search
top

Zimmerman Case Roundup

Getting tired of this case yet? I sure am. But it’s all that’s in the media, and it’s the best shot our opponents in the gun prohibition movement have had to return to relevance in years. Unfortunately for them, I think this case jumped the shark. Miguel notes the slowly disappearing political memes. Over at Just One Minute, it turns out the audio forensics expert offered up by the media is, in fact, no such thing. Turns out plenty of other experts agree that the comparison just isn’t valid. I’m not surprised to hear this, because the story of the audio analysis set off my bullshit alarm as soon as I read it, but not being an expert in the field, I was reluctant to come out guns blazing on it.

Also, ABC now has an “enhanced” video that shows Zimmerman’s injuries, which is several lacerations to the back of the head. I don’t think the guy needs to be bleeding out all over the place. I’ve had my bell rung hard enough in my life without drawing blood to know you can still get a concussion without cutting the scalp. Also in that article:

In a letter to U.S. Department of Justice officials, Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton allege that State Attorney Norm Wolfinger met with the Sanford police chief within hours of the teen’s death and that together they overruled a detective’s recommendation that Zimmerman be charged with manslaughter. The letter claims a lead investigator filed an affidavit stating that he didn’t find Zimmerman’s story credible.

Wolfinger called the allegations “lies” and said no meeting took place.

“I’m outraged by the outright lies contained in the letter,” Wolfinger said in a statement. “I encourage the Justice Department to investigate and document that no such meeting or communication occurred.”

It’s been rather amazing how much of what the family has said in public have turned out to be outright fabrications. The family has very little credibility left with me at this point, especially since I was originally quite sympathetic to the idea of taking the case to a grand jury to evaluate the evidence. I still think that’s the right thing to do in this case, but my sympathy for the family diminishes with every fabrication. I tend to give grieving families the benefit of doubt, but I don’t like being outright lied to. The lawyer over at Crayfisher notes:

On another topic, I have seen a number of posts bemoaning how the “wingnuts” are smearing Tayvon Martin and defending his killer. According to these people anyone who casts doubt on Zimmerman’s guilt must be a wingnut.

Since when is defending accused criminals a wingnut activity?

This has been driving me bonkers too, that the left has essentially taken the position that Zimmerman is guilty before his case has even gone before a jury. I think blowhards like Sharpton would be happy to lynch Zimmerman in the media if it means Sharpton gets to be relevant again. I believe the reason the NAACP has been, comparatively speaking, the voice of reason here is they probably understand that if this case blows up in a big way, it’ll hurt Obama. Rightly or wrongly, I think a lot of Americans viewed Obama as an opportunity to move beyond the politics of race. This case is not only bringing that back to the forefront, it has the potential to set race relations back decades. For people like Sharpton, that translates into increased relevance, but I don’t think that’s a good thing for this country.

97 Responses to “Zimmerman Case Roundup”

  1. ephilly says:

    No wonder why there are very little comments on your posts. How has the family been discredited lol. Zimmerman has been discredited. This case is nothing more than an asshole picked a fight with someone-Zimmerman, started to lose the fight and than snapped an gunned down the winner. You oddly report on the bad things Martin did, but failed to question why a 28 year old is an “aspiring cop” (I have a Criminal Justice degree and I took the paralegal route, but many of my classmates completed law enforcement training by age 21), has had three run-ins with law enforcement for VIOLENCE, and is claiming that a 17 year old saw HIS gun and told him that he was “going to die tonight”…really??? I was born and raised in NYC and I don’t know anyone that tough. I know mob members that will cry like a baby if someone was armed with a gun. Of course idiots like you fall for the “He attacked me for no reason” b.s. Why the hell would Martin attack someone who was close to his size. I am 5’6” and 130 pounds. If I am looking for a victim, wouldn’t it be a 4’11” 90 pound person? Not someone who could take me and possibly identify me, since my father lives in that GATED community.

    • Sebastian says:

      Given it just went up a few minutes ago, it’s hardly surprising there are few comments. I see little reason to try arguing with you, because you’ve already made up your mind to convict this guy based on what the media has told you. You know what Zimmerman is saying is false? How? What’s your evidence? Witness statements and evidence backs up his accounting of things. Is it just a hunch? We don’t lock people in prison based on hunches in this country.

      As far as the family. They claimed he had skittles and iced tea, yet no one can find a source for this in the police reports.

      The family claimed something the state prosecutor flat out called a lie in the very article I’ve cited.

      You’re also citing the narrative that Zimmerman was much larger, which is also turning out to be another fabrication, if you examine actual facts.

      The family said he was a model student, which has turned out to be another lie.

      And I should note that none of this has any bearing on the guilt or innocence of George Zimmerman, but when you choose to try a man in the media before his case has even gone before a jury, you don’t get act outraged when other people start digging.

      • Dirk Diggler says:

        the lawyers representing the family are well known Florida trial whores. They don’t care about the family. This is about free advertising, pure and simple. The quicker this case goes away, the sooner they can get back to chasing ambulances.

        • ephilly says:

          Not trying to be mean, but I see very little responses on any of your Posts. I am not convicting this guy. If anything I was feeling a little sorry for him until HIS story started to change. Where in the Police report did it say “He told me I was going to die tonight after he spotted my gun?”

          Why do you fail to mention that Chris Serino wanted to investigate this case further? Zimmerman supposedly had to get out of the car to check the name of the street…really in a community that he patrolled for over 2 years??? I can tell you the name of every street in a one mile radius of my house because I walk a lot in a major Urban environment.

          Listen, Martin is not an innocent kid. However, I don’t believe that Zimmerman saying “It was simply a case of self defense cuts it. There was a fight that that NO ONE knows who initially caused. Where is your conclusive evidence that Zimmerman DID NOT cause the fight- his word, ??? LOL.

          What witnesses have come forward and said I was outside smoking a cig and I saw a kid come out of nowhere, strike Mr. Zimmerman, tossed him to the ground, bang his head and Mr. Zimmerman after yelling help, shot him as a last resort???????? The only witness who witnessed the fight saw it AFTER it started.

          You are right the Martin family attorneys are media whores- I will give you that one. What about the State Prosecutor though- LOL?

          Where are the pictures of the spot where Zimmerman had his head banged that shows blood on the ground?

          Where are the toxicology reports on Zimmerman (which could discount any chances he was drunk or high during this occurrence?) (A report was done on Martin)?

          If he said he got out to check the street signs and was till near his car…where are the photos that show how far away from the incident his car was?

          Why would the Prosecutor’s office declare there was not enough evidence to go further prior to the CONCLUSION of an autopsy and a door to door check to determine if any of the neighbors spotted anything?

          • Dave says:

            Come post about this after the grand jury next week.

          • Sebastian says:

            If anything I was feeling a little sorry for him until HIS story started to change. Where in the Police report did it say “He told me I was going to die tonight after he spotted my gun?”

            The police have not released the deposition they took from Zimmerman the night of the shooting after they arrested him and took him to the station for questioning. I believe that statement came from a leak within the State Attorney’s office.

            Listen, Martin is not an innocent kid. However, I don’t believe that Zimmerman saying “It was simply a case of self defense cuts it. There was a fight that that NO ONE knows who initially caused. Where is your conclusive evidence that Zimmerman DID NOT cause the fight- his word, ??? LOL.

