Re: George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #1

by Gizmo711 Sun May 20, 2012 7:03 am

Alessandra_Deux wrote:
Freckles wrote:
CherokeeNative wrote:
Freckles wrote:CN-
IMO, Trayvon MAY have stepped off to the side to prevent GZ from knowing where he was going. GZ cut him off and demanded to know who he was, where he was going and he may have been shining the flashlight in TM's eyes (emulating a cop); TM was indigent (and probably felt threatened) and refused to answer the stranger who was interrupting his walk. At this point, IMO, GZ pulled the gun to try to intimidate TM. TM, at that point, may have responded with the push landing them both on the ground.

I do think TM started yelling "Help! Help!" when he realized GZ had the upper hand, had a gun, and was going to kill him.

Freckles - I have said all along I believe that GZ managed to pass Trayvon by running along the front side of the townhomes and then crossing over and cutting him off - that he had his gun drawn at some point prior to the ground altercation - and that he had his flash light on at the time he confronted Trayvon...so your scenario is very close to what I was speculating. (Brilliant minds think alike) Now that we have the document dump, I don't see anything that supports that theory - In fact, I was worried about how the prosecutor was even going to present a Murder2 case out of what we have - so my earlier post today was merely a script, using what we have, to see how the prosecutor might present the case to the jury. And in my mind, it works. Now that I know there is a lot more to be seen, I would not be surprised if we are both right - then again, we may never know.
I know you have! lol In may way of thinking, GZ may have circled to the cut out and back tracked catching TM off guard OR TM may have stepped off to the side, slowing his walk as he wanted to know WHY he was being followed; after all, he did not want the lurker to know where he was going, he had done nothing wrong and was not going to run. TM NEEDED for the other person to leave so he could safely go to where the 14 year old was alone and unprotected.

Either way. Perhaps, both--- TM stepped off to the side and GZ went to the cutoff and back tracked to confront TM.

I think that Trayvon almost made to Brandy's house. I wonder how far, or how close, from Brandy's house is the house of the witness who told the police that she saw a man pursuing another man toward the cut-through (T).

I believe that Zimmerman went through one of the passageways between the townhouses into the backyard area to cut Trayvon off from his intended destination. Trayvon was on his way home when Zimmerman intercepted him.

I think it was Zimmerman who was chasing after Trayvon, Zimmerman had a gun, I don't believe that he was the one who was trying to run away.

There's also one thing that we must take into consideration. When someone is being followed and knows it, they aren't too easily to turn their back on the follower. I know I wouldn't be, out of fear that they will jump me from behind. There are many times, when a person being followed will confront the follower because they really don't feel that they are going to be able to shake the follower.

Years ago a friend fo mine was being followed home from work late at night, she was on the block that she lived on and the man was catching up with her, she decided to try and talk her way out of what ever it was he wanted and she turned and faced him. He did start to attack her and she screamed, her father heard her scream and ran out in his underwear and did stop the attack. I would think that anyone of us, in a situation like that, would either run or confront the follower if we didn't want them to know where we lived. The bottom line is that Zimmerman was following Trayvon for absolutely no reason other than what was in Zimmermans own mind. When you are being followed for no reason that you can possibly think of must scare the he!! out of you and you will react in some way to protect yourself. Trayvon had every right to thorw the first punch in a situation such as this, he didn't have a gun on him to scare the attacker off, so he had to use what he did have, his fist.

by Freckles Sun May 20, 2012 7:11 am

What is interesting:
The results for DNA testing of 4 areas of the gun are in:
3 areas (the slide, the grip and another area) show GZ' DNA however, the trigger shows an "unidentified" DNA.

Posted this yesterday. Bringing it up for possible discussion? (I remember typing on the Evidence swabs
being taken from the gun. Felt good they had taken that. Matter of fact, felt good they had also collected GSR from GZ' hands, his clothing and shoes, etc..Did a better job than I thought they had done! )

by Freckles Sun May 20, 2012 7:15 am

Gizmo-
I was listening to a talk show. The guest had conducted a study and was talking about the results. He had people stare at the backs of the heads of other people and see how if/how long it would take for a person to "feel" they were being stared at. The results were stunning. Most of us know when we are being watched EVEN from behind, in crowded buses, party rooms, etc.

by Gizmo711 Sun May 20, 2012 8:57 am

Freckles wrote:Gizmo-
I was listening to a talk show. The guest had conducted a study and was talking about the results. He had people stare at the backs of the heads of other people and see how if/how long it would take for a person to "feel" they were being stared at. The results were stunning. Most of us know when we are being watched EVEN from behind, in crowded buses, party rooms, etc.

No doubt about it, it's an instinct in all of us, in my younger years I had a few occasions myself. In one incident I was walking to my car after getting off off work, it was 11pm and a young man was walking passed me in the opposite direction, I felt him turn around and I immediately turned to look at him, I was near my car, just a matter of about 10 feet but I didn't go to my car in fear that while I was putting the key in he would attack me. Instead I walked into the middle of the street and yelled to him "what's your problem"?, he started to walk towards me and I yelled even louder while I was backing up as not to take my eyes off of him. I was also trying to look for something to pick up as a weapon, but never took my eyes off of him for more than a split second. There were two women walking down the street and I headed in their direction while I kept yelling louder to the guy. It wasn't long before he turned and walked away, I waited until he reached the corner, far enough for me to make it to my car and get in and drive off.

I think all of us can feel someone looking at us more less following us. It's obvious that Trayvon knew that he was being followed and talked about it to his gf. I too would not have turned and walked to my door. I can only imagine what was going thru Trayvons mind at that time and being in such an area in the dark, he would have had no alternative but to face his (what he thought) to be an attacker, and his thought wasn't far off because Zimmerman was an attacker in mind..

by Gizmo711 Sun May 20, 2012 8:59 am

Freckles wrote:What is interesting:
The results for DNA testing of 4 areas of the gun are in:
3 areas (the slide, the grip and another area) show GZ' DNA however, the trigger shows an "unidentified" DNA.

Posted this yesterday. Bringing it up for possible discussion? (I remember typing on the Evidence swabs
being taken from the gun. Felt good they had taken that. Matter of fact, felt good they had also collected GSR from GZ' hands, his clothing and shoes, etc..Did a better job than I thought they had done! )

I too would like to know whose other finger prints were on that trigger.

by Twinkle Sun May 20, 2012 9:09 am

Alessandra_Deux wrote:
Twinkle wrote:

~Snipped~

To answer the bolded, I have seen nothing that convinces me that GZ wanted to do anything other than keep an eye on TM so when the police arrived, he could tell them exactly where he went. He did not want to let another suspected burglar get away. I see nothing in his past behavior to suggest he was likely to do anything beyond that.

That is precisely the problem, Trayvon was not a suspected burglar, Zimmerman profiled him as a criminal and followed him, on foot, in the dark, behind the townhouses, to prevent him from "getting away", Zimmerman's decision to play the role of a law enforcement officer, which he is not, resulted in the death of Trayvon Martin. That is the reason why Zimmerman is facing a second degree murder charge.

I agree that GZ bears sole responsibility for the fact that he appears to have failed to consider that the "real suspicious guy" he was reporting might just be a kid walking home from running an errand, and that there could be an innocent explanation (e.g. ambling about while talking on the phone) for the "suspicious" behavior. However, I am not ready to make the leap from that point to second degree murder without more evidence. GZ claims to have been assaulted by TM, and so far I have not seen any evidence that disproves his claim. During the bond hearing, even the prosecution's investigator admitted that they don't have any evidence that TM didn't initiate the altercation.

by ellejay Sun May 20, 2012 9:25 am

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/trayvon-martin-case-911-call-two-experts-reach-two-much-different-conclusions/2012/05/19/gIQAtuapbU_story.html
Trayvon Martin case 911 call: Two experts reach two very different conclusions

Expert No. 1

One of those experts is Alan R. Reich, and his answer is that he is certain he can hear a young man he concludes is Martin pleading for his life, from the start of the 45-second recording until the end.

“I’m begging you,” he hears the younger of the two men yell as the recording begins.

Twenty-six seconds later: “Help me.”

In the last second before the gunshot: a high-pitched “Stop!”

