17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #33

[magnolia]

Originally Posted by Just K

As some have stated, we don't even know when that gun came out. We also don't know if GZ chased TM and in the process the two fell to the ground, with TM landing on top. Unless someone video taped the chasing through the two of them landing on the ground, we may never have the real story as to how, when or why that gun came out or how the two ended up in the position that they ended up in.

At best, it is an unholy mess. BUT, a mess that began because GZ assumed that TM was guilty of a crime that had not even been committed.

I agree with you. It is a mess. However, in a court of law, "who is responsible for how it ended" will be more important than "who is responsible for how it began". In my lay opinion

[Just K]

Before I go to work...
It doesn't really matter what someone was like 11 years ago, What matters is what actually caused this chain of events which led to a young guy getting shot down. Because, IMO, a "do-gooder" took it upon himself to play "cops and robbers." Only thing is, the other person, TM, didn't know ahead of time that GZ wanted him to participate. Another example of GZ doing what he wants whether the other person has a say in it or not. All IMO, of course.

[cityslick]

Originally Posted by Karmady

Have you seen any commentary from lawyers (other than the Crump firm -- did I get the nomenclature right?) weigh in in favor of the prosecution? Just curious. I've seen Dershowitz, obviously, and the lawyer mentioned in that same article, but I don't think I've seen any weighing in on the other side.

Most of the TH's have been pretty cautious in how they try to forecast. A good majority of them, no matter if they defense lawyers or former prosecutors, have agree that this is going to be a tough case to prosecute as a 2nd degree murder charge.

[LambChop]

Originally Posted by saguaro

They'd be skewered by some and get death threats by others if they were to come forward.

IMO!

Why would someone threaten them for taking a picture? I do not think anyone has threatened witnesses in this case. The picture is what it is. If someone were really afraid they never would have released the picture to the media in the first place. There could only be just so many people that could have taken that picture and since LE claimed GZ was in custoday at 7:17 when Ofc. Smith arrived a picture taken at 7:19 showing GZ on a cell phone might be a concern for the police department. A person hiding their identity leads people to believe this picture is not what it appears to be. Why else would someone disassociate themselves from it? Sets that old hinky meter into overdrive. jmo

[annalia]

Originally Posted by Elley Mae

It is really sad that one person can be in a position to cause so much hurt and hatred directed at one person to cause death threats all for the ratings. welcome to america jmo

I agree with you, however when I read the word, conservative, and that conservatives were complaining about it, it kind of made me not want to read anymore.

This is not one sided as some out there want to portray it to be. I've read some of the most vile and vulgar things on certain political sites that literally made me want to throw up, distorted facts and outright lies. Then we have Fox news, who are in a class all by themselves when it comes to distortions.

I wish they all would take a step back.

JMHO

[cityslick]

Originally Posted by annalia

How is it not a fair comparison? It's a perfect comparison.

Exactly, we're not seeing 11 year old pictures of Trayvon, we only saw pics that were a few years old because Trayvon had just turned 17, yet they were attacked for that as if they were intentionally trying to hide something. I've said many times, it's not like Trayvon was 30 and they were showing pics from when he was a baby, he had just turned 17, they were only a few years old

And again, that's the point, Trayvon's family didn't have as many choices, GZ's family certainly had newer pictures of GZ, but they chose an 11 year old high school photo.

So I ask was it something sinister, or maybe simply that photo was special to them, or maybe that photo was a photo they had handy?

JMHO

I don't blame the parents, if that's the photos they provided, so be it. I lean more on the news agencies, considering that it's now been 2 months, more recent photos have been published and yet I still see some news stories that run with the first TM photo we saw and the 2005 GZ mugshot, side by side. That's sensationalism to me IMO.

[Just K]

If I were a cop, I would be pretty darn sure that all the guns were contained before I started photographing anything. Especially a shooter's head. That is why I don't think an on duty officer took the picture...but I might be wrong.

[Elley Mae]

Originally Posted by annalia

How is it not a fair comparison? It's a perfect comparison.

Exactly, we're not seeing 11 year old pictures of Trayvon, we only saw pics that were a few years old because Trayvon had just turned 17, yet they were attacked for that as if they were intentionally trying to hide something. I've said many times, it's not like Trayvon was 30 and they were showing pics from when he was a baby, he had just turned 17, they were only a few years old

And again, that's the point, Trayvon's family didn't have as many choices, GZ's family certainly had newer pictures of GZ, but they chose an 11 year old high school photo.