            I’m completely open to the idea that Zimmerman started the fight. Who started the altercation is the big ??? in this case. But without a witness to how it started, how would you, as a prosecutor, prove it wasn’t self-defense? It’s the state that carries the burden in cases like this, not the defendant. The state has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.

            Where are the pictures of the spot where Zimmerman had his head banged that shows blood on the ground?

            Not released to the public. The Grand Jury will likely see them.

            Where are the toxicology reports on Zimmerman (which could discount any chances he was drunk or high during this occurrence?) (A report was done on Martin)?

            He should have had a toxicology screen run on him. That was poor policing on the part of the SPD.

            Why would the Prosecutor’s office declare there was not enough evidence to go further prior to the CONCLUSION of an autopsy and a door to door check to determine if any of the neighbors spotted anything?

            The Prosecutor’s office needs probable cause to bring charges and issue a warrant for arrest. You have to wait for some evidence that offers probable cause. Until you have that evidence, if you charge someone or arrest them, you’re violating their civil rights. It’s not a matter of arresting and holding someone on mere suspicion, until you gather all the evidence. The defendant is an innocent man in the eyes of the law until you prove his guilt in a court of law, and he’s entitled to that presumption.

          • Sigivald says:

            So, uh… what does count of replies to a post matter, exactly?

            Not seeing the connection. Other than, I guess, an attempt to poison the well somehow by an accusation of unpopularity? I’m puzzled as to what other point there might be.

            (Also, “LOL” is not how grownups argue. That might work on Facebook or when preaching to the choir, but appeal to ridicule is a fallacy.

            Would it help convince you if Sebastian appended a LOL to his claims?

            I suspect it would not. Yet by your actions you imply that you think it helps your points. Suffice it to say that your “laugh test” sort of reaction is not universally shared.)

            I won’t touch any of your “factual” questions because it’s not worth the effort, all things considered. But the meta-questions about fallacies and argumentation might illuminate someone else, at least.

            (Not that fallacies prove you wrong, of course – but they suggest either lack of confidence in the argument, or not even realizing those are fallacies.

            Neither one of those things is something you want, if you want your arguments to be effective.

            A strong argument doesn’t need fallacies woven in – and a rigorous thinker avoids them automatically, because when a rigorous reader sees them, they backfire.)

            • ephilly says:

              Sorry, perhaps I should not “LOL”. I did not realize this was the Wall Street Journal, where we had to use the utmost professionalism. What fallacies? I am ASKING basic questions that I am asking for real answers to. Of course you will not touch my “factual” questions because the Sanford Police Dept. DID not conduct these basic investigations and no one has the answers to them…why the hell else would the FBI need to be called in, Bill Lee stepped down temporarily and Angela Corey (State Attorney from a separate district) have to be called in (This is a FACT)…because the Sanford Police were doing an awesome job??? Again, Sebastian said the family’s attorneys were media whores…and I agreed with him. I asked him why was the investigation shut down so early-which the Prosecutors office has a responsibility to fully investigate and he has not given me a good clear answer. How was there not Probable cause considering NO ONE saw the start of the altercation??? Of course you can make a Self-Defense claim when the other party is DEAD and there are no witnesses around.

              Some of the neighbors who are now being interviewed have said themselves that the Police did not ask them if they knew anything surrounding the incident around the time period it occurred and they bought their witness information to light when they realized the case was being re-examined. Do you need me to show you video footage of the neighbors being interviewed well after the incident that claim this occurred?

              How can he not be biased by blasting the family attorney and not the original Prosecutor for dropping the ball on the case??? Also, Craig Sonner, the lawyer for Zimmerman said himself that the “Stand Your Ground” does not apply in this case but it is still a Self Defense claim. The reason why the Stand Your Ground Law does not apply in this case is because Zimmerman approached the kid first and I guarantee you that he did not politely ask the kid why he was there and a scuffle broke out. His Attorney is not even testing the waters with that defense.

              • Sebastian says:

                Some of the neighbors who are now being interviewed have said themselves that the Police did not ask them if they knew anything surrounding the incident around the time period it occurred and they bought their witness information to light when they realized the case was being re-examined. Do you need me to show you video footage of the neighbors being interviewed well after the incident that claim this occurred?

                I think I’ve seen that video, but the neighbors didn’t see how the scuffle started. Without a witness to that, the prosecution has no evidence to disprove Zimmerman’s accounting of things.

                Of course you can make a Self-Defense claim when the other party is DEAD and there are no witnesses around.

                Yes, you can. If the police can’t find evidence or witnesses to disprove a defendant’s accounting of things, it’s possible for a guilty man to go free. But that’s how the system works.

                Also, Craig Sonner, the lawyer for Zimmerman said himself that the “Stand Your Ground” does not apply in this case but it is still a Self Defense claim. The reason why the Stand Your Ground Law does not apply in this case is because Zimmerman approached the kid first and I guarantee you that he did not politely ask the kid why he was there and a scuffle broke out. His Attorney is not even testing the waters with that defense.

                Stand your ground isn’t relevant in this case in either accounting of what happened. This is mostly a case of whether Zimmerman was justified, and that hinges on whether he was faultless (in other words, did he initiate the altercation). Words alone aren’t enough to surrender faultlessness under the law, unless the words are threats. In other words, if Zimmerman went up to Martin and insulted his mother, and Martin decked him, Martin initiated the scuffle, and has fault legally. If Zimmerman went up and grabbed Martin to detain him, then Zimmerman has fault legally and can’t claim self-defense. In fact, Martin could claim self-defense in that instance.

                But prosecutors have to prove these things with evidence and witnesses. It’s not enough to just have a hunch about how things went down.

                • ephilly says:

                  I apologize for being rude earlier. You are actually one of the few people who give intelligent, reasonable, and well thought out responses. I was wrong- it does not appear that you are taking either side…you are just weighing everything out fairly.

                  • Arnie says:

                    And that’s why I love this blog! I’ve learned a lot here from Sebastian, his wife, and his commenters. They do their research; they make me do mine. They make me think!

                    Welcome to the pagunblog, ephilly!

          • Zermoid says:

            Some of us have better sense than to flap our lips about things we really know nothing about.

            That’s why there aren’t alot of posts.

      • politicsbyothermeans@yahoo.com says:

        Why is it that something about wrestling with a pig comes to mind here?

        • I was actually thinking of Heinlein’s famous observation, “Never try to teach a pig to sing. It won’t work and it annoys the pig.”

          • ephilly says:

            Of course that’s what people say when they can’t explain Zimmerman’s lame story in every post I have visited. Even the author of this post admits that the Prosecutor’s office made mistakes and the truth will never be known.

            • Sebastian says:

              Actually, I have to take back what I said about the Tox screen. To draw blood from someone you need a search warrant, which requires probable cause. If the prosecution had probable cause to draw blood. Probably why the cops didn’t do a Tox screen.

              Nonetheless, Zimmerman should have consented to one. If you’re clean, it’ll only help your case.

              • ephilly says:

                Did they have Probable cause on Trayvon Martin? One was conducted on him- what crime did he commit that night to give them Probable cause to conduct one?

                • Sebastian says:

                  They can do a toxicology screen on a dead person as part of an autopsy. Dead people can’t be charged with crimes, so bodies don’t have the same protections legally.

              • Harold says:

                If you’re clean, it’ll only help your case.

