I. Introduction
Many thanks to Ada4750 for being a good sport and playing the role of devil’s advocate defending the proposition that Trayvon Martin may have provoked the fight with George Zimmerman (a) by not running all the way home to the safety of Brandy Green’s residence and (b) by confronting and assaulting Zimmerman for following him.
With Ada’s cooperation and Case 1′s unwavering analytical focus, we can now clearly see the underlying supposition for this claim; namely, Martin did not actually fear Zimmerman and chose to hide, ambush, confront and assault Zimmerman for daring to follow him.
ADA argues that Martin’s girlfriend’s (Dee Dee) testimony is absolutely critical to the outcome of the case because she is the only witness who can counter Zimmerman’s claim that Martin was the aggressor. In other words, if the jury does not believe Dee Dee’s claim that Martin told her he was afraid of the creepy man following him, it might decide Zimmerman is not guilty.
I will show why this argument is not valid and the jury does not have to believe Dee Dee to reject Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense and find him guilty of second degree murder.
In any event, her testimony will be supported by her phone records and confirmed by Zimmerman’s own statements describing Martin’s flight, disappearance from view, and import of their initial exchange of words, if not their exact words (i.e., Martin’s question why are you following me and Zimmerman’s response, why are you here?)
II. Analysis
A. Zimmerman is on trial, not Martin
The prosecution must emphasize and the jury must never forget the central truth of this case: Trayvon Martin is not on trial; George Zimmerman is on trial because he did five things that caused Trayvon Martin’s death and then he lied to the police to cover-up what he did.
(1) He should have left his gun at home because the Neighborhood Watch Program (NWP) forbids carrying a gun;
(2) He should have remained in his vehicle because the NWP forbids running after potential suspects to prevent them from getting away before the police arrive;
(3) He should have left his gun in his vehicle and immediately returned to his vehicle after the dispatcher told him to stop following Martin, instead of continuing to follow and hunt Martin down after Martin disappeared;
(4) He should not have fired his weapon because his aggressive intentions and conduct created the situation in which he found himself;
(5) He should not have fired his weapon because we know from the evidence of his injuries and the forensic evidence at the scene that he was never reasonably in imminent danger of being killed or seriously injured, regardless of what he may have believed; and
(6) He never should have lied to the police because his lies establish his guilty state of mind just as effectively as a signed confession.
B. Martin’s character and whether he feared Zimmerman are irrelevant
It does not matter whether Tratvon Martin was the most evil and violent man who ever lived, the most meek and mild man who ever lived, or something in between. Plug-in any personality you can imagine and you still have these incontrovertible facts:
(1) Martin was unarmed;
(2) As a visitor at Brandy Green’s residence, he had a right to be where he was;
(3) His conduct was not suspicious;
(4) He had not committed a crime, was not committing a crime, and was not about to commit a crime;
(5) He attempted to avoid GZ by running away from him;
(6) GZ provoked a confrontation by getting out of his vehicle and running after him; and
(7) But for Zimmerman pursuing Martin, even after Martin disappeared from view, there never would have been a confrontation and Martin would be alive today.
Conclusion
Whether Martin really feared, merely feared, or did not fear Zimmerman is irrelevant. Whatever Martin may have done, Zimmerman provoked him to do it and this is true whether Martin was a psycho gangsta or a mild mannered non-violent and peaceful kid.
It would take a mighty strange concept of justice to ignore all of the incontrovertible facts and circumstances of this case and allow Zimmerman to walk away from this situation without facing consequences because Trayvon Martin did not run all the way home to Brandy Green’s residence to hide and instead had the temerity to merely ask or demand GZ to explain why he followed him.
The legal elements of self-defense and murder in the second degree do not mention the victim’s character.
The victim can be anyone, good or bad.
The victim in this case was a good kid with a bright future ahead of him, but he did not have to be. He could have been the criminal psycho gangsta George Zimmerman claimed him to be and George Zimmerman would still be guilty of murder in the second degree.
BECAUSE when he shot and killed Trayvon Martin:
(1) Zimmerman was not reasonably in fear of suffering imminent death or serious bodily injury, as shown by the evidence of his minor injuries, the forensic evidence, and his many conflicting and inconsistent statements that are equivalent to a signed confession of guilt; and
(2) the shooting was an imminently dangerous act exhibiting a depraved mind indifferent to Trayvon Martin’s life.
Special thanks to all who participated and helped shape the discussion.
Note: the word “reasonable” is italicized to emphasize the self-defense test is objective
Professor I was over on the last post talking to you! Smiles…..
Great post as always and IMO George Zimmerman’s own statements on the NEN call can never be misconstrued. His statements on all the audio’s can never be misconstrued. From the beginning, George Zimmerman has stated he followed a running Trayvon Martin.
AND when he told the officer who arrived on the scene he shot Trayvon, those word’s can be twisted ten times til sundown….but, he followed and shot and killed a running teenager that he admits to Hannity and the world that he DID NOT think had a weapon (he even smiles and smirks saying it doesn’t he?).
My question….Is there an advantage or disadvantage to having a jury of 6 vs 12?
Nor can he say he did not understand “we don’t need you to do that,” because in his own handwritten statement he acknowledges that he was told to stop – he totally understood what that meant.
I wondered the same thing about a smaller jury.
I think this is the damning part:
” But for Zimmerman pursuing Martin, even after Martin disappeared from view, there never would have been a confrontation and Martin would be alive today.”
It narrows the self defense argument even further because it requires a duty to retreat. Zimmerman never identifies himself to TM. At every turn, when he had a chance to retreat, he didn’t.
The rebuttal will be that Zimmerman wasn’t stalking TM or breaking any laws, but that, as far as I know, is not the standard for provocation as far as pursuit. I believe it was boaz or someone like that who mentioned that in fact in FL the prosecution merely needs to show pursuit. if that is the case, and given how it narrows the defense to having to meet a duty to withdraw its hard to see even if one claims that the fight began at the T and moved to the place where the body is found- how at any point Zimmerman performed his duty to retreat. The witness who said she heard shouting voices is also damning on that front. During the shouting, Zimmerman once again could have retreated, etc.
That’s why this is at least manslaughter to me. Depraved mind I think is a little bit harder to show, but not the requisite state of mind for manslaughter. I believe the depraved mind can be shown, but I could see a jury reasonably saying there is some small amount of reasonable doubt just enough to decide on manslaughter, but not acquittal.
The case is Mixon v. State, 59 So.2d 38 (Fla. 1952)
Is that current law?
It would seem to make it very clear that one need not show some other law was broken as far as “stalking laws” to show provocation. It would also seem to say that once provoking a fight it also seems to suggest that self defense is almost completely lost to the defense as a matter of law due to the provocation. Is that still the law? if so, the case is stronger against GZ than I thought.
Also, if this is true, does the defense even get to have the self-defense instruction included at trial?
I don’t know how the law reads but I think the depraved mind is in how Zimmerman profiled Martin: “a real suspicious guy” by itself doesn’t do it. but add “f….. punks” and “these a…ho…., they always get away” and you get a mindset, I would say a depraved mindset, that leads to murder. Zimmerman was out to get his f…. funk a….h…. no matter what.
i belive the depraved mind will be shown as the “cry for help” and then the voice saying “no” right before the shot. this is how he will be convicted of murder 2 because at this point he knew hat the person was no longer a threat
You know the more I think about it, the more shrewd George is. He set himself up with lies about going to the store so he was not on official NHW. Then he says he was not actually following Martin, just looking for an address to give to dispatcher. He plays dumb and says he can’t remember certain things and blames it on ADHD.
My question is how smart is George Zimmerman or did Osterman and/or his father prompt him and together the concocted the ever changing story with George’s memory being the problem the story changes.?
My fear is that the prosecution won’t be able to persuade the jury that George was lying all along, while George hides behind his forgetfulness (ADHD) for not having his story straight.
This is the most disgusting lot of people I have ever heard of, the whole Zimmerman family and the Ostermans with a little Frank Taaffe and Joe Oliver thrown in.
Birds of a feather!
You said,
I think those excuses are pretty transparent and can be disproven.
Also ADHD affects concentration and not memory. Any number of qualified experts can establish that to a reasonable medical certainty.
Didn’t George already use the memory (ADHD) excuse when he said he couldn’t remember the 3 streets in the complex?
I hope the prosecution can win this. As I said before, the Zimmermans and their friends are the most despicable people I have heard of, lying to cover up the murder of a teen and even making money on it.
also the street he claims he didnt know the name of is the ONLY street you can enter the complex on it runs from front entrance to back, when he first looked to move there is directions had to be ENTER on twin trees lane……to leave or come home he had to drive on that street and had to pass its street sign…..
there is simply no way on earth he didnt know the name of that street.
It may or may not come up, but the Pros may have the ability to show that GZ is at least a Chronic liar, via testimony of MO and Serino regarding the issue of his education. He’d told MO his supposed best friend and others that he had graduated when he had not. He also told Serino at one point that he was going to school for something other than Criminal Justice. The first lie resulted in money being spent for him and receiving praise for something he hadn’t done. The second? Potentially meant to give the impression that while he had aspirations of being a magistrate, cop wtfever, he wasn’t completely familiar with the law. I think the second will be more damning in the fact it occurred during the middle of the first investigation. If he can lie about something like that who’s to say he’s not lying about things that actually pertain to the case?
Oh and this just came to be as far as lies – On SH he said he wasn’t afraid of Trayvon, knew he didn’t have a weapon/was bluffing etc. In one of his interviews with Serino however he said he never spoke to Trayvon because he was afraid. Something Serino countered with the fact GZ then got out to follow..oh excuse me go in the same direction as Trayvon.
George’s facial expressions in the Hannity interview show that George thinks he’s shrewd and clever, but the content of what he says shows him to be a prevaricator and without empathy.
Funny thing, but when I watched George Zimmerman on Hannity with a smirk at times, I could not understand how either Hannity or O’Mara didn’t stop the interview. Zimmerman was his own worst enemy with his smirks and preposterous stories.
I have come to the conclusion Zimmerman is pure evil and is enabled by family and friends. The thing I don’t comprehend is are his family and friends (and now his supporters) duped by him or are they just plain stupid, outwitted by the likes of George Zimmerman? How can they not see through him?
When I watched the interview, You should look at Hannity’s eyes. When he ask the question did you have any regrets, he said no , Hannitys eyes got wide and he leaned back like are you serious dude?
Hannity wouldn’t stop the interview. He got the only interview with GZ. He got ratings. Whatever SH’s view of the case, the interview goes on b/c it’s a high profile case.
As to the Zimmerman family and friends continuing to support him, GZ is a flawed human being, as are we all. He did something terrible, but he is still deserving of the support of those close to him. If it were your son or spouse or friend, would you dump him or continue to show support?
Folks on here seem much smarter than MO so I expect you wouldn’t mess things up further by appearing on Dr. Phil, but behind the scenes you could do a lot to help your family member deal with this.
I see why Hannity may have wanted to continue the interview for the ratings, but Hannity pretty much backed George Zimmerman and in turn, George Zimmerman made anyone who backed him look foolish because of his statements about Trayvon skipping instead of running and that it was God’s plan and he no regrets the night he killed Trayvon Martin.
As far as his family and friends supporting him, if George Zimmerman was in my family or a close friend, I would feel terrible and would not continue to support him in his series of lies to cover for his murder of an innocent teen. On the other hand, if he told me he was remorseful, he made a huge mistake and regretted his actions, I would support him the best I could under the circumstances. The lack of remorse and the lies would be the reason I would not choose to support George Zimmerman if he were a friend or family member privately or publically. To me George Zimmerman is more than flawed, he is evil because of his lies and cover-up making Trayvon responsible for his own death and George the victim.
Great post jm and I agree.
“If it were your son or spouse or friend, would you dump him or continue to show support?”
I would dump him. My family, close friends and I are the kind to help law enforcement and far from the kind to help a person like GZ. For example, I applaud W9. GZ needed tough love or good professional help that he apparently never really received–or worse couldn’t really receive if he’s a sociopath. It’s time for law enforcement to step in, because he’s become a menace to society. He had a concealed weapon. An unarmed 17-year-old boy, who did nothing wrong, ended up dead. I wouldn’t need to know much more than that.
I don’t see how anyone could get on board with GZ, unless they are similar to him in bad ways. Even if I were his identical twin brother, I would dump him. Worse, I would know in my gut what he really did, even if I couldn’t prove it in a court of law. In fact, I would be the fastest to dump him, if I hadn’t already for other reasons. He’s a prolific liar to everyone. He makes atrocious decisions that adversely affect other people, and he has no regrets. He doesn’t seem to be good at anything even he himself seems to care about–like being a good family member (presuming he does care about this) or cop or neighborhood watch captain.
>>“If it were your son or spouse or friend, would you dump him or continue to show support?”
… GZ needed tough love or good professional help that he apparently never really received–or worse couldn’t really receive if he’s a sociopath.<<
Which brings up some interesting questions also. I don't really believe that sociopaths are born that way. I don't know for sure, but I would guess that sociopaths are either people who have learned that it is profitable to manipulate others for their own benefit (either by example or by indirectly getting that message), or people whose who had a childhood that was dyfunctional in the sense of not have the chance to form connections to other people.
As for continuing to support him, a lot of the commenters on this blog probably just wouldn't ever have a friend or spouse who was like that. Of course, people have less control over who their family members are, but if sociopaths are made and not "born", then hopefully most of them are very unlikely to bring up a child like that. It's hard to imagine being in a situation like that if it has never happened to you. You still feel like your child is your child and want to help them in certain ways regardless, like visiting them in jail or giving them money if you can afford it. But I wouldn't back them in lying or trying to evade responsibiliy for their acts.
After teaching elementary kids for some 20 years, I’m not so sure that true sociopaths are made. I believe they are born without the capacity to develop a conscience. There are disorders like Aspergers where people (mostly makes) don’t quite understand emotions or social interactions. To me, that’s on a continuum to being unable to truly internalize morality. I’ve met a few (blessedly few) kids who truly scared me. Sociopaths already, stalking and bullying at the tender age of 9. Still many of them comprehend consequences. Not many become murderers.
There is an argument that most of the Wall Street bankers and CEOs of major U.S. corporations are sociopaths.
This is the best one yet!!!
The only thing I have a problem with is:
(1) He should have left his gun at home because the Neighborhood Watch Program (NWP) forbids carrying a gun;
(2) He should have remained in his vehicle because the NWP forbids running after potential suspects to prevent them from getting away before the police arrive;
AFAIK,
(1) He was not patrolling Neighborhood Watch that night but was on his way to Target to go shopping and had his gun with him, which is legal and fine.
(2) HOWEVER, even if he was not on NWP that night, he should have remained in his vehicle because he was aware of the NWP and WHY the rules are there. Once he started to follow and was told to stop, he should have just stopped. Trayvon was doing nothing wrong. It doesn’t matter if he was going to do something wrong, it was now up to the police.
I agree with everything else. Thank you very much for this wonderful blog entry.
But he always carries his gun while on NW and if the issue comes up, he will say he was on his way to a convenience store and not on duty.
He has not produced a schedule and I’ll bet there never was a formal schedule
It’s a ridiculous excuse and the absence of a schedule should prove it..
Very true. I have asked several times if there was a schedule, and no one seemed to know. It also was stated that perhaps it was just like he was “always” on duty and he was, of course, the go to guy if people had questions. So yes, in that respect, even though he was licensed to carry, because he was always on NW, he should not have been carrying.
I just think it is really convenient he was on his way to Target that night – and also just way too convenient that he forgot he had it on him until he had to pull it out and use it, I mean considering he always wears it except for to work. So which was it? He had it on him because he was on his way to Target or he forgot he had it on him because he was on watch but oh my, lookey there, there it is.
Ughhhh.
I mean – how does he get passed the point of explaining why he was watching the kid in the first place since there was nothing unusual about the kid other than he was a black kid in the area.
He “looked suspicious,” remember – he was walking leisurely.
I know GZ isn’t racist, it is just that all black kids/people look suspicious to him, even if they are 7-9 years old.
eyes roll
PROFESSOR “He has not produced a schedule and I’ll bet there never was a formal schedule. It’s a ridiculous excuse and the absence of a schedule should prove it.”
Exactly ! If Zimmerman doesn’t patrol the area regularly on some sort of a schedule then he is on 24-7 NHW.
I hope the prosecution is looking at your website and can use some of your and other posters logic. I just can’t see how they can lose – but this is the same state that gave Casey Anthony freedom.
professor – i am not convinced that a schedule would benefit george. neighborhood watch programs are not supposed to ‘patrol’. when i lived in san jose a few years ago, i was a member of my NWP. our block captain was a retired detective from SJPD and all of my neighbors on the cul de sac were either active or retired LE.
i went to my meetings, read my handbook, put up the NW placard in my window and never did anyone ‘patrol’. there are other, more training intensive programs in which people are assigned a special car and identifying clothing – but that is not NW (i cannot recall the name of that program).
what we were expected to do was to simply notice throughout the day/night, whether at home or coming/going, activities that seemed suspicious and were to call that into dispatch. no patrol, no personal involvement other than the phone call and speaking with LE officers if/when they came to your door. pretty simple stuff – but you basically agreed to be ‘on duty’ (really just paying attention) at all times. gz took his role way beyond what was needed or expected.
GZ turned his NW into an undercover vigilante program, he covered up his patrolling by disguising it as other activities, like dog walking, which would allow him to carry his weapon.
It will be incredibly difficult for him to explain to a jury, how he manage to forget he had a gun, that he carries everywhere every day. It’s one of the reasons GZ can’t be allowed to take the stand.
If the SP plays that segment of him saying he forgot he had a gun, then plays the Hannity, Osterman interviews where he and Osterman says he carries his gun everywhere but work, he’s gonna have some really difficult explaining to do.
With so many opportunities to show GZ to be a brash, boldfaced liar, he dare not sit in front of a jury and try to answer any questions at all. All he can do is sit there while MOM puts on some “Wonderland” theory of innocence, and watch helplessly while the SP tears it apart. But that’s about the best the defense is going to get.
So, to earn their keep and keep the donations rolling in, MOM has to find things to do, to make it seem like he’s working really hard on some promising theory that will work. The more outrageous the show MOM puts on, the more GZ’s supporters love it. Maybe next he’ll find away to appear in blackface without seeming incredibly racist of course, that’s sure to bring in donations.
Yes, that’s the way NWPs are supposed to work, but GZ used it to appoint himself as the Sheriff, without signing up any deputies.
I think he was always packin’ and like I said before, if there were any questions, his default response would have been, “There have been some break-ins in my neighborhood. I was on my way to the store when I noticed this real suspicious guy who looks like he’s up to no good . . .”