So I ask was it something sinister, or maybe simply that photo was special to them, or maybe that photo was a photo they had handy?

JMHO

I don't remember the exactly news source I first saw "the photos" but the ones I first saw were TN in maroon or burgandy Hollister shirt and GZ in orange jail shirt. That is the image that "they" wanted to portray to us, I do not think it had anything to do with availability of pics. jmo I was done to get attention for all the wrong reasons. jmo

[atthelake]

Originally Posted by Adrienne37

It would be very nice if we had a few attorneys to weigh in like we've had previously and then that way there is absolutely no doubt as what is legal and what is not. <mod snip>


~jmo~

Doubt that will happen until a *dedicated thread* for lawyers only is set up on the forum as too much for them to slog through and moves too fast IMHO MOO

[cityslick]

Originally Posted by LambChop

Why would someone threaten them for taking a picture? I do not think anyone has threatened witnesses in this case. The picture is what it is. If someone were really afraid they never would have released the picture to the media in the first place. There could only be just so many people that could have taken that picture and since LE claimed GZ was in custoday at 7:17 when Ofc. Smith arrived a picture taken at 7:19 showing GZ on a cell phone might be a concern for the police department. A person hiding their identity leads people to believe this picture is not what it appears to be. Why else would someone disassociate themselves from it? Sets that old hinky meter into overdrive. jmo

There's a perception that if you associate yourself with GZ that it will open you up to all sorts of criticism since that's not the 'popular' thing to do. Apparently FT has no issue with this, or loves the spotlight because he has no trouble running his mouth in front of cameras.

Maybe the person who took the photo doesn't want the attention and I don't mean negative attention, but any attention? You know as soon as it would be found that who exactly this person is, the media would be camped on their doorstep asking questions about that night, they would have to hire a lawyer to speak for them, etc. Some people don't want any of that.

[annalia]

Originally Posted by cityslick

Most of the TH's have been pretty cautious in how they try to forecast. A good majority of them, no matter if they defense lawyers or former prosecutors, have agree that this is going to be a tough case to prosecute as a 2nd degree murder charge.

There have been legal analysts and TH's who have spoken in favor of the prosecution. Don't know their names but on JVM there were those who spoke after the bond hearing who said the prosecution did just fine at the hearing.

There have also been legal analysts and TH's who have said that SYG doesn't apply to GZ.

From all the shows I've watched, there always seems to be pro and con, and they seem anything but cautious, lol, they get pretty loud at times, I haven't really seen that the majority favor one over the other.

That's why what these talking heads say, Alan Dershowitz included, shouldn't be taken as gospel. They are all speculating.

JMHO

[Just K]

Originally Posted by cityslick

There's a perception that if you associate yourself with GZ that it will open you up to all sorts of criticism since that's not the 'popular' thing to do. Apparently FT has no issue with this, or loves the spotlight because he has no trouble running his mouth in front of cameras.

Maybe the person who took the photo doesn't want the attention and I don't mean negative attention, but any attention? You know as soon as it would be found that who exactly this person is, the media would be camped on their doorstep asking questions about that night, they would have to hire a lawyer to speak for them, etc. Some people don't want any of that.

Yep, and within hours of O'Mara "slipping up" and saying the GF's name in open court & in front of the media, people were digging up her social network pages.

[grandmaj]

Originally Posted by cityslick

There's a perception that if you associate yourself with GZ that it will open you up to all sorts of criticism since that's not the 'popular' thing to do. Apparently FT has no issue with this, or loves the spotlight because he has no trouble running his mouth in front of cameras.

Maybe the person who took the photo doesn't want the attention and I don't mean negative attention, but any attention? You know as soon as it would be found that who exactly this person is, the media would be camped on their doorstep asking questions about that night, they would have to hire a lawyer to speak for them, etc. Some people don't want any of that.

I agree with this opinion in concept. However, in a case of alleged murder, if by some chance I got potential evidence, I think I would have turned it over to the investigators and stopped there.

