Discussion in 'George Zimmerman Trial/Trayvon Martin' started by SoSueMe, May 3, 2012.
Yes and Zimmerman Sr, says he doesn't believe that was true. He said he is thankful that the FBI is involved because they will confirm that Trayvon was not on the phone with the friend.
I would expect main points of his statements to be the same, the little unimportant issues no. I believe the SA has more information/evidence then we do. I would very much like to see Trayvons autopsy report, I believe the truth is there, I also believe it will not match any of GZ statements. I also believe it was in part because of the inconsistencies that charges were brought against GZ.
Beautifully asked, summarized and worth repeating.
Excellent point! Thus far, only the g/f says TM was on the phone w/her. I'd also like to know where his ear buds were found.
I dont doubt they were on the phone at some point, but I dont believe that the girl friend was alarmed by anything she heard or else she would have called 911.
It's weird, though. Defendants are deemed suspicious if their stories change.
But there's also a famous legal case (I think it was litigation in re the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire) in which a lawyer DIScredited a witness by asking her to tell her story three times. When she told it exactly the same each time, the lawyer argued that she had memorized her story and wasn't describing an honest memory.
So both inconsistency and consistency are held against witnesses.
Bjut don't his cell records and her cell records probably match up?
And the detective testified that the statements GZ gave were also inconsistent with the evidence the SA has.
No. He never said it twice. There were two questions. He answered affirmative "yes" to the 5 statements (and we know there were at least 4). He then said he did not know their names which he would have answered, "No." regarding not knowing their names. There were two questions by SA. GZ answered yes to one questions and he did not know the names to the other. If GZ did not understand the question he would have told SA please explain. But he did not. He answered both questions. jmo
Do you call 911 everytime you lose someone on a cell phone?
She was going to testify before the Grand Jury I think they must. jmo
Both sides have said they want witness names withheld, out of fear for their safety and to prevent news media from interviewing witness about out what happened. But neither side bothered to file a motion asking Judge Lester to keep that information secret before the 15 day deadline was up.
O'Mara, however, disputes that the information needs to be released to the public now. Despite how O'Mara demanded discovery within 15 days of April 12 in his motion, on two occasions he told Local 6 -- once during an April 25 phone interview and again in person after Friday's hearing -- that the 15 day deadline that marks when Corey is required to turn over discovery to him, and then the public, doesn't start ticking until a defendant's arraignment. Zimmerman's is set for May 8.
The day after Local 6 published a story explaining how Ponce refuted O'Mara's deadline pegging discovery disclosure requirements to the upcoming May 8 arraignment, O'Mara backed off his initial statement and made a different argument about why Corey isn't required to release the discovery to members of the public.
"While the rules do state that discovery is due 15 days from demand, that is a right which George Zimmerman enjoys, and it is up to his defense team to decide how to handle these matters," read a statement on GZLegalCase.com, a website O'Mara setup partly to "dispute misinformation."
"We are delaying demanding the discovery until we can file motions to protect these witnesses," O'Mara's statement continues. "Once that is in place, discovery will flow to us, then the media and the public has access to it, under our rules."
But several lawyers Local 6 interviewed believe O'Mara is too late. They don't see how he can file a written demand for discovery within 15 days of April 12 with the court, and then somehow claim the deadline in Rule 3.220(b) doesn't apply -- just so that he can delay the public release of the records in order to file a motion to hide witness information he had plenty of time to file before the deadline.
How do we know whether GZ lied?
We have not heard GZ's story yet. I have seen nothing yet to indicate that GZ has lied about what happened that night, whether under oath or while cooperating with LE's investigation, about how old he thought TM was, or about anything else. That's not to say he has not lied or perjured himself, but I've not seen proof of that yet. JMO
(Pointing this out because your post doesn't indicate whether you believe it is a fact, or are merely expressing your opinion that he has lied under oath. JMO)
I wonder which of these statements was really Tray's last words. First they told us it was " you got me.", and now we are being told that it was really "Okay, you got it." That he repeated "Okay, you got it" two times, and then fell face down to the ground. I keep playing, and replaying that over and over again in my head.. and it keeps pointing me back to one thing. The end of the call to the non-emergency line.. Coincidence much?
Is this normal, for the person who has murdered someone to go back to the scene of the crime to do a reenactment of the crime, and to have his father there? Who was there to speak for Trayvon?
And said what?
"My call with my boyfriend was disconnected. He is somewhere 250 miles away; I don't know the address. But I heard a stranger ask him a couple of questions."
Somehow I don't see 911 jumping on that one... I'm not sure *I* would have known what to do under those circumstances and I'm a lot older than 15.
of course GZ Sr is going to say that. How would he know whether or not Trayvon was on the phone? That's what teenagers do, talk on the phone all the time!!
It's so sad that Trayvon isn't here to tell his side of the story!
When the LE dispatcher asked GZ how old he thought TM was he said late teens. On the stand he said a little younger than he was. (25, 26???). That's the lie. Could be he forgot what he told the dispatcher. I think GZ may have a history of telling people what they want to hear. At the bond hearing he was clearly trying to redeem himself in the eyes of the Martins. jmo
At that point he was considered SYG untouchable. I'm sure he thought it was all over but agreed to the reenactment because he was free and clear. Not sure they will be able to use that in court if he was considered free to go. jmo