“Yes, that’s the way NWPs are supposed to work, but GZ used it to appoint himself as the Sheriff, without signing up any deputies. I think he was always packin’ and like I said before, if there were any questions, his default response would have been, “There have been some break-ins in my neighborhood. I was on my way to the store when I noticed this real suspicious guy who looks like he’s up to no good . . .” ”
Yes, and I’d be willing to bet that, that retired detective kept notes and wrote reports, because if he learned anything over his years on the force, after things happen is the wrong time to start reporting.
The first thing GZ should have learned in any law course is that reports and notes are the most essential tools of law enforcement and law practice.
Try this everyone, you’ll see how much more effective it makes you.
Open word or note pad and leave it open. Then, as you read, when you come across something that strikes you as important, quickly open notepad and jot something down. Give it a name like Scrapbook.txt and save it to your desktop so you can find it. If you save urls be sure to jot a line to remind you where it goes. Always click save before you switch the focus away. Then watch your effectiveness improve by leaps and bounds.
GZ should have had names, phone numbers and addresses of people who volunteered to get involved in any way, and he should have had a neighborhood map on his wall with push pins to indicate incidents. If not, then it’s a good thing they all kept him off the force and out of the courts, except as a defendant.
GZ had a cheap holster that didn’t protect his body from his gun sticking into it. So, how could he not know that he had his gun?
Thank you again, Professor, for giving us info to understand this case. Re: NW. IMO, when GZ called NEN, beginning his report with “We’ve had break-in’s in this area, and there’s a suspicious ….” he put on his NW hat without removing his gun off his person.
There is also info for what motivated him to get a gun and a cc license — Big Boi — that pit bull dog running loose around GZ’s house! That in itself gives reason to believe that GZ would and did carry his gun while walking or driving in the neighborhood. IOWs, when would he ever be able to separate himself from NW?
Early reports in March kept saying he was patrolling. He was described as “on the job.” Then he began to say he was NOT patrolling; he was on his way to the store. The reason is that (I believe) there had been complaints TO CHIEF BILL LEE that George was patrolling with a loaded gun. Residents SAID he was patrolling and one even commented that he was “very strict.” Everybody knew, and several people objected, to his forays around the neighborhood with his trigger finger and his gun. They felt uncomfortable unless they were part of his little cabal of “patrol goons.” He was self-appointed Gestapo. The reason the reports stopped mentioning that was that HE began to give conflicting information emphasizing groceries (nice, peaceful, family stuff) instead of militancy — for obvious reasons.
By the way, I counted 37 early reports of police records showing that in the previous year that neighborhood had had “eight burglaries, nine thefts and a shooting.” No mention EVER of the details of the “shooting.” Until Osterman says, on TV, that Shellie called him between 7 and 8 pm on 2/26/2012 to tell him that George “shot somebody else.”
MY QUESTIONS: Did the “nine thefts” include the “eight burglaries”?
What about that “shooting”? Who, what, where, how, when, and all like that. ???
“MY QUESTIONS: Did the “nine thefts” include the “eight burglaries”?
Probably stuff stolen during a burglary, but I don’t know for sure.
“What about that “shooting”? Who, what, where, how, when, and all like that. ???”
That’d be one mighty interesting question, as well as checking for unsolved gun homicides and assaults in Seminole County.
His normal vital signs after shooting Trayvon still bother me. I keep asking why?
There may be nothing to the comment, but then again . . .
Professor,
Yes, his normal vitals after experiencing an event such as this seems quite eerie, but also look how many times Witness Selma had to ask what was going on? On or about the third time, he tells her to call 911 or whatever. Odd behavior and probably not consistent with the response of most people after such an event.
@Malisha
I believe the shooting was the murder of Trayvon. Right! Some neighborhood watch guy he was.
” IOWs, when would he ever be able to separate himself from NW?”
He never did.
Professor, regarding the normal vital signs. The cocktail of prescribed drugs Gz was taking could account for that. By reacting to decreased anxiety and nervousness…the drug causes one to not react to stressful situations with feelings of stress. IMO Gz felt no fear, anxiety, or anything other than thinking clearly…”I’ve got to clean this up, I just blew this “thug” a new hole in his body”. He showed no reactions to the severity of killing someone, being taken to a police station, being questioned, being viewed as a killer (murderer). Someone with the cool calm demeanor of his is feeling nothing but a sense of euphoria and…saying, let me make sure I cover my ass.
The drugs are to keep you from feeling anxious and if not fearful or anxious….your vital signs would be normal. And, of course, what we now know of Gz’s normal psyche, the addition of drugs just let him see the world through his eyes.
And, no Gz, a 28 y/o did not need that amount of heavy narcotics to function normally in an everyday world. His past performances in life does not lead me to believe this for one moment. He’s not a psychotic killer. IMO… He is a cold blooded one….and if your blood’s just plain damned cold…you cannot have high blood pressure, racing pulse, or really a care in the world….except for yourself that is…..snark alert! I’m sleepy. Won’t proof read.
But since the cops effed up, we don’t KNOW what meds GZ was on that night. I rather believe that GZ is cold blooded. There are no meds for that.
“His normal vital signs after shooting Trayvon still bother me. I keep asking why?”
Quite some time ago I read about a study that was done that showed that there are people, probably psychopaths, whose vitals actually slow down when most people’s actually go up. These people are extremely dangerous. I’ll try to remember more. Right now I don’t remember enough to try to find it.
otoh, It could be that killing someone wasn’t such a big deal, especially someone as expendable as a young black thug. He thought he could get away with it as a member of the LE club (in his mind, not actually).
Another possibility: his meds. Someone I know quite well was recently diagnosed as bi-polar. When he first started his meds and for a few weeks after, he had no emotional reaction to anything.
Let’s say he was not patrolling…what was he doing the minute he started following Trayvon in his car after calling NEN? It becomes an even worse scenario for George, because then he becomes just a citizen with a gun stalking another citizen without a gun, for no legitimate reason-But then again that is what citizen George always was…
He has been using the legitimacy of the cloak of NW to cover up his blatant violations of Trayvon’s civil rights when needed and shedding the cloak whenever it becomes harmful to his position.
All your minds have been tainted so it is a hard exercise to attempt, but try to imagine this story if George had ZERO association with NW. I have managed to do it and I can tell you that it is even queerer and more unnerving to my mind to hear civilian George’s machinations and actions on the NEN call, then it is to hear those of NW George on the same NEN call. My mind unconsciously assumes NW George has some right or duty to be surveying Trayvon. But my mind immediately and noxiously rejects the thought that civilian George would follow someone in his car, Civilian George comes off like a cowboy vigilante crazy person-But then again that is what NW George always was…that is why civilian George needed and wanted to be NW George.
very true. And as far as this case goes I so wish Trayvon was alive(or had said something about what I am about to mention) for one very VERY good reason in regards to whether GZ was on duty or not that night. If I am remembering correctly the female block captain that was interviewed said that she regularly saw GZ patrolling the neighborhood in his car – WITH THE LIGHTS OFF. IF GZ was in fact on patrol, with his lights off that would have drawn even more attention to him from Trayvon. I don’t know what sort of neighborhoods Trayvon has lived in his life, but growing up in as close to the burbs as you can get even I knew as a kid that someone rolling down the neighborhood with their lights off was up to something and its a good idea to keep moving or at least get the hell out of their line of sight.
That or someone who might have seen GZ out that night when he first spotted GZ
Yep. That would be a BINGO!
Wow!
Tzar, you are so right. When I think of George a JoeBlowCitizen, he’s a scary dude. Excellent synopsis.
Do we know from the doc dump how much money he had in his pockets? Credit cards…the story about Target is yet another lie.
two quarters… don’t know about credit cards
if I find link will post
I think their credit cards were all maxed out…two quarters…going to the Target…right…
It’s possible that Shellie carried the money. If GZ actually was going to Target it’s a near certainty that Shellie was with him. As far as I’ve heard and read GZ never said that he was in the truck alone and I don’t believe that he was ever asked. His professed destination has shifted over the months, from “the store” to Target to (most recently by, way of Osterman) a “convenience store”.
I wouldn’t rule that out at all, you know. I thing Shellie being in the car is within the realm of possibility. In one video, he slips and mentions her and then stops himself…where there is smoke there is fire. But either way, it isn’t a good thing.
princss6 says: “Do we know from the doc dump how much money he had in his pockets? Credit cards…the story about Target is yet another lie.”
Actually we don’t know these things, but it does seem strange he wasn’t asked and did not offer. Two quarters are found in his pocket in a sandwich baggie. I think that should have provoked some questions of how he intended to buy groceries with that? Or, just looking at those quarters, should have provoked him to offer that he had either money or cards in his wallet or in his truck, instead he remains silent on the matter, just like he fell silent when asked to explain why TM was killed so far away from the tee. We may never get a definitive answer on this, because it’s low priority and GZ isn’t likely to testify.
Is there any lawyer here who would put GZ on the stand?
True true but like the Professor unless GZ’s words can be independently corroborated, I believe they are untrue. GZ stating he was going to the Target is not independently corroborated in my opinion since the police did nothing to verify if he was or not. That can be moved off the table and we are back at him patrolling which he never had the authority to do.
First, it’s GZ’s call to make and I believe he will insist on testifying even if O’Mara insists he not do so.
Second, he may have to testify in order to get a self-defense instruction.
Pursuant to the admission-by-a-party-opponent rule, the prosecution will cherry-pick through his statements to introduce what they want and we can be relatively certain that they won’t introduce anything that helps establish self-defense.
Subject to the rule of completeness that would allow the defense to complete an incomplete thought or statement, the defense would not be able to get any of the rest of his statements into evidence because they are barred by the hearsay rule.
That might require GZ to testify even if he does not want to do so.
Note: Pursuant to Davis v. Alaska, 415 US 308 (1974), he has an argument that might permit some of his statements in.
Good, I want to hear him on the witness stand say he didn’t think TM was afraid of him, but he was afraid of TM. Errr… oh wait, I think it was he wasn’t afraid of TM but TM wasn’t afraid of him either? No, that can’t be it. He was afraid of TM before he was unafraid of TM, then he became afraid of TM again? Hoo Boy, the jury is probably going to convict him of every crime under the sun, including killing Cock Robbin! The awesome insanity of it all, will probably cause the judge to sentence GZ to jail “Until the Sun goes out!”
From pure curiosity, is there a reason why the quarters were in a baggie? Or did the police do that?
No, the police didn’t do that.
But, as far as I know, change and/or bills in a baggie has usually to do with people making collections, sales, or just trying to keep money separated for various reasons. A small real estate office might, for example, put small fees collected into baggies until they could be entered on the books. If it was a home office, it isn’t uncommon for someone to take the bills out of a bag for expenses, then put change back into the bag to remind them of how much in bills they took out. So the quarters might indicate, for example, that the bag was supposed to contain fifty dollars.
Professor wrote,
“Many thanks to Ada4750 for being a good sport and playing the role of devil’s advocate defending the proposition that Trayvon Martin may have provoked the fight with George Zimmerman”
Oh Professor, you are so kind
. Your post of course was spot on and were the points that many of us were making.
“But for Zimmerman pursuing Martin, even after Martin disappeared from view, there never would have been a confrontation and Martin would be alive today.”
Yes, but for his actions…..Also, according to GZ, he thought that TM was long gone as many of these guys know the area and know how to dip out (paraphrasing the, but y’all get it) even more the reason he should have returned and made it to his truck.
riddle me this:
if he thought he was long gone, then why did he was he afraid Trayvon might overhear him give the dispatcher his apartment number and address?
So George were you lying on the NEN call or were you lying in the interview?
@Tzar,
You already know, bruh. He is a ball of lies and confusion. During the interview with Serino and when he stated the part about not wanting TM to overhear him and Serino said (paraphrasing) he would have been pretty close to you, then GZ starts saying he didn’t want anyone to hear it (something to that effect). Anyone like who? Where there other residents or individuals out that night that he saw and that possibly saw him? Hear from their windows? Hmmm…..
@Tzar. Absolutely! There’s another way of understanding GZ’s statement within the context. GZ was addressing where the cops would meet him. The “Oh crap. I don’t want to give it all out — I don’t know where this kid is at” can also mean, “I don’t want the cops coming to my house. I don’t know where this kid is so am going to find him.”
The conclusion then becomes;
“Actually can you have them call me and I’ll tell them where I’m at?”
@tbt
The guy seems to have never met a lie he did not like. How does he go from “I don’t want THIS KID to hear” to “I don’t want ANYONE to hear me”?
and to think he has supporters…SMH
@Tzar,
I tell ya. Yeah, but listen to the Serino/Singleton interview. I believe it is the 2/29 interview when they are going through the 911 call or it may be the 2/27 interview. As he is saying that, Serino talks over him and says yeah okay that’s fine and proceeds with another push-back, as I like to call it.
LLmpapa (and even Serino if I recall correctly) worked out that in the time it took for GZ to get to the T Trayvon had not had time to run home to safety. I reckon GZ knew Trayvon did not have time and suspected strongly he was laying low somewhere down the dark dog walk.
@gbrbsb,
YESSS!!!! You have me thinking. GZ stated that these guys know the area and I’m gathering, know how to exit quickly. So where would he have thought he went? TM didn’t run on RVC (the street where GZ claimed to have went to get and address). Hmmmm…..
In his previous NEN calls, he also refused to give out his address.
That was SOP for George.
And I wonder why he did this. He had no problem with giving his name, so he was not trying to remain anonymous.
Would it look bad if his neighbors saw police at his place all the time? Did want to minimize the number of people who knew he was behind all the complaints? Did he want the option to return to his place without finding the police already there? Was he just a control freak and could not bear the thought of the police going to the wrong place and everything not playing out the way he planned it?
“Would it look bad if his neighbors saw police at his place all the time? Did want to minimize the number of people who knew he was behind all the complaints? Did he want the option to return to his place without finding the police already there?”
How about, he did not want the police to see stolen property in his house?
What’s strange is that when he was telling the detectives about that suspicious person (think the one they eventually caught), he stated that he gave out his address. Something to the effect that he always gives if our; he doesn’t know why. I don’t know if he was trying to establish a pattern of not knowing streets or what. I don’t know.
Don’t forget he appears to be a man with many secrets who deals with most people at arms length on a need to know basis using deceit and manipulation.
Or… Maybe even go there and find his truck the next day.???
“Yes, but for his actions…..Also, according to GZ, he thought that TM was long gone as many of these guys know the area and know how to dip out (paraphrasing the, but y’all get it) even more the reason he should have returned and made it to his truck.”
Even more reason for him to have driven to the back entrance, parked, and worked his way back toward the T intersection by walking N/B between the two buildings.
@Professor,
Oooooohhh.
Even more reason for him to have driven to the back entrance, parked, and worked his way back toward the T intersection by walking N/B between the two buildings.
LOL!
Lightbulb – Parking down there also gives Shelie or anyone else the ability to move his vehicle without anyone really noticing as he lived closer to the back entrance.
“Even more reason for him to have driven to the back entrance, parked, and worked his way back toward the T intersection by walking N/B between the two buildings.”
I don’t think George drove to the back entrance. I think his lie about going to RVC to get a house number is based on his actually going to RVC and then down the sidewalk (on foot), then between the houses to the path. He can’t admit to going down RVC but a bit of truth crept in that he went to RVC and then the made up reason that makes no sense.
But in the long run, it doesn’t matter. GZ hunted TM and killed him. The prosecution can show that w/o knowing the specifics of what GZ did in the 2 minutes.
“(2) the shooting was an imminently dangerous act exhibiting a depraved mind indifferent to Trayvon Martin’s life.”
Zimmerman leaving home with a firearm was an imminently dangerous act exhibiting a depraved mind indifferent to the life of anyone around who was young and black.
Nevertheless, it was also a dangerous thing for an armed GZ to refuse to identify himself at the several opportunities he had to avoid the need to shoot someone. GZ never tried to prevent harm.
Meaning that he never intended that harm should not befall his target. GZ never intended to wait for the police, and never intended to identify himself. Meaning that he intended to safeguard an excuse to kill. I hope the SP puts that before the jury.
Yep, I think you nailed that, Lonnie.
Indeed, you did.
Thank you Professor, I needed that. The more I read GZ’s little stories, the more inclined I am to vote Murder One. If the trial is anything like these blogs, if GZ and MOM put up a vigorous defense, the judge will probably be left with the same feeling and max him.
And even more ironic when you think that his defence/excuse or whatever for his assault and battery of a police officer in 2005 (or 2007) was, wait for it, the officer had “failed to ID himself”
Ha! Crazy, huh? Not only that, if GZ came to the defense of his friend in a verbal and physical manner against a grown man (police officer), then obviously he has some physical strength and is willing to fight, but he becomes helpless and weak against this skinny kid? Riiiiiight.
Oh, the irony of it all.
Exactly! Are we not to live and learn?? Wait…maybe his ADHD caused him to forget that valuable lesson too! *sarcasm
Yes, that too, but even more importantly, here we see GZ’s own confidence in, not only his self defensive capabilities, but in his ability to play offense as well, with a healthy adult male. Where he voluntarily, rather than by being forced to act, engages an unknown adult male physically and so forcefully that other policemen have to come to the officers aid. That may be many things, but it is not the actions of a “mild mannered” person.
He must have loved being abouncer.
@TBT Great thinking… never thought of that! How come GZ was so utterly helpless against a scrawny adolescent (70 kg for 6`2″ = scrawny) but had no fear of wading into a fight for a friend against what was probably a VERY grown man (from my experience there policemen in the US tend to be pretty large) or indeed had no fear working, of all things as a bouncer, if that is a fact and not just a rumour as some theories go.
And to take your idea even further; either GZ was completely delusional about his capabilities or how come he wanted to be a policeman, a profession that surely doesn´t admit wusses who can´t even stand up to a skinny kid.
*mind blown*
First words out of his mouth (whether he was on the ground being beaten or standing up looking at the kid or what or where) should have been:
Hold on, I’m not gonna hurt you… My name’s George…
Case #1 wrote,
“I mean – how does he get passed the point of explaining why he was watching the kid in the first place since there was nothing unusual about the kid other than he was a black kid in the area.”
I’ve asked this questions quite a few times. I am still waiting for him to articulate what made TM “real suspicious.” He has set-up in his own mind what classifies as being suspicious. When I hear him say, it was raining, he didn’t look an athlete training in the rain, etc., it is sickening. Who the hell is he to determine how a person should act in certain weather conditions? Like I said, if TM wasn’t with his hands cupped over his eyes peering in people’s windows or twisting doorknobs, keep it moving.