                However “clean” includes never eating poppy seeds (they cause opiate false positives). I see risks as well as benefits and so I can’t agree with the end of your sentence.

    • Dirk Diggler says:

      the father does not live there. He was visiting his fiance. Big difference.

    • FatWhiteMan says:

      “I grew up in NYC”

      ‘Nuff said.

  2. DevsAdvocate says:

    The more details come out, the more vindicated I feel in defending Zimmerman’s actions and innocence. The problem here is the media ‘afterglow’. Even when all the details are released and (if) the Grand Jury clears Zimmerman, the media will always refer back to this story by their narrative. They will always look back on it as the time ‘a 26 yr old white man shot a 17 yr old black kid, supposedly, in self defense’. They’ll never accurately report it as it will hurt their credibility.

  3. Pat says:

    I’m still stuck on the fact that the nearest convenience stores selling Skittles and Iced Tea are not really all that “convenient” for a kid on foot in the rain.

    Google the address and search for stores – then do Street View to the nearest ones to see where he’d have been walking…

    Just sayin’

    • ephilly says:

      Who knows why he went there. Was there evidence he committed a crime on the way or back from the store? Again…You don’t find it weird that Zimmerman says Martin looks like he was on drugs or something, when there were no drugs found in his system. Also- you find it credible that a 17 Year old sees that someone is armed and they say to the armed person “I am going to take your piece and you are going to die tonight” and after he is shot he says “You got me” WOW. Sounds like something out of a Spaghetti Western. Also as Martin is slamming Zimmerman’s head, he also reached for the gun, all the while talking to him at the same time about how he was going to die that night.

      • Jake says:

        You don’t find it weird that Zimmerman says Martin looks like he was on drugs or something, when there were no drugs found in his system.

        Just out of curiosity, do you have a source for that assertion? As far as I am aware, the results of Martin’s autopsy – including the tox screen – have not been released.

        you find it credible that a 17 Year old sees that someone is armed and they say to the armed person “I am going to take your piece and you are going to die tonight” and after he is shot he says “You got me”

        Where are you getting that? Again, I’m not aware of any verifiable claims that Martin saw Zimmerman’s gun before the actual physical altercation started.

        I’m not saying you’re wrong or right on either of those claims. But I would like to know what sources you’re basing them off of, because only two people know what really started the fight. One of them is dead, and there doesn’t appear to be any actual evidence to disprove the other one’s story.

        • ephilly says:

          To be fair, the claims regarding the autopsy came from Martin’s family-which they could be lying. The statement about Martin seeing the gun came from Zimmerman’s brother and his father-that is why he is claiming Self Defense because Martin tried to take his gun and he thought he would use it on him.

          • Jake says:

            My understanding of Zimmerman’s story was that his gun came uncovered during the fight, and Martin then tried to grab for it. Unfortunately, I’m having a hard time finding the actual statement, and – considering how badly they’ve lied and manipulated the story so far – I trust “excerpts” and “quotes” from the MSM about as far as I can throw the whole planet.

            But, again, the only thing we have to go on is Zimmerman’s story – at this point there is no contradictory evidence that we know of.

            • ephilly says:

              Google the Brother- RObert Zimmerman on Piers Morgan and George Zimmerman father’s interview and you should be able to find their interviews.

    • Harold says:

      As has been noted before, this is easily explained by his wanting some privacy to talk to his girlfriend. Whether he went to a convenience store, whether he bought anything there or consumed it on the way back, even if he littered if he did the latter, isn’t really relevant to the case (if he lied about where he was going and what he was doing and was instead just going to talk to his girlfriend wouldn’t particularly cast aspersions on his character).

    • Ronnie says:

      I actually did use Google to determine the address of the nearest convenience store – a 7-11 – to the location of where Trayvon Martin was staying on the night of his death. The address of this 7-11 store in Sanford, Florida, is 1125 Rinehart Road. According to a map on this page of wagist.com –

      Evidence that Trayvon Martin Doubled Back

      – Brandy Green’s townhouse is located in the 2800 block of Retreat View Circle in Sanford, Florida. This townhouse is where Trayvon Martin was staying on that rainy night in February when he supposedly went out on foot to buy a bag of Skittles and a can of Arizona Iced Tea. Brandy Green is the fiancee of Tracy Martin, who was Trayvon Martin’s father.

      I used Google Earth to calculate the overall distance of the most likely and shortest route between Brandy Green’s townhouse and the 7-11 store on Rinehart Road. I came up with a round trip total of 1.8 miles.

      The questions which remain are these: Would Trayvon Martin really have been willing to walk a total of almost two miles at night and in the rain just for a bag of candy and a can of iced tea? Or, was this relatively lengthy walk to a 7-11 just a cover story that Trayvon Martin gave to his parents and/or caregiver(s)? Furthermore, has anyone bothered to investigate with the employees of this 7-11 store on Rinehart Road in Sanford Florida as to whether Trayvon Martin was seen by anyone there on the night of this shooting, or if this 7-11 store’s security cameras recorded Trayvon Martin being there on that night?

      • ecurb says:

        I take longer walks than that just to get out of the house. And if I’m a guest in someone else’s house, I try to give them as much privacy as I can.
        There’s nothing sinister about taking a walk, but checking out the 7-11 would be a good idea. It’s always best to confirm even the most trivial parts of a case with actual evidence.

      • ephilly says:

        Again, why are you calling the victim’s character into question and not examining why George Zimmerman had three contacts with the Police due to VIOLENCE/AGGRESSIVE behavior and he was never arrested or punished.

        • Heather from AK says:

          If your comment about arrest was referring to the earlier incidents, I believe he was arrested, charges filed, and the case was pleaded down to a minor charge. If it was referring to this particular case, then yes, Zimmerman was arrested, but charges have not yet been filed.

          • ephilly says:

            In essence, what I am trying to say is if people are wondering what the kid was up to that night, we must also take into consideration that if Zimmerman is claiming self defense in the form of the kid came up to him and hit him for no reason…is it that far fetched to believe that with Zimmerman’s history of aggressive behavior he tried to detain the teen while waiting for the cops, the teen took it the wrong way like ANYONE else would if they were not doing anything wrong and someone grabbed them. I just have a hard time believing that someone’s luck is that bad that the person who they called 911 on for looking “suspicious”, would all of a sudden target them and hit them for absolutely no reason. Zimmerman is leaving a few details out to help his case. Is he a malicious murderer, I don’t think so. Do I think he bit off more than he could chew that night and snapped that night-perhaps.

            • Heather from AK says:

              Both options are possibilities, as most people on this blog would agree. Either person involved could have been the one to start the aggression. As I’ve said before, I doubt that enough information exists to prove one way or the other beyond a reasonable doubt. If that is, indeed, the case, then Zimmerman should be found not guilty.

              • ephilly says:

                I agree with you. Unfortunately if the cops had went door to door that night and tried to piece together or the differing witness statements, as well as conduct a full on investigation that should have taken weeks-perhaps months, we would not have these questions. If they did forensic tests underneath Zim’s nails or hands they could have determined whether or not he did hit the kid back due to DNA (which could disprove or strengthen his self defense claim), etc.. Even if Zimmerman is not charged, the Sanford Police might as well declare bankruptcy now because they botched the case.

