George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #2

Freckles wrote:

Twinkle wrote:

Freckles wrote:GZ received instructions to stay in a vehicle and failed to heed the instructions but he took an innocent situation and escalated it.

I just want to address the bolded because I see this being said over and over, all over the internet, and it just isn't true. GZ did not receive instructions to stay in his vehicle prior to leaving his vehicle. Once it became obvious that he was outside of his car and on the move, the 911 operator asked if he was following TM, and when GZ acknowledged that he was, then said "we don't need you to do that". So there was no instruction for him to stay in his vehicle at any time, just an admonishment that he did not need to follow the "real suspicious guy" he was calling to report, and that did not occur until GZ was already out of his car and in pursuit. Moreover, it is GZ's claim that he heeded this advice and was headed back to his car when he was attacked by TM.

You are correct. I apologize for not acknowledging that earlier. For me, it is kind of a wash, however, as I take it to mean about the same thing. Sure. GZ was told he did not need to follow Trayvon;; I suppose he could had returned to his vehicle, stood along the drive, or any number of things. Since his last known location was inside the truck, when he was told he did not need to follow I presumed the instructions to be "return to your vehicle" as he said he was afraid--- but those words were NOT uttered.

Thank you for the clarity and the correction.

BCM:
Actually his last known location was already outside of the truck and it is acknowledged by the Dispatcher asking if he was following TM.

I must have listened to that unredacted non-911 call thirty times.
@1:10 I hear the door locks being utilized. (When he is stating that TM is coming toward him and checking him out)
@2:11 There are beeps from the car door opening (keys are still in ignition)
@2:34 I hear the car door again
(There are sounds of rustling right afterwards about for a few seconds as it seems as if he got resettled into the truck. There is no more wind noise and he is not out of breath)
@2:53 I hear the glove compartment opening

(All times are approx since hitting the pause wasn't always dead on...)

Much has been made here on the board of the clicking noises made, but I contend if he were still outside of the truck those would not have been that noticable due to wind noise. It isn't like it was a clear night without weather issues. And they seem to be in some sort of a pattern and reoccur two or three times. I even wondered if GZ kept a journal of some sort for detailing his NW duties/incidences because it reminded me of the tapping a pen against something.

Gizmo swears it is the movement of the slide while chambering of a round in that gun. I have owned semi-automatic handguns. One, it doesn't sound like a shell is being racked to me. And why would it be repeated? Two, IF I were prepping to leave my house and was going to holster a weapon, I would have done all that before I left. What is the object of being prepared if you are going to leave unprepared? As a handgun owner that just defies reason.

After he said OK, I think he did indeed return to his truck. I think he got out of his truck after terminating that call and went directly either to that T intersection of that sidewalk or if you want to give some credence to the witness who saw the blurs, he had driven his truck forward to the first place between the THs that would get him to the sidewalk the fastest way possible.

"There is the possibility that these statements may be subject to motions to suppress, if there is a potentially involuntary statement elicited from Mr. Zimmerman," O'Mara said.

"The release of that information would be highly prejudicial to Mr. Zimmerman's case, and again, would adversely affect the proper administration of justice," he said.

O'Mara also asked the judge to withhold what he said were thousands of emails received by the Sanford police about the case, some of which are racially charged, and Zimmerman's own text messages, emails and journal entries obtained by prosecutors as part of their evidence gathering.
---------
Interesting that MOM is fishing...he wants to call one statement involuntary to get it thrown out and George's racist text withheld. There are emails and journal entries.

Journal entries?!?

February 26, 2012

Dear Diary,
I am so misunderstood. I try to protect my neighbors and community and for what? I made a rash decision and had to stop a 17 year old from pummeling me. No one will miss him I am sure. My buds at the police department have my back. Dad is coaching me on how to handle the details. Shellie has my back. This will all die down over the next couple of weeks and life will get back to normal.

Until tomorrow faithful diary friend,
JoeG

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/zimmerman_state_motion.pdf

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/zimmerman_prot_order.pdf

DebFrmHell wrote:

Freckles wrote:

Twinkle wrote:

Freckles wrote:GZ received instructions to stay in a vehicle and failed to heed the instructions but he took an innocent situation and escalated it.

I just want to address the bolded because I see this being said over and over, all over the internet, and it just isn't true. GZ did not receive instructions to stay in his vehicle prior to leaving his vehicle. Once it became obvious that he was outside of his car and on the move, the 911 operator asked if he was following TM, and when GZ acknowledged that he was, then said "we don't need you to do that". So there was no instruction for him to stay in his vehicle at any time, just an admonishment that he did not need to follow the "real suspicious guy" he was calling to report, and that did not occur until GZ was already out of his car and in pursuit. Moreover, it is GZ's claim that he heeded this advice and was headed back to his car when he was attacked by TM.

You are correct. I apologize for not acknowledging that earlier. For me, it is kind of a wash, however, as I take it to mean about the same thing. Sure. GZ was told he did not need to follow Trayvon;; I suppose he could had returned to his vehicle, stood along the drive, or any number of things. Since his last known location was inside the truck, when he was told he did not need to follow I presumed the instructions to be "return to your vehicle" as he said he was afraid--- but those words were NOT uttered.

Thank you for the clarity and the correction.

BCM:
Actually his last known location was already outside of the truck and it is acknowledged by the Dispatcher asking if he was following TM.

I must have listened to that unredacted non-911 call thirty times.
@1:10 I hear the door locks being utilized. (When he is stating that TM is coming toward him and checking him out)
@2:11 There are beeps from the car door opening (keys are still in ignition)
@2:34 I hear the car door again
(There are sounds of rustling right afterwards about for a few seconds as it seems as if he got resettled into the truck. There is no more wind noise and he is not out of breath)
@2:53 I hear the glove compartment opening

(All times are approx since hitting the pause wasn't always dead on...)

Much has been made here on the board of the clicking noises made, but I contend if he were still outside of the truck those would not have been that noticable due to wind noise. It isn't like it was a clear night without weather issues. And they seem to be in some sort of a pattern and reoccur two or three times. I even wondered if GZ kept a journal of some sort for detailing his NW duties/incidences because it reminded me of the tapping a pen against something.

Gizmo swears it is the movement of the slide while chambering of a round in that gun. I have owned semi-automatic handguns. One, it doesn't sound like a shell is being racked to me. And why would it be repeated? Two, IF I were prepping to leave my house and was going to holster a weapon, I would have done all that before I left. What is the object of being prepared if you are going to leave unprepared? As a handgun owner that just defies reason.

After he said OK, I think he did indeed return to his truck. I think he got out of his truck after terminating that call and went directly either to that T intersection of that sidewalk or if you want to give some credence to the witness who saw the blurs, he had driven his truck forward to the first place between the THs that would get him to the sidewalk the fastest way possible.

Re: gun slide sound

The gun was recovered with a full magazine and an empty chamber. As only one shot was allegedly fired I would infer that GZ opted to carry with one in the chamber, ready to go.

Therefore point and shoot.

He could have been loading the chamber and magazine at that point perhaps.

Twinkle wrote:

Alessandra_Deux wrote:But, please, let's don't make this discussion into a racial debate, this thread was created to discuss the legal aspects of the case, the documents, the court proceedings and to follow the news about the case, and of course, to express our own views and opinions.

Well said, and I agree.

CherokeeNative wrote:It may be that there was no favoritism or cover-up going on, and if that is the case, fine. But a full investigation is warranted at this point. I find it odd that the CofP, the state attorney, and possibly Zimmerman's daddy were at the station or in contact with those at the station that night. If this is found to be untrue - I have not heard that as yet.

First of all, to address whether the CofP and state attorney were at the station that night, Norm Wolfinger strongly denied allegations that such a meeting took place, and to my knowledge Crump et al have not been able to back up these allegations with

In the letter delivered Monday, the Martin family said that a Sanford police detective "filed an affidavit stating that he did not find Zimmerman's statements credible in light of the circumstances and facts surrounding the shooting."

The family said Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee and State Attorney Norm Wolfinger met the night of the shooting and disregarded the detective's advice, letting Zimmerman go.

Neither Sanford police nor prosecutors have confirmed the existence of such an affidavit, which ABC News first reported. Sanford officials and special prosecutor Angela Corey's office declined comment.

But Wolfinger, who stepped aside in the case last month, vehemently denies that any "such meeting or communication occurred" between him and Lee.

"I have been encouraging those spreading the irresponsible rhetoric to stop and allow State Attorney Angela Corey to complete her work," Wolfinger said in a statement Monday. "Another falsehood distributed to the media does nothing to forward that process."

http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/02/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html

As for Robert Zimmerman, I have never seen any source for the rumors that he was at the station and/or talked to the CofP or state attorney, just pure speculation. We know that Robert Zimmerman was recovering from some kind of heart problem when the shooting occurred and that GZ's wife was the one who brought a change of clothes to the station for GZ and moved his car. There is no indication that Robert Zimmerman was at the station that night.

Also, Robert Zimmerman himself said:

After giving up his gun, clothes and shoes to police, George Zimmerman gave at least three statements. Pictures were taken of his injuries. "I saw him the next morning. He looked like hell. I said, 'Who beat you up?' His nose was swollen, he had a protective thing over it, and he had a cut lip and two cuts on the back of his head."

Zimmerman insisted that no one in the Sanford Police or the Seminole County prosecutor's office knew he was a retired judge. He denied ever meeting with the original prosecutor on the case, Norm Wolfinger. He said that he only met once with a prosecutor's investigator, when he gave a sworn statement insisting that the voice he heard on a 911 tape calling for help was George's.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/14/2799569_p2/zimmermans-father-our-lives-will.html

So..."I saw him the next morning" strongly implies that RZ did not see GZ the night of the shooting. And he denies meeting with Wolfinger or exerting his supposed influence as a retired magistrate from Virginia.

Twinkle - If you are satisfied with media banter, that's fine. But I am not. I am not satisfied with someone saying it didn't happen and expect me to accept that as gosspel. I want to see an investigation of the SPD and everyone involved that night down to phone records. If I were a member of that community, I would be doing more than just blogging about it, but seeing I am on the other side of the U.S., I can't quiet manage it. IMO there is more than enough suspicion to warrant an investigation. But again, that's just MHO.