My theory is George Zimmerman did have a racist thing going on (the kid didn’t act “white” enough? ) along with a need to prove something to his family and BFF Osterman, since he failed at everything he tried and didn’t graduate from his criminal justice courses. Add in a personality disorder or 2 and a history of aggressive behavior that he obviously got away with.
jm wrote,
“Add in a personality disorder or 2 and a history of aggressive behavior that he obviously got away with.”
Yes!! I don’t recall the disposition of the case as it relates the Arab co-worker that filed the complaint against GZ. Was GZ fired? Reprimanded? Did the co-worker leave as a result of nothing being done? If it is the latter, another one to add of GZ getting away with bad behavior.
Re: “I don’t recall the disposition of the case as it relates the Arab co-worker that filed the complaint against GZ. Was GZ fired? Reprimanded? ”
The report doesn’t say whether GZ was reprimanded, but it does give the feeling that GZ stopped hazing his co-worker after the official meeting resulting from the complaint. GZ was subsequently terminated, but for harassing HR with complaints about the managers and that he could do a better job than they were.
Xena wrote,
“The report doesn’t say whether GZ was reprimanded, but it does give the feeling that GZ stopped hazing his co-worker after the official meeting resulting from the complaint.”
Thank you Xena.
“GZ was subsequently terminated, but for harassing HR with complaints about the managers and that he could do a better job than they were.”
For real? Oh my goodness.
for your files….
letter to management employee to Car-Max about GZ
http://abcnews.go.com/US/letter-accuses-george-zimmerman-bullying/story?id=16659097
Thank you my Blushed Brown.:)
; ^ )))
Zimmerman: Uh… It was raining, he was looking into the houses, looking behind, looking at me, he wasn’t walking quickly to get out of the rain, he didn’t look like he was trying to head home, he didn’t look like a hardcore athlete that wanting to like train in the rain or anything. He just looked out of place.
Just asinine! Here’s the bottom line.In Zimmerman’s world….. Trayvon was a black kid so that automatically made him a bad character. How dare Trayvon breath the same oxygen from GZ’s neighborhood.
Zimmerman is a threat to society. A loose cannon cannot be allowed to roam the streets to kill kids based on their ignorant assumptions.
In response to Zimmerman:
“It was raining” – Okay.
“he was looking into the houses” – Hmmm…looking into? His definition of into is questionable. How close was he? During the re-enactment, he had TM on the grass but a considerable distance which would not constitute “looking into.” People walk past my home everyday and I see them looking at my house and the attached homes for one reason or another. So?
“looking behind” – Ummm…yeah…myself and a great deal of the population when walking in the dark, look behind themselves
“looking at me” – Okay, maybe because you were staring and following him and he took notice of you.
“he wasn’t walking quickly to get out of the rain” – I’m so very sorry that he wasn’t walking quickly enough per your standards and requirements. Rain is just water and it wasn’t a hailstorm or anything of such.
“he didn’t look like he was trying to head home” – Hmmm… how would you know this? Again, I am so very sorry that he offended you and did not satisfy your scientific-based beliefs as to what constitutes being real suspicious.
“he didn’t look like he was trying to head home, he didn’t look like a hardcore athlete that wanting to like train in the rain or anything” – So you were able to determine his build? You also stated that you weren’t afraid nor did you think that he had a weapon, so what was so dangerous or advantageous about him during the altercation that you felt the need to use deadly force? So if you deemed him an athlete, then you wouldn’t have bothered with him because he would have been doing something “understandable” according to your specifications?
“He just looked out of place” – He just looked out of place? So it’s not about “suspicious activities,” but more so his look automatically making him suspicious? Gotcha.
Post 9/11, many individuals have expressed fear, suspicion, apprehension, concern when seeing an Muslim or middle-eastern individual particularly, when it comes to boarding planes, etc. Same thing when it comes to Black males. There is often an automatic eye-brow raise and level of heightened awareness of that individual and a person will then start to believe they see that individual “acting suspiciously” when in fact, it is just because a person may subscribe to a particular race or ethnicity. That’s what makes them “look suspicious.”
@Truth
Let the church say AMEN!
@ SG2
I’m waving my fan Sis
.
What makes it worse for me is that I think nice, innocent looking kids, like TM, have more to fear from the coward GZ than real thugs. I think that if that GZ *sshole gets away again, he’ll be empowered. The first time is typically the hardest. I think that other cowards like GZ may also be empowered. Scary.
When I was 17, I remember being with a friend one Saturday, just wasting time. We walked to the park which was significantly away from where she lived. One our way back, it started to rain. Neither of us had an umbrella. Teens just don’t plan for that stuff. We ran a little, ducked under the awning of a store that was closed, and figured we could make it to another store that had a soda counter so headed out again.
Within a minute, we were so soak and wet that we felt why rush? We started singing Supremes songs and walked to the beat of them stopping along the way for some hand gestures like the Supremes. Those puddles of water by the street curbs? We didn’t try to step over them — walked right into them. We were already wet so why waste the energy?
Exactly SouthernGirl2,
Zimmerman is a threat to society. Obviously GZ didn’t read the NW Handbook because in RVC, the neighborhood was 50/50 racially speaking. Therefore, Trayvon Martin was NOT out of place and his presence should not have been considered suspicious at all, so says the handbook. Not to mention, it was only 7pm. I totally agree with you, he’s ignorant.
Xena, Walking in the rain, gettin’ soakin’ wet. I’ve done it myself more than once.
I keep saying that GZ had a deeper reason for his profiling that night. I understand that not everyone agrees, but it stays with me. When GZ was living with Osterman, he spent $135 at the post office. (According to the Credit Union’s Statement) This was before he launched his website to receive donations. That’s a lot of money to spend at the post office, giving me reason to question if he was selling stolen property on eBay and shipping it out.
http://blackbutterfly7.wordpress.com/2012/09/05/addendum-was-george-zimmermans-neighborhood-watch-a-cover-up/
@Xena,
I’m sorry, I’m not putting it together the $135 at post office and GZ possibly selling stolen property with the profiling of TM and subsequent killing. TIA.
He may have been getting a money order.
How much would a replacement gun cost? He got one. It was confiscated when he was arrested.
@TBT. Connecting the dots is detailed, which is why I posted a page on it. It begins with GZ’s stated reason for why he wanted to become a judge after talking with his imprisoned cousin.
@Princss6. It could have been a money order, but the $135 was a portion of the $3,500 deposit that he subsequently paid back to his parents.
Look, I can be completely wrong, and accept that it’s a theory, but the dots connect to closely from what I see.
@Xena,
You sure did provide a link. My apologies. Will take a look. Thanks.
Zena, I’m am ashamed of you. You and your friend could have at least done the Temptation Walk back home. How cool that would have been.
GZ is a guy who find kids playing in the street, open garage doors, etc. to be suspicious. Why isn’t a black kid, the sort of person he warned others in the neighborhood to watch out for, not suspicious?
Yes, TM was so suspicious that he was the one GZ had to shoot to death.
Mr. Leatherman, thank’s for your good words about the partcipants of your blog. My too tight schedule didn’t allow me to read the comments done after my last one. And frankly, it is better not if i want to stay concentrated on my work. I will probably tomorrow and also comment your text.
I just want to specify one point. To me, DeeDee’s testimony serves maily one crucial purpose wich is to prove that Trayvon was not at T point on his own will. She says that Trayvon was there because he was escaping from GZ. Fine. If she is believed the case is done for at least a manslaughter verdict. I don’t understand well the definition of second murder. I will come back on this later.
Now, the case where she is not believed can be split in two. The less likely one is when the jurors are not too sure if she is lying or not. Roughly speaking, this case is equivalent to the not existence of her testimony. The other case is devastating for the prosecutors. The jurors will then naturally be more incline to believe GZ because they will think that DeeDee is hiding something bad. Maybe this point had been already discussed today.
A nice day to all of you.
Why would anyone not believe her?
-Has she told several conflicting versions of that night?
-Has she aided and abated perjury?
-Has she orchestrated the hiding of funds from a criminal court proceedings?
-Does her version of that night defy logic?
-Did she go to school for criminal justice and therefore has a sophisticated understanding of how to usurp the judicial system?
-Did she lie to the police about any pre-trial diversion hearings?
-Has she ever been in trouble with the law?
@Tzar,
I see you:). LOL
@Tzar
I see you too! LOL
No she is just basically calling GZ a murdering liar and in some circles doing such means you MUST be lying. I think doubting DeeDee says more about the person engaged in such action than it does about DeeDee.
@tbt and SG2
http://ist1-1.filesor.com/pimpandhost.com/5/7/1/0/57100/1/9/X/o/19Xoq/watchingyou.gif
lol
@Tzar,
This truly made me laugh. I didn’t expect that picture LOL. Just finished watching The Martin Family on Dr. Phil and that was a hard one to get through; it truly was so this was right on time.
That was funny….
I wish it spoke though, that would of been totally cool
I’m watching YOU. LOL
@Tzar
Too funny. I am so copying the smiley. I love it.
What is there not to believe? Lying about WHAT? Like DeeDee is hiding WHAT? What E-V-D-E-N-C-E do you have of lying or hiding ANYTHING?
What IS your point??!!!!
You don’t believe she was talking to him? There are phone records.
You don’t believe he told her he was scared? We know he was running away from GZ.
Everything she says matches up with what George says timewise.
Beyond this, I have NO idea what you are getting at.
Why Rachael, why?
. Considering the professor addressed these redundant comments, this person is still going on. I don’t get what this person is trying to get at and the writing is not helping.
The lack of analysis is what makes it hard to follow their point
Ok..so I am new to the blog, (hello all) and I want to say thre is a needle on ada’s record, causing it to repeatedly skip. I’m sorry ada, you make no sense AT ALL…ijs
You also don’t explain why you find her to be central or why the T changes the overall meaning of the case.
As I said before, I don’t find you to be reasonable. Just dogmatic. You don’t seem to know the difference.
You need to provide reasons that are logical other than by stating your assertions again and again because one can not analyze what you are saying other than by guessing and debating that.
As it is, on its face, you keep making a series of assertions. I don’t care what you believe. I can what you can prove through analysis.
Are you from conservative treehouse? Just curious.
I think she is, Jim. I want to say I have seen her there, but maybe not, but that is the “theory” they have there, that DeeDee’s story is so important but it is totally fake and never happened, manufactured evidence. Sigh.
@Case#1 – Ada keeps making a series of assertions over and over and cannot explain what she is saying because it is a type of mantra, memorized but not understood – she is simply repeating what she has read, heard, and memorized and does not know why or how it came to pass. Simple as that.
LOL @CN. Sounds good to me.
Well, first I don’t like to make assumptions about people I don’t know. I also don’t think its necessary here.
All I know is what I said.
I certainly will not be jumping on any bandwagon trying to attack Ada for a difference of opinion.
My issue is as I described it: That she’s make assertions without explaining why in light of the other evidence it matters.
As I pointed out to her yesterday, even if I take her argument as true, where does it get us in terms of the narrative of what happen that night?
How does it make GZ any less in pursuit of TM?
There are going to not be details we are never going to k now about that night.
I see people who are anti-GZ making the same king of mistake- trying to get into finer details without explaining how this changes the narrative.
Ultimately whether the fight began at the T- and moved to where the body was found or began off the T is an interesting element, but its not the smoking gun either way. The facts that are relevant to me are facts like GZ was in pursuit, someone heard an argument so that means he had a chance to tell TM that he was in the neighborhood watch (but didn’t since he never says he announces that) and things like his multiple stories of what went down that all try to exonerate him of any crime (including manslaughter).
Other facts or hypothesis become less important once I know the standard that is at issue under the law.
To raise a self defense argument, the defendant must show in this case, based on what Professor L pointed out and my limited understanding of the law- a duty to retreat.
That’s an extremely high standard to show here given the case law. That means the prosecution has less of a hurdle to me in showing that it was an unlawful homicide committed without any reasonable doubt showing self defense.
Ultimately the two points by Ada keeps pushing requires speculation- pure speculation at that- on the part of a jury rather than reference inference.
Why would his being outside matter unless she’s adding a lot to that being outside that she can not reasonably conclude?
Why would where the fight matter so much unless she thinks GZ’s testimony is true?
Remember to think the T matters requires believing GZ
Why should we do that?
Analytically- I don’t get it. I don’t need to attack her to ask her to explain why she thinks it matters. So far she’s failed a this. Hope, however in me , springs external.
Well, the duty to retreat only applies to an aggressor who uses deadly force to defend against his victim’s use of excessive force. Otherwise, there is no duty to retreat under SYG law.
Under Mixon, Zimmerman’s behavior following Martin first by vehicle and then on foot, makes him the aggressor.
Under current law, he cannot use deadly force unless:
(a) Martin uses excessive force that reasonably places him in imminent danger of death or serious injury; and
(b) he communicates an offer to withdraw and attempts to retreat.
In response to “what are you following me for?”, the answer: “I’m NW guy.” Would have been an offer to retreat. Instead the aggressor displays hostility: “What are you doing around here?”
GZ thus reveals himself to be a hostile aggressor, hardly what any law enforcement position or NW duty entails.
It is this hostility that GZ displays, that puts the lie to his claims of non-aggression. Because his aggression is clearly brought on by his emotional investment in being hostile. If he surrenders his hostility, by announcing he’s NW, then his aggressive impulses must go away. So, his refusal to surrender his hostilities can only mean that he is striving to safeguard a view that aggression is proper.
It follows that by not identifying himself, he is increasing the hostile atmosphere he’s created, making it likely that his own continued aggressive behavior will be met with some kind of defensive action.
In short, he’s actually welcoming a fight! Why would he welcome a fight? Perhaps because he’s hostile, aggressive and he is armed.
These are the essential elements that breed the confidence needed to welcome a fight with an unknown opponent. Most especially with an opponent who is black and who may be armed, even if bluffing.
Expressed in lawyer-speak, I’d say that’s an example of a depraved mind indifferent to human life.
By the way, everyone should really read the case that Professor L mentions above on Google Scholar.
That person in the case had far more grievance with the victim than GZ does in this case with TM.
Ultimately, the court said the salient point is that of the pursuit. That someone who creates the conditions for someone else to be attacking them does not get to use the attack as an excuse to ignore they provoked the situation in the first place.
This above sentence is GZ’s core problem if this remains law.
This means that the minute he got out of that truck and continued to pursue TM pretty much it became a much more difficult case in which he could use self defense.
If the prosectuion is spending most of the case trying to justify where TM was and who was where, the central narrative, that the pursuit= a duty to retreat is lost.
This is why I am asking Ada to explain herself. Right now, she doesn’t seem able to do so because I don’t think she understands the legal issues are what matters. The legal issues are that the pursuit changed the level of what needed to be proven. The defense will have to enter evidence of an attempt to retreat.
How will knowing about the T, Ada, do that?
@ada4750. May I be blunt? On April 4, 2012, the missing 2 minutes/doubling back theory was presented on the Wagist website. HP has reported that the Wagist site is owned by White Supremacist. GZ was not arrested until 4/11, so Wagist has certain documents before GZ’s arrest.
http://www.wagist.com/2012/dan-linehan/the-missing-230-and-deedees-testimony
For his fans, that theory became the argument of the month after GZ’s arrest. The latest theory is that the phone Trayvon used that evening was stolen, that Attorney Crump falsified Trayvon’s phone log, thus making DeeDee a liar. But, they are convinced that the fraudulent phone records will be presented in court because the cards are stacked against GZ to prevent a race war. (rolling eyes.) Yeah. Sure.
The question of the month now became, since the phone records will be introduced into evidence, and O’Mara is not checking out the REAL owner of that stolen phone, how important is DeeDee as a witness? Well of course, if those seeking justice for Trayvon say DeeDee is the nail in GZ’s coffin, then an argument can be debated about her statement to prove that Trayvon doubled-back.
From the very beginning, GZ’s fans have argued that Trayvon was the aggressor. The missing 2 minutes theory is a brick they laid on that foundation. (Not shouting, but for emphasis) LAB REPORTS PROVE THAT TRAYVON DID NOT OPEN A CAN OF WHIP-ASS ON GZ.
@Xena,
Good post. I passed out at the last sentence LOL.
@TruthBTold. Sorry. Didn’t mean for anyone to pass out. (Waving hanking over TBT to give her some air.)
she could not even open her mouth and her truth would still be told. her phone records and zimmerman own words speak as loudly and as clear as she could. also i would like to add who attacks someone while still on the phone.
Rachael wrote,
“So yes, in that respect, even though he was licensed to carry, because he was always on NW, he should not have been carrying.”
I am not sure how they set this up as far as a schedule, etc. For example, Guardian Angels do foot patrols, but not solo I believe. They’ve been around forever and when I have seen them a few times back in the day, they were like in a group or so. However, different community-oriented policing programs or community initiative programs may operate differently. I think FT was part of it at one point, but it seems as though GZ was the Lone Ranger. I would think that when not “officially on duty,” one is still always on alert. The issue of being a licensed gun carrier and being on NW are kind of running together. He stated that he always carries his gun except at work, so it reasons that even on duty, he is armed which of course, is a problem. If he was going to Target that night as is their scheduled event every Sunday *side-eye,* once he left the vehicle which we all agree he shouldn’t have nonetheless, he should have left that gun in the vehicle.
No, TBT, he should not have left that gun in the vehicle. HE SHOULD NOT HAVE LEFT THE VEHICLE!!!!
He called the police and reported what he thought was someone suspicious.
Should have been
The end. Period.
Of course he shouldn’t have Rachael. I believe I said that and it goes without saying as many of us has said the same thing on multiple occassions. The fact that he did coupled with carrying the weapon, is a double violation of NW rules. If he never exited his vehicle TM would still be slice. If he exited (of course should not) but without gun, TM would still be alive.
I posted further up regarding GZ’s patrol habits(riding around with the lights off and how a mention from trayvon or even someone who was home on RVC at the time and may have seen GZ). As far as their “routine” – why was SheLie not with him? Why wait until 6-7pm on a Sunday to go to the store?
As far as the NWP goes from reading the discovery its pretty clear that GZ might have been capt/coordinator in name only as far as making sure everyone was doing what they were supposed to be doing.
The SPD person doing NW training said she never got a list of volunteers or a schedule from GZ even though they were requested. He organized a title for himself without doing the rest of the work. Poor management skills – he doesn’t know how to recruit or delegate. Of course, if you don’t recruit you have no one to delegate to. : )
GZ wanted the title or the power that he believed in his tiny little brain that it carried but he didn’t follow through on the paperwork involved. He was supposed to get back to the officer from the SPD who came out to speak to the residents at RTL about the NW program and send her a list of the residents involved in the program, including the block captains. GZ thought he was some kind of badass when in reality, without that gun, he was nobody. In fact, without the gun, I’ll wager he never would have gone after Trayvon. He’s a coward.