In an effort to find out what might be discerned from the crucial 911 call, The Washington Post retained Reich, 67, a former University of Washington professor with a doctorate in speech science who has worked for prosecutors and defense attorneys in hundreds of criminal and civil cases over a period of more than 35 years.

~~~~~~~~~
Expert No. 2

Another way to consider the 45-second recording is the way James J. Ryan considers it.

Ryan is the retired head of the FBI forensic audio, video and image analysis unit. He said even the best audio forensic expert in the world using the most sophisticated equipment available would have a difficult time determining much at all from a recording of such degraded quality.

“I think it’s hard to scientifically say anything definitive with audio like this,” Ryan said. “. . . One person will come up with one scenario, one speech, one sentence, and some other well-meaning person, trying hard, unbiased in a controlled environment with headphones, will come up with another one.”

---more@link---

by Twinkle Sun May 20, 2012 9:28 am

DebFrmHell wrote:
Twinkle wrote:
PROSECUTOR: So you could tell he was emotional, like somebody who was in fear?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah.

PROSECUTOR: He was breathing hard?

GIRLFRIEND: He said he had lost him and he was breathing hard and I told him 'Keep running.'

PROSECUTOR: So Trayvon said he started walking because he thought he had lost the guy?

GIRLFRIEND: Yeah.

PROSECUTOR: OK.

GIRLFRIEND: I said, 'Keep running.' He said he ain’t gonna run. 'Cause he said he is right by his father's house. And then in a couple minutes he said the man is following him again. He’s behind him. I said, 'Run!' He said he was not going to run. I knew he was not going to run because he was out of breath. And then he was getting excited, the guy’s getting close to him. I told him, 'Run!' And I told him, 'Keep running!' He not going to run. I tell him, 'Why are you not running?' He said ’I’m not gonna.’ He was tired. I know he was tired.

PROSECUTOR: I am sorry, Trayvon said he was not running because—-he’s not going to run he said because you could tell he was tired? How could you tell he was tired?

GIRLFRIEND: He was breathing hard.

PROSECUTOR: Real hard?

GIRLFRIEND: Real hard. And then he told me this guy was getting close! He told me the guy was getting real close to him. And the next I hear is, 'Why are you following me for?'
http://www.democracynow.org/2012/5/18/i_know_he_was_scared_trayvon

Why is he breathing hard? He is in better shape than the pudgy GZ? And there is that couple of minutes mentioned where TM was out of sight from GZ. The same couple of minutes between the "he running" at approx 2:08 and the end of that call at slightly after 4:06?

'Why are you not running?' He said ’I’m not gonna.’

He sounds, just by the transcription, pissed and a little beligerent. Not saying I don't blame him for being mad but if he was close by Brandys house, why didn't he go inside, lock the doors and call 911. If those couple of minutes were coinciding with the non-911, GZ was still with his truck.

If he mistrusted the police in a place that he is not even familiar with, then why not just lock the doors until it was "safe."

Methinks she is not going to do the Prosecution a lot of favors. And I am willing to bet that even though MOM handles her carefully, as to not piss of the jurors, he will do damage to her testimony.

Thanks for that link BTW. I had all kinds of trouble trying to hear that whole thing.

Regarding the bolded...good point. Aside from the fact that TM had to have been in better physical condition than GZ, if TM was running and then slowed to a walk for a few minutes, you wouldn't think he would be so winded that he couldn't run again. Also, if he was indeed so fearful, adrenaline would give him a big boost.

by snowbird Sun May 20, 2012 9:37 am

Gizmo711 wrote:It's really something how everyone perceives this case differently...During this time I have heard it blamed on Trayvon for wearing a hoodie, on Trayvons parents for not watching over their son, for Trayvons father for going out to dinner that night and not reporting his son missing until the morning. I have heard that Trayvon was a wannbe criminal a hoodlum, a drug addict who got suspended from school. I have heard how if it wasn't for Trayvon walking home thru the back entrance this may not have happened.

How about we put the blame where it belongs, on Zimmerman, the one who exited his car when told not to, who exited his car with a gun, who profiled a youth for just being black and wearing a hoodie. A young man who was bothering no one and had to end up fighting for his own life on the way home from the store and who ended up losing his life. I just wish Trayvon would have won this battle.....

I so agree with you, Trayvon had a right to defend himself as George has made that claim. It doesn't make much since to me that George made a comment to police that Trayvon was circling his car, yet he does not tell police, but chooses to exit the car to follow him. He was in a car he could have gone to a place of safety and waited for the police. I think what is going to hang George is going to be his own statements to police. The ones that don't back up the evidence and I believe that is why his attorney is going to try to get them suppressed. I think that George know enough about criminal Law that he know what he had to say to get out of charges, however I don't believe his statements will add up because you can't keep a lie straight.

by Twinkle Sun May 20, 2012 9:44 am

CherokeeNative wrote:4. Why did he take the gun with him then? He knew that it was against NWP policy. He either took it to use or for security in the event he needed. So it emboldened him.

According to GZ, he left his home that night to go grocery shopping at Target. For whatever reason, he opted to take his concealed weapon with him, which he is legally allowed to do. So if you take GZ at his word (which is supposedly backed up by a text he sent to his sister before he left the house), he was not out on patrol. In the heat of the moment, when he got out of his car to see where TM disappeared to, did he stop to think "maybe I should leave my gun in the car"? I doubt it. I suspect he hopped out and took off without giving it a second thought. That's why he had the gun on him, IMO.

CherokeeNative wrote:I think you are forgetting that this is just what I believe the prosecutor's theory will be given the evidence that we have seen.

I do understand that, and I think you have done an excellent job of summarizing what their case may be based on the evidence we have access to. I guess it's a bit silly for me to argue with a theory of the prosecution's case, eh? ;)

CherokeeNative wrote:You may have an entirely different theory based upon the same facts and evidence, and that is fine. I was just sharing how I reconciled in my mind how the State was going to present this case to the jury. I will most likely change and/or tweek it as more evidence is released. That's the beauty of having an opinion.

I hadn't really put much thought into formulating a big picture of what the prosecution's theory is. Right now I'm still trying to figure out how they will reconcile DeeDee's testimony, which paints a fairly straightforward picture of TM running/walking straight to Brandy's Green's home, with GZ pursuing from behind and catching up to him, and that of the witness who claims to have seen two figures run by in the opposite direction. DeeDee gave no indication whatsoever that TM told her that GZ suddenly appeared in front of her, so he had to turn and run. If he tells her that he is putting his hoodie up, surely he might mention this much more significant event. After all, she says they were on the phone together up until the physical altercation began.

by ellejay Sun May 20, 2012 9:48 am

Chickenbutt wrote:
marcena2 wrote:Just an idea...what if George caught up to Trayvon and asked him 'What are you doing here?' and then grabbed at his arm which caused Trayvon to say 'get off, get off' meaning let go of my arm. If they argued and then had their fist fight, Witness John could have seen Trayvon straddling George with George yelling for help. When this witness went to go call 911, he may have not seen George wiggle the fight off the sidewalk to the grass and get up to grab his gun. Another witness sees a man standing over another on the ground with the man on the ground (Trayvon) yelling for help. The man standing up seemed to be pinning the other down by his back. Two more witnesses see only a man laying on the ground yelling for help...no second man and no fight. A fourth witness says there was no physical fighting when the gun went off.

I think George may have been yelling during the first 20 seconds of the fist fight. But once he drew his gun and had it trained on Trayvon on the ground, it was Trayvon's turn to yell for help...and IMO that is the voice you hear on the 911 tape. At that moment knowing that police were on their way, George had options. He could have told Teayvon to freeze, cops are on their way. He could have shot his leg to put an end to any more fighting. But he chose to aim right for the kid's heart with a hollowpoint bullet. That is where I get depraved. No need to do that.

With all due respect Marcena....if I was going to shoot someone, I would shoot at center of mass (the largest target possible) not at a leg or an arm. Also, if I was prepared to shoot someone, I should be prepared for that person to die.

--if, in george's stmt to LE, he said that trayvon was straddling him when he managed to pull his gun out of the holster and shoot him--i think the ME's trajectory will be a huge problem for george.

--for the bullet to have entered horizontally "directly, front to back" george would have had to get his gun in that horizontal position before pulling the trigger.

--lying on his back when shooting trayvon straddled over him, it would make more sense that the bullet would have an "upward" path and not straight on as it did.

by Twinkle Sun May 20, 2012 9:51 am

Alessandra_Deux wrote:
Freckles wrote:
CherokeeNative wrote:
Freckles wrote:CN-
IMO, Trayvon MAY have stepped off to the side to prevent GZ from knowing where he was going. GZ cut him off and demanded to know who he was, where he was going and he may have been shining the flashlight in TM's eyes (emulating a cop); TM was indigent (and probably felt threatened) and refused to answer the stranger who was interrupting his walk. At this point, IMO, GZ pulled the gun to try to intimidate TM. TM, at that point, may have responded with the push landing them both on the ground.

I do think TM started yelling "Help! Help!" when he realized GZ had the upper hand, had a gun, and was going to kill him.

Freckles - I have said all along I believe that GZ managed to pass Trayvon by running along the front side of the townhomes and then crossing over and cutting him off - that he had his gun drawn at some point prior to the ground altercation - and that he had his flash light on at the time he confronted Trayvon...so your scenario is very close to what I was speculating. (Brilliant minds think alike) Now that we have the document dump, I don't see anything that supports that theory - In fact, I was worried about how the prosecutor was even going to present a Murder2 case out of what we have - so my earlier post today was merely a script, using what we have, to see how the prosecutor might present the case to the jury. And in my mind, it works. Now that I know there is a lot more to be seen, I would not be surprised if we are both right - then again, we may never know.
I know you have! lol In may way of thinking, GZ may have circled to the cut out and back tracked catching TM off guard OR TM may have stepped off to the side, slowing his walk as he wanted to know WHY he was being followed; after all, he did not want the lurker to know where he was going, he had done nothing wrong and was not going to run. TM NEEDED for the other person to leave so he could safely go to where the 14 year old was alone and unprotected.

Either way. Perhaps, both--- TM stepped off to the side and GZ went to the cutoff and back tracked to confront TM.

I think that Trayvon almost made to Brandy's house. I wonder how far, or how close, from Brandy's house is the house of the witness who told the police that she saw a man pursuing another man toward the cut-through (T).

I believe that Zimmerman went through one of the passageways between the townhouses into the backyard area to cut Trayvon off from his intended destination. Trayvon was on his way home when Zimmerman intercepted him.

I think it was Zimmerman who was chasing after Trayvon, Zimmerman had a gun, I don't believe that he was the one who was trying to run away.

Regarding the bolded, how do you reconcile this theory with the fact that DeeDee describes GZ following TM and closing in on him from behind? Don't you think TM would have told her if GZ suddenly reappeared in front of him, and he had to turn around and run to get away from him? I would think that would be extremely alarming and frightening to him. I just don't see how DeeDee's testimony could possibly be compatible with this scenario.

by Twinkle Sun May 20, 2012 9:54 am

Gizmo711 wrote:
DebFrmHell wrote:Hey now...where did my post go?

Judging from the Crime Scene Photos taken that night...
At the T Intersection of the sidewalks...

Evidence Marker #1
The Black MiniMag is near the Doggie Station.

Evidence Marker #5
GZs car keys with the small flashlight are across the side walk and down a couple of feet.

So if you have a flashlight in one hand and a set of keys in the other, where is the gun?

We all know where the gun was for sure, in Zimmermans hand ready to be fired. We really don't know where his keys were, they may very well have fallen out of his pocket or he had them in the same hand as the flashlight. But one thing is for SURE, Zimmerman was holding the gun that shot Trayvon.

We know for sure that the gun was in Zimmerman's hand just prior to being shot. Anything else is pure speculation; we do not know that that the gun was in his hand when he came face to face with TM. If it had been, I don't think there would have been a physical altercation on the ground with TM sitting on top of GZ.

by Puzzler Sun May 20, 2012 9:57 am

It would help to know "where" the altercation took place.

Was it close to Brandy's house? Was it close to GZ's car?

"If" GZ turned around and headed back to the car, TM could have gone after GZ.

TM telling girlfriend "he's getting close" could be GZ coming after him or TM going after GZ (semantics).

IIRC we don't know where the fight took place; please correct me if I'm worng.

by Twinkle Sun May 20, 2012 10:25 am

ellejay wrote:http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/trayvon-martin-case-911-call-two-experts-reach-two-much-different-conclusions/2012/05/19/gIQAtuapbU_story.html
Trayvon Martin case 911 call: Two experts reach two very different conclusions

Expert No. 1

One of those experts is Alan R. Reich, and his answer is that he is certain he can hear a young man he concludes is Martin pleading for his life, from the start of the 45-second recording until the end.

“I’m begging you,” he hears the younger of the two men yell as the recording begins.

Twenty-six seconds later: “Help me.”

In the last second before the gunshot: a high-pitched “Stop!”

In an effort to find out what might be discerned from the crucial 911 call, The Washington Post retained Reich, 67, a former University of Washington professor with a doctorate in speech science who has worked for prosecutors and defense attorneys in hundreds of criminal and civil cases over a period of more than 35 years.