Trayvon's killer said to make self-incriminating statements

By Barbara Liston

ORLANDO, Florida | Thu May 24, 2012 8:49pm EDT

ORLANDO, Florida (Reuters) - Neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman made statements to police that help establish his guilt in the second-degree murder case against him for killing unarmed black teenager Trayvon Martin, prosecutors said in a court filing on Thursday.

The claim came in a motion by prosecutors to keep some of Zimmerman's statements under seal pending his trial in a case that triggered civil rights protests across the United States, while sparking widespread debate over guns, self-defense laws and U.S. race relations.

"Defendant (Zimmerman) has provided law enforcement with numerous statements, some of which are contradictory, and are inconsistent with the physical evidence and statements of witnesses," the prosecutors said in their court filing.

They said the statements by Zimmerman were admissible in court and "in conjunction with other statements and evidence help to establish defendant's guilt in this case."

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/25/us-usa-florida-shooting-idUSBRE84O00020120525

Prosecutors, George Zimmerman's Attorney Ask To Seal Discovery Materials

Circuit Judge Kenneth Lester Jr. has ordered a hearing for next Friday, June 1

By Edward B. Colby | Thursday, May 24, 2012 | Updated 8:10 PM EDT

George Zimmerman’s attorney has agreed with prosecutors’ request that numerous discovery materials be sealed in new court motions.

“The State and Defendant wish to be able to receive a fair trial and try this case in the courtroom and not in the media,” prosecutors wrote in their motion for a protective order from Seminole County Circuit Judge Kenneth Lester Jr. They said that publishing various discovery materials in the media would result in the case being tried in the press and not in court, and would make it not possible to seat a fair, impartial jury in the county.

The state said that releasing evidence such as the names, addresses and phone numbers of potential witnesses would constrain both sides’ ability to hold a fair and independent investigation and present witnesses.

Lester has ordered a hearing on the matter for next Friday afternoon, June 1 in the Sanford courthouse.

http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/Prosecutors-George-Zimmermans-Attorney-Ask-To-Seal-Discovery-Materials-153838635.html

Gizmo711 wrote:

Chickenbutt wrote:Gizmo, I rarely, if ever, post but I read this and had to say...the def will say that the "we don't need you to do that" was just a suggestion. If the 911 operator wanted GZ to stay in his car, she would have said so.
As we all know, the courtroom is no place for reasonable people.

Did you hear the actual 911 tape? If you did you would plainly hear that it was a command. You say "she" but it was a "male" 911 operator, that leads me to believe that maybe you didn't hear the actual tape.

It was the way it was said that made it a command.

It wasn't like someone telling you that they are going to buy you a present for your birthday and you respond with "you don't need to do that" vs Being asked if you are following someone by a 911 operator and upon saying "yes" and the 911 operator saying "we don't need you to do that". That was a command in a nice manner, but a command none the less.

Gizzmo - In ChickenButt's defense, I think she is right. If you will go onto the legal defense blogs, and even in the media, the legal analysist's are stating that the Dispatcher's instruction of "we don't need you to do that" was nothing more than a suggestion and will most likely be presented that way by O'Mara. We all can read into the instruction however we want, but bottom line, the Dispatcher had no law enforcement authority over GZ.

Gizmo711 wrote:

Freckles wrote:

Twinkle wrote:

Freckles wrote:GZ received instructions to stay in a vehicle and failed to heed the instructions but he took an innocent situation and escalated it.

I just want to address the bolded because I see this being said over and over, all over the internet, and it just isn't true. GZ did not receive instructions to stay in his vehicle prior to leaving his vehicle. Once it became obvious that he was outside of his car and on the move, the 911 operator asked if he was following TM, and when GZ acknowledged that he was, then said "we don't need you to do that". So there was no instruction for him to stay in his vehicle at any time, just an admonishment that he did not need to follow the "real suspicious guy" he was calling to report, and that did not occur until GZ was already out of his car and in pursuit. Moreover, it is GZ's claim that he heeded this advice and was headed back to his car when he was attacked by TM.

You are correct. I apologize for not acknowledging that earlier. For me, it is kind of a wash, however, as I take it to mean about the same thing. Sure. GZ was told he did not need to follow Trayvon;; I suppose he could had returned to his vehicle, stood along the drive, or any number of things. Since his last known location was inside the truck, when he was told he did not need to follow I presumed the instructions to be "return to your vehicle" as he said he was afraid--- but those words were NOT uttered.

Thank you for the clarity and the correction.

Some words do not need to be uttered to precision. Anybody with a half of brain would have known exactly what that 911 operator was saying. And Zimmerman knew what he was saying, that's why he said "OK" in a low voice but chose to continue to follow Trayvon.

Again, my main point is that GZ was not failing to heed the instructions of the 911 operator when he left his vehicle to follow TM because at the time, no instructions had been given. Once the 911 operator said "we don't need you to do that", he acknowledged the direction with "OK", but the running sounds continued for another 10-15 seconds. We've been told that GZ claims to have walked along the cut-through sidewalk over to the next street and then was returning to his car; if this is true, he did heed the instructions of the 911 operator, just not immediately.

In reexamining the 911 call transcript, I find this passage interesting:

Dispatcher

Are you following him?

Zimmerman

Yeah.

Dispatcher

Ok, we don't need you to do that.

Zimmerman

Ok.

Dispatcher

Alright sir what is your name?

Zimmerman

George…He ran.

The "he ran" sounds resigned, like the "real suspicious guy" is no longer in his sight, and he has acknowledged that he is not to pursue him. He answers all the dispatcher's questions and makes no further mention of TM. He seems resigned to waiting for the police at this point. This does not sound to me like someone who was hot on the trail of TM and closing in on him. Of course, we know that it was about a minute or so between when he ended the call with the dispatcher and when the 911 calls started coming in to report an altercation between GZ and TM.

CherokeeNative wrote:

Twinkle wrote:

CherokeeNative wrote:It may be that there was no favoritism or cover-up going on, and if that is the case, fine. But a full investigation is warranted at this point. I find it odd that the CofP, the state attorney, and possibly Zimmerman's daddy were at the station or in contact with those at the station that night. If this is found to be untrue - I have not heard that as yet.

First of all, to address whether the CofP and state attorney were at the station that night, Norm Wolfinger strongly denied allegations that such a meeting took place, and to my knowledge Crump et al have not been able to back up these allegations with

In the letter delivered Monday, the Martin family said that a Sanford police detective "filed an affidavit stating that he did not find Zimmerman's statements credible in light of the circumstances and facts surrounding the shooting."

The family said Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee and State Attorney Norm Wolfinger met the night of the shooting and disregarded the detective's advice, letting Zimmerman go.

Neither Sanford police nor prosecutors have confirmed the existence of such an affidavit, which ABC News first reported. Sanford officials and special prosecutor Angela Corey's office declined comment.

But Wolfinger, who stepped aside in the case last month, vehemently denies that any "such meeting or communication occurred" between him and Lee.

"I have been encouraging those spreading the irresponsible rhetoric to stop and allow State Attorney Angela Corey to complete her work," Wolfinger said in a statement Monday. "Another falsehood distributed to the media does nothing to forward that process."

http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/02/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html

As for Robert Zimmerman, I have never seen any source for the rumors that he was at the station and/or talked to the CofP or state attorney, just pure speculation. We know that Robert Zimmerman was recovering from some kind of heart problem when the shooting occurred and that GZ's wife was the one who brought a change of clothes to the station for GZ and moved his car. There is no indication that Robert Zimmerman was at the station that night.

Also, Robert Zimmerman himself said:

After giving up his gun, clothes and shoes to police, George Zimmerman gave at least three statements. Pictures were taken of his injuries. "I saw him the next morning. He looked like hell. I said, 'Who beat you up?' His nose was swollen, he had a protective thing over it, and he had a cut lip and two cuts on the back of his head."

Zimmerman insisted that no one in the Sanford Police or the Seminole County prosecutor's office knew he was a retired judge. He denied ever meeting with the original prosecutor on the case, Norm Wolfinger. He said that he only met once with a prosecutor's investigator, when he gave a sworn statement insisting that the voice he heard on a 911 tape calling for help was George's.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/14/2799569_p2/zimmermans-father-our-lives-will.html

So..."I saw him the next morning" strongly implies that RZ did not see GZ the night of the shooting. And he denies meeting with Wolfinger or exerting his supposed influence as a retired magistrate from Virginia.

Twinkle - If you are satisfied with media banter, that's fine. But I am not. I am not satisfied with someone saying it didn't happen and expect me to accept that as gosspel. I want to see an investigation of the SPD and everyone involved that night down to phone records. If I were a member of that community, I would be doing more than just blogging about it, but seeing I am on the other side of the U.S., I can't quiet manage it. IMO there is more than enough suspicion to warrant an investigation. But again, that's just MHO.

I would say the principals accused of misconduct and/or undue influence categorically denying those accusations amounts to more than just media banter. Moreover, since these statements have been made, no one has come forward to prove them wrong. I feel confident that if Crump and the other Martin family lawyers had evidence to back up the accusations they made about the CofP and state attorney, or to show that RZ had influenced police/state attorney decisions, that they would not hesitate to make it public. Also, if RZ, Wolfinger, and the CofP were all at the police station the night of the shooting, forming an evil cabal to set GZ free, then I would think there would be witnesses, and we would have heard about it. Plenty of other information has leaked out. So, yes, I am fairly satisfied that these things did not happen, because there is absolutely no evidence that they did. I put the burden of proof on the accusers and the conspiracy theorists, not on the accused. I would add that we already know that there was a tremendous amount of misinformation put out there when this case first came into the public eye.

CherokeeNative wrote:

Gizmo711 wrote:

Chickenbutt wrote:Gizmo, I rarely, if ever, post but I read this and had to say...the def will say that the "we don't need you to do that" was just a suggestion. If the 911 operator wanted GZ to stay in his car, she would have said so.
As we all know, the courtroom is no place for reasonable people.

Did you hear the actual 911 tape? If you did you would plainly hear that it was a command. You say "she" but it was a "male" 911 operator, that leads me to believe that maybe you didn't hear the actual tape.

It was the way it was said that made it a command.

It wasn't like someone telling you that they are going to buy you a present for your birthday and you respond with "you don't need to do that" vs Being asked if you are following someone by a 911 operator and upon saying "yes" and the 911 operator saying "we don't need you to do that". That was a command in a nice manner, but a command none the less.