As far as I know there are several way to form a NW, but they are all usually initiated by a police department, who is supposed to manage the groups. Without PD involvement all you would have is a vigilante group.
There’s not a problem with the SPD not registering with the NSA, but someone like GZ with his claimed interest in law and law enforcement, certainly should have sought to have the SPD register all of their NW groups. After all, wasn’t he critical of the SPD on different matters? His lack of attention to details like registration of NW, shows why he probably flunked his law courses.
The SPD did have him take the NSA’s 14 hour course on NW, and it shows up that he was impressed and knew the rule, in his attempts to weave a story of excuse for his NW offending conduct.
But, going back, why would he want to keep his NW group so secret? No records of who’s on the “tree”, No records of who’s calling in what. Of course, he knows that there is no patrols to be done by NW, so he’d obviously not want to keep any records of anyone doing that. But he doesn’t even have records of who’s joined the group. Yet, he’s allowing certain people to claim they are members of NW and go on patrols. So, when someone complains that the NW is full of drunks and trouble makers, and we look at Frank Taaffe and Mark Osterman, we have a pretty good clue they are right.
The general impression I get is they were running the NW as their own little thing. More like a gang than an aid to police law enforcement.
There is an urabn legend here in Houston that gang members drive around their “territory” looking for rival gang members, ie trouble is brewing. IF that urban legend (or truth) also exists in Sanford, I can see why Martin was so scared. Couple that little fact with the gang-affiliated tattoo that GZ has, and you get a very frighetning character running an off-the-record NW program.
I’m late to this discussion. Sorry!
I don’t think TM, a 17-year-old kid, had to follow anyone’s logic but his own, since there is no evidence that he did anything wrong. In fact, I think it would have been okay if his 17-year-old choices were completely illogical relative to an adult’s logic (even though they weren’t), because he wasn’t doing anything wrong. If a 17-year-old kid wanted to do laps around the neighborhood at 7 pm on a rainy Sunday night while talking to his girlfriend on the phone, he can do it to his heart’s content. I know adults who would do their Sunday night walks even when it’s raining.
I don’t see why TM would necessarily go home after he realized that GZ was stalking him. I was stalked as a teenager. I didn’t go anywhere near my home, because I had no idea why I was being followed and I did not want the stalker to know where I lived. I was thinking about other places I could go where there would be people. I could have gone up to any number of homes with their lights on. Of course, as a teenager, I just assumed that a neighbor would help me. I never had to test that assumption, unlike TM.
I suspect that the stalker gave up, because he lost the element of surprise and he wasn’t going to be able to catch me easily and quietly. At least that’s what my teenage mind thought at the time. Afterwards, I took comfort in him not knowing where I lived. As a teenager, I thought it was over, and he would never find me again.
I don’t remember feeling anything close to fear of being raped or murdered—probably for a variety of reasons, like living in a “safe” neighborhood in terms of physical violence, having a false sense of confidence in the world, being naïve and ignorant, etc. I was freaked out about potentially being mugged.
What teenager expects to be murdered in a “safe” neighborhood at 7 pm on a Sunday night with plenty of neighbors at home? What type of fear was TM feeling while he was being stalked? Could he have been thinking more in terms of being mugged? Did he have a false sense of confidence with his girlfriend on the phone?
Rather than trying to apply logic to the choices a 17-year-old kid made while doing nothing wrong, what about trying to apply logic to the choices a 28-year-old man made, choices that ended in a tragedy? What did GZ do that he shouldn’t have done? Plenty. What didn’t GZ do that he should have done? Plenty. I’m late to this post, but I’m going to go ahead and make this comment this anyway.
I don’t think TM, a 17-year-old kid, had to follow anyone’s logic but his own, since there is no evidence that he did anything wrong. In fact, I think it would have been okay if his 17-year-old choices were completely illogical relative to an adult’s logic (even though they weren’t), because he wasn’t doing anything wrong. If a 17-year-old kid wanted to do laps around the neighborhood at 7 pm on a rainy Sunday night while talking to his girlfriend on the phone, he can do it to his heart’s content. I know adults who would do their Sunday night walks even when it’s raining.
I don’t see why TM would necessarily go home after he realized that GZ was stalking him. I was stalked as a teenager. I didn’t go anywhere near my home, because I had no idea why I was being followed and I did not want the stalker to know where I lived. I was thinking about other places I could go where there would be people. I could have gone up to any number of homes with their lights on. Of course, as a teenager, I just assumed that a neighbor would help me. I never had to test that assumption, unlike TM.
I suspect that the stalker gave up, because he lost the element of surprise and he wasn’t going to be able to catch me easily and quietly. At least that’s what my teenage mind thought at the time. Afterwards, I took comfort in him not knowing where I lived. As a teenager, I thought it was over, and he would never find me again.
I don’t remember feeling anything close to fear of being raped or murdered—probably for a variety of reasons, like living in a “safe” neighborhood in terms of physical violence, having a false sense of confidence in the world, being naïve and ignorant, etc. I was freaked out about potentially being mugged.
What teenager expects to be murdered in a “safe” neighborhood at 7 pm on a Sunday night with plenty of neighbors at home? What type of fear was TM feeling while he was being stalked? Could he have been thinking more in terms of being mugged? Did he have a false sense of confidence with his girlfriend on the phone?
Rather than trying to apply logic to the choices a 17-year-old kid made while doing nothing wrong, what about trying to apply logic to the choices a 28-year-old man made, choices that ended in a tragedy? What did GZ do that he shouldn’t have done? Plenty. What didn’t GZ do that he should have done? Plenty. GZ was educated and trained repeatedly to know better. What’s the logic a reasonable person would apply to GZ’s choices? I don’t think Rube Goldberg can make a GZ defense workable.
Professor – Somehow I double pasted text into this comment. Would you mind deleting half of it? Sorry!
LTG wrote,
“I don’t think TM, a 17-year-old kid, had to follow anyone’s logic but his own, since there is no evidence that he did anything wrong. In fact, I think it would have been okay if his 17-year-old choices were completely illogical relative to an adult’s logic (even though they weren’t), because he wasn’t doing anything wrong.”
Standing ovation. A+++ That’s why kids and adults are generally held to different standards and rightfully so.
*slow clap*
Excellent. Thank you.
For some unknown reason I have spent a lot of time wondering what Trayvon was wondering as this all played out. Remembering that it took (in pertinent part) less than 20 minutes, here are my choices, while taking into consideration that pretty much the whole time up until the last three minutes, he was multitasking by also speaking with DeeDee on the phone:
Hmmm
Is that car going too slow? How come?
Is that guy following me?
Who’s he?
What’s he staring at?
What’s his thing?
Hmmm
Creepy
I’ll duck in here
OK, let’s see
Hmmm
What? Is that him again?
Where’d he come from?
What’s he doing?
What’s that?
Hmmm?
What the F–?
He IS following me!
Damn, what for, who IS HE?
He looks like he’s up to no good.
Damn. Let me stay here for now…
What?
[to Dee Dee] Here he is again!
Damn!
“Why are you following me?”
I don’t really get a “psychic” feeling that Trayvon was analyzing this all very carefully. I don’t get the feeling that he was weighing the possibilities: “A – he could be a neighborhood watch volunteer; B – he coud be a predatory pedophile; C – he could be a cultural anthropologist in the field studying African American teen-agers in hoodies during weekends; D – he could be selling Amway and think I will buy some; E – he could be needing to ask directions and I’m the only person he sees walking here; F – he could be a wacko with a loaded gun who wants to unlawfully restrain me so he can appear to be a big-shot; G – well, WTF…”
Yep.
he was scared out of his wits
I’m sure Trayvon was scared. He was in a different town and didn’t know anyone in the complex he was staying at.
Can’t be sure but I think probably Trayvon was aware of or had experienced racists who don’t like black teens, so Zimmerman following him would cause more than a little concern for his safety.
“So, when someone complains that the NW is full of drunks and trouble makers, and we look at Frank Taaffe and Mark Osterman, we have a pretty good clue they are right.
The general impression I get is they were running the NW as their own little thing. More like a gang than an aid to police law enforcement.”
LONNIE: Chilling. And such a damned shame. The world is a completely scary place. I am the type that is very pro-active, and would have gotten to the bottom of this mess, had it been me living in that neighborhood with a bunch of grown-assed creeps like this. I would have wrote, called, and pestered whomever I could to shine a spot-light on GZ’s behavior. All he would have had to do was look at me wrong as a supposed neighborhood watch person. As long as I have known about neighorhood watch; I have never even known who they were in my neighborhood. And knowing someone this stupid was going around with a gun and an attitude would have just drive me up the wall. I wouldn’t have put up with it. Even if it took George to run his little tail over to where I live; I would have not put up with such stupidity and intimidation. Neighborhood Watch as some sort of neighborhood gang or vigilante group? Whatever was the matter with the folks who knew that this fool was going around without headlights and a gun? All of those people could have prevented Trayvon’s death. Did you see how closely all of the town-homes were to one another? Absolutely pathetic.
@MichelleO You are so right.
But, you ask, why did they put up with it?
Okay, try to remember the context. A lot of these people are renters, others are “underwater” (houses worth less than their mortgages”, and others facing foreclosure, and probably bitter about it as well. Faced with the bluster of MO, FT and GZ as well as who knows who else, NW could easily have been a terrorizing neighborhood gang to them, they’d not want to tangle with it.
Look at how the HOA president keeps his truck scornfully parked! No one dares to challenge him. These people seem cowed. And there’s an economy that goes along with it. Every day they go to their jobs and hear rumors of layoffs and shutdowns looming. So who needs to come home to do battle there as well?
So that’s a layer we haven’t discussed yet. But off to sleepyland with me. G’night all. See ya tomorrow.
For GZ, I’m not sure, but I might also add the following to his list:
- He shouldn’t have followed TM by truck (as well as by foot).
- He should have announced himself to TM.
- He should have had a real reason to find TM suspicious (redundant to TM’s list).
- He shouldn’t have sat on TM after he shot him. (I still haven’t gotten over that one.)
- He shouldn’t have lied to the court.
When it comes to GZ sitting on TM, that bothers the hell out of me, too. He took careful aim with his gun as he actually said so as not to shoot his own hand but yet he wants us to believe he didn’t think he hit him? Bullshit. The only reason he said that was because of the women who kept asking him what he was doing and saw him straddling TM with his hands on his upper back or neck. Then he lies and says he didn’t know TM was dead until someone told him an hour later? Common sense would tell you that if you shot someone in the chest and an ambulance came and didn’t leave in a hurry with the sirens blaring, that the victim is beyond help. For someone who claims he’s so observant, that would be impossible not to realize while still at the scene of the shooting. He had to hear them speaking but he still lied about it. He lied about everything!
The real reason he found TM suspicious was because he was black. I don’t believe there was any other reason.
I hope the prosecution has a few people working on this case that are savvy enough to look at websites on the internet and read a lot of the important realizations that many people have pointed out. It never hurts to have an extra set of eyes on the case and the work that has been done destroys GZ’s alleged timeline. Am I way out in left field on this one, Professor, or do you think they might have a few people who are curious enough to read blogs and forums that are pro-Trayvon?
I know they are busy with this case and their other cases. They also have more information than we do and they probably trust themselves to git ‘r done right without outside help from the blogosphere.
This is a new phenomenon since I quit practicing law at the end of 2004. There was no resource like this available to me when I was working on cases. I relied on my co-counsel, investigators, and experts to put my cases together.
All that I can say is that I know we’ve done some splendid analytical work and asked the right questions. I believe it would be worth their time and effort to monitor what we do.
Cannot hurt and we might just think of something they have overlooked.
I don’t expect we will ever get any credit, but we will get a lot of satisfaction when the case goes to trial and we discover we have already figured out everything that’s being presented and feel like we are inside the lawyer’s heads watching, predicting and critiquing each card played.
Zimmerman showed acts of a depraved mind when he sat on Martin post-gunshot and also when he instructed the neighbor not to call an ambulance when he knew only police were coming. Any logical juror could conclude that he did not want Martin to survive. I don’t believe Zimmerman had a premeditated intention to kill Martin, but once he realized Martin was not a criminal and unarmed he knew he was screwed and had to invent a story quick.
It is conceivable that even if Martin survived, Zimmerman’s life as he knows it would cease to exist. He would have done serious time under the Florida 10-20-life law which gives serious time to anyone who fires a weapon during the commission of a crime. If Marissa Alexander is doing 20 years for firing a weapon in a situation in which nobody was hurt, how much time would Zimmerman be doing had Martin survived?
Ironic how a statute passed with the intention of discouraging crimes involving the use of a gun actually encourage murders to silence potential witnesses.
” I hope the prosecution has a few people working on this case that are savvy enough to look at websites on the internet and read a lot of the important realizations that many people have pointed out. It never hurts to have an extra set of eyes on the case and the work that has been done destroys GZ’s alleged timeline. Am I way out in left field on this one, Professor, or do you think they might have a few people who are curious enough to read blogs and forums that are pro-Trayvon?”
Ever since the Dream Team worked on the OJ trial, defense and prosecutors, in high profile cases, have assigned people to monitor the internet for errata. Nor is it as hard as it looks, after browsing a site for a few minutes you can tell whether the people are using fact and evidence, or if they’re just waxing emotional and/or spouting nonsense. Then you stick to the sites that are important, and even then you get to know which posters are doing the hard work/heavy lifting, from those merely along for the ride so to speak. You collect those handles and using search, you can go through the site in minutes.
Be sure that the SP has people, interns or volunteers doing it.
LOL! Yep I’m just along for the ride. But what an awesome trip it’s been! I am particularly grateful for the work on the “missing 2 minutes” since that seems to be a meme with the pro- Z crowd. If the SP isn’t reading this site then they’re fools somehow I don’t think they are fools at all.
cielo62 said: “LOL! Yep I’m just along for the ride. But what an awesome trip it’s been! I am particularly grateful for the work on the “missing 2 minutes” since that seems to be a meme with the pro- Z crowd. If the SP isn’t reading this site then they’re fools somehow I don’t think they are fools at all.” ————-|
I do some riding and some working, but mostly riding, I had enough with the OJ trial and the Bush Years. One can only watch so many trains go over the cliff, while the passengers scream put on the brakes, showing him maps, satellite images and bridge out reports, while he ignores them with his toothy grin and keeps pouring on the steam.
I think that Tchoupi’s work will show up at trial in some modified form, as well as perhaps the work of a few others. The Miami Herald admits it would have cost thousands of dollars to produce that work. I think after the trial is over, those contributors may get some acknowledgement later, of course that can’t be done now, for the obvious reasons. But hopefully it will if their work is used.
I read the Casey Anthony case was monitored and the feedback Jose Baez came up with was people didn’t like and/or believe George Anthony and in turn Baez focused on making George Anthony the villain.
This seemed to work in the Anthony case and that may be what the defense is doing in the Zimmerman case, trying to portray Trayvon as a gangsta thug and Trayvon’s parents as not very caring and being all about making money off of Trayvon’s death.
Very sad to not just lose their son, but to have his name and their name maligned. What evil people the Zimmerman team are.
GZ own statements is all that’s need to prove guilt. He lied about TM grabbing his gun and saying “your going to die”. Proved by TM screaming when being shoot.
Get GZ on the stand and ask him if you were in fear of your life why lie.
You know I have to add my 2 cents. George said he wears his gun everywhere except to work. I bet it is against policy to have gun at work, but my true belief is he did wear it at work. He lies so I bet he is lying about wearing it at work. jmo
I wouldn’t be surprised. And I honestly cannot believe he had forgotten his gun. 1. the holster is crap and 2. Assuming he was in fact NOT patrolling had JUST put the damn gun on before leaving. Of course if you listen to the way MO was on Dr. Phil you’d think GZ only took the gun off to shower and sleep.
follow thread
Me too!
: ^ )
lol
Brown,
“follow thread” What does this mean?
i post follow thread so i can get a confirmation email so i can follow the thread its faster then hitting that follow in the lower right of computer
Ok just thought of something based on my earlier posts and I think I might be right of course short of a witness this is unlikely to be proven. This came from thinking about what I wrote and rewatching one of LLMPapa’s newer vids – The one with GZ’s lil flub about Trayvon looking around for someone else during his re-enactment.
I think GZ was on Patrol that night. As I mentioned above its in the discovery documents that GZ routinely patrolled the neighborhood with his lights off(suspect in and of itself) and more than likely at a slow speed(again suspect).
That night he’s out on patrol doing his usual shadow routine. Sees Trayvon. Maybe Trayon hears the car or even just notice its moving without the lights on, GZ realizes he’s been spotted, but doesn’t want to break off. Turns the lights on and drives past Trayvon.
Trayvon keeps going on his way, but does give the car a second look because it has now stopped and is idling. Turns the corner, not completely worried yet but aware. Stops at the mailboxes and here comes GZ again. At this point Trayvon keeps moving his main intent to get the hell away from this creep, have his conversation with DeeDee and go watch the game.
GZ´s stalking of Trayvon may be even worse than “shadowing”. According to Tchoupi´s very thorough analysis of car lights recorded on the clubhouse videos in conjunction with the NEN call timeline he concludes GZ u-turned twice on RVC passing Trayvon three times as he was walking towards the clubhouse, to then follow him as he turns on to TTL driving past him to go down to the cut through where he parks facing towards the clubhouse in order to watch Trayvon walking down TTL.
@rayvenwolf. IMO, GZ got a call from someone saying that they saw a Black teen in a hoodie enter the gated community by Taaffe’s house. (That someone might be MO since he was at the bank across from RTL at 6:38.)
DeeDee says that she called Trayvon at 6:54, and he was in the mail shed then. His phone log indeed shows a call at that time. During that call, Trayvon also told her that he was being followed by a man in a car. He was going to start walking “from the back.”
GZ called NEN at 7:09. So, it is reasonable to say that GZ watched Trayvon for 15 minutes or longer before he called NEN. NEN GZ hints at this during his SH interview when saying it didn’t look like Trayvon was running out in the rain to get his mail and run back.
I’m not savy on seeing all the detail in the clubhouse vids, but have watched what others say what they see and the time stamps. The clubhouse vids are off by 18 minutes. I don’t totally agree with the presentation on the second link/vid, but it does make me wonder if Trayvon was saying he was going to walk from the back of the clubhouse.