            • Jake says:

              is it that far fetched to believe that with Zimmerman’s history of aggressive behavior he tried to detain the teen while waiting for the cops, the teen took it the wrong way like ANYONE else would if they were not doing anything wrong and someone grabbed them.

              In fact, several of us had advanced that theory (or similar theories) in previous comment threads. I think that it’s faded to the background for the simple reasons that a) there’s no actual evidence to support it, b) it’s been discussed to the point of repetition without any new information that would support it, and c) the media’s lies about both Zimmerman and Martin, and about pretty much everything in this case, have caused many people to hold back on discussing any theories not supported by verifiable witness statements or physical evidence.

              In fact, if you go back to the early posts on the topic, you’ll find that most people were condemning Zimmerman until the police reports and other information came out showing how badly the media was deliberately twisting the story just to make him look bad.

              • ephilly says:

                Of course there is no evidence because people are taking his word that this did not happen. I had to take a restraining order out on someone who hit me first (there were witnesses) and I actually hit the person back. Do you think I admitted that when I went to court. Hell No. I didn’t lie about it either, I just omitted that part. Guess what…I obtained the order.

                I am not saying he is a bad person, I have a lot of street smarts to know based on interviews given by his father and brother that no 17 year old is going to see an armed person, reach for the gun and tell the armed person “You are going to die tonight” This is what Zimmerman’s family said that he stated to them within 24 hours after the incident (watch thier interviews).

                Therefore, I am the opposite of everyone else. I gave his account the benefit of the doubt until I heard that Martin supposedly told him he would kill him with his OWN gun…really? Sounds like he is trumping up his own self-defense claims by saying Martin went for the gun and he HAD to use deadly force because of this.

        • Ronnie says:

          I am calling Trayvon Martin’s character into question because I keep seeing more and more evidence to support the notion that Trayvon Martin knocked George Zimmerman to the ground and did not just stop there. Trayvon Martin then opened up a can of whoop-ass on George Zimmerman while George Zimmerman was still down on the ground. So, George Zimmerman used his gun to end Trayvon Martin’s violent assault upon him, rather than just lie there and be beaten bloody into a coma, or worse, such as being beaten bloody to death by Trayvon Martin, letting Trayvon Martin take his gun away and getting shot himself with it, etc.

          I have also seen plenty of evidence to suggest that Trayvon Martin was more of a wannabe “gangsta thug” type with gold teeth grilles and tattoos on the last day of his life, who was on a ten-day suspension (Suspensions for as long as this are usually for very serious violations as far as I know.) from his high school at the time, who was also rather tall and athletic, rather than having been some straitlaced, choir boy, honor-roll-student type, who was also puny and harmless. This is precisely why I believe that only dated photos of Trayvon Martin at age 14 or so have been released to the media by his parents. This image of Trayvon Martin as a sweet and scrawny prepubescent boy in a red Hollister t-shirt is the only image that his family, the libtard media, and the racial poverty pimps (Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, et al) all want us to think of as we try to play Monday morning quarterback with this case.

          I have also looked into the deal with George Zimmerman’s prior arrests. One of them involved him assaulting an ATF agent. I have read that George Zimmerman successfully competed a pre-trial program for this offense, which in turn resulted in the charge being dropped. I have also read that George Zimmerman had to attend anger management classes as a part of this program. I have also read that George Zimmerman’s other two police encounters involved domestic disputes, but neither one resulted in convictions because the charges were dropped in both cases. Now, is there anything in George Zimmerman’s past, police-related or otherwise, to suggest that he was some racist redneck who was just looking for an excuse to shoot some black kid in the neighborhood? So far, my answer to this question would have to be a resounding, “no, not at all.”

          • ephilly says:

            What evidence have you seen concerning the “START” of the altercation. Can you give me a link to that source? I am waiting. All the witnesses (whose stories all contradict eachother by the way) only saw the altercation after it started.

            Again I ask: What evidence have you seen concerning the “START” of the altercation? I don’t hink he is a racist at all. When did I say that??? I said I believe he tried to detain the kid while waiting for the cops and the kid took this as a threat and could have hit him. Again-what evidence do you have that the kid committed a crime on THAT NIGHT. You mean to tell me you are going to discount Zimmerman’s history of aggression, which I believe makes him seem like he is the type who is capable of running up to someone and grabbing them without announcing who he is. He is a wannabe cop.

            • Ronnie says:

              Here’s some evidence that I know of regarding the “START” of the altercation between Trayvon Martin and George Zimmerman: What the funeral director said to the media. He said that Trayvon Martin’s corpse had no marks on it other than the gunshot wound. Just because Trayvon Martin’s corpse was said by this funeral director to have no marks on the hands does not mean anything to me. What this suggests to me is that Trayvon Martin struck the first blow against George Zimmerman and went from there.

              I am a guy who is no stranger to physical altercations. I was on the wrestling team in my youth. I took karate classes back then too. I have also punched some guys in the face in my time, and I have been punched in the face myself. Since I know how to make a fist correctly, I have yet to ever experience any injuries to my knuckles or my hands from punching guys in the face. As far as I know, I have never caused any injuries to another guy’s knuckles with just the bones in my face or the cartilage in my nose. So this is why I was not all that impressed with what this funeral director said.

              Furthermore, when somebody is on top of another person and slamming that person’s head into the ground, which is what happened in this case according to one witness known only as “John,” who is said by the police to have watched this entire altercation from his upstairs window, the person on top is most likely going to remain unscathed until something else happens. Here’s a link about this witness whom I have referred to:

              Witness: Martin attacked Zimmerman

              Regarding the witnesses having stories that contradict one another, I have no idea at all what you are talking about. Maybe you are getting something twisted there. As to there being evidence that Trayvon Martin committed a crime that night, there is evidence a-plenty that he assaulted George Zimmerman. I can say that with certainty. It’s all in the police report and in many of the online media sources.

              At this point, it would be my guess that the whole he-went-out-to-seven-eleven-for-Skittles-Arizona-Iced-Tea part of this story was concocted after the fact by somebody in Trayvon Martin’s family, just like the way they made sure to supply the media only with pictures of Trayvon Martin at age 14 in his red Hollister t-shirt, Trayvon Martin riding on a pony, and Trayvon Martin on a snowboarding trip. It is my understanding that the police report on this shooting mentions nothing about Trayvon Martin having Skittles and Arizona Iced Tea. I have also read about the school report from Trayvon Martin’s high school in Miami, Florida which mentions that Trayvon Martin was caught at school with a bag filled with a dozen women’s gold rings and a burglary tool. (Trayvon Martin claimed that he got this jewelry from an unnamed “friend” – such a cliched thing for a teenager to say; also quite dubious, too.) It would be my belief now that Trayvon Martin actually was casing homes to burgle in the neighborhood when George Zimmerman first saw him that night, and this was why George Zimmerman called 911. George Zimmerman already had prior experience in spotting suspicious activity on the night of this shooting, so this is why I believe that George Zimmerman knew what he was talking about. A fellow neighborhood watch volunteer named Frank Taaffe has said this much since the night of this shooting, and he even credited George Zimmerman for the prevention of a burglary on his own home just one month prior to the shooting.