Gizzmo - In ChickenButt's defense, I think she is right. If you will go onto the legal defense blogs, and even in the media, the legal analysist's are stating that the Dispatcher's instruction of "we don't need you to do that" was nothing more than a suggestion and will most likely be presented that way by O'Mara. We all can read into the instruction however we want, but bottom line, the Dispatcher had no law enforcement authority over GZ.

This was exactly the point I was *trying* to make. As to the he/she business, I HAVE listened to the 911 call...forgive the grievous error. Too many 911 calls in my brain to keep them straight.

Twinkle wrote:

CherokeeNative wrote:

Twinkle wrote:

CherokeeNative wrote:It may be that there was no favoritism or cover-up going on, and if that is the case, fine. But a full investigation is warranted at this point. I find it odd that the CofP, the state attorney, and possibly Zimmerman's daddy were at the station or in contact with those at the station that night. If this is found to be untrue - I have not heard that as yet.

First of all, to address whether the CofP and state attorney were at the station that night, Norm Wolfinger strongly denied allegations that such a meeting took place, and to my knowledge Crump et al have not been able to back up these allegations with

In the letter delivered Monday, the Martin family said that a Sanford police detective "filed an affidavit stating that he did not find Zimmerman's statements credible in light of the circumstances and facts surrounding the shooting."

The family said Sanford Police Chief Bill Lee and State Attorney Norm Wolfinger met the night of the shooting and disregarded the detective's advice, letting Zimmerman go.

Neither Sanford police nor prosecutors have confirmed the existence of such an affidavit, which ABC News first reported. Sanford officials and special prosecutor Angela Corey's office declined comment.

But Wolfinger, who stepped aside in the case last month, vehemently denies that any "such meeting or communication occurred" between him and Lee.

"I have been encouraging those spreading the irresponsible rhetoric to stop and allow State Attorney Angela Corey to complete her work," Wolfinger said in a statement Monday. "Another falsehood distributed to the media does nothing to forward that process."

http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/02/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html

As for Robert Zimmerman, I have never seen any source for the rumors that he was at the station and/or talked to the CofP or state attorney, just pure speculation. We know that Robert Zimmerman was recovering from some kind of heart problem when the shooting occurred and that GZ's wife was the one who brought a change of clothes to the station for GZ and moved his car. There is no indication that Robert Zimmerman was at the station that night.

Also, Robert Zimmerman himself said:

After giving up his gun, clothes and shoes to police, George Zimmerman gave at least three statements. Pictures were taken of his injuries. "I saw him the next morning. He looked like hell. I said, 'Who beat you up?' His nose was swollen, he had a protective thing over it, and he had a cut lip and two cuts on the back of his head."

Zimmerman insisted that no one in the Sanford Police or the Seminole County prosecutor's office knew he was a retired judge. He denied ever meeting with the original prosecutor on the case, Norm Wolfinger. He said that he only met once with a prosecutor's investigator, when he gave a sworn statement insisting that the voice he heard on a 911 tape calling for help was George's.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/14/2799569_p2/zimmermans-father-our-lives-will.html

So..."I saw him the next morning" strongly implies that RZ did not see GZ the night of the shooting. And he denies meeting with Wolfinger or exerting his supposed influence as a retired magistrate from Virginia.

Twinkle - If you are satisfied with media banter, that's fine. But I am not. I am not satisfied with someone saying it didn't happen and expect me to accept that as gosspel. I want to see an investigation of the SPD and everyone involved that night down to phone records. If I were a member of that community, I would be doing more than just blogging about it, but seeing I am on the other side of the U.S., I can't quiet manage it. IMO there is more than enough suspicion to warrant an investigation. But again, that's just MHO.

I would say the principals accused of misconduct and/or undue influence categorically denying those accusations amounts to more than just media banter. Moreover, since these statements have been made, no one has come forward to prove them wrong. I feel confident that if Crump and the other Martin family lawyers had evidence to back up the accusations they made about the CofP and state attorney, or to show that RZ had influenced police/state attorney decisions, that they would not hesitate to make it public. Also, if RZ, Wolfinger, and the CofP were all at the police station the night of the shooting, forming an evil cabal to set GZ free, then I would think there would be witnesses, and we would have heard about it. Plenty of other information has leaked out. So, yes, I am fairly satisfied that these things did not happen, because there is absolutely no evidence that they did. I put the burden of proof on the accusers and the conspiracy theorists, not on the accused. I would add that we already know that there was a tremendous amount of misinformation put out there when this case first came into the public eye.

Media banter is exactly what it was - Crump calling out for an investigation which was reported in the media, and the Wolfinger making a statement to the media is response. And Twinkle, you are entitled to be satisfied with what we have seen. I am not and hope that others who have the ability to not let it be swept under the rug will see it through to the end. We can agree to disagree.

marcena2 wrote:George made self incriminating statements to police.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/05/25/us-usa-florida-shooting-idUSBRE84O00020120525

Tks Macarena! Interesting article.
Seems like the defense is hoping to bury a lot of the hot mess George spewed out.
Since his story doesn't jibe at all with the location of Trayvons death, this has me wondering how much more there is. If his story's not credible, maybe it is more than manslaughter. I thought it would be manslaughter even if George had been telling the truth.

Twinkle wrote:
In reexamining the 911 call transcript, I find this passage interesting:

Dispatcher Are you following him? ..........
George…He ran.

The "he ran" sounds resigned, like the "real suspicious guy" is no longer in his sight, and he has acknowledged that he is not to pursue him. He answers all the dispatcher's questions and makes no further mention of TM. He seems resigned to waiting for the police at this point. This does not sound to me like someone who was hot on the trail of TM and closing in on him. Of course, we know that it was about a minute or so between when he ended the call with the dispatcher and when the 911 calls started coming in to report an altercation between GZ and TM.

That's not exactly right. Later in the tape when the dispatcher asks him his address, he starts to say it and then says " I don't want to say it out loud, I don't know where this kid is." Clearly he is talking about TM and if he were back in the privacy of his car, why wouldn't he want to say the address out loud? Do you honestly think he sounds like he is resigned to waiting for the police at this point or that he is back in his car? Or looking for an "address"?

Chickenbutt wrote:

CherokeeNative wrote:

Gizmo711 wrote:

Chickenbutt wrote:Gizmo, I rarely, if ever, post but I read this and had to say...the def will say that the "we don't need you to do that" was just a suggestion. If the 911 operator wanted GZ to stay in his car, she would have said so.
As we all know, the courtroom is no place for reasonable people.

Did you hear the actual 911 tape? If you did you would plainly hear that it was a command. You say "she" but it was a "male" 911 operator, that leads me to believe that maybe you didn't hear the actual tape.

It was the way it was said that made it a command.

It wasn't like someone telling you that they are going to buy you a present for your birthday and you respond with "you don't need to do that" vs Being asked if you are following someone by a 911 operator and upon saying "yes" and the 911 operator saying "we don't need you to do that". That was a command in a nice manner, but a command none the less.

Gizzmo - In ChickenButt's defense, I think she is right. If you will go onto the legal defense blogs, and even in the media, the legal analysist's are stating that the Dispatcher's instruction of "we don't need you to do that" was nothing more than a suggestion and will most likely be presented that way by O'Mara. We all can read into the instruction however we want, but bottom line, the Dispatcher had no law enforcement authority over GZ.

This was exactly the point I was *trying* to make. As to the he/she business, I HAVE listened to the 911 call...forgive the grievous error. Too many 911 calls in my brain to keep them straight.

You got busted by the Gender Police?

What is next? The Punctuation Patrol? Spelling Squads roaming the boards? Dogs and Cats living together?

We must all hide! Hide I tell you!

On a serious note:

Dear Twinkle,
I appreciate your efforts to bring actual evidence into the conversation. You remind me of a dear friend who used to post at The Hinky... She too was very sane and reasonable when things got...well, wierd.

And nothing was being swept under the rug. There wasn't enough evidence to arrest GZ the night of the shooting. You just can't arrest someone without probable cause to take to a DA. The DAs will review and tell what else you need to get to make a case.

The case was not moving fast enough to suit the family of Trayvon Martin and their lawyer. So the lawyer hired out a PR firm to make the wheels of justice move faster...and it started with the picture of 12-13 yr old TM being blasted around MSM being put beside a 2005 mug shot of GZ.

Look at what was being done. Read the reports prior to March 20th. Things the SPD was accused of not doing...they were doing. Coreys team took a couple of weeks+ also but no out cry there! Why not?

Sanford may have been well into the arrest process but they handed off their case to the SAO instead.

If they did such a crap job, why did Corey show them respect for their work? She could have kept her mouth shut.

IMO.

[/quote]
Sorry, I made a spelling mistake. Sorry you don't understand my statement. However when one race blames another for everything, and not look at their race then there will always be a problem between race. If you are saying I should get off my high horse, then you didn't read other post I wrote. You have no idea what my concerns are because you did not read. [/quote]

I just read how you think some (or all) African Americans blame white people for "everything". Your words. Your "concerns".
Sad.

Snipped from DebFrmHell

You got busted by the Gender Police?

Now that made me laugh!

DebFrmHell wrote:

Chickenbutt wrote:

CherokeeNative wrote:

Gizmo711 wrote:

Chickenbutt wrote:Gizmo, I rarely, if ever, post but I read this and had to say...the def will say that the "we don't need you to do that" was just a suggestion. If the 911 operator wanted GZ to stay in his car, she would have said so.
As we all know, the courtroom is no place for reasonable people.

Did you hear the actual 911 tape? If you did you would plainly hear that it was a command. You say "she" but it was a "male" 911 operator, that leads me to believe that maybe you didn't hear the actual tape.

It was the way it was said that made it a command.

It wasn't like someone telling you that they are going to buy you a present for your birthday and you respond with "you don't need to do that" vs Being asked if you are following someone by a 911 operator and upon saying "yes" and the 911 operator saying "we don't need you to do that". That was a command in a nice manner, but a command none the less.

Gizzmo - In ChickenButt's defense, I think she is right. If you will go onto the legal defense blogs, and even in the media, the legal analysist's are stating that the Dispatcher's instruction of "we don't need you to do that" was nothing more than a suggestion and will most likely be presented that way by O'Mara. We all can read into the instruction however we want, but bottom line, the Dispatcher had no law enforcement authority over GZ.