WARNING. STRONG LANGUAGE
BWA HA HA HA @ potty mouth. I ain’t mad at him.
I have been wondering for a while if there are any major lies in the first half of the NEN call. There are some things that do not fit Dee Dee’s account.
The big one is the “mail shed”, a pretty good description of the structure next to the club house but not of many others. The other is that Dee Dee describes a significant period that Trayvon spent somewhere thinking that he had lost GZ. After that he still had a limited but non-trivial distance left to walk. Those two may or may not be the same.
Those things do not really fit into GZ’s account. If you include everything he ever said like the strange disappearance and return to circle the vehicle then there are internal difficulties as well.
I think there is a real chance that what he described as happening in real time was a composite of things that happened earlier and possibly his own speculation or outright fabrication. For example I am still not sure that he actually saw TM run or skip when he said he did.
@PY: if he saw Trayvon run or realized that he ran off, the way GZ says it makes me think it was more of an out loud oh shit, rather than actually wanting NEN to know that. Of course once it was out there, GZ had to acknowledge that.
When Tchoupi did those cctv analysis we hadn’t yet time to really digest the evidence dump very thoroughly, I’ve noticed he made some changes from what they originally were.
http://imgur.com/a/bcAII
After correcting the cctv’s for time stamp errors, we have to hold that up against the time line because that’s the only way to reveal what is possible from what is not.:
6:22 Travyon arrives at 711
6:29 leaves 711
6:54 At mailboxes
25 MIN WALKING 7500 FEET AT 5ft/second.
7:11 George calls NEN to report suspicious person.
7:11:44 He’s running.
7:12 TM receives call.
7:12 TM tells DD man following, puts hoodie up.
7:13 GZ tells police to call him for location.
7:13:39 GZ ends NEN call
7:13 “What are you following me for?”
7:13: Zimmerman tells NEN he lost him, returning to truck.
a) Martin punches him
b) beats him
c) he shoots Martin
7:16 TM’s line goes dead the call he received at 7:12 ended
a) First of at least 7 911 calls begin.
7:30 Martin pronounced dead.
7:17 First officer arrives on scene.
———
These are times I “scraped” from various time lines, it’s obvious some may be off a tad, but I’ll correct that as I see more time lines or better points established. Someone’s timeline even had TM leaving for the store at 6:40pm. I don’t remember what they were “selling” but if you see it, catch it.
GOTTA love him! Cuss on, brother, cuss on!
@lonniestar
“7:13: Zimmerman tells NEN he lost him, returning to truck.
a) Martin punches him
b) beats him
c) he shoots Martin”
Where is the evidence that Martin beat him?
@Tzar: “@lonniestar “7:13: Zimmerman tells NEN he lost him, returning to truck. a) Martin punches him b) beats him c) he shoots Martin” Where is the evidence that Martin beat him?”
None whatsoever! That gets in the timeline because it was there via claims made to officials.
I left it in place, in case I come across and/or collect evidence of something else happening in that time frame. I’ve got my timeline notepad open and minimized, so whenever I come across documented timeline material I can enter it quickly.
Still, the early false claims have been committed to documents too, so they have to be collected as well.
@Xena the 2nd video link doesn´t work.
The first video is from Trent Sawyer and if you haven´t seen them watch the 3 cabbage patch videos for a good laugh although he is really OTT in language.
Both he and Tchoupi separately have analysed the clubhouse videos with the NEN timeline. Both had sussed out from the first police car lights on scene that the videos were out of time sync by 18 mins many weeks before the prosecution disclosed that fact. Both come to conclusions of GZ´s movements that night with a lot of confirming similarities but they also have a few significant differences which goes to show nothing is 100% but fascinating work they both did none the less. Shame they don´t work together to find a finite answer… but that´s experts for you.
No, it’s much better that they keep working independently, so we can see where they both come to the same conclusions by themselves. Otherwise we might miss where they diverge into the possible alternatives.
@gbrbsb. The second vid is also by Trent Sawyer where he goes through the clubhouse vids showing the times and pointing out headlights and movements. In one, you can see a person walking by and then slow moving head and tail lights behind that person. Trent believes it is Trayvon walking and GZ following. Trent, like SaelPalani, do not believe that GZ parked at the clubhouse like he said. Neither do I. I think that Tchoupi also reached that conclusion.
I am unsure if pinpointing where GZ parked has an significance since it appears there is evidence that he stalked Trayvon for a significant time in an area where Trayvon could not have possibly been looking into houses.
Roughly, using the time TM left the 711 and the time he arrives at the mailboxes, it looks like he could have walked 7500 feet in that time at 5ft/sec. If so, he sheltered for nearly 12.5 minutes under the awning. Notice that his complaint about being followed comes closer to when he left there, than it is to when he got there.
Likely he discovered he was being followed while he waited for the rain to slow down.
Chilling thought:
As a parent, if I had a young healthy teenage son
stalked in the dark of night as Trayvon was,
what would I think “creepy” George Zimmerman’s intent was,
his interest in my son?
Mugging for cash?
No – not worth the trouble for so little $$$
Deviant sexual predator?
All too likely.
To kidnap and kill out of racial hatred?
It’s happened before in history.
For a big bucks capture?
Harvesting organs from a young healthy male for resale –
Over $100,000 for heart, kidneys, liver, corneas, marrow …
Zimmerman was OBLIGED that night
to let uniformed law enforcement
interact with Trayvon,
and remove himself from ANY contact,
so to allay Trayvon’s fears.
Trayvon had NO IDEA
why this “person” pursued,
caused extreme physical pain,
and killed him.
He DIED not knowing.
:’(
Patricia,
If Mr Zimmerman’s name is Roberto (Rob) Zimmerman Brull
his mother *in law * died 09 Nov 1999 in Madrid. She was buried in Barcelona. Her name was Mercedes De Palleja Fabra (her obit was published in laVanguardia newspaper…search her name, you’ll see it) IF he is in fact Roberto, his wife’s name is not Gladys, but rather Ines. If he is Roberto, the entire family, both sides have long had careers in Foreign Service/Diplomatic/Embassy positions
I live in Latin America and have searched Lima’s Birth records by line item (Civil registrations and church)I cannot find any record of Gladys/Gladis and/or her brother Luius Miguel aka “Uncle George/now Mike” Mesa/Meza.
It’s all just a little too murky, however
RJ and Gladys married 1975…children born 1980,1983,1986 date of elder “half sister Susie/Grace’s” birth unknown
Roberto and Ines married 1975..daughter born June 1976
Who are RJ & Gladys/Gladis married in 1975?
Last Names?
Thanks!
rj and gladys/gladis last name would be zimmerman, george’s parents.
looney – i looked all through the documents aja presented and i question some of it. i have never seen any documentation that proves that robert j zimmerman (brull) was the son of robert w. zimmerman. there is also the question that i have read many times that george’s father (robert j. zimmerman sr.) grew up in the same area in pennsylvania in which norm wolfinger hails. obviously, if he was the son of robt w. zimmerman who was in the foreign service and traveled extensively, this cannot be true. if you have any of the missing link info, i would be interested.
Forgive my mental thickness, but why is any of that relevent to this case? I’m confused. Not that geneology isn’t interesting but I’m sure GZ is psychotic all on his own.
Cielo, I brought this up again following the comments about the sappy jailhouse phone conversations between GZ and half-sister Susie. Just trying to get the genetic relationship straight. One of our posters referred to their talk as “creepy.”
In retrospect, “creepy” was ’nuff said, and I shouldn’t have brought it up again. It does seem to be a family with stress levels throughout its history. Even if the lineage were explained, it wouldn’t explain subsequent events.
Was it Tolstoy who wrote, “All happy families are alike. All unhappy families are unhappy in their own way … ” ?
My apologies for looking down that unproductive path.
Wasted our readers’ time, and I’m sorry.
Actually, I am having the same problem.
What’s the relevance of the genealogy stuff?
Cielo, your cat is sticking its tongue out at me!
I explained the circumstances to my cat, my stupidly getting back into the GZ fam history & other dumbass stuff.
Showed him the photo on your post.
Beauregard said, “Cielo’s cat is right! You were an idiot.”
(Cats never sugarcoat the truth … )
LOL! True, cats never sugar coat the truth! But you are from being any kind of idiot! Like I said I usually read along. I don’t always see the dots so I ask. This was one of those times. Forgive my opinionated cat.
This geneology sounds suspiciously like our previously banned poster… Or am I pulling a GZ?
@cielo,
Not just you. I saw someone else reference said poster as it relates to this genealogy stuff. Personally, I don’t read these posts when I see the content. It has no relevance to the event on the 2/26.
Patricia and FauxMcCoy
Did you notice I prefaced each of my sentences with “if” ??
Robert (Rob)Zimmerman Brull married Ines Tell De Palleja in June 1975, Barcelona. They have one daughter, Beatrice, born 1976 in Chicago, IL.
backstory for gz’s parents;
Robert J Zimmerman met Gladys/Gladis Meza/Mesa in Jan 1975. They married just months later. They have three children born 1980,1983,1986.
There is a half sister “Susie/Grace” who’s date of birth is unknown. She and gz do not have the same mother (according to Osterman) and gz is closer to half sister than any other member of his immediate family
After listening to their conversations (in Spanish) it is clear they have a very unusual relationship, while gz and his mother’s is strained. It’s a very strange family dynamic. Beyond that, who knows ??
PROBABLY incestuous.
When you stop and think about that for a minute, Michelle, that limits the spread of the gene pool.
@Patricia: “Trayvon had NO IDEA why this “person” pursued, caused extreme physical pain, and killed him.
He DIED not knowing”
So heart wrenching and so terribly sad for Trayvon and his parents.
Any idea how much weight will be given to Trayvon screaming the words “I’M BEGGING YOU!”? IMO, those three words are very powerful!
YES!!!
@LJ,
I have not heard the enhanced version and I really don’t like listening to that recording, but the State would have to determine with reasonable certainty that that’s what’s being said. I know some other claims put forth as to what people are hearing, I did not hear the same thing, so I don’t know.
Its when he says mamma just before he is shot :’(
Will this be admitted if they can’t establish who is yelling? (Think George will claim he was yelling mama?)
REALLY? I have to admit that I haven’t listened to any of that child’s chilling cries and screams. I have to go by what other’s report. But, oh, my gosh, that is truly sad. I bet Zimmerman, Osterman, and Taaffe all came with satisfaction.
My post got misplaced. When he cries out mamma just before he is shot does it too.
I haven’t heard Trayvon’s cry for mama. It’ll be interesting if GZ claims that was him. GZ probably refers to his mother as Mom 95% of the time, and never Mama. The other 5% of the time, I bet he calls her everything under the sun, but a child of God… Lol
As his mother tongue is Spanish I would think he would call his mother, mama, but with accent on the last “a”, e.g. maMA which is why in Spanish the second a carries an accent, “mamá”.
@LJ,
LOL
@LJ “GZ probably refers to his mother as Mom 95% of the time, and never Mama. The other 5% of the time, I bet he calls her everything under the sun, but a child of God…”
From what I gather from Mark Osterman’s statement, GZ didn’t call his mother anything because he was estranged from his family. IF Osterman is to be believed, GZ was beat by his mother and his father did nothing to intervene. Was this the beginning of GZ mental problems or was his mother onto something that was wrong with George from the get-go with habitual lying issues.
On Dr. Phil’s program, Sybrina said Trayvon called her “Cupcake.” On the recording, I do hear “I’m begging you.” and “Noooo!” I don’t hear “mama.”
I heard “Noooo!” also.
From an analysis on you tube I can hear both “noooo” and “I don´t know…” as well as the “I´m begging you” at the start, and “stooop” just before the shot. Others have heard more.
same here
same here
jm
In phone calls gz addresses her as “madre” (mother) rather than the more familiar mami or momi. Their conversations in Spanish are very stilted and cold. There is little or no love shared between gz and his mother.
Conversations with elder half sister “Susie/Grace” are like listening to two love struck adolescents…….but between brother and sister ? Just creepy.
LooneyDoone -
I believe the blood relationship between George and half-sister Susie is as cousins, with GZ and brother RZ Jr. adopted by RZ Sr. and wife Gladys. I think birth mother of the two boys is Gladys’s sister.
So George’s beloved Spanish grandmother Cristina is Glady’s mother and she is grandmother to all three children.
Gladys may not have bargained for this when she married Roberto (as RZ Sr. was known fondly by his Cuban mother) and the sudden added workload and responsibility may have made her a little testy at times.
If George was a sneaky, lying, self-serving kid as it appears he’s grown up to be, there may have been some “disipline” applied.
Not that it did any good.
I hadn´t heard the jail tapes but if he uses “madre” in Spanish that is like calling your mother “mother”, so yes it is a cold and formal term and quite rare for someone of his generation.
Assuming W#9 is telling the truth, its possible Gladys had some idea of what he was up to and was trying to beat the devil out of him so to speak.
I’m guessing it was simpler than that. In 2005 George put up on facebook i think that he was scard of his mother. I think she was abusive, period. I think his father was self-righteous and dumb and mom was abusive and resentful. I think George has plenty of reason to be who he is but no reason at all to kill someone.
“The guy seems to have never met a lie he did not like.”
The Z-man is toast.
The Dr. Phil show today was absolutely heartrending. Hopefully the Martin family is beginning to find some peace and to celebrate the life of their beautiful son (brother, nephew, grandson) . . .
Patricia,
Grandma Cristina would be papi zee’s Aunt (the sister of papi’s mother, Silvia)IF they were in fact, adopted.
I believe papi’s name is Roberto (aka Rob)
LooneyDoone -
re ” … Grandma Cristina would be papi zee’s Aunt (the sister of papi’s mother, Silvia) IF they were in fact, adopted. I believe papi’s name is Roberto (aka Rob)”
Yes, understand that papi is “Rob” or “Roberto.” His mother is Silvia, Cubana, whose father was in the Cuban Embassy then posted to Canada. Rob’s father went up to Ottawa to marry her.
Did not know Christina was his (Rob’s) aunt/George’s “great-aunt.”
So that is not the mother-in-law that they had to move to Florida for, because of her fragile health?
My assumption that GZ and brother were adopted is because the boys now have the Zimmerman name and Robert is “Jr.”
(Tried to get this all worked out with ajamazin before she got all whacko, but she would get cutesy and just dribble out bits & “clues.”
Incidentally, despite the photo of the gorgeous gal, I’m convinced ajamajin is a 46 year old guy with bad acne living in his aunt’s basement in Bismark, ND)
Indeed it was heartrending. At one point during the show I was almost wailing.
I almost wail just to think of it now. In fact, I’ve felt like I lost someone personally ever since hearing about TM.
Evidence about the two quarters from document dump 1
page 110
dms-19 jacket and 2 quarters in a plastic bag represented as being from GMZ
http://www.axiomamnesia.com/TrayvonMartinFiles/Trayvon-Martin-George-Zimmerman-FULL-case-report-documents.pdf
Case #1 wrote,
“Ultimately whether the fight began at the T- and moved to where the body was found or began off the T is an interesting element, but its not the smoking gun either way. The facts that are relevant to me are facts like GZ was in pursuit, someone heard an argument so that means he had a chance to tell TM that he was in the neighborhood watch (but didn’t since he never says he announces that) and things like his multiple stories of what went down that all try to exonerate him of any crime (including manslaughter).”
While I understand that you recognize it being an interest element as it relates to the altercation and the T, I don’t quite get why it is not a relevant fact to you per your list. You already acknowledged his multiple statements, but those statements significantly deals with where the altercation took place. I believe it is extremely important and also when Investigator Gilbreadth (sic?) was asked at the first Bond Hearing about evidence, he stated having the defendant’s statements, the location of Mr. Martin’s body, and the shell casing.
edited to add, the location of the body goes to pursuit as well.
compare the pursuit of him leaving the truck as evidence versus the T as evidence
One is a powerful piece of evidence alone. The other- the T- is not. It needs more to give it value.
@Case,
I understand your point and this has nothing to do with Ada; I don’t understand her points as we have tried and she keeps saying the same thing. However, as it relates to your comment, wouldn’t you say the location of the body, in the direction of heading back home, can also stand alone as evidence of pursuit? Whether there was an initial fight, it broke-up, and GZ continued to pursue TM because it wouldn’t make sense for GZ to have ran in that direction considering where he was located on the T when he said TM approached and punched him and his “safe haven” (car) wasn’t that direction. He’s damned just for exiting the truck, but the location is damning as well as it relate to the pursuit. I understand what you are saying though. These damning facts are not mutually exclusive, but like you stated, Ada is trying to isolate with this “possibility,” that’s not making sense.
I agree with Case. The evidence cannot be interpreted in any meaningful way by isolation.
Each fact or item of evidence must be interpreted in a manner that is reasonable and consistent with the context in which it was found.
Alternative explanations that are unreasonable and inconsistent with the context are nothing more than remote possibilities destined for oblivion.
The main problem with the Zeebots is they are stuck defending isolated conclusions that conflict with reason and context.
They only repeat them like a mantra and eventually turn to character assassination when their conclusions are challenged.
.
Totally agree with you professor as well as Case. Believe I said as much. Those crazy Zimmerman supporters are a pain to deal with.
When one wanders over there, use the “Newtonian rule” meet silliness with equal and opposite silliness. Like say that TM’s underwear had hearts and flowers, meaning that TM was a mild person, while GZ’s underwear had stripes, and we all know what stripes mean! LOL. In short don’t let them get to you, have a little fun.
I mean in isolation it is not meaningful. Its relevance only has value in relationship to other evidence. You just listed some of it.
The T versus the location of the body
The T versus the defendant’s statements
Those are all important.
But only as they related to one another.
The part I don’t understand is what Ada thinks this all means in isolation.
Oh oh okay Case…yes.
The strategy of those on the other side is to keep repeating a mantra (anything they want to make up) and repeat it over and over again, so that sinks into our subconscious as a factoid.
The nonsensical style of writing is also designed to have the reader think he or she is “just not getting it.” In fact, instilling doubt about the readers’ thought processes is part of the strategy.
Repeatedly saying DeeDee could fail under examination is to get us to THINK she will fail and then ultimately BELIEVE she will fail.
Repeatedly saying some minutae outside the essential narrative of how the crime went down will cause the jury to exonerate Zimmerman is RUBBISH.
If that part of the puzzle gets filled, they will dart to another …
E.g., “If the prosecution can’t prove Trayvon was wearing underwear, then the jury will decide DeeDee’s testimony is lying, because she omits any mention of underwear, so that will discredit ALL her testimony and the jury will exonerate Zimerman.