~~~~~~~~~
Expert No. 2

Another way to consider the 45-second recording is the way James J. Ryan considers it.

Ryan is the retired head of the FBI forensic audio, video and image analysis unit. He said even the best audio forensic expert in the world using the most sophisticated equipment available would have a difficult time determining much at all from a recording of such degraded quality.

“I think it’s hard to scientifically say anything definitive with audio like this,” Ryan said. “. . . One person will come up with one scenario, one speech, one sentence, and some other well-meaning person, trying hard, unbiased in a controlled environment with headphones, will come up with another one.”

---more@link---

Very interesting...elsewhere on the web I have seen someone who swears he hears a voice (presumably TM) making threats to GZ in the background during the portion of the 911 call when GZ says the "real suspicious guy" is coming to check him out. The bolded sentence pretty well sums it up.

by Nene_Please Sun May 20, 2012 10:26 am

I have been on different juries and useally. The evidense in the charges is why different charges are bought against someone. If the jury beleives a is what happen and everything points to that then a it is but if b points to a total different evidense then it is b. The capital murder trial I was on the defendant changed his story severall times. He was charged with killing one of his 6 week old twins. He said he accidently dropped the baby, first off the couch then from his arms in the kitchen. Evidence showed that the bby had injuries of like he had fell off a 3 story building. Evidence will also show in this case where the gun was when it went off and how close. So far we are seeing broken noses and blood but how and when this all occured will come out and charges had to be based on something or there would not be any charges. The judge told us tv is one thing, evidence is another. People want justice but it needs to be the right way with the right charges or it will just go away without ever having any closure for either side.

by CherokeeNative Sun May 20, 2012 10:35 am

Deb, I will be the color dark red - I tried cyan, but eeeeuuwwww :-)

DebFrmHell wrote:I will be the one in purple!

Twinkle wrote:
CherokeeNative wrote:
CherokeeNative wrote:Nevertheless, GZ initiated contact with Trayvon and apparently attempted to detain him without waiting for police to arrive.
Twinkle wrote:[How do we know this? At the bond hearing, didn't Dale Gilbreath admit that they don't know who initiated the altercation? I don't think you can equate GZ leaving his car with initiating contact when GZ says he was only trying to see where TM went, then get an address to identify his location, unless the prosecutors have evidence to show that he is lying. Based on what Gilbreath said, it doesn't sound like they do.

If GZ initiated that conversation, why did TM ask first "What are you following me for?"

I don't know who spoke first. As you all know, I have always said that my theory is that GZ crossed over to behind the townhomes closer down towards Brandy's townhouse, likely the cross through between the second and third building. I envision Trayvon, maybe after having hidden for a moment or two to catch his breath, is now heading towards the townhome when GZ jumps out in front of him and cuts him off. This is what I mean by "initiated contact" - not necessarily in words or physical contact, but just the act of showing up in front of him.

By initiate contact and detain - I am meaning face to face contact not physical, and I am taking this from the girlfriend's statement - as well as GZ's statement as represented by the GZ camp: The discussion of "Why are you following me" and "What are you doing here."

Thanks for explaining your thoughts on this. I would just add that the GZ version of events, as best we can determine without having seen his statements, is that he was walking back to his car (see evidence markers. It certainly does lend credence to the fact that GZ may have been going back to his car) when TM initiated contact with him and then punched him. So I don't think the GZ version of events bolsters the girlfriend's statement, unless there is something quite different in his statements from what we've been hearing from his father, brother, and other sources reporting what the police have said. But it is true that the version of GZ's story we've heard and the "girlfriend"s account have in common GZ and TM abruptly coming face to face and exchanging words before ending up in a physical altercation.

CherokeeNative wrote:
CherokeeNative wrote:A witness' statement saw the two in a chase away from the direction of Trayvon's destination.
Twinkle wrote:That particular witness statement is pretty nebulous. If I were on a jury, I surely would not convict for second degree murder based on that.

I still think that it is just as likely that a PO'd TM could have been chasing down GZ. Seeing two people (not man, not woman, no description of clothing apparel, not one distinguishing feature) move past your window do not automatically mean that GZ was chasing down TM.

I just don't see Trayvon chasing after GZ. He isn't emboldened with a gun in his waist band should something go wrong. It wasn't him who was worried that GZ would get away. Hell, he just wanted to get home, drink his tea and watch March Madness. Also, take into consideration that family and friends are describing Trayvon as nonconfrontational whereas GZ has had assault allegations wagered against him, anger management problems and has been described by people as going from docile to raging lunatic in seconds. I go with the jury believeing it was Trayvon who was being chased.

Yes, you are entitled to your opinion. But the jury will not be convicting on this witness alone - it will be the accumulation of facts and evidence that will convict.
True, but if you discount this testimony, what is left to establish that GZ was chasing TM? I guess there is still the "girlfriend"'s testimony. However, her description of TM being "close by" his father's house, with GZ following and closing the distance behind him, doesn't really mesh well with that witness's testimony, which as I understand it has two people running in the opposite direction, away from Brandy Green's home.

CherokeeNative wrote:
CherokeeNative wrote:We have yet to learn whether GZ had his gun drawn, or whether Trayvon had otherwise become aware of the gun - although GZ's dad says he did - in which case, it would be reasonable for Trayvon to use deadly force in self-defense by bashing GZ's head into the concrete.

Twinkle wrote:I would think if GZ approached TM with his gun drawn, it would be highly unlikely for the two to end up fighting on the ground, with TM on top beating up GZ "MMA style.

See my post using the actual evidence markers...

Unfortunately, the photos won't open up on my computer for some reason.

Again, we all have our theories at this point - I would think it took something to set Trayvon off - either he saw the gun, or GZ tried taking hold of him or something to cause him to throw a punch. But we are all entitled to our theories and opinions.

Very true. At this point I admittedly have no idea what would have set Trayvon off enough to throw the first punch, beyond the fact that he understandably would not appreciate someone watching and seemingly stalking him.

CherokeeNative wrote:
CherokeeNative wrote:GZ's conduct in exiting his vehicle while armed with a gun and following Trayvon is sufficient to "initially provoke" the ensuing struggle, no matter who struck the first blow.

Twinkle wrote:IMO not necessarily. Though I happen to think GZ should have stayed in his vehicle, I don't see why the fact that he left his vehicle should be provocation for an attack from TM. And since it was a concealed weapon, TM would have had no way to know GZ was armed unless GZ was brandishing the weapon. So far as I know, the prosecutors do not have any witness saying that GZ had his weapon drawn.

Again, these are only opinions, but I believe that the fact that he was armed with a concealed weapon enboldened him and I believe a Jury will think along those lines too - what do you think that GZ intended to do once he caught up with GZ? How was he going to make sure that Trayvon didn't get away until the police got there? I think these are things that the jury will consider when they are looking to who initially provoked the ultimate altercation.
To answer the bolded, I have seen nothing that convinces me that GZ wanted to do anything other than keep an eye on TM so when the police arrived, he could tell them exactly where he went. He did not want to let another suspected burglar get away. I see nothing in his past behavior to suggest he was likely to do anything beyond that.

CherokeeNative wrote:
CherokeeNative wrote:There is absolutely no credible evidence that GZ either tried to escape from Trayvon or that he withdrew from the altercation and clearly indicated his intent to withdraw from the altercation before firing the deadly shot killing Trayvon.

If the altercation started on the cement and wound up in the grass, perhaps GZ was not only going for self-preservation but trying to get away from TM?

Since we don't have GZ's statements, we only have the GZ camp's allegation that GZ wiggled his head away from the concrete. None of the witnesses say it started on the concrete and moved over to the grass do they? And at the bond hearing, I got the distinct feeling that the investigator was intimating that GZ's head was not hurt by Trayvon bashing it into concrete. Nevertheless, this would not satisfy the statute - GZ had to indicate clearly to Trayvon that he wanted to withdraw and stop the use of force likely to cause death or great bodily harm, but Trayvon continued or resumed the use of force. So, assuming that GZ is telling the truth for sake of this discussion, instead of yelling for help with a gun on his person, he should have been yelling, "I do not wish to harm you, I am a NWC, I have a gun, and the police are on their way" or something of that nature.

Twinkle wrote:How about the witness "John", who saw TM pinning GZ to the ground while beating him "MMA" style, while GZ was calling for help?

I don't believe that it was GZ yelling for help - I believe John is mistaken - other witnesses say it was Trayvon and IMO it makes more sense that it was Trayvon since the yelling stopped as soon as the gun was fired. Although we do not have GZ's statements, I don't believe anyone has indicated that he ever told Trayvon that he was the NWC, informed Trayvon that the police were on their way, or anything else that could have prevented the altercation.

John is the closest witness. He is the one who told them to stop. He told them both he was calling 911.

Yes, I agree with you that this is what John is stating. But it conflicts with the other witnesses' statements. Although eye witnesses are always given more weight than any other evidence at trial, studies have proven that eye witnesses get it wrong more often than not. So, I am going with the majority on this one. Plus, something in my gut tells me not to trust John - I have no reason.

From what I can determine, John appears to have had the best view of TM and GZ during their altercation; the others you are referring to appear to have been swayed by TM's age into thinking he must have been the one crying out, without having really had a good view of the altercation in progress. We already know that GZ doesn't have a particularly deep male voice, while it has been reported by Sybrina Fulton that TM's voice had already changed, and some who heard his voice on the 7-11 surveillance video said it was fairly deep. Also I think it makes sense that if GZ was the one crying out for help, once the gun was fired he would have stopped. There was no need to cry out for help once TM was shot and the physical fight abruptly ended.

Even the supposed GF of TM said in her statement that his voice got lower. I think she attributed it to fear. The FBI couldn't determine the voices because of the level of stress and poor audio recording.

