Unarmed black 17 year old shot by Neighborhood watch captain in gated community...

[SpatiallyAware]

I am really enjoying seeing the crumptonite house of cards come crashing down.

 

[EagleKeeper]

And to the contrary there's then no evidence Trayvon went back, laid in wait, etc.

And then you're left w\ a heap of evidence of GZ going after Trayvon and no evidence of Trayvon going after GZ.

I guess we won't hear any pro zimmerman nut huggers claiming they have evidence Trayvon went back to confront Zimmerman again, right?

What is then left with is
1) Accounting for the fact that TM was in the area of the top of the T for a few minutes and out of sight/hearing when Zimmerman first went along the T and/or arrived at the top.

2) A witness stated that someone was seen running from south to north just before the interaction happened.

3) Martin "family" thinking that he was home due to some evidence.

There is no evidence (per the state) the GZ went after Martin.
You can use supposition as your opinion.
then by the same scope; one can suppose that Martin initially hid out of sight to see what Zimmerman might do. Once Zimmerman's actions were better understood; Martin chose to come out/be visible and interact with Zimmerman.

I am avoiding the word confrontation because the prosecution has no evidence either way.

 

[soundforbjt]

My theory? Processing the events that had just transpired, trying to get an address on the street he was more familiar with, collecting himself, thinking of what to say to the responding officer and lingering around... Peering south to see if TM might reappear in the distance.

Sound fanciful? It's not. It's exactly what I'd have done.

I would have returned to where the police were initially instructed by GZ to go (back to his truck) and wait for them (which is what GZ "claims" he was doing). So GZ lied right...?

 

[Darkman]

lol .. dee dee also was heard on tape (interview with LE) saying "i heard a BUMP ... Trayvon BUMPED ... someone BUMPED trayvon ... etc" .. (can't recall now exact wordings .. but she stated something like that)

So which one was it .. Trayvon BUMPED someone ... or someone BUMPED trayvon ...
Make up your mind ...
.. can you smell what the rock ... is cookin'

Somewhere closer to the end of interview when asked by LE dude: "So what happened then?"

She replies ... "... I hear something like "BUMP" .. .You can hear that Trayvon bumped ... ( ooops ) .. that someone bumped Trayvon ... blah-blah .. you can hear that "grass-thing..."

Source: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=34669011&highlight=#post34669011

 

[soundforbjt]

I've always felt the timeline, car keys, witness 11, and lady who saw a shadow run north toward the T just prior to the assault all were much more compelling evidence of that than anything DD said.

What IF that shadow was GZ? No way to prove it was or wasn't.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

I would have returned to where the police were initially instructed by GZ to go (back to his truck) and wait for them (which is what GZ "claims" he was doing). So GZ lied right...?

Rofl the stretches you guys make... Anything.. ANYTHING to justify the guilt you see in this clearly innocent man.

 

[soundforbjt]

Rofl the stretches you guys make... Anything.. ANYTHING to justify the guilt you see in this clearly innocent man.

Where did I state anything counter to GZ's statements? Please point it out.

 

[Tom]

Serino also stated he didn't have enough evidence to press charges against GZ.

State's lead investigator testimony.

You only quoted part of his testimony which does not give a fair representation of what he said.

And, what he knew or remembered at that moment doesn't comprise the entirety of what evidence exists, what the prosecution knew existed, or even what he personally would know at a different moment in time.

Basically, it meant nothing and its only purpose was to play to the public.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I would have returned to where the police were initially instructed by GZ to go (back to his truck) and wait for them (which is what GZ "claims" he was doing). So GZ lied right...?

There doesn't seem to be any proof he wasn't in the process of returning to his car.

O'MARA: Since. Today. Do you have any evidence that conflicts with his suggestion that he had turned around and went back to his car?

GILBREATH: Other than his statement, no.

 

[micrometers]

I'm glad that it has turned out the way it has.

Now every gun self defense nut will think twice before shooting someone in public. Poor George wears a bulletproof vest when he goes to the grocer! haha!

 

[Londo_Jowo]

You only quoted part of his testimony which does not give a fair representation of what he said.

And, what he knew or remembered at that moment doesn't comprise the entirety of what evidence exists, what the prosecution knew existed, or even what he personally would know at a different moment in time.

Basically, it meant nothing and its only purpose was to play to the public.

I watched the bond hearing, all he claimed is there were inconsistencies in GZ's statements. However, under oath he did make those statements. Those statements are now evidence for the defense and nothing will change that.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So do you know who started the fight?

GILBREATH: Do I know?

O'MARA: Right.

GILBREATH: No.

O'MARA: Do you have any evidence that supports who may have started the fight?

GILBREATH: No.

O'MARA: Since. Today. Do you have any evidence that conflicts with his suggestion that he had turned around and went back to his car?

GILBREATH: Other than his statement, no.

 

[Tom]

What is then left with is
1) Accounting for the fact that TM was in the area of the top of the T for a few minutes and out of sight/hearing when Zimmerman first went along the T and/or arrived at the top.

2) A witness stated that someone was seen running from south to north just before the interaction happened.

3) Martin "family" thinking that he was home due to some evidence.

There is no evidence (per the state) the GZ went after Martin.
You can use supposition as your opinion.
then by the same scope; one can suppose that Martin initially hid out of sight to see what Zimmerman might do. Once Zimmerman's actions were better understood; Martin chose to come out/be visible and interact with Zimmerman.