And when the Medical Examiner shows up with Trayvon’s underwear, this proves Zimmerman did not get a “Fair Trial.”
‘Zat make sense? No?
Well, ‘zat’s the kind of nonsense that’s been going on.
This is all part of the scam to REHABILITATE Zimmerman.
Or try to,
Zimmerman is unrehabilitatable… LoL (is that even a word?)
LOL! Ah, the old “underwear” ploy! Works everytime!
@Patricia. YES! That is exactly the type of arguments that they present.
Oh, but you left out something. After they announce that GZ will be exonerated, they say “lock and load for the riots.”
Patricia – What kind of juror falls for this? One that is a special kind of dumb, blind, dishonest, etc.? What special kind of blind would cause a juror to side with GZ? A racist one? What special kind of dishonest would cause a juror to side with GZ? Is there a liar’s logic that makes it easier for one extreme liar to make excuses for another extreme liar? Or, does one liar need to have a cause in common to support another liar, which may take us back to racism?
I found DeeDee to be completely credible. I am always extremely offended by attempts to character assassinate credible people. I wish the consequences for unfounded character assassination were more severe, because it is over the top.
By the way, this is like he discussion of whether TM could gurgle out a few words after being shot, although that one is a little more relevant.
If it were entirely impossible that would mean that GZ is lying per se.
However, its also not as meaningful unless one is connecting it to other evidence.
Ability to talk after shot v. what GZ claims the victim said
Ability to talk after shot v. action took by GZ
I would imagine based on human nature that the minutes or sections that one has after being shot are not filled throwing on gangsta lines from the 80s/90s
I would also imagine that one would have to be a stone cold racist to believe the kid was saying anything other than being in pain after being shot in the chest.
How do I know this? because Iam human. I know the idea of what pain feels like.
So, while the fact the victim could talk may have some importance, the real problem with GZ’s statements and actions is what he claimed the victim said and that he’s claiming a kid who had just been shot would be putting up a fight or not focused on telling anyone in ear shot to save him since he’s got a wound in his chest that he would have felt from being shot.
A lot of the evidence- the way the GZ-bots argue it requires one to ignore what humans do and treat TM as non human.
It only works in isolation and if you don’t think about it at all.
@Case,
Extremely well-stated. Yes sir.
Yes, Case
Zimmerman obviously faking a mortally wounded kid’s last, painful dying words will REPEL jurors.
They are human, as you are.
They will know Zimmerman is lying, and they will loathe him for this.
My thoughts exactly. TM may not have been clinically dead, but he probably wasn’t conscious either. The mind quickly assesses fatal wounds (I’ve read) and shuts down immediately if it detects them. That plus the shock of being hit hard in the chest, would likely knock him out cold. Of course we have to bow to the pros who say he could have spoken a few last words. Even though I doubt he would, because I don’t get the feeling that lungs filling with blood, would give anyone enough comfort to speak, but only cough a few times. As a rule, even a tiny drop of liquid in the lungs and you’re going to start coughing rather than uttering words. But, again, the experts will have to hash that out.
If GZ dares to say Trayvon’s purported last words in his testimony, that he didn’t know whether he actually shot him, and describe how he jumped on Trayvon’s back, I hope that the prosecutors ask if he was concerned with where that bullet went if not hitting Trayvon. GZ fired his gun in a residential area.
I was wondering if the “duty to rescue” exists in the US as it does here under uk common law if the other party has created the hazardous situation… presumably shooting someone would count as “hazardous”! In some countries, including Spain where I´m from, it is in fact a criminal offence to not help an injured person (unless your own life would be endangered) at the very very least by calling 911 and GZ did not even do that rather called someone else it appears, and as of a previous post weeks ago by frisking him and getting on his back surely caused more pain and anguish to the dying Trayvon. If failure to give aid is not legally punishable it should at least be included as an aggravation for sentencing.
@gbrbsb,
No, we don’t have Good Samaritan Laws (well not in my state, but pretty sure no other state). I remember though some talks about should we, but that was abandoned. This type of law does not sit well with people.
My sense of humor may be returning a bit after reading about the depravity of GZ squeezing the rest of the life out of TM. Since TM apparently wasn’t a human, I’m guessing that he was a cephalopod. Based on his reported length and width, I’m leaning towards a baby, male, giant squid (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cephalopod_size). He had two limbs for repeatedly smashing GZ’s head into concrete. He had two limbs for smothering GZ’s nose and mouth. He had two limbs for straddling GZ. He had two limbs for holding down GZ’s arms. Right before he was shot, he used one of his eight limbs to reach for GZ’s gun. Perhaps human DNA and blood don’t stick to squid limbs. Regardless, I’m still not comfortable with a baby of any species having his life ended prematurely.
Cute as a Cuttlefish.
Oops. I’m sorry. I meant based on TM’s reported length and weight, not length and width. Since I screwed that one up, I should add the following. I have read about his potentially being an octopus many places. But, it seems like a full grown octopus would be much longer than TM. It seems like he’s closest to a baby, male, giant squid.
Any info on the 911 tapes? I do not remember the tape, but I could have sworn I heard a kid’s voice pleading and begging. I think that they can also conclusively prove the screams are Trayvon and prove Robert Zimmerman a liar. I also hear a voice sound like Zimmerman say something before the killing.
Personally, the difficult part for Zimmerman, since he is lying, so he has to keep lying to cover another lie and so forth, is convincing a judge and jury that his stalking and chase of Martin with a gun, flashlight, car, & physical and age advantage over Trayvon, was somehow justified. A point that jumps out at me is Zimmerman is not legally authorized, not even under citizens arrest, probable cause or reasonable suspicion, nor legally identified as such. To anyone, a stranger much larger in a car then foot in the dark of the night is menacing and leaves reasonable doubt on Zimmerman’s intent
Follow thread
Watching 20/20 about nasty neighbors and the case of Raul Rodriguez who shot his neighbor claiming standing his ground/self-defense. This happened in Texas. Some of you may have heard about it before. There are sooooo many similiarties to GZ, that it’s creepy. His neighbors paint an interesting picture of him. Check this out though, he was licensed to carry a concealed weapon and knew about SYG laws (of course). He also knew what language to use as he relates to self-defense, as he filmed going out confronting his neighbors about a party. So GZ would you like to revise your answer about not knowing the SYG statute considering you have a permit to carry a gun?
I remember coming across a few articles during the trial and my first thoughts were – 1. how STUPID do you have to be to take a camera with you? 2. I hope the jury puts him under the jail(40 years is good) and 3. I wonder how much of this GZ is aware of.
GZ is full of it when it comes to the SYG law. I believe two of the ranges/gun shops he went two are NRA affiliated – he would have heard about SYG at some point whether it be casual or someone going on about how great the law is etc.
And yeah RR was a paranoid bully and its only a miracle he hadn’t shot someone before.
Raul Rodriguez did indeed get 40 years. At his age it might as well be a life sentence. Although he’s eligible for parole in 20, with HIS temper there is no way he’d make it pass the parole board. I saw the similarities with GZ also. As with narcissists, he ALSO recorded his heroic acts, which eventually doomed him. Camcorder or cell phone: both will witness justice.
I did read about this case. He went on to someone else’s private property looking for trouble, armed with a weapon. I don’t imagine it was very hard for the jury to determine who the aggressor was in this situation. My take is that he wanted to shoot that person. He knew about the SYG law and did nothing to try to avoid a violent confrontation, he did pretty much the opposite.
And the kicker was… HE RECORDED IT ALL! Although RR used all of the SYG “buzzwords”, the jury realized that 1. he had plenty of time to retreat, 2.nothing was happening illegally before the confrontation and 3. RR clearly began the confrontation and escalated it to the point where he “had” to shoot to defend himself. If he hadn’t actually videotaped the whole thing, i’m not sure that justice would have been done.
Cielo I think he still would have been found guilty even without the tape, it just may have been far less time. Simply for the fact there were so many witnesses out that night
The point is, he would only record it on tape IF HE WAS EXPECTING TROUBLE
Hello provocation, goodbye SYG.
Is there a “known or should have known” requirement to having a concealed weapons permit? He was trained in self defense laws and in protecting his gun. He put himself in a situation where he “had” to use his gun against an unarmed kid who wasn’t doing anything wrong. We know that even if he didn’t know (which is probably another GZ lie), he should have known. Is there a requirement that can be used against him?
“Patricia says:
September 14, 2012 at 8:54 pm
The strategy of those on the other side is to keep repeating a mantra (anything they want to make up) and repeat it over and over again, so that sinks into our subconscious as a factoid.”
********
And everything else you stated – I agree with 100%. Thank you for summing it up so clearly.
Reminds me of the saying – Repeat a lie often enough and it becomes the truth. GZ can repeat this lie until the day his miserable piece of shit ass dies and it will NEVER be the truth.
This could be considered a diversion, apropos Fred’s original topic but it was prompted by the ongoing discussion of the confrontation starting at the T.
The more I think about it, the less significant the T becomes to trying to unravel what happened during the confrontation. Much has been made of the missing two minutes, I will offer an alternative explanation.
Firstly, GZ made very much of the fact that he walked along the top of the T to RVC to find a street address. He stressed this fact in nearly all his interviews. This was meant to account for the missing 2 minutes.
From what we now know about GZ’s efforts to justify himself, I would say that he put far more importance on this movement than was necessary. Why was he so adamant that he walked east to RVC? Maybe because he wanted to cover the possibility that he was seen on RVC. Remember, at this time, witness statements hadn’t come out.
Let’s say Trayvon ran; turned right at the T, down the path and ducked into the gap between townhouses to his right – the gap that leads back to TTL.
While he caught his breath, DeeDee rang back, Trayvon reported that he had lost the creepy guy. All was well.
While this was going on, GZ turned right from the cut-through and down RVC, after hanging up from the NEN call. He took the first opening on his right between the townhouses – back towards the rear dogwalk area.
This opening is slightly south of the gap on the opposite side of the dogwalk on which Trayvon was resting/hiding.
Zimmerman turns north up the dogwalk at practically the same time that Trayvon decides its safe to emerge and go home. Surprise! The creepy guy hasn’t gone, he is right here, a few feet south of Trayvon on the dog walk path.
This meeting is what DeeDee hears. Both GZ and Trayvon are taken aback by seeing the other.
Trayvon ran. Back the way he came – why? The creepy guy was between him and the back door of Brandi’s house.
I purposely minimise the impressions given by neighbours who called 911. Sound echoes from buildings, it’s difficult to be sure of a direction. Besides, the confrontation could have eddied back and forth once or twice – Trayvon trying to escape and GZ trying to hold on.
The main clue for me that GZ continued down RVC is his insistence that he was looking for a street address. He has CYA so inbuilt that he needed a cover just in case someone looked out their front window and saw him.
Zhickle – your synopsis coincides with my best guess of what occurred considering the evidence – GZ went down RVC and cut through still looking for Trayvon and surprised Trayvon. I think this fits in with the one witness who saw one or two people running from south to north. W18 provides the opportunity for GZ to have planted the small flashlight w/key fob at the “T.” I believe that GZ’s mind was constantly working through what he needed to do and say in order to justify his actions as self-defense. I pick up from this scenario with believing that GZ shot Trayvon because he had no choice but to do so or be charged with assault and brandishing a weapon and then Patricia’s, who believes that GZ immediately flipped Trayvon over to make sure the bullet did not pass through his body into the ground and to make sure that Trayvon took his final breath. Experts say that a person will usually intermix the truth in with their lies so as to make it appear more believable – I believe that GZ’s comment on Hannity that he was “afraid the police would show up” or something to that effect as being truthful in that he was afraid the police would show up before he could silence Trayvon permanently. I believe, as you do, that the “T” is George’s attempt to divert the fact that he traveled down RVC and cut over to cut Trayvon off….this does not bode well for a claim of self-defense.
Yesterday I said that I thought GZ might have returned to his vehicle after terminating the NEN call, driven to the rear entrance to prevent escape, parked, and walked back N/B between the buildings toward the T.
I think your scenario is equally good, maybe better.
There is another potential scenario involving an as-yet-unidentified third person who starts at the south end of the sidewalk and works his way N/B between the buildings hoping to flush TM toward GZ who waits at the T.
This third person might have been in the vehicle with GZ, either as passenger or driver. For example, we don’t know if GZ was driving his vehicle as he claimed or if he was a passenger in a vehicle driven by someone else. He might have been dropped off, for example, at the cut-through on TTL with the driver proceeding to the rear entrance.
Communication would have been by cell phone.
I have been troubled by the 40 seconds or so of screaming before the shot. My imaginative mind conjures up an interrogation at gunpoint, involving the use torture, that ended badly.
This scenario requires a third person conducting the, ahem! enhanced interrogation with GZ holding the gun. He splits right after the shot heading S/B from whence he came, or, assuming he was a nearby resident, he returns to his residence.
W13, who shows up with a flashlight awfully quickly might be a candidate, as would Mark Osterman if, for example, while on his way to deliver the loan money to GZ, he had spotted TM entering the neighborhood through the cut-through next to Taafee’s residence and he picked up GZ to go hunting.
The problem is that the teacher (W18) probably would have seen a third person, if one were were present. She did not.
Therefore, I am inclined to consign this scenario to the land of tinfoil hats, unless additional evidence turns up confirming it.
As things now stand, I like your theory the most.
Professor – Can the prosecution withhold a witness’s testimony if it is contradictory to what GZ has stated for purposes of impeaching him? I am asking this because I want to know whether it is possible that the prosecution has an undisclosed witness who will testify to seeing GZ walking down RVC that night prior to the shooting. Or, do they have to disclose this informaiton?
They have a duty to disclose the identity of every witness they intend to call at the immunity hearing or the trial and provide a copy or summary of any statement they made.
@Professor,
I was of the same belief about disclosure of witnesses. However and I am not sure if was television or real life (don’t laugh and I know the difference between embellishment for entertsinment purposes and reality lol), but situations where one side is surprised by the calling of a witness unbeknown to the other side and they needing time to prepare. Is this real? LOL
@Professor,
As I think about it a bit more, your possible theory that GZ returned to his vehicle and drove to rear entrance, doesn’t seem that he would have had enough time. He terminated his call about 7:15 and some change and the altercation began about 7:16 and some change. There’s no missing time. Just wondering.
I don’t feel we should become too complacent with this case as we are dealing with the state of Florida & I’m still scratching my head over the Anthony case.
We still have a long journey ahead and still worried why the prosecutor attorney would blurt out voluntarily that Trayvon hit George! Are we stuck with that statement as a fact now? If the Professor was the prosecutor for this case this would be a slam dunk!
Where DeeDee’s testimony might be problematic is that Trayvon & DeeDee talked that day for hours including the encounter with George. Abruptly the calls ends and she calls Trayvon back but the call is unanswered. The defence is going to go after her here and ask what she thought was happening and why she did nothing.
Most likely they will bring in her social media sites to show at this time she was not at all concerned with Trayvon after the call ended. Then maybe go after her phone call testimony from there.
The defence will likely suggest that her phone call testimony was concocted and tailored to follow the narrative of George’s NEN call. I think more discussion is needed with what the defence might conjure up to try and derail her testimony.
We have a long way to go to get justice for Trayvon!
@ Ada4750
“I just want to specify one point. To me, DeeDee’s testimony serves maily one crucial purpose wich is to prove that Trayvon was not at T point on his own will. She says that Trayvon was there because he was escaping from GZ. If she is believed the case is done for at least a manslaughter verdict. I don’t understand well the definition of second murder. I will come back on this later.”
Ada, since yesterday I have been shooting myself non-stop in the head trying to understand what you mean. With you latest statement, I started thinking that I finally understand you. Bet then I lost you again. IMO, the whole premise of your arguments is false. As such the conclusions you draw must be deemed false as well. I will tell you why:
I think it is quite obvious that ‘Trayvon was at “the T” ON HIS OWN WILL’ – and NOT ‘against his will’ (as you suggest/wrongly interpret DeeDee’s testimony). Trayvon was NOT forced to the T. On the contrary, Trayvon chose to run to the T heading south, i.e. the place where he thought that he shall have effectively evaded Zimmerman; the place where he thought that Zimmerman, who was in his car the moment he (Trayvon) ran, could not have followed him to in the said car. At the very moment Trayvon “ran”, he (Trayvon) had no reason to believe that Zimmerman would get out of the said car to follow him on foot (!!). Consequently, Trayvon could not have hidden in the same place he ran to, lying in ambush waiting to assult Zimmerman – since he (Trayvon) (a) was NOT expecting Zimmerman there, (b) thought that the creepy episode was finally over and (c) started relaxing after which Zimmerman showed up again – on foot, this time.
I suspect that you might have problem understanding the IMO highly intellectualize, very subtle arguments of Case#1 on the one hand and the robust, hard-hitting, ‘in-your-face’ arguments of Rachael, Xena and others on the other hand, so I decided to try to reason along your line. I think you are a very smart and reasonable fellow. You just need to think the ‘“on/against his own will” thing’ thoroughly through before proceeding any further, for there is the very point where i think you started to stray. Both the premise and the conclusion(s) are false.
Actually there is ZERO proof that Trayvon was ever at the T junction. AT ALL, even just passing through. Even at the start he could have run down TTL. NO PROOF he was ever at the T at all.
GZ claims Trayvon attacked him about 7 or 8 feet south of the T. That is the closest to the T anybody places Trayvon. The final fight and the shooting were 45-50 feet south of the T.
So it is fairly pointless to go on for weeks about whether he was there by his own will or not.
DeeDee’s call is about
* Trayvon knew he was being followed
* he tried to get away and thought he had done so
* he found himself being followed again
* he asked WHY? and didn’t get a reasonable reply
* there was some pushing or shoving and the phone went dead.
NONE of this specifies any route or place, apart from it beginning near the mail shed.
That is a good point, but you will need to provide a satisfactory explanation for the presence of the little flashlight/key chain eventually, if you stake out this position.
The flashlight-keyring w/key is proof that Zimmrman was at the T – if Zimmerman claims ownership. (Athough I don’t think this is in dispute.)
It has no link to Trayvon Martin.
Does not put Trayvon at that location at all.
Zimmerman either lost it or tossed it to that location, for reasons only Zimmerman knows.
What link has been established between Trayvon and the keyring?
None. It was not Trayvon’s job to keep track of Zimmerman’s junk.
Trayvon’s presence is established at the debris field, and where his body lay in death. Not at “the T.”
The flashlight/key chain only proves that GZ was there. GZ could have dropped it for any number of reasons – while putting his cell phone in his pocket, while messing with his other flashlight, while getting his gun out. I don’t see any reason to assume that TM was there.