This was exactly the point I was *trying* to make. As to the he/she business, I HAVE listened to the 911 call...forgive the grievous error. Too many 911 calls in my brain to keep them straight.

You got busted by the Gender Police?

What is next? The Punctuation Patrol? Spelling Squads roaming the boards? Dogs and Cats living together?

We must all hide! Hide I tell you!

On a serious note:

Dear Twinkle,
I appreciate your efforts to bring actual evidence into the conversation. You remind me of a dear friend who used to post at The Hinky... She too was very sane and reasonable when things got...well, wierd.

And nothing was being swept under the rug. There wasn't enough evidence to arrest GZ the night of the shooting. You just can't arrest someone without probable cause to take to a DA. The DAs will review and tell what else you need to get to make a case.

The case was not moving fast enough to suit the family of Trayvon Martin and their lawyer. So the lawyer hired out a PR firm to make the wheels of justice move faster...and it started with the picture of 12-13 yr old TM being blasted around MSM being put beside a 2005 mug shot of GZ.

Look at what was being done. Read the reports prior to March 20th. Things the SPD was accused of not doing...they were doing. Coreys team took a couple of weeks+ also but no out cry there! Why not?

Sanford may have been well into the arrest process but they handed off their case to the SAO instead.

If they did such a crap job, why did Corey show them respect for their work? She could have kept her mouth shut.

IMO.

Oh Deb ---- It was so much more fun when it was a conspiracy - and there you went and took all of the fun out of it.

See ya over coffee.

I'm going to dispute the below strenuously. Surely you forget the police were defending their decision to treat the killers statement as "best evidence". Insanity!
While ignoring witnesses who were calling in, ignoring the 9/11 call not matching up with the location of the body, ignoring GZ statements didn't match the evidence.
They didn't need the FBI and outside investigators coming in to fix things if they were working on it. They stopped working the case and were defending their decision to do so. Corey has to be non judgemental on it- because that's not her fish to fry.
The FBI wasn't brought in for no reason, that's not how things work. The Sanford police screwed the pooch and were going to let this killing go. They were making excuses for doing exactly that.
Shame on them!

And nothing was being swept under the rug. There wasn't enough evidence to arrest GZ the night of the shooting. You just can't arrest someone without probable cause to take to a DA. The DAs will review and tell what else you need to get to make a case.

The case was not moving fast enough to suit the family of Trayvon Martin and their lawyer. So the lawyer hired out a PR firm to make the wheels of justice move faster...and it started with the picture of 12-13 yr old TM being blasted around MSM being put beside a 2005 mug shot of GZ.

Look at what was being done. Read the reports prior to March 20th. Things the SPD was accused of not doing...they were doing. Coreys team took a couple of weeks+ also but no out cry there! Why not?

Sanford may have been well into the arrest process but they handed off their case to the SAO instead.

If they did such a crap job, why did Corey show them respect for their work? She could have kept her mouth shut.

IMO.

DebFrmHell wrote:

Chickenbutt wrote:

CherokeeNative wrote:

Gizmo711 wrote:

Chickenbutt wrote:Gizmo, I rarely, if ever, post but I read this and had to say...the def will say that the "we don't need you to do that" was just a suggestion. If the 911 operator wanted GZ to stay in his car, she would have said so.
As we all know, the courtroom is no place for reasonable people.

Did you hear the actual 911 tape? If you did you would plainly hear that it was a command. You say "she" but it was a "male" 911 operator, that leads me to believe that maybe you didn't hear the actual tape.

It was the way it was said that made it a command.

It wasn't like someone telling you that they are going to buy you a present for your birthday and you respond with "you don't need to do that" vs Being asked if you are following someone by a 911 operator and upon saying "yes" and the 911 operator saying "we don't need you to do that". That was a command in a nice manner, but a command none the less.

Gizzmo - In ChickenButt's defense, I think she is right. If you will go onto the legal defense blogs, and even in the media, the legal analysist's are stating that the Dispatcher's instruction of "we don't need you to do that" was nothing more than a suggestion and will most likely be presented that way by O'Mara. We all can read into the instruction however we want, but bottom line, the Dispatcher had no law enforcement authority over GZ.

This was exactly the point I was *trying* to make. As to the he/she business, I HAVE listened to the 911 call...forgive the grievous error. Too many 911 calls in my brain to keep them straight.

You got busted by the Gender Police?

What is next? The Punctuation Patrol? Spelling Squads roaming the boards? Dogs and Cats living together?

We must all hide! Hide I tell you!

On a serious note:

Dear Twinkle,
I appreciate your efforts to bring actual evidence into the conversation. You remind me of a dear friend who used to post at The Hinky... She too was very sane and reasonable when things got...well, wierd.

And nothing was being swept under the rug. There wasn't enough evidence to arrest GZ the night of the shooting. You just can't arrest someone without probable cause to take to a DA. The DAs will review and tell what else you need to get to make a case.

The case was not moving fast enough to suit the family of Trayvon Martin and their lawyer. So the lawyer hired out a PR firm to make the wheels of justice move faster...and it started with the picture of 12-13 yr old TM being blasted around MSM being put beside a 2005 mug shot of GZ.

Look at what was being done. Read the reports prior to March 20th. Things the SPD was accused of not doing...they were doing. Coreys team took a couple of weeks+ also but no out cry there! Why not?

Sanford may have been well into the arrest process but they handed off their case to the SAO instead.

If they did such a crap job, why did Corey show them respect for their work? She could have kept her mouth shut.

IMO.

According to the Sanford Chief of police, Bill Lee, who was asked to step down, and Norm Wolfinger, the Brevard and Seminole County State Attorney, who was removed from the case, there was not enough evidence to charge Zimmerman, but the Special Prosecutor who was assigned to the case by the Florida Governor and the Florida Attorney General, found enough evidence to charge him with second degree murder.

It took 2. 273. 274 signatures and the public's outrage against the Sanford Police Department to get the attention of the USDOJ, the Florida Governor, and the Florida Attorney General. if Trayvon's parents would have built public pressure against the Sanford police, none of them would have gotten involved. When the Sanford Police become the focus of intense criticism and found themselves in the eye of a firestorm, they started backpedaling.

Alessandra_Deux wrote:

DebFrmHell wrote:

Chickenbutt wrote:

CherokeeNative wrote:

Gizmo711 wrote:

Chickenbutt wrote:Gizmo, I rarely, if ever, post but I read this and had to say...the def will say that the "we don't need you to do that" was just a suggestion. If the 911 operator wanted GZ to stay in his car, she would have said so.
As we all know, the courtroom is no place for reasonable people.

Did you hear the actual 911 tape? If you did you would plainly hear that it was a command. You say "she" but it was a "male" 911 operator, that leads me to believe that maybe you didn't hear the actual tape.

It was the way it was said that made it a command.

It wasn't like someone telling you that they are going to buy you a present for your birthday and you respond with "you don't need to do that" vs Being asked if you are following someone by a 911 operator and upon saying "yes" and the 911 operator saying "we don't need you to do that". That was a command in a nice manner, but a command none the less.

Gizzmo - In ChickenButt's defense, I think she is right. If you will go onto the legal defense blogs, and even in the media, the legal analysist's are stating that the Dispatcher's instruction of "we don't need you to do that" was nothing more than a suggestion and will most likely be presented that way by O'Mara. We all can read into the instruction however we want, but bottom line, the Dispatcher had no law enforcement authority over GZ.

This was exactly the point I was *trying* to make. As to the he/she business, I HAVE listened to the 911 call...forgive the grievous error. Too many 911 calls in my brain to keep them straight.

You got busted by the Gender Police?

What is next? The Punctuation Patrol? Spelling Squads roaming the boards? Dogs and Cats living together?

We must all hide! Hide I tell you!

On a serious note:

Dear Twinkle,
I appreciate your efforts to bring actual evidence into the conversation. You remind me of a dear friend who used to post at The Hinky... She too was very sane and reasonable when things got...well, wierd.

And nothing was being swept under the rug. There wasn't enough evidence to arrest GZ the night of the shooting. You just can't arrest someone without probable cause to take to a DA. The DAs will review and tell what else you need to get to make a case.

The case was not moving fast enough to suit the family of Trayvon Martin and their lawyer. So the lawyer hired out a PR firm to make the wheels of justice move faster...and it started with the picture of 12-13 yr old TM being blasted around MSM being put beside a 2005 mug shot of GZ.

Look at what was being done. Read the reports prior to March 20th. Things the SPD was accused of not doing...they were doing. Coreys team took a couple of weeks+ also but no out cry there! Why not?

Sanford may have been well into the arrest process but they handed off their case to the SAO instead.

If they did such a crap job, why did Corey show them respect for their work? She could have kept her mouth shut.

IMO.

According to the Sanford Chief of police, Bill Lee, who was asked to step down, and Norm Wolfinger, the Brevard and Seminole County State Attorney, who was removed from the case, there was not enough evidence to charge Zimmerman, but the Special Prosecutor who was assigned to the case by the Florida Governor and the Florida Attorney General, found enough evidence to charge him with second degree murder.

It took 2. 273. 274 signatures and the public's outrage against the Sanford Police Department to get the attention of the USDOJ, the Florida Governor, and the Florida Attorney General. if Trayvon's parents would have built public pressure against the Sanford police, none of them would have gotten involved. When the Sanford Police become the focus of intense criticism and found themselves in the eye of a firestorm, they started backpedaling.

Not to mention. The Sanford police also refused to release the 911 recording as well

--i find it rather ironic that omara brings up the fact that people/and potential jurors are getting information overload due to the internet---when he started his own GZlegalcase.com site w/ a link to the GZlegalcase F/B where "the omara law group" encourages their followers to post non stop about the case, the players, the discovery--supplying them w/ links to media articles FOR discussion...


http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/Prosecutors-George-Zimmermans-Attorney-Ask-To-Seal-Discovery-Materials-153838635.html
Prosecutors, George Zimmerman's Attorney Ask To Seal Discovery Materials

Overall, O’Mara made the case that not disclosing certain information would protect Zimmerman’s rights to a fair trial in a case that, as he noted, has received an enormous amount of media and Internet coverage.

http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/Press_Releases/zimmerman_prot_order.pdf
DEFENDENT'S CONCURRENCE TO THE STATE'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER AND OBJECTION TO RELEASE OF CERTAIN DISCOVERY AND REQUEST FOR DELAY IN RELEASE OF CERTAIN DISCOVERY TO ALLOW ANALYSIS

--page 5

--The State of Florida v GeorgeZ has garnered an enormous local, statewide, nationwide and international focus...
--Further, the internet, todays staple of information commerce, has had hundreds of websites addressing various elements of this case on an ongoing basis, there are thousands of 'internet chat' events going on regarding this case...