I am avoiding the word confrontation because the prosecution has no evidence either way.

The bolded part is just not true. On many,many levels. Its not even true as to what the lead investigator said at the first hearing.

 

[OCNewbie]

I would have returned to where the police were initially instructed by GZ to go (back to his truck) and wait for them (which is what GZ "claims" he was doing). So GZ lied right...?

He wasn't able to provide an address for where his truck was: "It's a cut-through, so I don't know the address". The dispatcher suggested that maybe they could meet him by the mailboxes, which he at first says "yeah, that's fine", but then he says "actually, could you have them call me, and I'll tell him where I'm at?". I imagine that was since the mailboxes would actually be backtracking, and actually further away from where GZ had last seen the suspect, and where the suspect was headed.

 

[EagleKeeper]

What IF that shadow was GZ? No way to prove it was or wasn't.

A jury needs to try to put @ + 2 together to determine if it equals 4.


If the defense uses the lead in from Tracy indicating they thought that Martin was home, then present the running witness; that can setup the play by play scenario for the jury

To have Zimmerman running from South to North requires the prosecution coming up with a scenario that explains how Zimmerman got south enough for him to be seen running north. They would have to show a need for Zimmerman to run from South to North vs walking. And then present that need to the jury. Also take into account the timeline and justification.

 

[Darkman]

Did Crump coach DeeDee ... but she could not keep her story straight anyhow?

 

[Tom]

He wasn't able to provide an address for where his truck was: "It's a cut-through, so I don't know the address". The dispatcher suggested that maybe they could meet him by the mailboxes, but then he says "actually, can you just have them call me, and I'll let them know where I am?". I imagine since the mailboxes would actually be backtracking, and actually further away from where GZ had seen TM headed.

So, you're admitting that Zimmerman's purpose in leaving his truck was to follow Martin, not to look for an address ?

 

[OCNewbie]

So, you're admitting that Zimmerman's purpose in leaving his truck was to follow Martin, not to look for an address ?

No, he didn't have an address at that point, but by the time the dispatchers called him, he would know have an address to tell them "where he was at".

Edit: Oh, I see. I'm not sure, I suppose it was a combination of both: to see where TM went and to get an address. He was also trying to explain (unsuccessfully) to the dispatchers how to get there when TM apparently began running.

 

[Darkman]

Did Crump coach DeeDee ... but she could not keep her story straight anyhow?

Crap DeeDee, Crap! ... right on that Grass Thing ... :biggrin:

 

[Tom]

There doesn't seem to be any proof he wasn't in the process of returning to his car.

He said other than his statement. That isn't the same as no proof.

And you keep leaving out the context in which the lead investigator was testifying. He repeatedly said he was not speaking for the entire prosecution and he was only speaking as to what he remembered at that moment.

So its completely bogus to use his statement as definitive of the true scope of the prosecution's case.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

The bolded part is just not true. On many,many levels. Its not even true as to what the lead investigator said at the first hearing.

Funny, you seem to be the only one that sees what he said as something else.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-04-21/george-zimmerman-lawyers-bail/54450118/1

Investigator Dale Gilbreath testified that he does not know whether Martin or Zimmerman threw the first punch and that there is no evidence to disprove Zimmerman's contention he was walking back to his vehicle when confronted by Martin.

Here's the part that Gilbreath found inconsistent about GZ's statements.

But Gilbreath also said Zimmerman's claim that Martin was slamming his head against the sidewalk just before he shot the teenager was "not consistent with the evidence we found." He gave no details.

 

[EagleKeeper]

The bolded part is just not true. On many,many levels. Its not even true as to what the lead investigator said at the first hearing.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: So do you know who started the fight?

GILBREATH: Do I know?

O'MARA: Right.

GILBREATH: No.

O'MARA: Do you have any evidence that supports who may have started the fight?

GILBREATH: No.

I guess that one must just decide how to interpret verbiage.

For myself; following is not going after someone.
Going after means to catch up and/or confront, depending on the situation.

Zimmerman never expected to have a confrontation with Martin; at the best he was hoping to see what direction he went from the top of the T.

 

[Druidx]

In Cory’s probable cause affidavit, DeeDee’s testimony was the only evidence they used to claim GZ pursued TM.
Someone the defense can now prove to have lied under oath.

 

[soundforbjt]

There doesn't seem to be any proof he wasn't in the process of returning to his car.

Except he could have crawled on his hands & knees and made it back with time to spare...

And that statement was made before the timeline video made by the forensics expert.

 

[Tom]

No, he didn't have an address at that point, but by the time the dispatchers called him, he would know have an address to tell them "where he was at".

Edit: Oh, I see. I'm not sure, I suppose it was a combination of both: to see where TM went and to get an address. He was also trying to explain (unsuccessfully) to the dispatchers how to get there when TM apparently began running.

Hmm. You know, its always been completely obvious that he got out of his truck to follow Martin and that he lied by ommission about that in his statement.

The critical question is why he lied ? The logical conclusion is that in his mind if he was pursuing Martin that would make his self-defense case weaker.

The problem is that lying about that makes his description about being jumped also seem to be less likely to be the truth than its his attempt to make his self-defense claim stronger.

And at what point to the untruths add up to him lying about the reason for shooting ?

He may have been in a stronger position to be entirely truthful even if it meant taking more responsibilty for the encounter, but then claimed he was physically overwhelmed by Martin.

Or of course its also possible it wasn't really self-defense at all.

 

[micrometers]

LMAO