I have no argument for this other than it is differences of opinion on who we are going to believe. I just don't see a grown man screaming like we hear on the tape if he has the benefit of a gun and is getting ready to make a kill shot. It just doesn't ring true - but I can see Trayvon pleading for his life when he sees the gun and knows he about to be shot.

I agree with you that we have no indication that GZ informed TM that he was the NWC, or that the police were coming. If indeed TM walked up to GZ and said something like "You got a problem?", that would have been a good opportunity to say "Hey, I'm with the neighborhood watch", etc., yet so far as we know, GZ does not claim to have done so. That certainly adds to his culpability in this matter. If he was going to get out of his car to track TM's movements, the least he could do, upon coming face to face with him, is inform him of those two important facts.

CherokeeNative wrote:You've brought up some good questions Twinkle and I appeciate the opportunity to point out that these are my theories - not set in stone. I will most likely change them as more evidence is presented.
Thanks :) I really admire your capability to openly discuss opposing views so gracefully, along with the way you have thought things through and produced a detailed theory of the prosecution's approach to this case.

And I still want to know about those two minutes... Not only have I remarked about it on more than one occasion, even the Not-Quite-A-GF alluded to it in her statement that took weeks to get. LOL!

That would be a no, IMO, on the flashlight attached to the gun.

Haha - I knew I couldn't get the "flashlight attachment" past you Deb. LOL

I hope I haven't misled people. The last thing I want to do is frustrate anyone with my theories. When this case is ready for trial, both the prosecutor and the defense will have a "theory" and a script in their minds as to how they are going to present their case to the jury given the evidence and the law. Will they portray GZ as a former gangsta and Trayvon as an unexperienced school kid in his teens who merely experimented with pot? Would they focus on just the ground altercation for purposes of the self-defense claim, or would they look at the look at the entire incident as a whole to show who the "aggressor" was? Night before last, after receiving the document dump, I was really concerned about just how the prosecution was going to pull off justifying Murder2, or manslaughter for that matter, based upon what we know from the document dump and a few things that we know or assume through media leaks. Surely the prosecution didn't just bring this charge to calm the masses. That's when I prepared my original comment above to satisfy myself that the prosecution has some sort of case - so the above was my theory of what the prosecution's script at trial will be. By doing so, I now understand where the prosecution is going and have a little more faith that they can prevail...that's all, and I was sharing it with you. Hopefully we will get to see the other 2/3's evidence and if so, this script will most likely change to include that evidence. In the meantime, it is extremely interesting to see how we look at the facts and evidence differently - pretty much like a jury will do.

I would love to see how any of you feel that the case will be presented by the prosecution, or even better, the defense. .

by Alessandra_Deux Sun May 20, 2012 10:38 am

Puzzler wrote:It would help to know "where" the altercation took place.

Was it close to Brandy's house? Was it close to GZ's car?

"If" GZ turned around and headed back to the car, TM could have gone after GZ.

TM telling girlfriend "he's getting close" could be GZ coming after him or TM going after GZ (semantics).

IIRC we don't know where the fight took place; please correct me if I'm worng.

We don't know exactly where Zimmerman car was parked, hopefully we will find out when the prosecution shows the jury a reconstruction sketch of the crime scene, and/or the police crime scene reenactment video, during the trial.

The only things that we know is that Martin was killed in the common backyard of the townhouses, and that the area can only be accessed by foot, Zimmerman's vehicle was parked somewhere on front of the houses that face Twin Trees Lane, in order to access Twin Trees from the area where the shooting took place, he had to walk through the intersection (cut through) or through the passageways between some of the townhouses.

by Alessandra_Deux Sun May 20, 2012 10:43 am

Twinkle wrote:
Alessandra_Deux wrote:
Freckles wrote:
CherokeeNative wrote:
Freckles wrote:CN-
IMO, Trayvon MAY have stepped off to the side to prevent GZ from knowing where he was going. GZ cut him off and demanded to know who he was, where he was going and he may have been shining the flashlight in TM's eyes (emulating a cop); TM was indigent (and probably felt threatened) and refused to answer the stranger who was interrupting his walk. At this point, IMO, GZ pulled the gun to try to intimidate TM. TM, at that point, may have responded with the push landing them both on the ground.

I do think TM started yelling "Help! Help!" when he realized GZ had the upper hand, had a gun, and was going to kill him.

Freckles - I have said all along I believe that GZ managed to pass Trayvon by running along the front side of the townhomes and then crossing over and cutting him off - that he had his gun drawn at some point prior to the ground altercation - and that he had his flash light on at the time he confronted Trayvon...so your scenario is very close to what I was speculating. (Brilliant minds think alike) Now that we have the document dump, I don't see anything that supports that theory - In fact, I was worried about how the prosecutor was even going to present a Murder2 case out of what we have - so my earlier post today was merely a script, using what we have, to see how the prosecutor might present the case to the jury. And in my mind, it works. Now that I know there is a lot more to be seen, I would not be surprised if we are both right - then again, we may never know.
I know you have! lol In may way of thinking, GZ may have circled to the cut out and back tracked catching TM off guard OR TM may have stepped off to the side, slowing his walk as he wanted to know WHY he was being followed; after all, he did not want the lurker to know where he was going, he had done nothing wrong and was not going to run. TM NEEDED for the other person to leave so he could safely go to where the 14 year old was alone and unprotected.

Either way. Perhaps, both--- TM stepped off to the side and GZ went to the cutoff and back tracked to confront TM.

I think that Trayvon almost made to Brandy's house. I wonder how far, or how close, from Brandy's house is the house of the witness who told the police that she saw a man pursuing another man toward the cut-through (T).

I believe that Zimmerman went through one of the passageways between the townhouses into the backyard area to cut Trayvon off from his intended destination. Trayvon was on his way home when Zimmerman intercepted him.

I think it was Zimmerman who was chasing after Trayvon, Zimmerman had a gun, I don't believe that he was the one who was trying to run away.
Regarding the bolded, how do you reconcile this theory with the fact that DeeDee describes GZ following TM and closing in on him from behind? Don't you think TM would have told her if GZ suddenly reappeared in front of him, and he had to turn around and run to get away from him? I would think that would be extremely alarming and frightening to him. I just don't see how DeeDee's testimony could possibly be compatible with this scenario.

How do I reconcile this theory? A witness told the police that she saw the two men running in the opposite direction to Brandy's house.

by CherokeeNative Sun May 20, 2012 10:52 am

ellejay wrote:
Chickenbutt wrote:
marcena2 wrote:Just an idea...what if George caught up to Trayvon and asked him 'What are you doing here?' and then grabbed at his arm which caused Trayvon to say 'get off, get off' meaning let go of my arm. If they argued and then had their fist fight, Witness John could have seen Trayvon straddling George with George yelling for help. When this witness went to go call 911, he may have not seen George wiggle the fight off the sidewalk to the grass and get up to grab his gun. Another witness sees a man standing over another on the ground with the man on the ground (Trayvon) yelling for help. The man standing up seemed to be pinning the other down by his back. Two more witnesses see only a man laying on the ground yelling for help...no second man and no fight. A fourth witness says there was no physical fighting when the gun went off.

I think George may have been yelling during the first 20 seconds of the fist fight. But once he drew his gun and had it trained on Trayvon on the ground, it was Trayvon's turn to yell for help...and IMO that is the voice you hear on the 911 tape. At that moment knowing that police were on their way, George had options. He could have told Teayvon to freeze, cops are on their way. He could have shot his leg to put an end to any more fighting. But he chose to aim right for the kid's heart with a hollowpoint bullet. That is where I get depraved. No need to do that.

With all due respect Marcena....if I was going to shoot someone, I would shoot at center of mass (the largest target possible) not at a leg or an arm. Also, if I was prepared to shoot someone, I should be prepared for that person to die.

--if, in george's stmt to LE, he said that trayvon was straddling him when he managed to pull his gun out of the holster and shoot him--i think the ME's trajectory will be a huge problem for george.

--for the bullet to have entered horizontally "directly, front to back" george would have had to get his gun in that horizontal position before pulling the trigger.

--lying on his back when shooting trayvon straddled over him, it would make more sense that the bullet would have an "upward" path and not straight on as it did.

I agree Ellejay - I believe there are going to be issues with the trajectory of the bullet and it being inconsistent with GZ's version of when he shot Trayvon. I also know I have harped on the fact that the gun had to be drawn - it had to be unholstered somehow, if not in GZ's had (because I understand the argument against that) then in his coat pocket or loosely tucked in his waist band - because I do not see how he could have unholstered it with Trayvon on top of him straddling his waist. One or the other - either Trayvon wasn't straddling him or the gun wasn't holstered. The witnesses saw Trayvon straddling him apparently so that leaves the other. IMO

by CherokeeNative Sun May 20, 2012 10:57 am

GOOD MORNING ALL. I just want to say that you are all such a wonderful group of people to discuss this case with. Thank you for making this such a nice place to blog. (Now, you can continue to wring my neck for taking up so much space with my babble.) tongue

by Alessandra_Deux Sun May 20, 2012 10:58 am

CherokeeNative wrote:
ellejay wrote:
Chickenbutt wrote:
marcena2 wrote:Just an idea...what if George caught up to Trayvon and asked him 'What are you doing here?' and then grabbed at his arm which caused Trayvon to say 'get off, get off' meaning let go of my arm. If they argued and then had their fist fight, Witness John could have seen Trayvon straddling George with George yelling for help. When this witness went to go call 911, he may have not seen George wiggle the fight off the sidewalk to the grass and get up to grab his gun. Another witness sees a man standing over another on the ground with the man on the ground (Trayvon) yelling for help. The man standing up seemed to be pinning the other down by his back. Two more witnesses see only a man laying on the ground yelling for help...no second man and no fight. A fourth witness says there was no physical fighting when the gun went off.

I think George may have been yelling during the first 20 seconds of the fist fight. But once he drew his gun and had it trained on Trayvon on the ground, it was Trayvon's turn to yell for help...and IMO that is the voice you hear on the 911 tape. At that moment knowing that police were on their way, George had options. He could have told Teayvon to freeze, cops are on their way. He could have shot his leg to put an end to any more fighting. But he chose to aim right for the kid's heart with a hollowpoint bullet. That is where I get depraved. No need to do that.

With all due respect Marcena....if I was going to shoot someone, I would shoot at center of mass (the largest target possible) not at a leg or an arm. Also, if I was prepared to shoot someone, I should be prepared for that person to die.