--In addition, the victim's family in this matter, being handled by a law firm and a PR firm, have had an extrodinary media and internet presence which has further heightened the focus on this case..
--As to that issue it is without question that the potential jurors in this matter are being exposed to an unprecedented onslaught of information, innuendo, opinion, proselytizing, and lobbying regarding issues mostly tangential to this case by various elements involved.

--Under the best of circumstances it will be difficult to identify and sit a juror who has not been so impacted by information regarding this case that they do not have a preformed opinion regarding it.

Porky wrote:

Alessandra_Deux wrote:

DebFrmHell wrote:

Chickenbutt wrote:

CherokeeNative wrote:

Gizmo711 wrote:

Chickenbutt wrote:Gizmo, I rarely, if ever, post but I read this and had to say...the def will say that the "we don't need you to do that" was just a suggestion. If the 911 operator wanted GZ to stay in his car, she would have said so.
As we all know, the courtroom is no place for reasonable people.

Did you hear the actual 911 tape? If you did you would plainly hear that it was a command. You say "she" but it was a "male" 911 operator, that leads me to believe that maybe you didn't hear the actual tape.

It was the way it was said that made it a command.

It wasn't like someone telling you that they are going to buy you a present for your birthday and you respond with "you don't need to do that" vs Being asked if you are following someone by a 911 operator and upon saying "yes" and the 911 operator saying "we don't need you to do that". That was a command in a nice manner, but a command none the less.

Gizzmo - In ChickenButt's defense, I think she is right. If you will go onto the legal defense blogs, and even in the media, the legal analysist's are stating that the Dispatcher's instruction of "we don't need you to do that" was nothing more than a suggestion and will most likely be presented that way by O'Mara. We all can read into the instruction however we want, but bottom line, the Dispatcher had no law enforcement authority over GZ.

This was exactly the point I was *trying* to make. As to the he/she business, I HAVE listened to the 911 call...forgive the grievous error. Too many 911 calls in my brain to keep them straight.

You got busted by the Gender Police?

What is next? The Punctuation Patrol? Spelling Squads roaming the boards? Dogs and Cats living together?

We must all hide! Hide I tell you!

On a serious note:

Dear Twinkle,
I appreciate your efforts to bring actual evidence into the conversation. You remind me of a dear friend who used to post at The Hinky... She too was very sane and reasonable when things got...well, wierd.

And nothing was being swept under the rug. There wasn't enough evidence to arrest GZ the night of the shooting. You just can't arrest someone without probable cause to take to a DA. The DAs will review and tell what else you need to get to make a case.

The case was not moving fast enough to suit the family of Trayvon Martin and their lawyer. So the lawyer hired out a PR firm to make the wheels of justice move faster...and it started with the picture of 12-13 yr old TM being blasted around MSM being put beside a 2005 mug shot of GZ.

Look at what was being done. Read the reports prior to March 20th. Things the SPD was accused of not doing...they were doing. Coreys team took a couple of weeks+ also but no out cry there! Why not?

Sanford may have been well into the arrest process but they handed off their case to the SAO instead.

If they did such a crap job, why did Corey show them respect for their work? She could have kept her mouth shut.

IMO.

According to the Sanford Chief of police, Bill Lee, who was asked to step down, and Norm Wolfinger, the Brevard and Seminole County State Attorney, who was removed from the case, there was not enough evidence to charge Zimmerman, but the Special Prosecutor who was assigned to the case by the Florida Governor and the Florida Attorney General, found enough evidence to charge him with second degree murder.

It took 2. 273. 274 signatures and the public's outrage against the Sanford Police Department to get the attention of the USDOJ, the Florida Governor, and the Florida Attorney General. if Trayvon's parents would have built public pressure against the Sanford police, none of them would have gotten involved. When the Sanford Police become the focus of intense criticism and found themselves in the eye of a firestorm, they started backpedaling.

Not to mention. The Sanford police also refused to release the 911 recording as well

The Major had to intervene to have the recordings released.

And here is Chris Serino telling the Orlando Sentinel that the best evidence they had was Zimmerman's story that he acted in self defense.

Some news agencies have reported that Sanford's lead investigator, Chris Serino, wanted Zimmerman charged with manslaughter that night but Wolfinger's office put a stop to it. The city of Sanford issued a statement saying that is not true.

Police did that night prepare an incident report that lists "manslaughter" as the possible crime being investigated, but in every case in which an officer prepares an incident report, he or she fills in that spot with some crime and statute number to allow the agency to properly report crime statistics to the FBI.

Two weeks ago, during an exclusive interview with the Sentinel, Lee disclosed certain details of the investigation and during that session, attended by Serino and others, Serino said his investigation turned up no reliable evidence that cast doubt on Zimmerman's account – that he had acted in self-defense.

"The best evidence we have is the testimony of George Zimmerman, and he says the decedent was the primary aggressor in the whole event," Serino told the Sentinel March 16. "Everything I have is adding up to what he says."

http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-04-02/news/os-trayvon-martin-federal-review-justice-letter-20120402_1_chief-bill-lee-federal-review-federal-agency

Alessandra_Deux wrote:---snipped--

Prosecutors, George Zimmerman's Attorney Ask To Seal Discovery Materials

Lester has ordered a hearing on the matter for next Friday afternoon, June 1 in the Sanford courthouse.

http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/Prosecutors-George-Zimmermans-Attorney-Ask-To-Seal-Discovery-Materials-153838635.html

--w/ the hearing a week away that should give george plenty of time to make arrangements to get to florida from wherever he's hanging his jacket these days.

--thinking back to baez wanting to "waive kc's apearance at hearings" , that was met w/ a resounding "NO"from judgeS, who ruled that she had to attend each and every one so that she couldn't cry later that her attorney had done/said something that she wasn't aware of/disagreed with, in the courtroom and on her behalf.

--i would hope that the same applies to george.

--at least omara can't use the excuse that it would be a difficult financial burden.......again.

ellejay wrote:

Alessandra_Deux wrote:---snipped--

Prosecutors, George Zimmerman's Attorney Ask To Seal Discovery Materials

Lester has ordered a hearing on the matter for next Friday afternoon, June 1 in the Sanford courthouse.

http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/Prosecutors-George-Zimmermans-Attorney-Ask-To-Seal-Discovery-Materials-153838635.html

--w/ the hearing a week away that should give george plenty of time to make arrangements to get to florida from wherever he's hanging his jacket these days.

--thinking back to baez wanting to "waive kc's apearance at hearings" , that was met w/ a resounding "NO"from judgeS, who ruled that she had to attend each and every one so that she couldn't cry later that her attorney had done/said something that she wasn't aware of/disagreed with, in the courtroom and on her behalf.

--i would hope that the same applies to george.

--at least omara can't use the excuse that it would be a difficult financial burden.......again.

Maybe O'Mara can argue a security issue.........

Florida Statute 776.032 expressly prohibits police from arresting someone who had a reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm. Police may investigate, the statute says, "but the agency may not arrest the person" without probable cause.

Following the letter of the law, they waited until they had enough Probable Cause to arrest George Zimmerman.

The FBI got nowhere with the hate crime issue. With all of their advanced audio technology they could not prove that George Zimmerman uttered any kind of a racial slur. As a result the State of Florida did not persue that in their Probable Cause.

Why so quiet from the DofJ? They have been at this for a couple of months, too. The SPD have not been exonerated nor have they been condemned. Gee, you would think that this has just gone away...or waiting to see if they can scapegoat that department if things don't go the way the SAO planned in the event of a trial.

(Before going further please note that I am using you simply because it is easier. It does not designate one poster or another but to a group.)


And say what you might, there is not a person commenting here or elsewhere, self-included, that has not "profiled" George Zimmerman despite that all of the statements attributed to him come from a proxy spokesperson or a leak. And despite the outrage about profiling of any kind be it racial or criminal.

You have not read one of Zimmerman's actual statements to police. They haven't been released. Do I think there will be some inconsistencies? Yes. He gave five statements according to Gilbreath, under oath, at the bond hearing. Zimmerman thought he had only made three, IIRC, from that same hearing.

I don't even think that MOM has the statements at this stage. He said himself he had about a half of the discovery and what was released to the media is about a third of that. IIRC.

My advice... Read the reports. Check the dates. Quit relying on some other posters to do the work you don't want to do.



Food for thought.
A wise doctor once told me that when you find someone that you dislike so intensely it is because they exhibit outward traits that you secretly dislike within yourself.


Have a good night.

Alessandra_Deux wrote:

ellejay wrote:

Alessandra_Deux wrote:---snipped--

Prosecutors, George Zimmerman's Attorney Ask To Seal Discovery Materials

Lester has ordered a hearing on the matter for next Friday afternoon, June 1 in the Sanford courthouse.

http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/Prosecutors-George-Zimmermans-Attorney-Ask-To-Seal-Discovery-Materials-153838635.html

--w/ the hearing a week away that should give george plenty of time to make arrangements to get to florida from wherever he's hanging his jacket these days.

--thinking back to baez wanting to "waive kc's apearance at hearings" , that was met w/ a resounding "NO"from judgeS, who ruled that she had to attend each and every one so that she couldn't cry later that her attorney had done/said something that she wasn't aware of/disagreed with, in the courtroom and on her behalf.

--i would hope that the same applies to george.

--at least omara can't use the excuse that it would be a difficult financial burden.......again.

Maybe O'Mara can argue a security issue.........

--i'd like to know what the "law" is on that----does a defendant have to appear, or does the judge have discretion? judgeS had a valid point as to why kc had to show up, for the sake of a possible appeal issue down the road..

--i'm sure omara will argue security, the additional costs to the court etc....then again he called for the hearing to get his client out in the 1st place knowing full well that there would be a ton of pre-trial motions coming up. he could have left him in the safety of PC in jail and eliminated the cost of having to get him to court. in jail or out, there will still be additional security in the courtroom if george is present.

--i guess omara could dip into "the fund" to provide a Skype type of set up for george to appear from wherever he is.