Because if it really is evidence, providing it to the media is an attempt to involve oneself and then claim anonymity. Either you stand behind your picture or you do not. If the person provided it to Investigators and it ended there, I'd have less question about motivation of the person who took the picture.

[annalia]

Originally Posted by magnolia

I agree with you. It is a mess. However, in a court of law, "who is responsible for how it ended" will be more important than "who is responsible for how it began". In my lay opinion

But that's the thing, there are those in the legal field who say how it began is very important in a court of law.

The SYG hearing will be very interesting and in the end the only thing that really matters is what the judge will rule.

JMHO

[Kimberlyd125]

Originally Posted by cityslick

There's not a whole lot of people in this world who show 'young and full of life' after they get arrested though.

And who smiles after being arrested?
That would make no sense IMO.

I could just see how the coversations would go if he were cheesing it up in his mug shot, his first court date, or his bond hearing!
People would be talking about that for sure.

IMO I would not be grinning after I was arrested either.

JMO

[cityslick]

Originally Posted by grandmaj

I agree with this opinion in concept. However, in a case of alleged murder, if by some chance I got potential evidence, I think I would have turned it over to the investigators and stopped there.

Because if it really is evidence, providing it to the media is an attempt to involve oneself and then claim anonymity. Either you stand behind your picture or you do not. If the person provided it to Investigators and it ended there, I'd have less question about motivation of the person who took the picture.

But we don't know that if it hasn't been turned over to investigators. It's been speculation one way or the other based on the line in the article that said 'investigators are aware of the photo'. People can spin that line either way but unless LE comes straight out and said 'yes that photo was provided to us', we really don't know if it was provided.

[Kimberlyd125]

Originally Posted by LambChop

Why would someone threaten them for taking a picture? I do not think anyone has threatened witnesses in this case. The picture is what it is. If someone were really afraid they never would have released the picture to the media in the first place. There could only be just so many people that could have taken that picture and since LE claimed GZ was in custoday at 7:17 when Ofc. Smith arrived a picture taken at 7:19 showing GZ on a cell phone might be a concern for the police department. A person hiding their identity leads people to believe this picture is not what it appears to be. Why else would someone disassociate themselves from it? Sets that old hinky meter into overdrive. jmo

I think it has been well established that GZ's friends and family have recieved death threats.

I would not come forward shouting to the world that I provided the photo that proved GZ had injuries to the back of his head that night.

NO WAY

[Aedrys]

Originally Posted by magnolia

I agree with you. It is a mess. However, in a court of law, "who is responsible for how it ended" will be more important than "who is responsible for how it began". In my lay opinion

We already know who was responsible for how it ultimately ended. GZ pulled a trigger, and shot and killed Trayvon. Who was responsible for how it began has everything to do with how it ended and the responsiblity for how it ended. A jury will get to judge whether GZ's actions of following and confronting Trayvon is more believable than Trayvon hiding and jumping GZ. Everything that led up to the gunshot is going to play in the jury's decision. They're not going to ignore everything that led up to it and just focus on the last few seconds. At least, I would hope not.

[cityslick]

Originally Posted by Kimberlyd125

And who smiles after being arrested?
That would make no sense IMO.

I could just see how the coversations would go if he were cheesing it up in his mug shot, his first court date, or his bond hearing!
People would be talking about that for sure.

IMO I would not be grinning after I was arrested either.

JMO

I read all the reactions on FCA first shots were after she was arrested and folks were going up the wall with the reactions.

I don't blame him for looking out of it.

[who]

Originally Posted by Kimberlyd125

And who smiles after being arrested?
That would make no sense IMO.
...

Tom Delay did.

[Adrienne37]

Wow, 2 months ago today, Trayvon was murdered. It's really too bad it took so long to get the process of justice started. God bless Sybrina, Tracy, and Jahvaris, and the rest of Trayvon's family and friends. My thoughts and prayers are with them each and every day.


http://www.nypost.com/rw/nypost/2012...2--300x300.jpg


~jmo~

[grandmaj]

Originally Posted by cityslick

But we don't know that if it hasn't been turned over to investigators. It's been speculation one way or the other based on the line in the article that said 'investigators are aware of the photo'. People can spin that line either way but unless LE comes straight out and said 'yes that photo was provided to us', we really don't know if it was provided.