--if, in george's stmt to LE, he said that trayvon was straddling him when he managed to pull his gun out of the holster and shoot him--i think the ME's trajectory will be a huge problem for george.

--for the bullet to have entered horizontally "directly, front to back" george would have had to get his gun in that horizontal position before pulling the trigger.

--lying on his back when shooting trayvon straddled over him, it would make more sense that the bullet would have an "upward" path and not straight on as it did.

I agree Ellejay - I believe there are going to be issues with the trajectory of the bullet and it being inconsistent with GZ's version of when he shot Trayvon. I also know I have harped on the fact that the gun had to be drawn - it had to be unholstered somehow, if not in GZ's had (because I understand the argument against that) then in his coat pocket or loosely tucked in his waist band - because I do not see how he could have unholstered it with Trayvon on top of him straddling his waist. One or the other - either Trayvon wasn't straddling him or the gun wasn't holstered. The witnesses saw Trayvon straddling him apparently so that leaves the other. IMO

I agree. That theory is something that absolutely defies logic and common sense.

by Alessandra_Deux Sun May 20, 2012 11:04 am

CherokeeNative wrote:GOOD MORNING ALL. I just want to say that you are all such a wonderful group of people to discuss this case with. Thank you for making this such a nice place to blog. (Now, you can continue to wring my neck for taking up so much space with my babble.)

Carry on.

You are doing a great job at contributing to the discussion by expressing your honest views of what might have taken place the night of the fatal shooting.

by Alessandra_Deux Sun May 20, 2012 11:18 am

Featured Videos

Trouble for prosecutors in Trayvon Martin case?

May 20, 2012
- 6:11 -

Alan Dershowitz weighs in on new evidence

http://video.foxnews.com/v/1647766211001/trouble-for-prosecutors-in-trayvon-martin-case/

Alan Dershowitz Is Wrong: Trayvon Martin’s Alleged Killer Must Be Tried

by Mansfield Frazier
May 20, 2012 4:45 AM EDT

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/05/20/alan-dershowitz-is-wrong-trayvon-martin-s-alleged-killer-must-be-tried.html

by Twinkle Sun May 20, 2012 11:30 am

Something I hadn't heard before...from the description, "Witness 6" has got to be "John".

Key witness in Trayvon Martin shooting: I'm no longer sure Zimmerman was crying for help

By Rene Stutzman, Orlando Sentinel

4:05 p.m. EST, May 18, 2012

One of the most important eye-witnesses to the Trayvon Martin shooting, a neighbor who told police Trayvon was straddling George Zimmerman, pinning him to the ground, changed his story once prosecutors took control of the case.

The man, identified in prosecution documents as "Witness 6," originally said Zimmerman was the person screaming for help as he fought with the unarmed 17-year-old from Miami Gardens.

But a few weeks later, on March 20, while sitting for a follow-up interview by a Florida Department of Law Enforcement investigator the witness said he was no longer sure who was calling for help.

"At first, I thought it was the person on the ground, just because, you know, me thinking rationally, if someone was on top, the person on the bottom would be yelling," he said.

Now, though, he said, "I truly can't tell who, after thinking about it, was yelling for help just because it was so dark out on that sidewalk. You can't see a mouth …"

The witness did not, however, change his account that Trayvon was the one on top as he and Zimmerman fought. He identified both combatants by skin color and by the color of their clothes, although he described Zimmerman's orange jacket as red, and Trayvon's dark gray hoodie as black.

by Alessandra_Deux Sun May 20, 2012 11:34 am

Despite evidence, no answers in Martin shooting

May 18, 2012 6:46 PM

By Mark Strassmann

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57437482/despite-evidence-no-answers-in-martin-shooting/

by CherokeeNative Sun May 20, 2012 11:36 am

Twinkle wrote:Something I hadn't heard before...from the description, "Witness 6" has got to be "John".

Key witness in Trayvon Martin shooting: I'm no longer sure Zimmerman was crying for help

By Rene Stutzman, Orlando Sentinel

4:05 p.m. EST, May 18, 2012

One of the most important eye-witnesses to the Trayvon Martin shooting, a neighbor who told police Trayvon was straddling George Zimmerman, pinning him to the ground, changed his story once prosecutors took control of the case.

The man, identified in prosecution documents as "Witness 6," originally said Zimmerman was the person screaming for help as he fought with the unarmed 17-year-old from Miami Gardens.

But a few weeks later, on March 20, while sitting for a follow-up interview by a Florida Department of Law Enforcement investigator the witness said he was no longer sure who was calling for help.

"At first, I thought it was the person on the ground, just because, you know, me thinking rationally, if someone was on top, the person on the bottom would be yelling," he said.

Now, though, he said, "I truly can't tell who, after thinking about it, was yelling for help just because it was so dark out on that sidewalk. You can't see a mouth …"

The witness did not, however, change his account that Trayvon was the one on top as he and Zimmerman fought. He identified both combatants by skin color and by the color of their clothes, although he described Zimmerman's orange jacket as red, and Trayvon's dark gray hoodie as black.

Twinkle, is it too late to edit my responses to your questions? roflao

Thanks for bringing that forward because I truly didn't have a reason for not going with his original statement - gut feeling is all I can say.

by ellejay Sun May 20, 2012 11:52 am

http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2012/05/the-trayvon-transcripts-witness-describes-zimmermans-attititude-just-tell-my-wife-i-shot-somebody-li.html#storylink=cpy

The Trayvon transcripts: Witness describes Zimmerman's attitude: "‘Just tell my wife I shot somebody.’ Like it was nothing.”

A Florida Department of Law Enforcement agent interviewed one of the first people to witness George Zimmerman after he shot Trayvon Martin. A partial transcript of the interview with the witness. He at home Feb. 26, fixing a coffee table in his front room when he and his wife heard the scuffle.

“We heard voices outside,” he said. “At first it sounded like dogs.”

Moments later, when he told his wife to get away from the window, they heard what he called “either a loud grunt -- it sounded like a gunshot, too.”

He came outside with his cellphone and flashlight, which he shined on Zimmerman. He said it had sounded as if Zimmerman were on the phone.

I think he was on the phone because it sounded like he was on the phone….

“Why don’t you call 911?” the man says he asked Zimmerman.

“No, I just got off the phone with them,” Zimmeran reportedly told him. “Am I bleeding?”

The man looked and saw Zimmerman had blood on his face: “Yeah, you’re bleeding.”
~~~~~~~~~

On the night of the shooting, the Sanford Police Department only interviewed the witness for two minutes. His recollection is here:

Zimmerman: "Man, I got blood on my face?"

Witness: "Yeah, you got blood all over, man. I looked over and he’s got blood on the back of his head. You alright man?"

Zimmerman: "Ah, man this guy he was beating up on me so I had to shoot him."

Witness: "Did you use a 9 or a 40?"

Zimmerman: "I used a 9."

Witness: "Did you call 911, yet?"

Zimmerman: "No, I already called. Can you just call my wife?"

--more@link---

by CherokeeNative Sun May 20, 2012 12:08 pm

ellejay wrote:http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2012/05/the-trayvon-transcripts-witness-describes-zimmermans-attititude-just-tell-my-wife-i-shot-somebody-li.html#storylink=cpy

The Trayvon transcripts: Witness describes Zimmerman's attitude: "‘Just tell my wife I shot somebody.’ Like it was nothing.”

A Florida Department of Law Enforcement agent interviewed one of the first people to witness George Zimmerman after he shot Trayvon Martin. A partial transcript of the interview with the witness. He at home Feb. 26, fixing a coffee table in his front room when he and his wife heard the scuffle.

“We heard voices outside,” he said. “At first it sounded like dogs.”

Moments later, when he told his wife to get away from the window, they heard what he called “either a loud grunt -- it sounded like a gunshot, too.”

He came outside with his cellphone and flashlight, which he shined on Zimmerman. He said it had sounded as if Zimmerman were on the phone.

I think he was on the phone because it sounded like he was on the phone….

“Why don’t you call 911?” the man says he asked Zimmerman.

“No, I just got off the phone with them,” Zimmeran reportedly told him. “Am I bleeding?”

The man looked and saw Zimmerman had blood on his face: “Yeah, you’re bleeding.”
~~~~~~~~~

On the night of the shooting, the Sanford Police Department only interviewed the witness for two minutes. His recollection is here:

Zimmerman: "Man, I got blood on my face?"

Witness: "Yeah, you got blood all over, man. I looked over and he’s got blood on the back of his head. You alright man?"

Zimmerman: "Ah, man this guy he was beating up on me so I had to shoot him."

Witness: "Did you use a 9 or a 40?"

Zimmerman: "I used a 9."

Witness: "Did you call 911, yet?"

Zimmerman: "No, I already called. Can you just call my wife?"

--more@link---

Is there any evidence that GZ called 911 a second time? Or, was he calling Daddy? Hmmm.

by Alessandra_Deux Sun May 20, 2012 12:16 pm

CherokeeNative wrote:
ellejay wrote:http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2012/05/the-trayvon-transcripts-witness-describes-zimmermans-attititude-just-tell-my-wife-i-shot-somebody-li.html#storylink=cpy

The Trayvon transcripts: Witness describes Zimmerman's attitude: "‘Just tell my wife I shot somebody.’ Like it was nothing.”

A Florida Department of Law Enforcement agent interviewed one of the first people to witness George Zimmerman after he shot Trayvon Martin. A partial transcript of the interview with the witness. He at home Feb. 26, fixing a coffee table in his front room when he and his wife heard the scuffle.

“We heard voices outside,” he said. “At first it sounded like dogs.”

Moments later, when he told his wife to get away from the window, they heard what he called “either a loud grunt -- it sounded like a gunshot, too.”

He came outside with his cellphone and flashlight, which he shined on Zimmerman. He said it had sounded as if Zimmerman were on the phone.

I think he was on the phone because it sounded like he was on the phone….

“Why don’t you call 911?” the man says he asked Zimmerman.

“No, I just got off the phone with them,” Zimmeran reportedly told him. “Am I bleeding?”