Deb from Hell - had you seen any quotes from the police dept saying they were still investigating or casting any doubt on GZ's story aside from Serino? I though the PD did nothing but defend their decision not to charge him? I can't find anything where they talk about a continuing investigation until after it was taken out of their hands.

Everybody else re the "need you to stay in your car" - its got nothing to do with whether this was an order or not, it just shows that George's actions at that time were not at all reasonable. And that he chose an agressive act for o good reason. He cast aside some very valuable advice- and of he gets on the stand, he will have to explain why. I'm thinking that's going to be very difficult for him.

Also, someone here touched on us here "profiling"'GZ here and I have to say, no.... That profiling is when you do NOT know anything about a subject and Jude solely on appearances. From what I have seen here, everyone is judging based on his actions and behavior. That's a completely different thing. Even if people sometimes make crazy leaps and put thoughts or words in his mouth so to speak- they are based on his statements and actions As we know them from police and court statements- not on his skin color, gender or age. To equate the two completely misunderstands - and minimizes what an awful thing profiling is to do to another human being.

DebFrmHell wrote:

Freckles wrote:

Twinkle wrote:

Freckles wrote:GZ received instructions to stay in a vehicle and failed to heed the instructions but he took an innocent situation and escalated it.

I just want to address the bolded because I see this being said over and over, all over the internet, and it just isn't true. GZ did not receive instructions to stay in his vehicle prior to leaving his vehicle. Once it became obvious that he was outside of his car and on the move, the 911 operator asked if he was following TM, and when GZ acknowledged that he was, then said "we don't need you to do that". So there was no instruction for him to stay in his vehicle at any time, just an admonishment that he did not need to follow the "real suspicious guy" he was calling to report, and that did not occur until GZ was already out of his car and in pursuit. Moreover, it is GZ's claim that he heeded this advice and was headed back to his car when he was attacked by TM.

You are correct. I apologize for not acknowledging that earlier. For me, it is kind of a wash, however, as I take it to mean about the same thing. Sure. GZ was told he did not need to follow Trayvon;; I suppose he could had returned to his vehicle, stood along the drive, or any number of things. Since his last known location was inside the truck, when he was told he did not need to follow I presumed the instructions to be "return to your vehicle" as he said he was afraid--- but those words were NOT uttered.

Thank you for the clarity and the correction.

BCM:
Actually his last known location was already outside of the truck and it is acknowledged by the Dispatcher asking if he was following TM.

I must have listened to that unredacted non-911 call thirty times.
@1:10 I hear the door locks being utilized. (When he is stating that TM is coming toward him and checking him out)
@2:11 There are beeps from the car door opening (keys are still in ignition)
@2:34 I hear the car door again
(There are sounds of rustling right afterwards about for a few seconds as it seems as if he got resettled into the truck. There is no more wind noise and he is not out of breath)
@2:53 I hear the glove compartment opening

(All times are approx since hitting the pause wasn't always dead on...)

Much has been made here on the board of the clicking noises made, but I contend if he were still outside of the truck those would not have been that noticable due to wind noise. It isn't like it was a clear night without weather issues. And they seem to be in some sort of a pattern and reoccur two or three times. I even wondered if GZ kept a journal of some sort for detailing his NW duties/incidences because it reminded me of the tapping a pen against something.

Gizmo swears it is the movement of the slide while chambering of a round in that gun. I have owned semi-automatic handguns. One, it doesn't sound like a shell is being racked to me. And why would it be repeated? Two, IF I were prepping to leave my house and was going to holster a weapon, I would have done all that before I left. What is the object of being prepared if you are going to leave unprepared? As a handgun owner that just defies reason.

After he said OK, I think he did indeed return to his truck. I think he got out of his truck after terminating that call and went directly either to that T intersection of that sidewalk or if you want to give some credence to the witness who saw the blurs, he had driven his truck forward to the first place between the THs that would get him to the sidewalk the fastest way possible.

I SWEAR and YOU THINK?

I don't remember saying I SWEAR. I believe my words were "it COULD have been". And it COULD very well have been. So we can BOTH keep believing in OUR theory, if that's OK with you?

WeeBonnie wrote:

Gizmo711 wrote:

Because they are activist not police. It is the police's job to sort thru crimes. White on white, black on black, hispanic on hispanic has nothing to do with activists. There is always going to be crime. But hate crimes are treated differently because ther is no motive other than hate.

Well said! I'd like to add that it's the activists job to make sure that local police take every murder seriously and not favor those who look- or act- like them to the detriment of the community.

It is not 'paranoia' to state racial profiling does occur among the police all to frequently- it has been backed by many studies! It is not paranoia or asking for special favors to possess the same civil rights and be treated equally by LE officers. It is merely asking to be treated as an equal.

We're not there yet, folks. That's why they felt comfortable sweeping this killing under the rug. That's why this case eventually received national attention.

Exactly, and that is why they stepped in. It wasn't because of the shooting it was the way the case was handled by the SPD. That is always the case with activists. They don't go digging into who shot who, or who killed who (unless it was a police officer shooting someone).

We have activists od all sorts out here. Gay activists, father's rights activists, Jewish activists etc. It's just that we always saw more of Al Sharpton and Jessie Jackson, because what they were activists for happened more often.

And they WERE needed in this case or there would have been no justice for Trayvon Martin.

Twinkle wrote:

Gizmo711 wrote:

Freckles wrote:

Twinkle wrote:

Freckles wrote:GZ received instructions to stay in a vehicle and failed to heed the instructions but he took an innocent situation and escalated it.

I just want to address the bolded because I see this being said over and over, all over the internet, and it just isn't true. GZ did not receive instructions to stay in his vehicle prior to leaving his vehicle. Once it became obvious that he was outside of his car and on the move, the 911 operator asked if he was following TM, and when GZ acknowledged that he was, then said "we don't need you to do that". So there was no instruction for him to stay in his vehicle at any time, just an admonishment that he did not need to follow the "real suspicious guy" he was calling to report, and that did not occur until GZ was already out of his car and in pursuit. Moreover, it is GZ's claim that he heeded this advice and was headed back to his car when he was attacked by TM.

You are correct. I apologize for not acknowledging that earlier. For me, it is kind of a wash, however, as I take it to mean about the same thing. Sure. GZ was told he did not need to follow Trayvon;; I suppose he could had returned to his vehicle, stood along the drive, or any number of things. Since his last known location was inside the truck, when he was told he did not need to follow I presumed the instructions to be "return to your vehicle" as he said he was afraid--- but those words were NOT uttered.

Thank you for the clarity and the correction.

Some words do not need to be uttered to precision. Anybody with a half of brain would have known exactly what that 911 operator was saying. And Zimmerman knew what he was saying, that's why he said "OK" in a low voice but chose to continue to follow Trayvon.

Again, my main point is that GZ was not failing to heed the instructions of the 911 operator when he left his vehicle to follow TM because at the time, no instructions had been given. Once the 911 operator said "we don't need you to do that", he acknowledged the direction with "OK", but the running sounds continued for another 10-15 seconds. We've been told that GZ claims to have walked along the cut-through sidewalk over to the next street and then was returning to his car; if this is true, he did heed the instructions of the 911 operator, just not immediately.

In reexamining the 911 call transcript, I find this passage interesting:

Dispatcher

Are you following him?

Zimmerman

Yeah.

Dispatcher

Ok, we don't need you to do that.

Zimmerman

Ok.

Dispatcher

Alright sir what is your name?

Zimmerman

George…He ran.

The "he ran" sounds resigned, like the "real suspicious guy" is no longer in his sight, and he has acknowledged that he is not to pursue him. He answers all the dispatcher's questions and makes no further mention of TM. He seems resigned to waiting for the police at this point. This does not sound to me like someone who was hot on the trail of TM and closing in on him. Of course, we know that it was about a minute or so between when he ended the call with the dispatcher and when the 911 calls started coming in to report an altercation between GZ and TM.

But the fact is, they did meet up, behind the buildings, so how would Zimmerman have gotten there if not by getting there by himself?

We seem to be putting logic asside when it comes to Zimmerman. The FACTS that we know and have been privy to is that Zimmerman made several 911 calls to report a suspiscious guy (Trayvon), George left his car with a loaded gun. There was NOTHING suspiscious about Trayvon Martin (it was all in Zimmermans head) it was assumed by Zimmerman that Trayvon was suspiscious. We ALL hear Zimmerman out of breath, he acknowledges to the 911 operator that he is following Trayvon. He states on the 911 call "these a$$holes always get away". Trayvon ends up dead in a matter of 60 seconds.

Zimmerman is ALWAYS on the phone with 911, IF Zimmerman was running FROM Trayvon he would have been on the phone with them AGAIN, but he wasn't. And the public is to believe that it was TRAYVON who was in pursuit of ZIMMERMAN? That's NOT logical to me. Trayvons body is found behind the buildings NOT by Zimmermans car, infact no where near where his car could have possibly been, but it was near where Trayvon was staying.

As much as we would love to believe, that this had nothing to do with race, it certainly does. It is there no matter how one looks at it. The hoodie represented something to Zimmerman, but not to the majority of the world. Everyone wears hoodies (except me, I don't like to mess up my hair). But my grands wear them, my children wore and wear them, and they were never taken as a suspiscious character.

The bottom line is that a young man lost his life due to someone not even addressing himself as a citiznes patrol and maybe letting Trayvon know that he wasn't being stalked. If Zimmerman had not had a loaded weapon on his person, and had Zimmerman STAYED in his car, none of this would have happened.

In the state of Florida, if there is a road rage, the person who exits his car is the one that is arrested. So how can this be defended when the person who is profiling someone, leaves his car to begin with, with a loaded weapon and the person he is profiling ends up dead. Zimmerman was wrong all which ways around, there is no justification for what he did and the actions that he took. Actions that left a young man dead, for no reason whatsoever..

People can blame Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson, Obama, Trayvons parenst, Trayvons suspension from school, Trayvon wearing a hoodie, Trayvon going to the store, Trayvons father going out to dinner on that night, Trayvons father not reporting him missing til the next morning. People can search for every possible reason why Zimmerman was not to blame. But the fact is ZImmerman was to blame.

Zimmerman profiled
Zimmerman exited his car
Zimmerman had a gun
Zimmerman fired that gun
Zimmerman killed Trayvon Martin.