              If Trayvon Martin was such a helpless and weak little boy as his family and all of these professional racial agitators want us to believe, then why didn’t Trayvon Martin dial 911 himself that night? He had a cell phone, right? Trayvon Martin could have said something like, “Help, there’s some creepy guy I don’t know that’s bothering me!” Instead, Trayvon Martin took a swing at George Zimmerman and knocked him down to the ground. Trayvon Martin could have then ran off and called it a night, but he took it further than that. Trayvon Martin is now dead as a result, but I believe that the blame for this rests with Trayvon Martin.

              • ephilly says:

                I did not read your response because I don’t care. Please show me evidence of a witness that says they saw the start of this thing.

                The witness “John”, Mary Cutcher, Austin Brown, and another anonymous witness all say different things. look it up.

                I am also no stranger to physical altercations and I can assure you sweetheart that no 17 year old is going to see an ARMED person, go for the gun, and tell the arm person that “you are going to die tonight”…doesn’t happen. I also don’t know any “thugs” that are going to randomly attack someone in a GATED community on foot. If I was going to look for a random victim, I wouldn’t do it in an area where my father’s girlfriend lives an get caught within a matter of hours.

                Some people do not call 911 because not everyone thinks to do that in a split second. Trust me. I am a woman and once I had someone grab me on the train, I ran away and I actually ran farther away from my job so they could not identify where I work.

                George Zimmerman tried to grab the kid and detain him and the kid fought back, Zimmerman was losing the fight, his temper got the best of him and he pulled out the gun…as simple as that.

                Why didn’t you investigate Zim’s thug like behavior against his girlfriends, at his place of employment, and have you wondered why his charges were reduced when he hit a cop of all people. My friend did 6 months when he hit a cop and still had to go to treatment afterwards. Why do you ignore Zim’s propensity for violence and snap judgment????????????????????????

                Oh yeah…the same Frank Taafe who hasn’t spoken to Zim in a while who got shut down by Nancy Grace last night. Check it out yourself
                …www.nancygrace.com

                • Jake says:

                  I can assure you sweetheart that no 17 year old is going to see an ARMED person, go for the gun, and tell the arm person that “you are going to die tonight”…doesn’t happen.

                  You’re assuming without evidence that Martin knew Zimmerman was armed. If Zimmerman was carrying concealed – which is likely, since open carry is illegal in Florida unless you are “engaged in, or going to and from, Fishing, Hunting, [or] Camping”, then his gun would not have been visible.

                  I also don’t know any “thugs” that are going to randomly attack someone in a GATED community on foot.

                  I don’t think anyone is claiming that Martin just “randomly” decided to attack Zimmerman. More likely (assuming the scenario where Zimmerman did not initiate physical contact) is that Martin saw Zimmerman following him and was insulted or angered in some way during the verbal confrontation (which I don’t believe either side is denying took place), and then struck Zimmerman.

                  Some people do not call 911 because not everyone thinks to do that in a split second.

                  Agreed. Martin not calling 911 is not grounds for suspicion in and of itself.

                  George Zimmerman tried to grab the kid and detain him and the kid fought back, Zimmerman was losing the fight, his temper got the best of him and he pulled out the gun…as simple as that.

                  It’s only that simple if you assume facts that we don’t have evidence for. If the evidence exists, only the police have it at this point.

                  Tam had the best summary of the case that I’ve seen so far.

                  An honest assessment would say that this is what we know:

                  1) Zimmerman was out doing his neighborhood watch thing and saw Martin.
                  2) He called 911 and followed Martin in his vehicle.
                  3) When Martin walked someplace that Zimmerman couldn’t follow in his vehicle, he got out of his vehicle and followed on foot.
                  4) ???
                  5) In the process of getting his ass beaten, Zimmerman busts a cap in Martin.

                  It appears Zimmerman was on his way to the grocery store, not doing the neighborhood watch thing, but otherwise that’s all correct. The key is what happened at the ??? step, but, well, it wouldn’t be question marks if we knew what happened, would it?

                  • ephilly says:

                    Zimmerman’s father has stated that he was walking back to his truck when Martin attacked him from behind for no apparent reason. Why would the kid be offended if someone briefly was following him…how would he even know, unless somehow Zimmerman made his presence known. Again, Zimmerman’s brother said that when Martin attacked Zimmerman the gun became noticeable during the assault and Martin went for the gun and told him “You are going to die tonight”. Please google his family interviews. They claim that Zimmerman told them this within 24 hours after the shooting.

                    • Jake says:

                      Zimmerman’s father has stated that he was walking back to his truck when Martin attacked him from behind for no apparent reason.

                      Actually, that’s not what he said.*

                      “It’s my understanding at that point Trayvon Martin walked up to him, asked him, ‘do you have a f—in problem?’ George said ‘no, I don’t have a problem,’ and started to reach for his cell phone. At that point, he was punched in the nose, his nose was broken, and he was knocked to the concrete,” Robert Zimmerman said.

                      I believe that the “attacked from behind” bit is yet another media myth that has gained traction.

                      * Supposedly. See my previous comments on exactly how far I trust the media to quote people accurately in this.

                    • Jujube says:

                      Didn’t “attacked from behind” come from the police report?

                • Ronnie says:

                  You did not read my response simply because you know that you are losing this debate, lady. Face it – this whole narrative of Trayvon Martin being an “innocent” sweet little boy victim of a mean ol’ big bad racist white guy with a gun is imploding more and more every day. The libtard media has already been busted at least twice in trying to distort the facts with this case. NBC selectively edited the audio recording of George Zimmerman’s 911 call to make it seem like he was singling out Trayvon Martin for being black, when in fact it was the 911 dispatcher who brought up the subject of the suspicious person’s race rather than George Zimmerman, and ABC played a dirty trick with the security camera video from the sally port of the Sanford Police station to make it SEEM LIKE George Zimmerman had no injuries to the back of his head, when in fact he actually did.

                  Did 13-year-old Austin Brown’s statement to the Sanford Police contradict what the witness known only as “John” said? Nope, not really. The kid told police that he saw a man fitting George Zimmerman’s description lying on the grass moaning and crying for help just seconds before he heard the gunshot that killed Martin.

                  Mary Cutcher has stated that she and her roommate Selma Lamilla went outside AFTER they heard the shot, not before, so why you would believe that what they saw somehow contradicts the eyewitness account of “John” from his upstairs window does not make any sense to me. These two women basically missed out on the entire altercation.

                  As for your belief that Trayvon Martin would not have attacked George Zimmerman first simply because George Zimmerman had a gun that night, it would seem that you are going with an assumption that George Zimmerman had his gun in hand or conspicuously displayed before the altercation had even started. Here’s a clue for you though: concealed carry holsters, the waistbands that support them, and upper garments that cover these things up. Yes, these things all exist. Being that a loaded pistol can easily weigh more than three pounds, people with pistol permits typically own holsters such as these and make a regular use of them, and when they do, other people cannot tell at a glance that they are armed. This would be the overall idea, too. Being that George Zimmerman is such a “wannabe cop” as you like to think, do you really doubt that he would not have bothered with wearing a concealed carry type of holster, and wearing adequate garments for the purpose of concealing his gun, just like the undercover cops do?