Fiou! I missed a lot of comments. I will resume my point before reading them. Let’s be snappy as Bill would say.
We may disapprove GZ’s behavior but before let say 19:15:00 we don’t have any proof that he broke the law. So legally we can resume the all case with those GS’s statement
– I had been surprised and attacked by Trayvon near the T point.
– I got scared for my life.
– I was under Trayvon when i shot.
Only the second statement is subjective and the first statement is imortant for the evaluation of the second.
My all point is without DeeDee we can not invalidate the first statement. And then we can not invalidate the second one neither. Because when we are attacked and get overpowered by a stranger it is very normal to fear for our live. Serino tought the same way mainly because he didn’t know about DeeDee. Having said that, i am pretty confident that DeeDee will smash it.
Now i will read fast the comments starting with the oldest.
Ada – Your argument is based on the premise that DeeDee’s testimony is the all mighty evidence that is going to sink GZ or spoil his attempt to claim self-defense. That is where you are misplaced. The statement “I had been surprised and attacked by Trayvon near the T point” is dispelled by the evidence even without DeeDee’s testimony. The body and debris was found 47′ south of the “T” for starters. The statement “I was under Trayvon when I shot” is likewise not substantiated by the evidence. The bullistics don’t coincide with that assertion. So, I am confused how you continue to believe that DeeDee’s testimony is paramount to GZ being found guilty of Murder 2. All of this is circumstantial evidence, and DeeDee’s testimony simply breathes fact into that evidence but it in no way is critical to the case. I don’t understand how you cannot see the evidence in its totality.
It’s important to note that GZ never volunteered to investigators the idea that Trayvon ran away from him, and only ever speaks of it when prompted first. But for the NEN call to dispatch recording, the SPD would never have known Trayvon ran from him. Dee Dee corroborates this running, but her testimony is only supporting the evidence of the NEN call- the evidence that George deliberately tried to hide from investiagators.
As to movements in the missing minutes, many things are possible, but what GZ claims is not possible.
@CherokeeNative That’s good. I was just about to write the body location. You are right, in his first depositions that night GZ said that he felt on his back right there. Is this enough to invalidate the all thing? I doubt it but this is only my opinion.
For the bullet, i didn’t see anything striking. If there is a solid proof that GZ was not under Trayvon when he shot then of course the case is closed. I am writing with the assumption that there is no solid proof. Once again, i might be wrong.
Do you not think it is rather odd, to put it mildly, how perfect, dead-on and straight-on amazing that hollow point shot was, straight through the heart? Oh, that’s right, GZ told the cop he “aimed the gun,” Not only that, but he was careful not to hit his other hand. Out of all of the possible angles for a shot fired during the course of a life-and-death struggle, GZ’s shot just happens to be, as if in accordance with aligning of planets, straight through the heart. Another coincidence?
Do you think that is strange at all? No snark intended…I am asking seriously.
Let’s see, if they’re standing, TM has to be standing slightly to GZ’s right, for the shot to go straight in. If they are standing lined up with both of their shoulders aligned with each other, then the shot takes on an angle. If they’re both on the ground, it isn’t possible for them to have GZ’s right shoulder slightly to the left of TM’s left shoulder, so the shot takes an angle again. Because the ground acts as a limiting factor keeping both of their shoulders aligned.
If GZ is on the ground and his elbow is there too, then TM has to somehow align his chest over the weapon while stooping low enough for his garments to be stretched for a contact shot. That’s got to be a pretty weird contortion, as if he’s in the midst of pulling away.
The thing is, there’s a limited number of angles and positions that can yield or result in this shot. My guess is the forensics team are working their way through all of them. I’d bet that nothing they come up with matches GZ claims, given his history so far.
thought this would be interesting for you, if you haven’t seen it already
The answer that pops out at me, besides that GZ was a few feet back and away when he fired the shot, is that GZ had his own blood on his own hands and was trying to wipe it off on his own clothes. Probably so he could get a better grip on his little gun.
If so, then wiping blood off his hands doesn’t comport well with his SD claims. Since he first has to get blood on his hands, how he does this while in fear of his life is beyond imagination to figure, let alone wiping his hands, Of course, he can always claim he did this after it was all over. Yet, isn’t there some of his blood on the gun???
I’ve seen them both before. But this one is hard to watch:
I like that tune, can’t remember the name of it though. It should probably be renamed “Zimmerman’s Theme” now.
In any event, with Zimmerman laying prone on the ground, we have to remember that the right arm is on the right side of the body. The legs of the straddler on top, would tend to align the shoulder of both people, so that a straight in shot should not be possible without some really weird wrist/arm contortions, and certainly not with the elbow of the shooters arm on the ground.
The lack of angularity of the shot says both were standing at the time, because TM has to have his right shoulder over to the right of GZ’s right shoulder or the shot will either not go straight in, or it would go to the right of where it did.
If GZ’s right arm isn’t directly perpendicular to TM’s chest, it won’t work that way. Because then GZ has to fire with an angle where, his own arm is pointing to his left side, producing an angle.
I keep asking myself what is the probability that GZ pulled off the perfect shot during a struggle in which he and TM were grappling and twisting?
A million to one?
A hundred million to one?
But wait, during the VSA test he said he “aimed” the gun and extended his arm to avoid shooting his left hand.
That reduces the probability somewhat, but TM still has to be immobilized to pull off that shot, even if GZ is aiming, right?
Evidently GZ’s left hand was involved in immobilizing TM.
What was he doing with his left hand that placed it in danger of being shot?
Given his admission that he aimed his gun, what is the probability that he was reasonably in imminent danger of death or serious injury when he fired that shot?
“Given his admission that he aimed his gun, what is the probability that he was reasonably in imminent danger of death or serious injury when he fired that shot?”
The answer is zero!
@Crane-Station Strange … not really, it is possible that’s all i can say.
Ada
Possible without context is meaningless.
You are playing the same trick as you did above.
I certainly hope GZ’s defense has more to offer than you do at trial because GZ will lose if they are not prepared to offer a consistent counter narrative.
@Brown It is a possibilty but then why DeeDee didn’t tell the sory this way?
because he didn’t go home…….
@case1 ??? Why should i find it strange if it is possible? The only thing i can say about it is that GZ didn’t shot at random. But could he do that under Trayvon. My answer is yes.
Geez Ada, anything is possible I guess – I mean it is possible it could snow here tomorrow – I sure hope you never get picked for jury duty. I know you might think it is a good think thinking anything is possible and that makes you a “reasonable” person when in fact it is actually limiting you to being able to see what really is and makes you totally unreasonable.
Also, you keep bringing up this thing about if TM went back. Back from where? Why? Without knowing back from where and why (and without any evidence to show where or why), I just don’t understand what you are saying.
@CherokeeNative I understand your hesitation to mention racism in a previous comment. I want to be clear. With time, i almost forgot Trayvon’s color. It is not at all a consideration.
With time, i almost forgot Trayvon’s color. It is not at all a consideration.
Puhleeze!
LOL @ SG2. Between that comment and reading the excerpts from MO’s book, nothing like a little comedy to start the day. On to Chapter 3 LOL.
Thank you ADA for clarifying that and I respect your position. I am not trying to attack you on a personal level at all – I do question how you can form the conclusion that Trayvon can turn from a kid who is obviously alarmed and attempting to avoid any sort of confrontation into a psycho thug (who had paranormal abilities to inflict the injuries to George without any of GZ’s DNA or blood evidence showing up on his appendages) without having some sort of preconceived notions of Trayvon. Since Trayvon cannot speak to this – we have to take what we are given as evidence and the evidence and George all state that Trayvon ran – so it is obvious that Trayvon wanted no part of GZ. There is nothing, but GZ’s self-serving statements, to try and make us believe that Trayvon changed that state of mind. Given GZ’s proven tendency to lie to his benefit, I do not believe his statement – it is a nonexistent factor. That being so, I do not see how anyone can claim Trayvon was ever an aggressor in this case. But I am beating a dead horse at this point.
Let me start by stating an extreme example of what we have here:
Would anyone believe that a 17 year old teen would climb into a boxing ring and attempt to claim a million dollar purse, against a heavy weight prize fighter champion?
If not, then what does anyone here think, would be going through a teens head, that would make them decide not to try it?
Could it be “lack of confidence”?
Could a teenager realistically envision himself, throwing the kind of heavy impact punches necessary? Of course, he could easily picture himself bobbing, weaving and dodging effectively, because of his greater speed and agility, but that’s not going to win him anything at all. To win he has to get in close enough and hit harder.
So, he’ll try to draw on his experience, in contacts with adults to get a clue. He’ll quickly realize that his best efforts are considered laughable by adults, and that will sap him of any confidence, that he has any chance to succeed in such a match.
Travyon is not a fighter, he has no martial arts skills, no combat training, and very likely, not even athletic train as well. So where would he gain any confidence in his ability to have more than a laughable impact on GZ? Remember, to him GZ is a dangerous crazy man with some undefined but horrible intent. GZ also appears hostile and aggressive, which has to be very frightening to a teen, who is use to adult authority.
The point is, people don’t jump to do things they realize they cannot do! For Trayvon to think that fisticuffs by him, might somehow have even a slim chance of rendering GZ anything more than angrier than he already appears, he’d have to take leave of his senses. So why would he abandon his, so-far-effective evasion, and place himself in overwhelming danger of capture?
A cornered animal would attack, no matter the odds of success. But human children are not animals and they don’t have such instincts. Cornered and trapped a human child will whine, cry and/or call for help, because they have so far learned they are helpless alone. An adult male, attacked by a bad dog, for example, will often attempt a defense, and although he may get bloodied, 9 times out of ten he’ll succeed, because of his greater strength and intelligence. But a child won’t even try, except to perhaps throw up his hands to block.
All of which tells us Trayvon felt he dare not even approach GZ. The only way they come into contact is if GZ catches the child.
To be clear, it takes a pretty tough life, a life steeped in physical altercations, and the scars and bruises to prove it, to toughen up a teen to where he has enough confidence to even think of tangling with an adult male without a weapon.
When GZ caught the kid, it was because the kid had squandered all his energy in a chaotic scramble to escape. Had Trayvon some athletic training, he’d have been better able to manage his energy resources and he’d probably have had no trouble escaping GZ. But he didn’t, he ran too far too fast, got himself winded and tired too quickly, enabling GZ to catch him easily, which should not have been the case. If Trayvon had run at 50 or 60% of his capacity, he’d have far outlasted and out run GZ. But a lack of training and fear worked against him.
ada4750 says: “With time, i almost forgot Trayvon’s color. It is not at all a consideration.”
For real? LOL. You kind of sound like George Zimmerman with that statement.
@SouthernGirl ??? I am telling the truth. I do feel a lot for his family though.
@CherokeeNative. I am just pointing that it is a realistic possibility not a fantasy that Trayvon went back. I was a juror i wouldn’t declare anybody guilty as long as the realistic possibilities are not discarded.
By the way, thank you for your respectful language. I am reading others comments and i am taking a beat.
Lets say for argument sake, that TM did go back to the T to ask “Why are you following me for”. TM GAVE GZ an oppurtunity to explain himself, which he didn’t. He answered with a more confrontational question to TM’s question. “What are you doing around here”. Which DeeDee heard, other witnesses heard a loud dominering voice and arguing. Now does take away the facts, that he watched TM at the mailshed, then behind him in the car, then a foot chase . TM is the only one who asked a resonable question. Because TM asked a question most reasonable people would of asked, whether he went home or not, does that make what GZ justifiable ? Answer NO.
Think back to a time when you run into a person at the same time over and over, the first thing you ask to youself is “is this person following me., or ask the person “Are you following me. Two things comes to my mind when I or another person ask this question. One to break the ice and give the person a chance to explain. Two gauge the persons reaction to the question and to see if they are a threat to you.
Ada- Martin “going back” might be A possibility, but a “realistic” possibility, not hardly. Martin was afraid of GZ. No way he would “realistically” confront a creep stalker.
@Cherokee
But I am beating a dead horse at this point.
http://www.bikeforums.net/images/smilies/DeadHorse.gif
I agree it seems not likely but not impossible. I mean if it was so unrealistic why SD let GZ go even after knowing who really was Trayvon? Of course they didn’t have DeeDee’S testimony for help. Isn’t what i keep saying?
@ada :With time, i almost forgot Trayvon’s color.
WTF??!!!
But it is true. What’s wrong if i just see the kid in him? And you should watch your language.
Came back from where? For what? Why? What evidence is there?
And what does any of this mean?:
I agree it seems not likely but not impossible. I mean if it was so unrealistic why SD let GZ go even after knowing who really was Trayvon? Of course they didn’t have DeeDee’S testimony for help. Isn’t what i keep saying?
I have NO idea what you are asking/saying there? What does DeeDee have to do with it and isn’t what you keep saying?
I have no idea what you are saying, what you are asking or why.
Rachael,
re: “Came back from where? For what? Why? What evidence is there? And what does any of this mean?”
What Ada means is: “When Trayvon came back from the dead …” (the jury will not find Zimmerman guilty).
But if the jury DOES find Zimmerman guilty, it is because DeeDee lied, and Zimmerman did not get a “fair trial.”
Remember, It is “a possibility.”
From what i can see, anyone who get off the road here is subject to pay the price, But why am i surprised of such a trivial statement?
No, not at all Ada. It has nothing to do with “paying a price” I guess for a dissenting opinion or other perspectives. There are a couple of problems going on here:
1) Either a language problem resulting in difficulty translating to written form in a way that’s easy to comprehend. Or really bad writing and grammar on your part.
2) The professor, Case, myself and others have tried to get you to see the fallacy in the possibility you are continuously putting forth. Do you not understand what has been arguments put forth in response to your statements? You have not acknowledged that you understand what is being said but continue to be redundant and confusing.
3) Some may be detecting a hidden agenda on your part especially with the use of the word color in reference to TM. Maybe color and colored is still used wherever you are, but that particular word don’t sit we’ll with many.
Nothing is wrong if you just see the kid in him.
But when you say over time you almost forgot his color, it makes me wonder how much time was it before you saw the kid in him and “almost” forgot his color.
So tell me Ada, just how long was it before you could get past his color to see him as a child, as a human being?
Good point Rachael.
Please delete my comment awaiting moderation. I edited out the links and reposted.
Thanks.
I’ve been gone for several hours running some errands and just returned. I saw your comment was held up, probably due to the links, so I approved it.
Do you still want me to take it down?
So tell me Ada, just how long was it before you could get past his color to see him as a child, as a human being?
****BOOM****!
@southernGirl You should be ashamed to ask such a question. I said that because it looks like my argumentation may have been influenced by Trayvon’s color. I answer not at all the the rest. But i am stunted that this color question is so omnipresent. The facts should be discussed without any reference to the color of the people involved.
@TruthToBTold The word color is offensive? I had no idea. So how should i wrote “trayvon’s color” ?
@Ada,
Do you have selective reading? You only addressed that one portion. Hmmmmm……anyway well, the more perhaps appropriate way would have been to say I didn’t consider Trayvon’s race or ethnicity at all. Also, others took exception to your comment based on their interpretation of what you wrote which is by the way, difficult to understand.
Ada4750
Here I help with you: “So how should i wrote “trayvon’s color” ?”
Wrote best Zimmerman like talk: “He looks Black.”
But truth not always Zimmerman mouth out.
Maybe bad reference “fair trial” for.
Also, but always maybe “possible.”
TruthBTold No i didn’t have time to read everything .. far from it. And i guess it is getting obvious now, English is not my first language.
You didn’t have time to read everything? It was all in one post, the post you had to have read because you responded to the color issue which, by the way, was at the end. Yes, it is very obvious that English is not your first language. Anyway……
@TruthToBTold I meant every comments since i quit reading a day and half ago.
Now tell me TruthToBtold Are you profiling me because English is not my first language?
@ada,
Am I profiling you because of English not being your first language you ask? *quizzical look* Don’t go there with me. I can’t figure out how or why you are even asking me this question, but what I will do for you is chalk it up to cultural differences and lack of understanding on your part. Good day.
I have to say that i am very surprised with this color question. I couldn’t imagine. What’s wrong with this so innocent word? Well never too late to learn.
@Ada
Is something wrong with your short term memory? You’re the one who brought the “color” issue up. YOU can’t seem to discuss the facts of the case without the color issue. You can’t get passed it.
@Ada
What does race/color have to do with anything? Good grief!
@TruthBTold All right .. all right. One thing for sure i can feel a wind of intolerance here. And it is sad for a blog of this nature. Beside that, I have the greatest respect for Mr and Mrs Leatherman and i want to thank them for all they done for Trayvon Martin.
Ada, I’m not sure if you are playing a game here or if you are serious and don’t understand because of the language barrier.
There is NOTHING wrong with color or the word color. It is the context within which you used it. In English what you said was that you saw his color first and after a time were able to see him as a child. When you say that, I have to wonder what it means when you see someone’s color first – does it mean you saw them as a thug? You saw them as less than human? You saw them as someone menacing? You saw them as someone who deserved to be shot?
You did NOT say that color never influenced your argumentation. What you said, in fact, was just the opposite – you said that color DID influence your argumentation for a time and then you saw Trayvon as a child and his color did not bother you anymore.
I do have the feeling you know this and you are playing me, but on the off chance you are not, I just wanted to explain to you why this sounded so bad to me. Nothing wrong with mentioning color. It was the way in which you mentioned it that sounded way off.
@ada4750 “@CherokeeNative I understand your hesitation to mention racism in a previous comment. I want to be clear. With time, i almost forgot Trayvon’s color. It is not at all a consideration.”
“… almost forgot …” That hit me like a ton of bricks. Let’s not forget. We need to remember in order to check our own preconceived thoughts for how we see others.
Here’s an exercise. Think of the person GZ killed as a 17 yr old female of any race. Ask yourself how you think she should have behaved and the decisions she should have made that evening. Then, think of the person GZ killed as a White 17 yr old male. Apply the same speculative questions about actions, decisions. Do the same for a 17 yr old Hispanic male and a 17 yr old Asian male.
If any of your speculation on what they should have done or could have done relies on a preconceived idea that they would have decided and acted differently than Trayvon, ask yourself why? What is it about 17 yr olds of other races and/or genders that makes them different from Trayvon.
Yes, that is an excellent way to spot prejudice.
@ Professor:
I’ve been gone for several hours running some errands and just returned. I saw your comment was held up, probably due to the links. Do you still want me to take it down?
Yes please, if you would.
@Ada, I really do believe that the problem is one of context because you are not a native English speaker, and I want to apologize.
It’s hanging out with Davie Jones at the Locker.
Ada,
What a long thread this has become!
