he says happened, and what we see in the police station video don't add up.
That might be a bit of a clue into his thinking...is it possible he hates getting his clothes mussed, and (consciously or subconsciously) avoids it tenaciously? Would this possibility give him a unique perspective or unusual definition of a "fight for his life"?
Sun48shine
05-09-2012, 12:19 PM
That is absoultely not true.
Can you prove that it is not true in this case? NO!!!
AJ Noiter
05-09-2012, 12:21 PM
Can you prove that it is not true? NO!!!
This case is irrelevant, given what you stated was:
Taking a gun out of the house shows intent to cause harm.
I walk out of my house with a loaded weapon on a daily basis and have never shot anyone. I AM your proof. My father, IS your proof. He carried a weapon for nearly 50 years and never shot a single person.
Sun48shine
05-09-2012, 12:27 PM
I walk out of my house with a loaded weapon on a daily basis and have never shot anyone. I AM your proof. My father, IS your proof. He carried a weapon for nearly 50 years and never shot a single person.
I am referring to this case. So does your state allow people to carry loaded guns out when they see people appearing to be suspicious?
LambChop
05-09-2012, 12:28 PM
Could you please supply links to why it appears that TM was shot in the center chest area and the bullet traveled upwards, etc. I don't think the autopsy has been released, but if you have seen it I would certainly like to read it too. TIA
Notice I said IF. I believe it was mentioned in another article that it was about the center of the chest but I can't locate that one. No one has said the wound was over his heart. jmo
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57406725/martin-funeral-director-no-signs-of-fight-on-body/
Sun48shine
05-09-2012, 12:29 PM
This case is irrelevant, given what you stated was:
I walk out of my house with a loaded weapon on a daily basis and have never shot anyone. I AM your proof. My father, IS your proof. He carried a weapon for nearly 50 years and never shot a single person.
Are you a police officer?
zenreaper
05-09-2012, 12:31 PM
Taking a gun out of the house shows intent to cause harm. Most states don't have a "Stand Your Ground" rule. What would GZ have done if he lived in other states, like Maryland? We had a similar case here with neighborhood watchmen who knocked down a 15 year old teen, banged his head with a radio/walkie talkie, and broke his wrist. The older brother/neighborhood watchman was convicted of false imprisonment and second-degree assault, and cleared of carrying a deadly weapon with intent to injure. The younger brother was acquitted of all three counts.
Read more: http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/1-brother-convicted-in-Md-neighborhood-watch-case-3532438.php#ixzz1uNgn3kST. http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/1-brother-convicted-in-Md-neighborhood-watch-case-3532438.php
False. LEGALLY taking a gun out of the house merely means you have a tool designed to protect yourself or someone else from harm. The difference between the case you describe and the case we are dealing with is that TM ATTACKED GZ.
Concerned Papa
05-09-2012, 12:32 PM
I've never owned a small gun like this PF-9 and I've never felt the need for a concealed carry application. Out of the 25 or so guns I own, only 3 are hand guns. For fellow gun nuts here, I have a Ruger Super Blackhawk .44 Mag w/a western holster, a Thompson Contender with interchangeable barrels (.410 & .35 Rem.) w/a Uncle Mike's shoulder holster, and a 9 shot Ruger revolver .22.
As for hand guns, that's the limit of my personal experience or use. With that said, I've gone to various gun sites to read up on this notion of concealed carrying a gun inside your pants, because in all honesty, that's a new one on me. It's just not an option I find particularly comforting to have a loaded gun where my buziness is at, KWIM?