                  I don’t think for even a minute that Trayvon Martin was a “wannabe thug” looking for a random victim to mug or assault on the night he was shot. Instead, I think that Trayvon Martin was a “wannabe gangsta” looking for an unoccupied home or two to burgle some more jewelry that he could then sell for cash, just like those women’s gold rings that he was caught with at his high school without having any plausible explanation other than the, “I’m holding these for my friend,” excuse. George Zimmerman apparently took notice of Trayvon Martin casing houses in the neighborhood that night. He had seen this type of thing before according to his neighbors. George Zimmerman then dialed 911 and dared to go ask Trayvon Martin what he was doing. Trayvon Martin then got pissed off by being questioned like this, decided to beat up George Zimmerman for it, and the rest is history.

                  Why you decided to keep running further away rather than dial 911 after somebody grabbed you on a train is your business – I wasn’t there. It might not have been such a good idea on your part to do only this and nothing else though, because I am guessing that whoever grabbed you on the train was never arrested for that, right?

                  I already covered why George Zimmerman’s charge was dropped after he shoved the ATF agent – he was allowed to enter a pre-trial intervention program, and he completed it successfully. Usually, only first-time offenders get accepted into these programs, and these programs are not always available in every single instance as far as I know. Maybe your friend who had to do six months had prior convictions. I also happen to know that a guy can get hit with a domestic violence charge for something as little as spitting on his spouse or throwing his car keys at her. Maybe that was why George Zimmerman’s domestic violence cases were both dismissed. As for George Zimmerman being violent at work, it seems to be nothing more than just hearsay and/or rumor from “unnamed sources” as of now, so I don’t place any credence in it.

                  I don’t know where you get this notion that Frank Taaffe is not a close friend and/or neighbor of George Zimmerman who has not seen him for a long time. Perhaps you are confusing Frank Taaffe with Joe Oliver? I did watch a video on Youtube of Frank Taaffe on Nancy Grace’s show, and all I saw there was Nancy Grace badgering this guy relentlessly, and then cutting off his microphone. Is that what you meant by him being “shut down” by Nancy Grace? Being bullied by the host and another guest on her show, and then silenced?

                  I also watched a video on the CNN website of Frank Taffee on Soledad O’Brien’s show, and this is where I saw Soledad O’Brien repeatedly trying to bait Frank Taaffe into saying that George Zimmerman was engaged in racially profiling Trayvon Martin on the night of the shooting. Frank Taaffe did not bite at this, however. Frank Taaffe seemed to be quite consistent with what he was trying to convey to the CNN audience, which is that his neighborhood has had nine burglaries in the last 15 months, and that the suspect had a description similar to that of Trayvon Martin in each and every case.

                  It’s like I said at the top already – the libtard media’s narrative on this Trayvon Martin shooting is imploding more and more each and every day. This is likely not going to end well, either. By this, I mean that no matter what happens, there will probably be another massive riot like there was in 1992 after the acquittal of the cops for beating the violent career criminal, Rodney King, and the libtard media will be just as culpable for fomenting this one as they were for the one back in 1992.

                  • Jujube says:

                    You realize that Frank Taaffe’s comments to Soledad O’Brien are the very definition of “racial profiling,” right?

                    • Ronnie says:

                      You call it “racial profiling” – I call it stating the facts. Frank Taaffe simply stated the facts on the demographics of the burglars in his neighborhood over the previous 15 months. Sanford, Florida has one of the highest crime rates in America for a city of its size. This is a verifiable fact. Nine out of the eleven “career offender” criminals profiled on the Sanford, Florida Police Department’s web site are black. This is also a verifiable fact. That works out to about 82% of the “career offender” list in Sanford, Florida, but the overall black population of Sanford, Florida is just 30.5%, which is also a verifiable fact. Facts such as these are apparently “hate facts” to Soledad O’Brien and the other libtards on CNN.

                    • Jujube says:

                      It’s a fact that most serial killers are white men. Does that mean that you should be singled out as a potential serial killer simply because you are a white man?

                    • Natassia says:

                      Most serial killers are white because most people in America are white. Big deal. What matters is proportion. Is the proportion of white people in America equal to the proportion of serial killers who are white? What you discover may surprise you.

  4. Rydak says:

    One of the things that I find amazing are the number of people who HAVE been killed in clear cut homicidal manor, with heavy overtones of race bias and I see no such “Zimmerman/Martin” effect. If you read the news , local or national, its amazing the body count. Where are all these left wing bleeding hearts?

    • ephilly says:

      Some stories get more press than others. I have a friend who was kidnapped when I was a kid. Where was her story. Elizabeth Smart’s story was all over the news for years. Jon Benet’s story, Jaycee Dugard. Who knows why some people are deemed more important than others.

    • Jujube says:

      How did this become a left wing/right wing issue? Some of the non-bleeding hearts that Sebastian has been linking to are actually left wingers. Criminal defense attorneys? A lot of them are liberals, not conservatives.

  5. Jujube says:

    I’m still struck by the number of gunnies who won’t admit that Zimmerman probably pulled his gun out on that dark walkway chasing the suspicious Martin. Most gunnies aren’t quick draw artists. When they go into an area expecting the worst (check Weer’d’s post on his experience with someone acting crazy in the street), they pull out their guns because that is being prepared. Not only that, the whole premise behind the entire open carry movement is that display of a gun is enough to ward off criminals.

    The whole idea that the armed Zimmerman was just wandering around in the dark with someone he said had “his hand in his waistband” is just nuts. Police don’t go into dark alleyways without being prepared. Zimmerman was prepared too. That’s why Zimmerman carried a gun.

    • ephilly says:

      I also find it weird that he patrolled that neighborhood for 2 years and had to get out of his car to check the street names. I can tell you every single block within one mile of me within a split second, I would not have to get out of my car to do it. Why did he have to get out of the car to do that? Couldn’t he see it from inside his car where he was when he spotted Martin?

      • Jujube says:

        I read that he was looking for the house number, so it makes even less sense that he would be in the backyard area.

        • Sebastian says:

          He got out of his car to follow the kid. If I were the prosecutor, I think the 911 tape where he admits to following the kid destroys any claim he might have made to be looking for a street number. But that doesn’t really get me anywhere, other than in impugning his credibility if I want a jury to believe something else he said might not be true.

      • Jake says:

        I also find it weird that he patrolled that neighborhood for 2 years and had to get out of his car to check the street names.

        Two points on that: 1) I have been running EMS in the same town for 15 years, and I still have to look up some streets, so I don’t find it odd or unbelievable that he might not have been sure what the closest street was, even if it is a small community; and 2) the “looking for a street sign” meme is another media fallacy that has taken hold and become like gospel.

        From what I can peice together from the transcript of his 911 call (verified by listening to the tape): Zimmerman, from his truck, calls 911. During the call, Martin approaches, then “runs”. At this point is when Zimmerman gets out of his truck to follow (which you can hear on the tape). The dispatcher asks if he’s following and then tells him “We don’t need you to do that.” Zimmerman responds with “Okay”. His later statement is that at that point he turned around to go back to his truck. There is nothing on the tape and no witnesses to either corroborate or contradict this claim. From this point, the dispatcher is asking for information about where Zimmerman is to pass to the officers, but Zimmerman is unsure. It sounds like he is unsure of the building number, not the street, but that’s not clear.

        Dispatcher: What address are you parked in front of?

        Zimmerman: I don’t know. It’s a cut through so I don’t know the address.

        You can also see just after that where, when the dispatcher asks for Zimmerman’s apartment number, he states that he’s lost track of Martin.