The man looked and saw Zimmerman had blood on his face: “Yeah, you’re bleeding.”
~~~~~~~~~

On the night of the shooting, the Sanford Police Department only interviewed the witness for two minutes. His recollection is here:

Zimmerman: "Man, I got blood on my face?"

Witness: "Yeah, you got blood all over, man. I looked over and he’s got blood on the back of his head. You alright man?"

Zimmerman: "Ah, man this guy he was beating up on me so I had to shoot him."

Witness: "Did you use a 9 or a 40?"

Zimmerman: "I used a 9."

Witness: "Did you call 911, yet?"

Zimmerman: "No, I already called. Can you just call my wife?"

--more@link---

Is there any evidence that GZ called 911 a second time? Or, was he calling Daddy? Hmmm.

We will find out when his phone records are made public.

by ellejay Sun May 20, 2012 12:24 pm

CherokeeNative wrote:
ellejay wrote:http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2012/05/the-trayvon-transcripts-witness-describes-zimmermans-attititude-just-tell-my-wife-i-shot-somebody-li.html#storylink=cpy

The Trayvon transcripts: Witness describes Zimmerman's attitude: "‘Just tell my wife I shot somebody.’ Like it was nothing.”

A Florida Department of Law Enforcement agent interviewed one of the first people to witness George Zimmerman after he shot Trayvon Martin. A partial transcript of the interview with the witness. He at home Feb. 26, fixing a coffee table in his front room when he and his wife heard the scuffle.

“We heard voices outside,” he said. “At first it sounded like dogs.”

Moments later, when he told his wife to get away from the window, they heard what he called “either a loud grunt -- it sounded like a gunshot, too.”

He came outside with his cellphone and flashlight, which he shined on Zimmerman. He said it had sounded as if Zimmerman were on the phone.

I think he was on the phone because it sounded like he was on the phone….

“Why don’t you call 911?” the man says he asked Zimmerman.

“No, I just got off the phone with them,” Zimmeran reportedly told him. “Am I bleeding?”

The man looked and saw Zimmerman had blood on his face: “Yeah, you’re bleeding.”
~~~~~~~~~

On the night of the shooting, the Sanford Police Department only interviewed the witness for two minutes. His recollection is here:

Zimmerman: "Man, I got blood on my face?"

Witness: "Yeah, you got blood all over, man. I looked over and he’s got blood on the back of his head. You alright man?"

Zimmerman: "Ah, man this guy he was beating up on me so I had to shoot him."

Witness: "Did you use a 9 or a 40?"

Zimmerman: "I used a 9."

Witness: "Did you call 911, yet?"

Zimmerman: "No, I already called. Can you just call my wife?"

--more@link---

Is there any evidence that GZ called 911 a second time? Or, was he calling Daddy? Hmmm.

--i guess he could be referring to the fact that he had already asked the 2 female witnesses to call 911 , and not that he had actually called 911 himself.

--if so, and the witness thinks that george was on the phone, who was he calling? it wasn't shellie. (can't wait to see those phone records!)

--i find it really strange, there's a DEAD body on the ground, and the witness is calmly asking george what type of weapon he used to shoot him?

by CherokeeNative Sun May 20, 2012 12:43 pm

CherokeeNative wrote:
4. Why did he take the gun with him then? He knew that it was against NWP policy. He either took it to use or for security in the event he needed. So it emboldened him.

Twinkle wrote:
According to GZ, he left his home that night to go grocery shopping at Target. For whatever reason, he opted to take his concealed weapon with him, which he is legally allowed to do. So if you take GZ at his word (which is supposedly backed up by a text he sent to his sister before he left the house), he was not out on patrol. In the heat of the moment, when he got out of his car to see where TM disappeared to, did he stop to think "maybe I should leave my gun in the car"? I doubt it. I suspect he hopped out and took off without giving it a second thought. That's why he had the gun on him, IMO.

Twinkle, I just wanted to discuss this with you a little further. I believe that GZ was going out on patrol, or Taffe called him and gave him a "heads up" about Trayvon -maybe he was going to go to Target afterwards - but we will never really know what the truth is. With that said, even assuming that GZ was truly going out to Target, and not on patrol, don't you think that the moment he decided to take interest in Trayvon and call the non-911 dispatch line that he had now taken on the role of NWC and was required ethically to follow the NWP's policies and procedures once he assumed that role? Just curious.

by Twinkle Sun May 20, 2012 12:45 pm

CherokeeNative wrote:
Twinkle wrote:Something I hadn't heard before...from the description, "Witness 6" has got to be "John".

Key witness in Trayvon Martin shooting: I'm no longer sure Zimmerman was crying for help

By Rene Stutzman, Orlando Sentinel

4:05 p.m. EST, May 18, 2012

One of the most important eye-witnesses to the Trayvon Martin shooting, a neighbor who told police Trayvon was straddling George Zimmerman, pinning him to the ground, changed his story once prosecutors took control of the case.

The man, identified in prosecution documents as "Witness 6," originally said Zimmerman was the person screaming for help as he fought with the unarmed 17-year-old from Miami Gardens.

But a few weeks later, on March 20, while sitting for a follow-up interview by a Florida Department of Law Enforcement investigator the witness said he was no longer sure who was calling for help.

"At first, I thought it was the person on the ground, just because, you know, me thinking rationally, if someone was on top, the person on the bottom would be yelling," he said.

Now, though, he said, "I truly can't tell who, after thinking about it, was yelling for help just because it was so dark out on that sidewalk. You can't see a mouth …"

The witness did not, however, change his account that Trayvon was the one on top as he and Zimmerman fought. He identified both combatants by skin color and by the color of their clothes, although he described Zimmerman's orange jacket as red, and Trayvon's dark gray hoodie as black.

Twinkle, is it too late to edit my responses to your questions? Thanks for bringing that forward because I truly didn't have a reason for not going with his original statement - gut feeling is all I can say.

lol...by all means, go back and edit if you like! But I freely acknowledge here and now that we no longer have a witness stating that GZ was the one screaming.

I do admire "John"/Witness 6 for thinking things through and making that clarification in a subsequent interview; to me, this indicates that he does not have an agenda. I can not say the same for witnesses like Mary Cutcher and her roommate, who have somewhat evolving stories and have had their photo taken with Benjamin Crump.

by CherokeeNative Sun May 20, 2012 12:56 pm

Twinkle wrote:
CherokeeNative wrote:
Twinkle wrote:Something I hadn't heard before...from the description, "Witness 6" has got to be "John".

Key witness in Trayvon Martin shooting: I'm no longer sure Zimmerman was crying for help

By Rene Stutzman, Orlando Sentinel

4:05 p.m. EST, May 18, 2012

One of the most important eye-witnesses to the Trayvon Martin shooting, a neighbor who told police Trayvon was straddling George Zimmerman, pinning him to the ground, changed his story once prosecutors took control of the case.

The man, identified in prosecution documents as "Witness 6," originally said Zimmerman was the person screaming for help as he fought with the unarmed 17-year-old from Miami Gardens.

But a few weeks later, on March 20, while sitting for a follow-up interview by a Florida Department of Law Enforcement investigator the witness said he was no longer sure who was calling for help.

"At first, I thought it was the person on the ground, just because, you know, me thinking rationally, if someone was on top, the person on the bottom would be yelling," he said.

Now, though, he said, "I truly can't tell who, after thinking about it, was yelling for help just because it was so dark out on that sidewalk. You can't see a mouth …"

The witness did not, however, change his account that Trayvon was the one on top as he and Zimmerman fought. He identified both combatants by skin color and by the color of their clothes, although he described Zimmerman's orange jacket as red, and Trayvon's dark gray hoodie as black.

Twinkle, is it too late to edit my responses to your questions? Thanks for bringing that forward because I truly didn't have a reason for not going with his original statement - gut feeling is all I can say.

lol...by all means, go back and edit if you like! But I freely acknowledge here and now that we no longer have a witness stating that GZ was the one screaming.

I do admire "John"/Witness 6 for thinking things through and making that clarification in a subsequent interview; to me, this indicates that he does not have an agenda. I can not say the same for witnesses like Mary Cutcher and her roommate, who have somewhat evolving stories and have had their photo taken with Benjamin Crump.

I was only teasing you. Very Happy

I agree with you that this gives me a completely different impression of John - that he would admit that he is questioning his original statement tells me he is trying to be as honest as possible. And I agree, Mary Cutcher and her roommate have discrepancy issues according to LE.

by Twinkle Sun May 20, 2012 1:03 pm

CherokeeNative wrote:
CherokeeNative wrote:
4. Why did he take the gun with him then? He knew that it was against NWP policy. He either took it to use or for security in the event he needed. So it emboldened him.
Twinkle wrote:
According to GZ, he left his home that night to go grocery shopping at Target. For whatever reason, he opted to take his concealed weapon with him, which he is legally allowed to do. So if you take GZ at his word (which is supposedly backed up by a text he sent to his sister before he left the house), he was not out on patrol. In the heat of the moment, when he got out of his car to see where TM disappeared to, did he stop to think "maybe I should leave my gun in the car"? I doubt it. I suspect he hopped out and took off without giving it a second thought. That's why he had the gun on him, IMO.

Twinkle, I just wanted to discuss this with you a little further. I believe that GZ was going out on patrol, or Taffe called him and gave him a "heads up" about Trayvon -maybe he was going to go to Target afterwards - but we will never really know what the truth is.

Actually if this is the case, it should be very easy for the prosecution to prove that Taaffe called GZ just prior to him leaving the house. I tend to think it did not happen, because it seems like Taaffe would not hesitate to brag about his role in the situation. (And if Taaffe is trying to cover up something like this, he has to know the prosecutors have GZ's phone records, and they may very well be wanting to know what the phone call was about if GZ left his house immediately after hearing from Taaffe.)

CherokeeNative wrote:With that said, even assuming that GZ was truly going out to Target, and not on patrol, don't you think that the moment he decided to take interest in Trayvon and call the non-911 dispatch line that he had now taken on the role of NWC and was required ethically to follow the NWP's policies and procedures once he assumed that role? Just curious.

This is a murky area for me. If he was headed to the store, spotted a "real suspicious guy", called 911, and tried to keep an eye on him, is he acting as a neighborhood watch volunteer or just a concerned citizen? Either way, it would have been better if he and his gun had stayed in his car.

by CherokeeNative Sun May 20, 2012 1:10 pm

My follow up comments in blue.