Also, if Zimmerman didn't take the words of the 911 operator as a command then why would he have said "OK". If Zimmerman thought this to be just a jester, and he had already gotten out of his car with a loaded gun, why would he than retreat so easily? Zimmerman was already fired up and so sure of himself that he was about to cathch a thiref (so to speak) he would not have retreated for just a "jester" from the 911 operator. Zimmerman knew this was a command nicely put.

If Zimmerman would have said to the 911 operator "NO" I am going after him, I bet then the 911 operator would have gotten a little more agressive with how he phrased it at first. 911 operators are trained to tell the callers how to act in a situation (more training than Zimmerman could have had with how to handle a gun). The 911 operator did NOT give Zimmerman the go ahead to go after Trayvon, by just jestering.

All this is, is word picking. We all know that this was a comman. Of course the defense attorney's are trained and skilled in twisting everything that anyone says to meet their defense. But the fact is, is that is was a command.

Testing...

Was this topic locked briefly around 6am?


I went to post one of my usually verbose reponses and got a "thread locked" and lost my post.

Was it something I said?

DebFrmHell wrote:Testing...

Was this topic locked briefly around 6am?


I went to post one of my usually verbose reponses and got a "thread locked" and lost my post.

Was it something I said?

I too received that, but when I tried again it switched over to a new thread, it could have been that.

Gizmo711 wrote:

DebFrmHell wrote:Testing...

Was this topic locked briefly around 6am?


I went to post one of my usually verbose reponses and got a "thread locked" and lost my post.

Was it something I said?

I too received that, but when I tried again it switched over to a new thread, it could have been that.

LOL! I figured that out a few mnutes ago. I just hadn't been back to say so. We were even warned that it would be split. I just forgot!

CherokeeNative wrote:Media banter is exactly what it was - Crump calling out for an investigation which was reported in the media, and the Wolfinger making a statement to the media is response. And Twinkle, you are entitled to be satisfied with what we have seen. I am not and hope that others who have the ability to not let it be swept under the rug will see it through to the end. We can agree to disagree.

I see no facts to back up Crump's claims and all the speculation out there about RZ having some kind of mythical influence over LE because he is a retired magistrate from Virginia. There are also no facts to back up speculation that RZ, Wolfinger, and/or Lee were at the police station the night the shooting took place. Moreover, Crump's original claim was that Wolfinger and Lee had a clandestine meeting and agreed not to charge Zimmerman despite the recommendations of lead investigator Chris Serino. However, on March 16th, almost three weeks after the shooting, Serino himself said:

Investigator Chris Serino, the lead investigator on the case, told the Sentinel that there are no grounds for an arrest as of now because there is no probable cause to dispute his story.

http://www.wesh.com/r/30692415/detail.html

And although Serino did ultimately fill out a capia request recommending that Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter, he did so on March 13th, not on the night of the shooting. (There were reports in the media that Serino had filed an "affidavit" the night of the shooting requesting that Zimmerman be charged, but tellingly, no such document has seen the light of day thus far.)

Here's a little more information Jeralyn, an attorney blogging at TalkLeft, dug up from sifting through the evidence released so far:

One item needs to be clarified. No one filed a capias the night of the shooting asking that Zimmerman be arrested. The capias request by Chris Serino is dated March 13, 2012. In his 13 page report dated the same day, Serino says he spoke to Asst State’s atty Kelly Jo Hines at 23:45 on 2/26 “and apprised her of circumstances.” There's no mention of anyone having an opinion Zimmerman should have been arrested or was not to be believed. I don't trust any of the media reports using unnamed police sources who may say differently.

Also, Serino says in his March 13, 2012 report that "the case was presented to" the state's attorney's office on March 8 at a meeting with Assistant State's Attorney James Carter that took place at the Sanford Police Department. (See p. 42 of 183.)That may be the earliest anyone with the Sanford Police had an opportunity to voice an opinion to the State's Attorney's office, other than in personal conversations.

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2012/5/20/6642/30597

angela_nw wrote:

Twinkle wrote:
In reexamining the 911 call transcript, I find this passage interesting:

Dispatcher Are you following him? ..........
George…He ran.

The "he ran" sounds resigned, like the "real suspicious guy" is no longer in his sight, and he has acknowledged that he is not to pursue him. He answers all the dispatcher's questions and makes no further mention of TM. He seems resigned to waiting for the police at this point. This does not sound to me like someone who was hot on the trail of TM and closing in on him. Of course, we know that it was about a minute or so between when he ended the call with the dispatcher and when the 911 calls started coming in to report an altercation between GZ and TM.

That's not exactly right. Later in the tape when the dispatcher asks him his address, he starts to say it and then says " I don't want to say it out loud, I don't know where this kid is." Clearly he is talking about TM and if he were back in the privacy of his car, why wouldn't he want to say the address out loud? Do you honestly think he sounds like he is resigned to waiting for the police at this point or that he is back in his car? Or looking for an "address"?

I did not say that GZ ever made it back to his car, only that he claims to have walked over to the next street to get an address and then headed back to his car. My contention is that by the end of the call, he seems resigned to giving up trying to pursue TM. The fact that he didn't want to say his address out loud merely indicates that he was still outside of his car, and reinforces the fact that he had lost sight of TM and didn't know where he was at this point. We haven't seen his statements, but so far as I know GZ does not claim to have made it back to his car; he says he was attacked by TM on his way back to the car.

I am the one that thinks he made it back to his car. Not Twinkle.

i think that because he asked for them to call him so that he could tell them his location. If he were going back to his car at that time, he would know where he would be. If he was just starting to look around for TM he wouldn't know.

Just IMO.

OK. I finally miss my words. I thought it was at this site that I labeled all of the times for things I heard on the unredacted 911. There was conversation between myself and Cherokee about it. I didn't save it to Word and all of my hand-written notes look like I wrote them in Greek.

I can't find it here so it must be at The Hinky that it was discussed.

DebFrmHell wrote:

Chickenbutt wrote:

CherokeeNative wrote:

Gizmo711 wrote:

Chickenbutt wrote:Gizmo, I rarely, if ever, post but I read this and had to say...the def will say that the "we don't need you to do that" was just a suggestion. If the 911 operator wanted GZ to stay in his car, she would have said so.
As we all know, the courtroom is no place for reasonable people.

Did you hear the actual 911 tape? If you did you would plainly hear that it was a command. You say "she" but it was a "male" 911 operator, that leads me to believe that maybe you didn't hear the actual tape.

It was the way it was said that made it a command.

It wasn't like someone telling you that they are going to buy you a present for your birthday and you respond with "you don't need to do that" vs Being asked if you are following someone by a 911 operator and upon saying "yes" and the 911 operator saying "we don't need you to do that". That was a command in a nice manner, but a command none the less.

Gizzmo - In ChickenButt's defense, I think she is right. If you will go onto the legal defense blogs, and even in the media, the legal analysist's are stating that the Dispatcher's instruction of "we don't need you to do that" was nothing more than a suggestion and will most likely be presented that way by O'Mara. We all can read into the instruction however we want, but bottom line, the Dispatcher had no law enforcement authority over GZ.

This was exactly the point I was *trying* to make. As to the he/she business, I HAVE listened to the 911 call...forgive the grievous error. Too many 911 calls in my brain to keep them straight.

You got busted by the Gender Police?

What is next? The Punctuation Patrol? Spelling Squads roaming the boards? Dogs and Cats living together?

We must all hide! Hide I tell you!

DebFrmHell wrote:On a serious note:

Dear Twinkle,
I appreciate your efforts to bring actual evidence into the conversation. You remind me of a dear friend who used to post at The Hinky... She too was very sane and reasonable when things got...well, wierd.

And nothing was being swept under the rug. There wasn't enough evidence to arrest GZ the night of the shooting. You just can't arrest someone without probable cause to take to a DA. The DAs will review and tell what else you need to get to make a case.

The case was not moving fast enough to suit the family of Trayvon Martin and their lawyer. So the lawyer hired out a PR firm to make the wheels of justice move faster...and it started with the picture of 12-13 yr old TM being blasted around MSM being put beside a 2005 mug shot of GZ.

Look at what was being done. Read the reports prior to March 20th. Things the SPD was accused of not doing...they were doing. Coreys team took a couple of weeks+ also but no out cry there! Why not?

Sanford may have been well into the arrest process but they handed off their case to the SAO instead.

If they did such a crap job, why did Corey show them respect for their work? She could have kept her mouth shut.

IMO.

Well said!

WeeBonnie wrote:I'm going to dispute the below strenuously. Surely you forget the police were defending their decision to treat the killers statement as "best evidence". Insanity!

The same lead investigator hailed as a saint for filing the mythical affidavit calling for GZ to be charged the night of the shooting, and who in fact did write a capias request on March 13th calling for GZ to be charged with manslaughter, is the man credited with the "best evidence" statement you refer to.

WeeBonnie wrote:While ignoring witnesses who were calling in, ignoring the 9/11 call not matching up with the location of the body, ignoring GZ statements didn't match the evidence.

There is no lack of witness statements in the evidence released thus far. I don't think any were ignored, and I don't find it surprising that the police may not have found some of the witnesses, who saw little and seemed to have an agenda, less useful than the witnesses thought themselves to be. As for the location of the body, keep in mind that GZ's keys and flashlight were found very close to the intersection between the cut through sidewalk and the sidewalk running behind the townhouses, which could be consistent with the physical altercation starting at some point along the cut through, as claimed by GZ. Since we don't have GZ's statements, we don't know how he explained the distance between the cut through and where Trayvon's body was found.

WeeBonnie wrote:They didn't need the FBI and outside investigators coming in to fix things if they were working on it.

And what have the FBI and outside investigators turned up so far? I would submit their involvement was politically motivated and instigated by a misinformation campaign.

WeeBonnie wrote:They stopped working the case and were defending their decision to do so.

Au contraire, they were still working the case when Corey took over, as she herself acknowledged.

WeeBonnie wrote:
The FBI wasn't brought in for no reason, that's not how things work.

I agree, they didn't come in for "no reason". They came in because of the successful media campaign conducted by the Martin family lawyers and PR team, and because of all the campaigns.

WeeBonnie wrote:The Sanford police screwed the pooch and were going to let this killing go. They were making excuses for doing exactly that.
Shame on them!

The evidence released thus far demonstrates that the Sanford police actually did accomplish a lot of things they were accused of not doing. Also, ultimately it was not their decision whether or not to charge Zimmerman; it was the state attorney's office who made that call. And even the state attorney's office is constrained by the laws of the state.