        Zimmerman: It’s a home it’s 1950, oh crap, I don’t want to give it all out, I don’t know where this kid is.

        As to Jujube’s point, it seems likely that he ended up in the “backyard” area before the dispatcher hinted that he should stop following Martin – i.e., he wasn’t going there to look for a house number, he was already there when the dispatcher asked. If you pull the address up in Google Maps, you can see a sidewalk running between the two rows of townhouses, which is likely a “commons” area for the gated community, and would be consistent with his statement that it was a “cut through”.

        • Jujube says:

          I think he was already there too. From witness testimony, it was a very dark night with no moonlight and there are no lights along the walkways.

    • Sebastian says:

      It could be the case, but someone would have to have witnessed it for it to be relevant in the case. As it is, I would tend to doubt it. People who are quick to draw their guns usually get themselves in trouble pretty quickly. Generally speaking, drawing a gun on someone you aren’t justified in shooting is a crime. Certainly is in Florida:

      http://law.onecle.com/florida/crimes/790.10.html

      • Heather from AK says:

        Indeed, and given the number of 911 calls Zimmerman was documented making, if he had been the type to draw on suspicion, wouldn’t we have already known? Odds are, anyway.

      • TS says:

        Plus, it would be extremely unwise to run around with a gun out after you just sent the police there. It would be also unwise to start a fight that arriving officers could witness. A more believable explanation would be that Zimmerman was trying to detain the suspect for the police, and Martin’s response was to punch him in the nose in self-defense.

        • ephilly says:

          BINGO!!!!!!!!!! This is what I think happened. I think Zimmerman tried to DETAIN Martin and Martin, being a kid from an Urban environment, probably swung at him to get him off of him. For some reason, Zimmerman supporters seem to forget that he was not in uniform that night. How did this kid know who he was. With the heat of the moment, it is possible that Zimmerman forgot to announce who he was. Zimmerman realizing that he could not handle the situation pulled out his gun and shot him.

          • Jujube says:

            Well, there’s a lot to ponder.

            Like others, I can’t see Martin attacking him for no reason whatsoever. It just doesn’t make sense. As far as we know, Martin doesn’t have an aggressive personality – no fights in school, etc.

            • ephilly says:

              I agree. Listen, I don’t know your background. But I was born and raised in a major Urban environment and I have friends of all different races. Every single one of them who was raised in the city do not sit well with Zim’s and his family’s stories due to the following reasons:

              If I am going to look for a random victim, it will not be in a gated community while I was on foot.

              If I do find a random victim, why would I try to beat them to death and not have bought a weapon with me from the jump?? Wouldn’t that make it much easier to KILL them and make it easier for me to get away without getting caught?

              Last but not least, I am not going to see an armed person and reach for their gun and tell them “You are going to die tonight”- especially when I can get caught within a matter of minutes since I was visiting someone in that same gated community. 17 year olds are dumb, but not that dumb.

          • Tam says:

            BINGO!!!!!!!!!! This is what I think happened. I think Zimmerman tried to DETAIN Martin and Martin, being a kid from an Urban environment…

            Racist.

            I believe it’s possible that it happened that way, and have suggested it myself. I also believe that it’s possible it went down just like Zimmerman said.

            Unlike you and half everybody else on the planet, I’m willing to wait on the grand jury, because lynch mobs are evil and I don’t want to be evil.

            • ephilly says:

              How the hell am I racist? A part Portugese person being racist against a latino. WOW. Please tell me you are a troll. You also say I am lynching him just because I gave an opinion? UHHH… A kid died and people are just giving opinions on what COULD have happened. I am not on any jury. If your 17 year old died and he did not have a history of beating up on people…you would have questions as well.

              • Adam A says:

                I think he meant your assumptions about “an urban youth” were racist. Interestingly, your response was to claim some special race status. Very interesting indeed.

                • ephilly says:

                  I don’t know why they assumed that. Urban Youth understand the streets a little better than country bumpkins and they are going to swing if a stranger tries to grab them. How is that a bad thing??? One of my best friends who has been in a million fist fights is actually a millionaire and he was taught to fight back as well. So what did I say that was so wrong?

                  • BSmedia says:

                    People can be racist to their own race so your logic is flawed. Also a poor attempt to defend the “urban youth” argument. So it is more understandable and justifiable that a youth swings at someone because they grew up in an urban setting? Your generalizations and hyperboles are all over the place.

              • Sebastian says:

                Tam is being snarky… that’s what she does.

              • Natassia says:

                I am “part Portuguese” (half, in fact.) Portuguese is WHITE, specifically Western European. You might be able to get away with calling yourself “of Mediterranean descent.” Latino, however, is heavily of South and Central American Indian descent (ie Mestizo). Different races altogether, therefore it is very possible for a part Portuguese to be racist against Latinos.

  6. Andy B. says:

    Just a thought and an honest question: If the police had initially dressed Zimmerman’s wounds, and kept the swabs to take blood samples, would they have needed a warrant, as they would to draw a sample? Or is an abandoned bloody swab like trash sitting by the side of the street?

    With regard to the competing opinions from voice identification “experts,” I have testified as an expert witness for the defense, in another discipline, and what I know is that we “experts” are paid to defend our employers’ positions. While I did it honestly, I certainly wasn’t looking for weak points in my own arguments or amplifying them. At the other extreme, I once went up against one of my former professors who was an ambulance chaser, who would argue his side’s position simply by testifying “I’m an Ivy League professor and I say so. And I taught that guy. . .”

    The point of that story being, while nothing has reached court yet, this story is already so polarized by people (including me) believing what they want to believe, that one side can be moved to say “Here’s the analysis [that supports my position],” and someone with similar (?) credentials only needs to say “That’s a lot of hot air” and everyone who wants to reject the first expert’s position will run with that.

    I personally will not be satisfied until a grand jury returns its judgment.

    • Heather from AK says:

      Can you test a bloody cloth for drugs? DNA, yeah, but if they can get drugs and whatnot out of just a bloody swab, why does the Dr make me give vials and vials?

      Honest question, I don’t know jack about what’s needed to test blood.

      • Jake says:

        I’m not sure, but I don’t believe so. I think there needs to be a certain amount for them to do the tests and get meaningful results.

        Even if they could, it probably wouldn’t be admissible in court – most states have restrictions on who can and can’t do a “legal” (i.e., useable as evidence) blood draw, and specific procedures that must be followed. I routinely do blood draws for the hospitals I transport to, and they can do alcohol/drug/cardiac/etc. levels from that, but since I’m not on the list of people approved by the court none of those numbers are admissible as evidence (though they may be sufficient to establish probable cause to get a warrant for a legal blood draw). The rules vary from state to state, of course, but I believe most are similar.

      • Harold says:

        Getting a quantitative reading off a “bloody swab” would be very hard, and for such tests to be useful you generally need that. E.g. usually the level of alcohol in someone’s bloodstream matters a lot more than an indication there’s some. And then there’s all those poppy seed opiate false positives.

        Whereas with PCR amplification only a tiny bit of DNA is needed to start and you’re looking for a qualitative result, who’s DNA is this?

        And then there’s the question of marketplace demand. There’s an obvious need for making use of tiny DNA samples, but I wold imagine there’s seldom a need for this, in most cases where it’ll be important a full sample can be drawn. Heree the issue is why wasn’t that done vs. only having little bits of dried blood possibly still available.