Twinkle wrote:
CherokeeNative wrote:
CherokeeNative wrote:
4. Why did he take the gun with him then? He knew that it was against NWP policy. He either took it to use or for security in the event he needed. So it emboldened him.
Twinkle wrote:
According to GZ, he left his home that night to go grocery shopping at Target. For whatever reason, he opted to take his concealed weapon with him, which he is legally allowed to do. So if you take GZ at his word (which is supposedly backed up by a text he sent to his sister before he left the house), he was not out on patrol. In the heat of the moment, when he got out of his car to see where TM disappeared to, did he stop to think "maybe I should leave my gun in the car"? I doubt it. I suspect he hopped out and took off without giving it a second thought. That's why he had the gun on him, IMO.

Twinkle, I just wanted to discuss this with you a little further. I believe that GZ was going out on patrol, or Taffe called him and gave him a "heads up" about Trayvon -maybe he was going to go to Target afterwards - but we will never really know what the truth is.
Actually if this is the case, it should be very easy for the prosecution to prove that Taaffe called GZ just prior to him leaving the house. I tend to think it did not happen, because it seems like Taaffe would not hesitate to brag about his role in the situation. (And if Taaffe is trying to cover up something like this, he has to know the prosecutors have GZ's phone records, and they may very well be wanting to know what the phone call was about if GZ left his house immediately after hearing from Taaffe.)

Good points - and obviously not well thought out on my part. If Taffe were the instigator, he would have surely been bragging about it - and the phone records would indicate such.

CherokeeNative wrote:With that said, even assuming that GZ was truly going out to Target, and not on patrol, don't you think that the moment he decided to take interest in Trayvon and call the non-911 dispatch line that he had now taken on the role of NWC and was required ethically to follow the NWP's policies and procedures once he assumed that role? Just curious.
This is a murky area for me. If he was headed to the store, spotted a "real suspicious guy", called 911, and tried to keep an eye on him, is he acting as a neighborhood watch volunteer or just a concerned citizen? Either way, it would have been better if he and his gun had stayed in his car.

I will be interested to see if the prosecutors bring this up at trial and how they consider it under the law - i.e., can you ever really escape your ethical duties once you have taken on to wear that hat? I don't know either.

by ellejay Sun May 20, 2012 1:18 pm

CherokeeNative wrote:

Twinkle, I just wanted to discuss this with you a little further. I believe that GZ was going out on patrol, or Taffe called him and gave him a "heads up" about Trayvon -maybe he was going to go to Target afterwards - but we will never really know what the truth is. With that said, even assuming that GZ was truly going out to Target, and not on patrol, don't you think that the moment he decided to take interest in Trayvon and call the non-911 dispatch line that he had now taken on the role of NWC and was required ethically to follow the NWP's policies and procedures once he assumed that role? Just curious.

--george must have told LE that he was on neighbourhood watch at the time, b/c that's what (lead investigator) chris serino then told ME investigator tara malphurs.

ME case summary:

ECC contacted FI malphurs of an apparent death in sanford----POC (person of contact) was SPD Inv.Serino.
POC stated the following:

--"...he observed the male while walking his neighbourhood watch."

George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #1 - Page 12 SerinotoMEinv

George Zimmerman / Trayvon Martin Case #1 - Page 12 SerinotoMEinv

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/Zimmerman_Discovery.pdf
--ME case summary--page 137--

by Gizmo711 Sun May 20, 2012 1:26 pm

We really cannot pick any witnesses that favor our opinion. Infact we really cannot take any witness because no one saw what exactly took place. The only credible witness that I can see here is the gf and that is for only what she heard up to the point that the phone went dead.

The only credible and positive info that the state will have are the 911 calls and the fact that an unarmed youth who was being followed ended up dead at the hands of the follower. There is no explaination for that. None that makes any sense at all. Trayvon was being followed, he had every right to confront the man that was following him. He had every right to throw the first punch, I don't know too many people that would wait until the follower was going to harm them. Trayvon was Standing HIS Ground either way anyone wants to look at this. Zimmerman was wrong from the getgo, Zimmerman should have stayed in his car. When one looks for trouble they will find trouble. Zimmerman is now in big trouble and rightfully so.

by CherokeeNative Sun May 20, 2012 1:30 pm

ellejay wrote:
CherokeeNative wrote:

Twinkle, I just wanted to discuss this with you a little further. I believe that GZ was going out on patrol, or Taffe called him and gave him a "heads up" about Trayvon -maybe he was going to go to Target afterwards - but we will never really know what the truth is. With that said, even assuming that GZ was truly going out to Target, and not on patrol, don't you think that the moment he decided to take interest in Trayvon and call the non-911 dispatch line that he had now taken on the role of NWC and was required ethically to follow the NWP's policies and procedures once he assumed that role? Just curious.

--george must have told LE that he was on neighbourhood watch at the time, b/c that's what (lead investigator) chris serino then told ME investigator tara malphurs.

ME case summary:

ECC contacted FI malphurs of an apparent death in sanford----POC (person of contact) was SPD Inv.Serino.
POC stated the following:

--"...he observed the male while walking his neighbourhood watch."

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/Zimmerman_Discovery.pdf
--ME case summary--page 137--

Ahhh - so originally he stated he was on patrol, but later changed his story? Of course until we see his statements... But, this is the little stuff that has me convinced that GZ (with his multiple years of criminal justice schooling) was aware of the need to have his story conform to the laws of self-defense in a shooting scenario. This is only my opinion, but I have no doubts that GZ studied all aspects of what circumstances must have occurred in order to claim self-defense and has tried to mold his story in that fashion. I believe he most likely discussed scenarios with his wife or Taffe. That's what wanna-be's do. Like mentioned up thread, it is odd that he was so calm and collected after shooting someone - you would think that he would have been explaining himself. Instead, I believe he was consumed with trying to formulate his story.

by Gizmo711 Sun May 20, 2012 1:30 pm

ellejay wrote:
CherokeeNative wrote:

Twinkle, I just wanted to discuss this with you a little further. I believe that GZ was going out on patrol, or Taffe called him and gave him a "heads up" about Trayvon -maybe he was going to go to Target afterwards - but we will never really know what the truth is. With that said, even assuming that GZ was truly going out to Target, and not on patrol, don't you think that the moment he decided to take interest in Trayvon and call the non-911 dispatch line that he had now taken on the role of NWC and was required ethically to follow the NWP's policies and procedures once he assumed that role? Just curious.

--george must have told LE that he was on neighbourhood watch at the time, b/c that's what (lead investigator) chris serino then told ME investigator tara malphurs.

ME case summary:

ECC contacted FI malphurs of an apparent death in sanford----POC (person of contact) was SPD Inv.Serino.
POC stated the following:

--"...he observed the male while walking his neighbourhood watch."

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/Zimmerman_Discovery.pdf
--ME case summary--page 137--

I certainly believe that Zimmerman did say that he was on patrol that evening, probably thinking that it would justify his actions, but when he had second thoughts as to carrying a loaded gun, he changed his story and then said that he wasn't on call. I believe that he even had his brother make a point to say it on the media.

Zimmerman was obviously informed that he could not say that he was on call in a self defense case or a SYG case when you are patrolling with a firearm.

by CherokeeNative Sun May 20, 2012 1:35 pm

I want to add to my comment - doesn't it seem odd that out of the blue GZ would just state "I yelled for help, but nobody came" or something to that effect? I mean, he's being calm and collected, not chattering about what happened and then just offers up that statement? This out of the blue comment tells me that he was going through in his mind what had occurred, what he had done wrong, and how he was going to modify the sequence of events to conform to self-defense theory - and if anyone had heard Trayvon's screaming, he was going to claim it was him doing the screaming. JMHO

by CherokeeNative Sun May 20, 2012 1:39 pm

Here is the comment "up thread" that I was referring to. I would think that if you had just been involved in a shooting where you had killed a teen, you would be upset and trying to explain your actions.

Freckles wrote:Alessandra:
Two scenarios:
Innocent-
GZ was being "harassed" by TM (as TM was winding his way to the condo in the rain after being at the store):
Would he not have said to the arriving officers, " This guy, he was unbelievable! I called the station about him! He started threatening me and pushing me around!! He knocked me to the ground and I had no choice, man. I had no choice!!! I mean, I had the gun and he tried to grab it!! He was sitting on my chest beating my head into the ground! I just wanted to make sure he wasn't one of those punks causing problems here!! I don't know what I could have done differently!"

Or:
Guilty-
GZ thinking to himself, "I know I may be in big trouble. I just won't say anything. At the station, I will tell them TM jumped me, threatened me. He is one of the punks I have seen hanging out and causing problems. "

by Chickenbutt Sun May 20, 2012 1:45 pm

I don't believe it matters one bit if GZ was "on patrol" or going shopping. Neither activity gives him the authority to stop, question, assault, kill another person. In fact, if he was on patrol, then he had even less authourity. I believe, and I could be very wrong here, that the rules of the NW said something about not confronting, but calling 911. So he violated that rule (if there was one). In my mind, none of the witnesses statements, GZ's statements, 911 tape analysis or anything else can alter the fact that TM was walking along, minding his own business, was confronted by a man with a gun (who had no business doing that), fought for his life and lost. To me, it is painfully simple.
BTW, I am all about simple. To me the simplest explanation is probably the truth of what happened.
dancing

tiptoeing away to safety.... Very Happy

by ellejay Sun May 20, 2012 1:51 pm

Gizmo711 wrote:We really cannot pick any witnesses that favor our opinion. Infact we really cannot take any witness because no one saw what exactly took place. The only credible witness that I can see here is the gf and that is for only what she heard up to the point that the phone went dead.

The only credible and positive info that the state will have are the 911 calls and the fact that an unarmed youth who was being followed ended up dead at the hands of the follower. There is no explaination for that. None that makes any sense at all. Trayvon was being followed, he had every right to confront the man that was following him. He had every right to throw the first punch, I don't know too many people that would wait until the follower was going to harm them. Trayvon was Standing HIS Ground either way anyone wants to look at this. Zimmerman was wrong from the getgo, Zimmerman should have stayed in his car. When one looks for trouble they will find trouble. Zimmerman is now in big trouble and rightfully so.

--the way i understand the portion of the SYG statute that applies---if trayvon "threw the 1st punch" , then george had the right to fight back, using deadly force if he felt it neccessary, in which case SYG would apply to george.

--which is why there's so much discussion on what appears to be a 'grey area'----WHO was the aggressor????? we'll never know who threw the 1st punch, b/c there are no witnesses, trayvon is dead----ALL we will have is george's word ( which to me is worthless.)