I understand. And I believe that at some point or perhaps even first it might have been turned over. Difficult to know that.

That is not my point. My point is, good evidence is preserved for a court of law. If you are really afraid of your safety why go to the press? What is the motivation to provide this picture to the press anonymously . If it was safely in the hands of the investigators what purpose did releasing this to the media serve? And could this picture be thrown out as possible evidence as a result?

If I got myself willingly involved in a case, I certainly would stand on my reputation and not hide. The motivation has to be considered IMO. I question what this person's reason is for rushing this to the media on the day of the bond hearing.

[Elley Mae]

Originally Posted by annalia

There have been legal analysts and TH's who have spoken in favor of the prosecution. Don't know their names but on JVM there were those who spoke after the bond hearing who said the prosecution did just fine at the hearing.

There have also been legal analysts and TH's who have said that SYG doesn't apply to GZ.

From all the shows I've watched, there always seems to be pro and con, and they seem anything but cautious, lol, they get pretty loud at times, I haven't really seen that the majority favor one over the other.

That's why what these talking heads say, Alan Dershowitz included, shouldn't be taken as gospel. They are all speculating.

JMHO

I do separate the TH's "media people" from the Attorney's when listening for facts as they pertain to a case. Th's for the most part are just that, then there's the lawyers, Prosecutors and then Defense and this is where I remind myself when they speak they are speaking as the Lawyer they are. The Lawyers are the ones I want to talk, the Th's can... nevermind jmo

[Aedrys]

Originally Posted by cityslick

There's not a whole lot of people in this world who show 'young and full of life' after they get arrested though.

That is not what I meant. Sheesh. Of course he's not going to be smiling after he got arrested. No one is happy about that unless they just don't care, like Casey. What I mean is that he had a good life and was happy before he decided to shoot someone and things didn't go his way. He's not the hero anymore. He's a child killer. That has to be weighing on him. I'd rather he be in jail than out on his own. I fear he might not make it to trial if he slips into a depression. Like I said, his eyes looked deadened, like all the joy has gone out of him. It's a stark contrast to his previous pictures. It shows that all of this is weighing on him, and he might choose to kill himself rather than face an actual trial.

I never ever said that he should have had a happy mugshot. Please don't take my words out of context like that. Whatever side we're on, there should be concern for GZ's wellbeing.

[csziggy]

Originally Posted by elementary

Actually, how do we reconcile the three?

"In 2004, Zimmerman partnered with an African-American friend and opened up an Allstate insurance satellite office, Donnelly said.Then came 2005, and a series of troubles. Zimmerman's business failed, he was arrested, and he broke off an engagement with a woman who filed a restraining order against him.
<snip>
In 2007 he married Shellie Dean, a licensed cosmetologist, and in 2009 the couple rented a townhouse in the Retreat at Twin Lakes. Zimmerman had bounced from job to job for a couple of years, working at a car dealership and a mortgage company. At times, according to testimony from Shellie at a bond hearing for Zimmerman last week, the couple filed for unemployment benefits.
Zimmerman enrolled in Seminole State College in 2009, and in December 2011 he was permitted to participate in a school graduation ceremony, despite being a course credit shy of his associate's degree in criminal justice. Zimmerman was completing that course credit when the shooting occurred.."

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/20...on-martin?lite

So was he going to school full time or working or both? Nowhere does it mention that in the recent past he had a job or what that job was. Maybe I missed it somewhere.

I did find verification that GZ was licensed as an insurance agent in Florida:
Name of Licensee: ZIMMERMAN, GEORGE MICHAEL
License #: E007947
Business Location: ALTAMONTE SPRINGS,FLORIDA
Types and Classes of Valid Licenses
Type Original: GENERAL LINES (PROP & CAS)(0220)
Issue Date: 11/10/2004
Qualifying Appointment: NO
http://www.myfloridacfo.com/Data/AAR_ALIS1/index.htm

I don't seem that he had a business name for an insurance company, though I did find a George Michael Zimmerman who had a pressure wash company with a fictitious name in Lake Mary beginning in 2008 and still active. http://www.sunbiz.org/search.html

I don't think he could be an underwriter without a license. I'm not sure about being a 'fraud investigator' or whatever they called it.

IMO, JMO, etc.