I don't know what kind GZ carried his gun in. I ran across 2 or 3 different types ranging from, what's GOT to be the biggest misnomer of all time, a "Smart Carry":
http://i941.photobucket.com/albums/ad257/Papa813_bucket/TMHolster.png
http://i941.photobucket.com/albums/ad257/Papa813_bucket/TMHolster3.png
to this:
http://i941.photobucket.com/albums/ad257/Papa813_bucket/TMHolster4.png
In any event, what I'm seeing, and what I'm reading is making me question, even more, the concept of GZ being able to reach into his pants and pull out his gun, while TM was allegedly on top of him, beating him senseless.
http://i941.photobucket.com/albums/ad257/Papa813_bucket/TMGetToGun.png
One site pointed out the following:
1. The PF-9 tends to get caught-up in clothing when a shooter tries to remove it in a hurry.
Carrying the gun in a proper holster and practicing drawing it from concealment dramatically reduces the chances of this potential problem. But many people who carry handguns this small and (let’s face it) cheap don’t “invest” in a good holster or spend much time practicing unholstering at the range. Even worse there are a number of people who simply pop one of these in a pocket and carry it that way, which makes getting the gun out and into the fight extremely difficult.
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/03/foghorn/the-truth-about-george-zimmermans-kel-tec-pf-9/
Considering the above, the small size of this weapon,:
http://i941.photobucket.com/albums/ad257/Papa813_bucket/TMKelTek.jpg
http://i941.photobucket.com/albums/ad257/Papa813_bucket/TMKelTek1-1.jpg
the mechanicaly failed condition of the gun when recovered,:
Police found a single shell casing at the scene, and when they seized George Zimmerman's handgun, a Kel Tec 9 mm, its magazine was full, according to a source close to the investigation. The only bullet missing was the one in the chamber, the source said.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-19/news/os-trayvon-martin-shooting-students-20120319_1_warning-shot-college-students-single-shell-casing
and a likely cause of this failure:
This is a condition we associate with something preventing the gun from cycling a fresh round from the magazine into the chamber after the shot was discharged. One thing that can cause that is another man’s hand wrapped around the pistol, retarding its slide mechanism. This would indicate, as could certain gunshot residue patterns or cuts in certain places if found on Trayvon Martin’s hand(s), that a struggle for a gun was taking place when the fatal shot was fired.
http://backwoodshome.com/blogs/MassadAyoob/2012/03/23/george-zimmerman-and-trayvon-martin-what-we-dont-know/
It is my opinion that George Zimmerman had his gun drawn when this encounter began leaving Trayvon little choice but to fight for his life.
AJ Noiter
05-09-2012, 12:32 PM
I am referring to this case. So does your state allows people to carry loaded guns out when they see people appearing to be suspicious?
No, my state requires that if we see someone suspicious we can not be carrying a firearm, legally.:ohoh: To be honest I'm not even sure I understand your question here, it seems a bit.. fragmented or something.
Sun48shine
05-09-2012, 12:33 PM
False. LEGALLY taking a gun out of the house merely means you have a tool designed to protect yourself or someone else from harm. The difference between the case you describe and the case we are dealing with is that TM ATTACKED GZ.
Where is the proof that TM attacked GZ? Can you please provide the link? Was there a video of this or is it just the ever changing words of GZ?
zenreaper
05-09-2012, 12:33 PM
There is also nothing illegal about walking (I'm not sure what "Bopping" means, but does it call for execution?) along in the rain, wearing a hoodie, and talking on the telephone.
IMO the prosecution will prove that TM was doing nothing illegal. He was "Walking while black." That is not illegal. It is illegal to stalk someone and murder them, however because you don't like their looks.
Those who are in support of finding GZ guilty REFUSE to accept that it was not the WALKING that got TM shot, it was the ATTACKING that got him shot. GZ was not standing his ground or defending himself from a WALKER, he was defending himself from an ATTACKER.
vlpate
05-09-2012, 12:35 PM
I am referring to this case. So does your state allows people to carry loaded guns out when they see people appearing to be suspicious?
In my state, the people who look suspicious are carrying a gun too. Why should I be at a disadvantage? There's a great responsibility that goes with owning and carrying a concealed weapon, there's no such responsibility adhered to by those with illegal weapons. I think people confuse the two.
As far as the prosecution's case goes, his right to legally carry a gun won't come into it. If TM was not beating him, then his irresponsibility with the gun will. If TM was beating him, he used his gun as it was meant to be used.
JMO
vBulletin® v3.8.1, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
0