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html
--florida statute---Chapter 776 --JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE

776.013
A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

by CherokeeNative Sun May 20, 2012 2:02 pm

Chickenbutt wrote:I don't believe it matters one bit if GZ was "on patrol" or going shopping. Neither activity gives him the authority to stop, question, assault, kill another person. In fact, if he was on patrol, then he had even less authourity. I believe, and I could be very wrong here, that the rules of the NW said something about not confronting, but calling 911. So he violated that rule (if there was one). In my mind, none of the witnesses statements, GZ's statements, 911 tape analysis or anything else can alter the fact that TM was walking along, minding his own business, was confronted by a man with a gun (who had no business doing that), fought for his life and lost. To me, it is painfully simple.
BTW, I am all about simple. To me the simplest explanation is probably the truth of what happened.
tiptoeing away to safety....

LOL - love the tiptoeing... I agree with you 100% - but the prosecution will point these violations out to the jury if the court allows it in order to sway the jury towards their position that GZ, while having a CWP, should not have been carrying that gun when he got out of his vehicle. The defense will counter trying to avoid that ethical duty by using the excuse that he always carried his weapon and was merely on his way to Target and forgot it was there.

Changing the topic, I am really curious about the trajectory of the bullet - I can hardly wait for expert witness depositions. I am not too curious as to whose DNA is on the trigger of the gun - I don't know why, but I don't think it will be a "smoking gun" (pun intended). And of course, I want to see the phone records and the text messages that GZ sent. Those text messages are going to give true insight into what GZ was thinking about following the shooting I suspect.

by Freckles Sun May 20, 2012 2:03 pm

ellejay wrote:http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2012/05/the-trayvon-transcripts-witness-describes-zimmermans-attititude-just-tell-my-wife-i-shot-somebody-li.html#storylink=cpy

The Trayvon transcripts: Witness describes Zimmerman's attitude: "‘Just tell my wife I shot somebody.’ Like it was nothing.”

A Florida Department of Law Enforcement agent interviewed one of the first people to witness George Zimmerman after he shot Trayvon Martin. A partial transcript of the interview with the witness. He at home Feb. 26, fixing a coffee table in his front room when he and his wife heard the scuffle.

“We heard voices outside,” he said. “At first it sounded like dogs.”

Moments later, when he told his wife to get away from the window, they heard what he called “either a loud grunt -- it sounded like a gunshot, too.”

He came outside with his cellphone and flashlight, which he shined on Zimmerman. He said it had sounded as if Zimmerman were on the phone.

I think he was on the phone because it sounded like he was on the phone….

“Why don’t you call 911?” the man says he asked Zimmerman.

“No, I just got off the phone with them,” Zimmeran reportedly told him. “Am I bleeding?”

The man looked and saw Zimmerman had blood on his face: “Yeah, you’re bleeding.”
~~~~~~~~~

On the night of the shooting, the Sanford Police Department only interviewed the witness for two minutes. His recollection is here:

Zimmerman: "Man, I got blood on my face?"

Witness: "Yeah, you got blood all over, man. I looked over and he’s got blood on the back of his head. You alright man?"

Zimmerman: "Ah, man this guy he was beating up on me so I had to shoot him."

Witness: "Did you use a 9 or a 40?"

Zimmerman: "I used a 9."

Witness: "Did you call 911, yet?"

Zimmerman: "No, I already called. Can you just call my wife?"

--more@link---

Great find. Thanks for sharing! Cool

by Freckles Sun May 20, 2012 2:06 pm

CherokeeNative wrote:
CherokeeNative wrote:
4. Why did he take the gun with him then? He knew that it was against NWP policy. He either took it to use or for security in the event he needed. So it emboldened him.
Twinkle wrote:
According to GZ, he left his home that night to go grocery shopping at Target. For whatever reason, he opted to take his concealed weapon with him, which he is legally allowed to do. So if you take GZ at his word (which is supposedly backed up by a text he sent to his sister before he left the house), he was not out on patrol. In the heat of the moment, when he got out of his car to see where TM disappeared to, did he stop to think "maybe I should leave my gun in the car"? I doubt it. I suspect he hopped out and took off without giving it a second thought. That's why he had the gun on him, IMO.

Twinkle, I just wanted to discuss this with you a little further. I believe that GZ was going out on patrol, or Taffe called him and gave him a "heads up" about Trayvon -maybe he was going to go to Target afterwards - but we will never really know what the truth is. With that said, even assuming that GZ was truly going out to Target, and not on patrol, don't you think that the moment he decided to take interest in Trayvon and call the non-911 dispatch line that he had now taken on the role of NWC and was required ethically to follow the NWP's policies and procedures once he assumed that role? Just curious.

I am not ready to rule that out yet.
I still want to see the results of the DNA on the trigger. Cell

by Guest Sun May 20, 2012 2:07 pm

Gizmo711 wrote:We really cannot pick any witnesses that favor our opinion. Infact we really cannot take any witness because no one saw what exactly took place. The only credible witness that I can see here is the gf and that is for only what she heard up to the point that the phone went dead.

The only credible and positive info that the state will have are the 911 calls and the fact that an unarmed youth who was being followed ended up dead at the hands of the follower. There is no explaination for that. None that makes any sense at all. Trayvon was being followed, he had every right to confront the man that was following him. He had every right to throw the first punch, I don't know too many people that would wait until the follower was going to harm them.

Trayvon was Standing HIS Ground either way anyone wants to look at this. Zimmerman was wrong from the getgo, Zimmerman should have stayed in his car. When one looks for trouble they will find trouble. Zimmerman is now in big trouble and rightfully so.

Gitmzo, your right, no one can pick & choose witnesses, the State or Defense, & blogger's forming opinions. As we know ALL of the witnesses are going to be vetted as we saw from KC's trial, those that made MEDIA appearances may even be excluded as we too saw from KC's trial, we don't have to agree if it is right or wrong, it is how Defense attorney's defend their client's, it is legal. Criminal Defense Attorney's as well as LE frequently make the statement, "we would rather have forensics/DNA than an eye witness, sometimes witnesses lie or embellish, forensics never do."

Everyone can agree that GZ should not have gotten out of his vehicle BUT it was not illegal. The fact is, LE doesn't know who threw the first punch, nor who started the physical altercation, that is indeed at issue, legally. The Detective has said LE doesn't know, that is crucial. In your opinion, Trayvon was standing his ground, that is only an opinion & not a fact, Trayvon could have knocked the chit out of GZ because he was pissed off, at several inches taller, GZ imo, was not an intimadating figure to Trayvon, that too, is only an opinion.

Jean Cassaris explained on IN SESSION this week that in the SYG Law, there doesn't even have to be a physical altercation at all, one only has to be in fear of their life or bodily harm. There are a lot of opinions being expessed, but the legal arguments, the Fla. Law, is what this case is going to be determined on, not opinions. I agree, GZ should have stayed in his truck, but he didn't, Trayvon is dead & NO ONE knows how it happened. imo, the forensics are going to tell the story of how it happened. Hopefully, the jury at least finds him guilty of manslaughter.

by Alessandra_Deux Sun May 20, 2012 2:22 pm

ellejay wrote:
Gizmo711 wrote:We really cannot pick any witnesses that favor our opinion. Infact we really cannot take any witness because no one saw what exactly took place. The only credible witness that I can see here is the gf and that is for only what she heard up to the point that the phone went dead.

The only credible and positive info that the state will have are the 911 calls and the fact that an unarmed youth who was being followed ended up dead at the hands of the follower. There is no explaination for that. None that makes any sense at all. Trayvon was being followed, he had every right to confront the man that was following him. He had every right to throw the first punch, I don't know too many people that would wait until the follower was going to harm them. Trayvon was Standing HIS Ground either way anyone wants to look at this. Zimmerman was wrong from the getgo, Zimmerman should have stayed in his car. When one looks for trouble they will find trouble. Zimmerman is now in big trouble and rightfully so.

--the way i understand the portion of the SYG statute that applies---if trayvon "threw the 1st punch" , then george had the right to fight back, using deadly force if he felt it neccessary, in which case SYG would apply to george.

--which is why there's so much discussion on what appears to be a 'grey area'----WHO was the aggressor????? we'll never know who threw the 1st punch, b/c there are no witnesses, trayvon is dead----ALL we will have is george's word ( which to me is worthless.)

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html
--florida statute---Chapter 776 --JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE

776.013
A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

Trayvon was not engaged in an unlawful activity when Zimmerman "spotted" him, and he definitely had the right to be where he was. If Zimmerman tried to stop Trayvon from "fleeing" ("they always get away"), he violated the law because he didn't have the authority to pursuit or detain anyone, not even when he was on duty as a community watchman. Trayvon had the right to perceived Zimmerman as an imminent threat and to defend himself against him.

In my opinion, if anyone had the right to claim self defense under the Stand Your Ground Law, it was Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman initiated the events and created the circumstances that culminated in Trayvon's death.

by Twinkle Sun May 20, 2012 2:22 pm

ellejay wrote:
CherokeeNative wrote:

Twinkle, I just wanted to discuss this with you a little further. I believe that GZ was going out on patrol, or Taffe called him and gave him a "heads up" about Trayvon -maybe he was going to go to Target afterwards - but we will never really know what the truth is. With that said, even assuming that GZ was truly going out to Target, and not on patrol, don't you think that the moment he decided to take interest in Trayvon and call the non-911 dispatch line that he had now taken on the role of NWC and was required ethically to follow the NWP's policies and procedures once he assumed that role? Just curious.

--george must have told LE that he was on neighbourhood watch at the time, b/c that's what (lead investigator) chris serino then told ME investigator tara malphurs.

ME case summary:

ECC contacted FI malphurs of an apparent death in sanford----POC (person of contact) was SPD Inv.Serino.
POC stated the following:

--"...he observed the male while walking his neighbourhood watch."

http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/sections/news/Zimmerman_Discovery.pdf
--ME case summary--page 137--

Regarding the bolded statement, until we see GZ's statements, we don't know exactly what he told the police officers. They were well aware that he was the neighborhood watch guy for that development; in fact, in one of the police reports, the officer indicated he had interacted with GZ in the past. So it is very possible that the police assumed that GZ was out on patrol. The quoted statement from the report implies that GZ told the 911 operator that he was on patrol, but I do not recall any such statement from GZ during the call. I just checked the transcript and verifed that GZ does not state that he is on patrol during the call.

by Sponsored content