Twinkle wrote:

CherokeeNative wrote:Media banter is exactly what it was - Crump calling out for an investigation which was reported in the media, and the Wolfinger making a statement to the media is response. And Twinkle, you are entitled to be satisfied with what we have seen. I am not and hope that others who have the ability to not let it be swept under the rug will see it through to the end. We can agree to disagree.

I see no facts to back up Crump's claims and all the speculation out there about RZ having some kind of mythical influence over LE because he is a retired magistrate from Virginia. There are also no facts to back up speculation that RZ, Wolfinger, and/or Lee were at the police station the night the shooting took place. Moreover, Crump's original claim was that Wolfinger and Lee had a clandestine meeting and agreed not to charge Zimmerman despite the recommendations of lead investigator Chris Serino. However, on March 16th, almost three weeks after the shooting, Serino himself said:

Investigator Chris Serino, the lead investigator on the case, told the Sentinel that there are no grounds for an arrest as of now because there is no probable cause to dispute his story.

http://www.wesh.com/r/30692415/detail.html

And although Serino did ultimately fill out a capia request recommending that Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter, he did so on March 13th, not on the night of the shooting. (There were reports in the media that Serino had filed an "affidavit" the night of the shooting requesting that Zimmerman be charged, but tellingly, no such document has seen the light of day thus far.)

Here's a little more information Jeralyn, an attorney blogging at TalkLeft, dug up from sifting through the evidence released so far:

One item needs to be clarified. No one filed a capias the night of the shooting asking that Zimmerman be arrested. The capias request by Chris Serino is dated March 13, 2012. In his 13 page report dated the same day, Serino says he spoke to Asst State’s atty Kelly Jo Hines at 23:45 on 2/26 “and apprised her of circumstances.” There's no mention of anyone having an opinion Zimmerman should have been arrested or was not to be believed. I don't trust any of the media reports using unnamed police sources who may say differently.

Also, Serino says in his March 13, 2012 report that "the case was presented to" the state's attorney's office on March 8 at a meeting with Assistant State's Attorney James Carter that took place at the Sanford Police Department. (See p. 42 of 183.)That may be the earliest anyone with the Sanford Police had an opportunity to voice an opinion to the State's Attorney's office, other than in personal conversations.

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2012/5/20/6642/30597

Twinkle - I think it is okay that I believe that it is the responsible thing to do that the SPD's handling of this case be investigated. You obviously don't. But that does not change my opinion in this regard. I could sit here and list out my reasons, but I don't feel the need to do that since it is my opinion. To do so would only bring more acrimony on this thread. My comment was and is that I believe the SPD should be investigated for the manner in which they handled this case and if I were a member of the Sanford community, as a registered voter, I would be rallying to insure that occurred to completion. Since I am not, there is not much I can do about it - except sign another petition. That's my stance. Other than trying to prove yourself right in my eyes, or try to make my opinion look unreasonable (which I do not believe), I don't know why you cannot agree to disagree. Hmmm? Is it just a matter of having the last word because otherwise I just don't get it. TIA

Alessandra_Deux wrote:According to the Sanford Chief of police, Bill Lee, who was asked to step down, and Norm Wolfinger, the Brevard and Seminole County State Attorney, who was removed from the case, there was not enough evidence to charge Zimmerman, but the Special Prosecutor who was assigned to the case by the Florida Governor and the Florida Attorney General, found enough evidence to charge him with second degree murder.

First of all, Wolfinger was not removed; he opted to take himself out. And I don't remember Bill Lee being asked to step down, but maybe I missed that detail. As for Corey finding enough evidence to charge 2nd degree murder, she is known to be a very aggressive prosecutor, and has been widely criticized for overcharging in this case. It remains to be seen whether she actually has enough evidence to back up those charges; many are very skeptical. There is also ample cause to suspect that she may have been unduly motivated by political pressure in this case.

Alessandra_Deux wrote:It took 2. 273. 274 signatures and the public's outrage against the Sanford Police Department to get the attention of the USDOJ, the Florida Governor, and the Florida Attorney General.

And let's not forget the Martin family lawyers, the misinformation campaign, and the complicit media altering 911 recordings and creatively misinterpreting a single word uttered by Zimmerman to help gin up the "public's outrage".

Alessandra_Deux wrote:if Trayvon's parents would have built public pressure against the Sanford police, none of them would have gotten involved.

It remains to be seen whether this is a good thing or was entirely necessary. We will see if Corey indeed has enough evidence to support her charges. If somewhere in this process Zimmerman is found to have immunity due to SYG or self defense claims, or if a jury fails to convict him, I fear the consequences of all this public pressure.

Alessandra_Deux wrote:When the Sanford Police become the focus of intense criticism and found themselves in the eye of a firestorm, they started backpedaling.

Backpedaling how?

I think that the SPD should welcome the investigation. Especially after reading all those police reports that have them doing what they were accused of not doing.

I don't know that I have ever read their reaction to the DoJ coming in. I do remember that the then Chief took exception to the reports made in the MSM.

He should be yelling "Bring It On!"

I still think it odd that the DoJ is so very silent so far. Methinks there is reasoning behind it.

That is as far as I am willing to go for a conspiracy when I have been up all night with remaining pup, the same one that is happily snoozing away as we speak.



If there is a link regarding the DoJ and SPD, Ellejay will work her magic for me.

WeeBonnie wrote:Everybody else re the "need you to stay in your car" - its got nothing to do with whether this was an order or not, it just shows that George's actions at that time were not at all reasonable. And that he chose an agressive act for o good reason. He cast aside some very valuable advice- and of he gets on the stand, he will have to explain why. I'm thinking that's going to be very difficult for him.

First, let me go on the record saying that I do not think it was wise for GZ to leave his car that night. That being said, he was already out of his car and pursuing TM when the 911 operator asked if he was following the "real suspicious guy" and then said "we don't need you to do that". Although it was another 10-15 seconds before we hear him stop running, by then he had clearly lost sight of TM, and we have been told that GZ's statements indicate that he was headed back to his car when TM attacked him. So in what way did he "cast aside some very valuable advice"? He claims to have complied with that advice after receiving it. The advice was not "go back to your car immediately", it was "quit chasing the 'real suspicious guy' you called to report". Where is the evidence he failed to follow this advice?

Gizmo711 wrote:

Twinkle wrote:
The "he ran" sounds resigned, like the "real suspicious guy" is no longer in his sight, and he has acknowledged that he is not to pursue him. He answers all the dispatcher's questions and makes no further mention of TM. He seems resigned to waiting for the police at this point. This does not sound to me like someone who was hot on the trail of TM and closing in on him. Of course, we know that it was about a minute or so between when he ended the call with the dispatcher and when the 911 calls started coming in to report an altercation between GZ and TM.

But the fact is, they did meet up, behind the buildings, so how would Zimmerman have gotten there if not by getting there by himself?

Zimmerman's keys and flashlight were found very close to the cut-through sidewalk, which is consistent with his claim of having been attacked while on that sidewalk headed back to his car. I don't know how they got from that point to where TM's body was found, but will be very interested to see how this is addressed in his statements and the reenactment he did with police.

Gizmo711 wrote:
We seem to be putting logic asside when it comes to Zimmerman.

I agree, but probably not for the same reason! I see many people setting aside logic in search of explanations for how GZ could have sustained the injuries he had without TM laying a finger on him. It amazes me to see people trying to twist the facts to support what they want to believe.

Gizmo711 wrote:The FACTS that we know and have been privy to is that Zimmerman made several 911 calls to report a suspiscious guy (Trayvon), George left his car with a loaded gun. There was NOTHING suspiscious about Trayvon Martin (it was all in Zimmermans head) it was assumed by Zimmerman that Trayvon was suspiscious. We ALL hear Zimmerman out of breath, he acknowledges to the 911 operator that he is following Trayvon. He states on the 911 call "these a$$holes always get away". Trayvon ends up dead in a matter of 60 seconds.

Zimmerman is ALWAYS on the phone with 911, IF Zimmerman was running FROM Trayvon he would have been on the phone with them AGAIN, but he wasn't.

I would suggest if suddenly accosted and punched in the nose, GZ had no time to grab his phone and call 911.

Gizmo711 wrote: And the public is to believe that it was TRAYVON who was in pursuit of ZIMMERMAN? That's NOT logical to me. Trayvons body is found behind the buildings NOT by Zimmermans car, infact no where near where his car could have possibly been, but it was near where Trayvon was staying.

Actually TM was found a lot closer to where Zimmerman's car was likely parked near the cut through than to Brandy Green's home. And also it was not all that far from the cut-through sidewalk, which is where GZ says he was when the altercation began.

Even if GZ took no further steps one direction or the other once the Dispatcher told him "we do not need you to do that" - if he states that it is at that point that he was returning to his vehicle, there is no way of disputing that because it could be true even if it was only in his mind and had not yet to put his body in motion towards that direction.

Now, if the evidence shows that he was easily further down in the complex than what the original 20 seconds of running would have placed him - he's got a problem. IIRC, from what evidence we do have, it appears that Trayvon and GZ met up further down towards where Trayvon's destination was and some sort of chase and words exchanged with the two ending back up near the T cross through. This would lead one to believe that GZ did not decide to return to his car as he is claiming, but went on trying to locate Trayvon - otherwise, how would he have ended up down towards where Trayon was staying?

CherokeeNative wrote:
Twinkle - I think it is okay that I believe that it is the responsible thing to do that the SPD's handling of this case be investigated. You obviously don't. But that does not change my opinion in this regard. I could sit here and list out my reasons, but I don't feel the need to do that since it is my opinion. To do so would only bring more acrimony on this thread. My comment was and is that I believe the SPD should be investigated for the manner in which they handled this case and if I were a member of the Sanford community, as a registered voter, I would be rallying to insure that occurred to completion. Since I am not, there is not much I can do about it - except sign another petition. That's my stance. Other than trying to prove yourself right in my eyes, or try to make my opinion look unreasonable (which I do not believe), I don't know why you cannot agree to disagree. Hmmm? Is it just a matter of having the last word because otherwise I just don't get it. TIA

We are here to discuss the case, which means a back-and-forth sharing of opinions and information. It is as simple as that.If you no longer wish to discuss this, I respect that.