First of all, your use of “color”. People come in all colors from very pale to very dark. I don’t think you meant to be insulting but in this country many years ago, African-Americans, or Black people, were known as “colored”. This was and is offensive. This was at a time when African-Americans were faced with signs that said “no colored allowed” or “colored” over drinking fountains and rest rooms. An important shameful sign in our history of segregation and some very bad treatment based on color/race/ethnicity.
You asked a question that maybe the clue as to why you think DeeDee’s testimony is so important.
“I agree it seems not likely [Trayvon going back to the T] but not impossible. I mean if it was so unrealistic why SD let GZ go even after knowing who really was Trayvon? Of course they didn’t have DeeDee’S testimony for help. Isn’t what i keep saying?”
At first the police believed GZ’s story because they had no witnesses to say otherwise. There was nothing but GZ’s word. There was a recommendation by the police (Serino) for a charge of manslaughter because he thought GZ was lying. In particular, Serino thought that GZ’s injuries didn’t support the kind of beating that he was claiming. If the DA had agreed, GZ would have been arrested at that time. The DA said there wasn’t enough evidence.
Some of the evidence would have been available within a few days of the shooting, but it also needed someone to look at it. Once the DA said “no”, apparently no one looked until Trayvon’s parents asked why not. I haven’t checked the dates on the evidence, but certainly once there was publicity about the case, the evidence was looked at and it was seen that GZ’s story had lots of problems. There were enough problems that the new DA charged him with murder-2 which is much more serious that manslaughter.
DeeDee’s testimony really doesn’t have anything to do with the T. From what DeeDee knows, Trayvon could have been anywhere along the path. In my opinion, DeeDee’s testimony helps because it adds humanity to Trayvon. Is it absolutely necessary for a guilty verdict? I don’t think so.
One of the things that complicates the puzzle for me is GZ’ vehicle. Since police did not bother themselves in the least with even snapping a photo of the vehicle that night, I have no idea where GZ parked and began his so-called search for some sort of address. I don’t know if he was even in his own vehicle. Assuming for argument that he was in his own vehicle, he could have parked at the back entrance for all I know. The key/flashlight at the top of the T is odd also. Do you mean to tell me that Paranoid George left a set of keys in the ignition of an unattended vehicle, at night, in a neighborhood where GZ claims that things are disappearing all the time….he leaves the truck with basically a ‘steal me please’ sign on it…and grabs a different set of keys? None of that whole thing makes any sense. He already had a tactical flashlight. (claimed it wasn’t working but in fact it was working, according to Serino) …why would he choose to use a five-dollar, Walmart, keychain flashlight to hunt with? Makes no sense.
First, shout-out to the Lady of the House, Crane. It’s been a while; hope all is well with ya:). Crane, you are correct and has been a question for many, where was GZ really parked? We know what he has said. Even when Singleton questioned him about where he was when he made the NEN call, where he was parked, etc., brought about some confusion. You know when he is questioned, he starts with I don’t know or remember.
Thanks, TruthBTold, I have been researching the workings of SCOTUS because of my legal case, which currently sits on their docket (an exercise in sheer madness, it is…the hopeless search for hope).
Anyway, it occurred to me…I have no great certainty that GZ was even in his own vehicle that night. Again, all we have for that is his word. Unless someone has determined for sure from the sounds in the tape that it did match his vehicle. I guess the bigger picture for me is, we have no idea how events unfolded after the gunshot, except for some of the bizarre things GZ did, like mounting the face-down TM, etc.
We do not know for certain that Shellie retrieved the vehicle. It could have been anyone. The vehicle could have been anywhere. It could have been anyone’s vehicle. Giant chunks of missing information here.
@Crane,
I know you’ve been busy with your personal legal matters. Yes, I think there are some things that we may never know:(.
There is a chance, however, that the officer tasked with looking at the cars, who determined that one car was “Zimmermans”, might remember where he saw it parked. After all, there were only two cars parked in that area to be searched. So, keep those fingers crossed.
Thanks Lonnie Starr *fingers crossed* for any information.
Crane-Station – I do have a vague recollection of someone saying that dings on GZ’s non-emergency call sounded like a Honda Ridgeline. And, I never questioned it again. Hmm…
@Crane
“Do you mean to tell me that Paranoid George left a set of keys in the ignition of an unattended vehicle, at night, in a neighborhood where GZ claims that things are disappearing all the time….”
I mean to tell you that loopy, slightly impaired Excitable George got such an adrenaline rush when he saw Trayvon start to run that he headed hurriedly after him without thinking of anything else, thus leaving the keys in the ignition AND the lights on.
And I mean to tell you that he had put the spare key to Shellie’s Honda sedan in his pocket when he left the house because it was attached to the mini-flashlight he grabbed as a back-up to his unreliable ‘tactical’ flashlight, which works sometimes, but sometimes doesn’t.
Yep! Paranoid, excitable George, the insurance company employee, Neighborhood Watch Captain, and wannabe cop who leaves a valuable bike and bbq grill outside (and apparently unlocked) in a neighborhood with a serious crime problem to be stolen.
yup…. dear ole paranoid george, the guy who locked his chair to his desk every night before leaving work and then had a fit when the night shift IT guy had to cut the lock to do some computer work.
sorry, that particular gz story cracks me up.
Faux, re ” … the guy who locked his chair to his desk every night before leaving work and then had a fit when the night shift IT guy had to cut the lock to do some computer work.”
Well, look at it this way. He got to practice yelling, “Don’t touch my seat!” He’s going to need that line when Mr. Precious hits The Yard.
Won’t do him any good, though.
^5′s
Oh my! I did not know that. I mean I did not know about Shellie’s spare key being the one that George took with him. Sorry about that. I’ll just go back to my corner and eat worms. In the dark. All by myself.
However, now that I think about it, what was he doing with her key out there? I have never understood that key/flashlight at the T. Far as I know, even GZ hasn’t offered an explanation for it, has he?
One of the SPD officers noted the license plates on the vehicles in the area. One of them belonged to GZ. I don’t recall an indication of where it was located. However, there is consistency in the truck being parked on TTL, north side, at the break between two sets of houses.
Most stories have the vehicle pointing toward the clubhouse. I’ve seen stories that it was pointing toward the T with its lights on so GZ could see and then the lights went off (after 15 seconds) so GZ needed his flashlight to return to his truck (rather than walking toward the street light). The security cameras analysis show a vehicle doing a u-turn and pointing toward the clubhouse.
Thank you. Interesting, I did not know this.
Good to see you Crane-Station!
Oh, good to be here, although I am behind everyone in knowing what’s going on! LOL, nice to see people being so patient!
1. It makes no sense for Zimmerman to leave his keys in the car.
2. We can’t be for sure where Zimmerman left his car.
3. If Zimmerman was not alone, someone else could have driven the car or moved it.
Professor, that was an excellent the way ADA4750 and Case #1 ran amuck and it plays out as a set up.
Crane Station, how true GZ “aimed” his gun!! Who in the world that is “fighting” for his life, would ever be able to “stop” “aim” and “fire” straight on. unless they had the upper hand and their victim
was screaming for help.
Exactly.
@ada4750: How do you reconcile that “I aimed the gun” statement? Right now it looks like a Freudian slip and a confession that GZ had the upper hand at that moment. If he had the upper hand, he did not have to kill TM.
At any rate, “I aimed the gun” (making sure my other hand was out of the way) is inconsistent with self-defense, because at that moment there is no imminent danger of death or bodily harm.
PS: A person cannot have it both ways. A person cannot have the upper hand AND claim self-defense. And this is not something that we have to infer. This came tumbling out of GZ’s own mouth.
@Crane-Station Where is the part that you are mentioning? If both of them were standing up, for sure Trayvon was twisting a lot. It is difficult to aim in this condition. If GZ was on top of Trayvon then it may be easier.
The “I aimed the gun” was in one of the early police interviews, and it was a direct quote from GZ to the officer. It is in the same videotape where officers do the voice stress analysis. If I remember, the officer interviewed GZ before the voice stress test, and that is when GZ made the curious comment.
I agree with your last statement, and that is why I think the “aimed the gun” quote is a problem for GZ.
@Ada: if you mean the aiming part its from the VSA video. Its clear from listening to the questions asked and how he answers that even the guy administering the test isn’t completely buying the story. This is also another version of the story – before we had TM was bashing his head again while he fired and TM not doing it. In the VSA version GZ states that he had TM’s left hand(well truth is GZ doesn’t remember which hand Trayvon reached for the gun with) trapped with his right arm. Trayvon had his right arm supposedly still planted on GZ’s face and GZ was holding onto his wrist/arm with his left hand.
He then goes on to say that he extended his arm aim, made sure he didn’t hit his own hand(you know the hand that should be well out of the line of fire based on his own statement) and fired. Gz’s hand/arm should be positioned by his words either out to the left or over the left side of his body vertically.
At that point IF he fully extends his arm(not possible with the way they were supposed positioned) He’s also FREED Trayvon’s left hand < Giving Trayvon the ability to FIGHT him for the gun, try and attack him again, or keep him from shooting < You cannot get a perfect shot that way.
If he fires from the hip, he's given up some control of Trayvon's hand, while not completely it still presents the opportunity for a struggle and again a non perfect shot.
Now to harken back to an older post from the Prof(combined with a witness statement) it is more likely that at the time of the shooting GZ was on top with Trayvon pinned in a way that he could not effectively get away. Now remember the aim and miss my hand part of his statements – GZ who is left hand dominant but right hand trained for shooting(very common and there are limited options of left hand pistols)had Trayvon's clothing in his left hand, the right pressing the gun into the fabric(FDLE report) and fired. This accounts for the "perfect" shot AND the distortion between the location of the holes in the hoodie and sweatshirt and the entrance wound on Trayvon.
@TM and ravenwolf No way GZ could aim if Trayvon was standing up but with GZ pinning him down yes. But then how would him managed to do have a straight line?
@ada4750
re “But then how would him managed to do have a straight line?”
No prob for Zimm, Ada.
Him do manage how do line straight gun trained by Osterman managed straight line trained.
Got it straight now, Ada?
Exactamundo! In a fight for his life, he’d have taken whatever shot was available. Instead he states that he clearly had time to be sure the gun was aimed, where he wanted the bullet to go, into the heart.
So now he’ll have to explain why he didn’t take the first available shot, which in all probability wasn’t a heart shot.
If you were in a life or death situation, you would pull the gun out and fire. How ironic that he says he “aimed” his gun and the fatal bullet was fired into Martin’s heart area. I’d say he is exactly correct when he claims he “aimed” and fired. Must be another one of his Freudian slips. If he was really having his face beaten to a pulp he would have pulled out his pistol and fired anywhere on Martin’s body. It would have been easier for him to have shot Martin in the leg or hip area rather than aiming at his heart.
Of course you guys are correct that in a life and death situation and in close physical contact, you fire without taking a death shot. But see, GZ is conflicted. He took aim, and said he took aim, because he wants his ability to shoot admired. Kinda like saying “See. I’m just as qualified as you guys to be a cop.”
Xena,
BRILLIANT! “”See. I’m just as qualified as you guys to be a cop.”
And expecting his mentor Osterman to glow.
As he did.
Nailed it!!
Both standing imo is quite possible. As a matter of fact the most logical. GZ has a hold on Trayvon by his shirt, yes, with his LEFT
hand and gun in right. Claims he is left handed, that is why he was “afraid” he might not shoot well with his right.. well he did!
He did just fine, didn’t you George Zimmerman.
Patricia, brilliant!
A thought: Professor says: ‘They have a duty to disclose the identity of every witness they intend to call at the immunity hearing or the trial and provide a copy or summary of any statement they made.”
Yes, but not REBUTTAL witnesses! Defense has not put on a case yet so there are no rebuttals available yet. SHOULD defense put on a case of self-defense, welll……REBUTTAL!!!
Perhaps they have a really good rebuttal witness just waiting.;.
@Malisha – Nope, the Professor is correct. Here’s a link that helps: http://www.countyjudges.com/articles/96discov.htm#IX. CONTINUING DUTY TO DISCLOSE
Attention Everyone:
Please let’s move on to another topic. I was out running errands for several hours and just came back. The frustration level in the comments is in the red zone.
For the good of the blog and our own equanimity, let’s agree to disagree and move on.
Ada, you believe the jury must believe Dee Dee or it will likely find Zimmerman not guilty. For a variety of reasons everyone else here disagrees.
Ada is not yielding her position and I don’t believe there is anything left to be said that will change that.
Likewise, Ada, there isn’t anything you can say that will change the opinions of the people with whom you are arguing.
I think we all can agree that we hope the jury finds her credible.
So, let’s leave it that and move on.
I am going to start a new thread i a few minutes on on opening statements. My remarks will be brief. Then y’all take over.
See y’all in a few minutes.
I have no problem moving on, but I still have no idea what was the reasoning behind Ada’s assertions. Its tough to have an exchange in which one side keeps going “Nope, I believe it will matter” without explaining how it will matter other than allowing others to fill in the gaps for her or using vague statements like “fair trial” to cover up a lack of explanation. In other words, I do not believe this has been a debate. This has been one side providing analysis and another making an assertion. Its really not fair to say those two things are equivalent. Now, I am completely ready to move on.
Case, in the world of blogging some people crave the attention and want to derail a good blog by coming on causing an uproar. If you go back a few I pointed out that this same person did exactly this to good blogs during the Anthony trial. They have no interest in the case…..have not even researched it in depth, in all probability. Their purpose is to derail and get 15 minutes of fame. Google what is an internet troll.
Hinkster, there’s a simple way for trolls to write disjointedly.
First, the reason they do it is to shake the euilibrium of the reader’s brain, so the reader has to concentrate on making sense of the sentence. The concept being advanced (and advanced, and advanced … ) finally gets anchored in the reader’s brain – even if the concept is brainless. Mission accomplished by the troll.
Second, the easy way to write senselessly is to write a perfectly normal paragraph, then go back and delete words at random. (You can also go back and insert words at random – uber-trolldom.)
Yes, we’ve seen this before.
Ada seemed to have no problem writing directly that English was not Ada’s mother tongue.
Martian isn’t mine, either, but I started picking up on it after a while.
THREE CHEERS for the next curriculum level from the Professor!
Again, I don’t need to attack her personally or make remarks that I can not substantiate about Ada to say that I don’t understand her assertions because she didn’t provide any reasoning to substantiate them.
I don’t want to gang up on her or back five each other like we have all the answers. None of us does. The problem I have is my own personal issue: I like reasoning. If someone is not providing it, it bothers me and I want to dig until I figure out what their reasoning is.
After reading many of Ada’s comments, I found a clue as to why she believes as she does. I responded up-thread. She may be a troll but I’ve given her the benefit of the doubt. Ada, please look for my comment up-thread and see if it is helpful.
Patricia says, “Ada seemed to have no problem writing directly that English was not Ada’s mother tongue.”
When I was in Germany I was asked if I spoke German. The question was asked in German. I answered, in German, “No, I don’t speak German. I speak English.” Cracked the German’s up that I understood and responded by saying no in complete sentences. If you don’t speak the language or you don’t speak it well, one of the first things you learn is how to let others know.
had to look back……how many people that dont know english VERY WELL use the word omnipresent?
the poster Ada indeed does speak english and is clearly trying to deceive this blog.
Ya’ll have had me smiling with pride as I watched football and kept up with my fantasy football team while reading along.
Poor, Professor has no idea about trolls and about how they deliberately try to change their writing to disguise themselves. I have to hand the group (and Crane wb, girl, u can rock with the best of them)….some high fives today! Great job of showing the unintelligent how far out of their league they really are!
Ya’ll got the poor professor left out in the cold shaking his head wondering what the hell…..smiles…..class act group worthy of an A+ in my book……
Ada~~you seems to be living on the edge like a blond eating edam on it’s expiry date. lol
Roflmbo
Lmbo!
Ouch!
I am sure she thinks Roy Kronk shot JR after he peed in the woods.
Bring on a new post Fred… I did not comment on this one for obvious reasons…
Stop it MSF my family thinks I am crazy laughing so hard! ……tears in my eyes………..
hinkster4ever~~ I can recognize certain broken English a mile away. How about you and I going out to dinner and we’ll go Dutch. lol
My new post is up:
Zimmerman: Opening Statements
[You responded to an internet troll and Zeebot who goes by the name Knuckledraggingwino. He hangs out at the Conservative Treehouse. He also ended his comment with a veiled threat. I banned him for restating the same ridiculous and absurd arguments that the Zeebots endlessly repeat and for threatening me. Since his comment is gone, I deleted your comment responding to it.]
[You responded to an internet troll and Zeebot who goes by the name Knuckledraggingwino. He hangs out at the Conservative Treehouse. He also ended his comment with a veiled threat. I banned him for restating the same ridiculous and absurd arguments that the Zeebots endlessly repeat and for threatening me. Since his comment is gone, I deleted your comment responding to it.]
It’s pretty depraved to kill a kid who is screaming for help begging for his life.
To wino; MOM! What are YOU doing here? Trying a few defense strategies against some real brains? (not mine but my esteemed classmates).
Hello Professor Leatherman and the rest of you posters. I’ve missed out on a few of the topics, so I’ve got to go back and read to catch up. I’ve been babysitting my great-grandchild. Also my Arthritis flaring up is making me mighty uncomfortable, so my Internet usuage has been sporadic and limited. Nevertheless, I’m confident that you and the rest of my fellow posters have been doing an excellent job. Nonetheless, I wanted to let you know that I’m still around and haven’t deserted ship.
I saw the latest report on the Trayvon case regarding none of Trayvon’s DNA on Zimmerman’s gun today. Trayvon never reached for Zimmerman’s gun. Zimmerman lied and he knows he lied and I believe that his friend Osterman has a guilty conscience because he was pumping Zimmerman up in the past with the “black thug” need to be eliminated theme. The only problem is that it turned out Trayvon was a not thug and that’s eating his conscience up.
I do not believe trayvon even had a chance to make it home i believe Zimmerman thought trayvon was a outsider looking to leave out of the back gate like he says on the 911 call. Zimmerman seen travon run up retreat view circle (wich would lead to trayvons front door) an Zimmerman used the cut through to cut trayvon off! (thats why gz was in a hurry an ranan also why he may have thought tm lost him) trayvon might have run up retreat view circle an decided to cut through some homes to the “T” WHERE he an Zimmerman meet head on to both suprise…..i believe in no way did trayvon “double back” like gz supporters suggest! if he did why not notify Chad he was going to fight? Why not drop off his snacks? To run an then all of a sudden decide to attack to kill makes no sense to me! Member he thought he lost gz an started back walking.