        I also question the real need for a toxicology test of Zimmerman, especially if he wasn’t obviously intoxicated on the scene. If you’re like me, being intoxicated is not a mitigating factor in one’s culpability, and unless Florida has a law against carrying while intoxicated (PA doesn’t, right? I’m pretty sure VA doesn’t.) and he was and a prosecutor wanted to either pile on charges or get him for something it doesn’t seem germane to me.

  7. Andy B. says:

    I was just following some of Sebastian’s links above and found the following:

    “But my *GUESS* is that neither Federal nor State prosecutors will be able to find credible experts to green light this evidence. So no audio ex machina for the prosecution.”

    Surely that author jests. Being an expert witness pays well, and per my story above, you can pay somebody with seemingly impeccable credentials to say anything. And what constitutes an “expert” legally, is that the judge accepts them as such. Could you imagine the screams if a judge rejected, say, an Ivy League professor as an expert, no matter how mercenary he/she was known to be?

  8. Kermit says:

    I may be off-base and might have missed these questions –

    – Did Zimmerman actually reside in this subdivision? I can use the County Real Property Appraiser on-line GIS and find a townhome owned by a ‘Zimmerman’ there, but is it this Zimmerman.

    – Did Martin’s Father’s GF reside in this subdivision? Sorry no homes owned in the GF’s published last name. Once saw that she lived elsewhere and numerous times that she did live there.

    – Did the cousin Martin’s Father once said he was with that night reside in this subdivision? Never once saw a claim that cousin lived there.

    Does anybody know if any of these people actually lived in the subdivision?

    My point is that there are no public streets/sidewalks within the subdivision – the SPD made a press release, specifically addressed to the press, reminding them that they are trespassing if they go there. At night that is another matter entirely.

  9. Harold says:

    Here’s the latest bit of “Doesn’t fit the narrative so the MSM won’t report it”:

    In 2010 race-related beating case, George Zimmerman pushed to discipline same officers who investigated Trayvon Martin shooting

    HT Extrano’s Alley.

    One wonders if the snap “judgment” of one of the investigators that night that Zimmerman should be charged was a bit of Blue Wall payback. Or if this helps to explain their choice of what to release once this became a cause célèbre.

    Yeah, this is mostly from Zimmerman’s family, but given how the MSM has taken Martin’s family’s story as gospel, despite their getting caught out with numerous lies … well, what can you say when one of the 3 major legacy networks is now apologizing for their “error” in editing Zimmerman’s 911 call to strongly imply he’s racist?

    • ephilly says:

      Again, what does that have to do with the events of that night? My ex-husband an Italian from Brooklyn loves Asian women, but also thinks Asians are greedy and dirty (he always speaks of how they ate dogs in the 70’s). Therefore, people may not be racist, but they can have pre-conceived notions. The MSM also reported Martin’s run in with the law which EVERYONE knows by now- I have heard this on every station. So how can you act like Martin’s history has been swept under the rug? Natalie Holloway left the resort she was staying on the night she was kidnapped because she got drunk (As reported by her friend). Are you saying she deserved what happened to her?

      Zimmerman said “These assholes…they always get away. What did he mean by “they”…when there is no evidence that Martin was doing anything wrong that night. Maybe he was running because…could it be…a strange adult was following him. Perhaps he thought he was a child molester, etc. Why did Zimmerman not announce who he was?

    • ephilly says:

      Also, why have you not addressed the lies told by Zimmerman’s “friends” who admitted that they have not spoken to him in months prior to the incident. Please also adress why Zimmerman’s father stated during an interview he gave that his son did not receive medical attention. Please listen closely to Zimmerman’s father’s interview.

      Also, why during the father’s interview did he only mention the NAACP, NBC, Al Sharpton, and black organizations as hating their family. What about Nancy Grace and all the other shows headed by whites, Jeb Bush, and the author of the Stand Your Ground Law who state it is not applicable in this case. Isn’t he twisting things as well?

      Why are we to belive anything Zimmerman says?

  10. Harold says:

    Some more about the environment as it were of Sanford, Florida:

    [Drive by] Shootings stir more tension in fearful Florida city

    “Sanford is a small town with big city problems,” [police spokesman Sergeant David] Morgenstern said on Tuesday, when asked about crime statistics in the city with just 119 active duty police officers.

    “Sanford is a difficult area to police,” he said. He stressed that Sanford had just four homicides [out of a population of 53K] or murder cases in 2011, however, and that Martin was the only reported killing so far this year.

    Hmmm, I’d call it a small city, in population it’s about the size of Joplin pre-tornado.

    • Sebastian says:

      4 murders for a town of 53k is a pretty substantial murder rate. We might have one murder a year in my county, which has substantially more population. 4 a year would be all of the suburban ring counties around Philadelphia.

      So 4 murders in a town of 53k sounds like a shitty place to live if you ask me.

      • Harold says:

        Well, with small numbers like that you have to look at the particulars, i.e. one bad domestic incident could skew the statistics, but you’re right, based on ~ 10 minutes with Google limited to calendar year 2011; here’s three relevant links:

        Sanford cops investigate two murders in one day

        Sanford police are investigating another fatal shooting….

        [...]

        This fatal shooting marked the second in Sanford in less than 24 hours.

        Crime Report for Sanford, Florida

        It scores badly, and while I’m not sure for which year the FBI statistics broken down by type are, the property crime rate is very high, twice the nation rate and a lot higher than Florida as a whole. Robbery is also a lot higher (and since these should be rates per 100K population, just divide by two for a total rough number).

        Sanford Crime Rate Report (Florida)

        The hard data in the above is for 2009 and it echoes the detailed statistics for property crimes.

        From other hits I got the impression there’s one really bad part of town, the rest is not so bad.

  11. Matt Ceriale says:

    How did this man ever get a carry permit?

    • Sebastian says:

      Florida, like most states, issues based on objective criteria, and only counts convictions for certain types of serious crime. If the authorities drop charges in exchange for you going through a program for first offenders, that doesn’t count. If Zimmerman had been convicted of what he was arrested for, he’d be prohibited from owning guns, let alone carrying them.

  12. John Blake says:

    SELF DEFENSE IS NOT A CRIME UNDER THE FLORIDA LAW

  13. MollyOkay says:

    This is like the second blog I’ve came across where nobody is pointing fingers or taking sides.. Just having a normal discussion/debate =`].. Buttttt

    I’m still in wonder.. Zimmerman told the police that “nobody” came to his aid when he was yelling for help.. According to “John” he came out, Zimmerman screamed at him for “help” and he told him to stop and he was calling the police!!..!! That night not once did Zimmerman inform the police that “John” saw him get beat…. He reported that no one came to his aid.. && if Zimmerman was on the ground getting beat screaming for help.. Why in the world would “John” yelled for him to stop and threaten to call 911?!?!

    • Harold says:

      Zimmerman told the police that “nobody” came to his aid when he was yelling for help…. That night not once did Zimmerman inform the police that “John” saw him get beat….

      Where did you learn either of these things? Contrary to e.g. the link you posted below, it’s not in the police report that was released by the department before “The office of the State Attorney, 4th Judicial Circuit, State Attorney Angela Coreyhad them take everything down (although there is a FAQ letter with some useful stuff there now).

      According to what’s been unreliably reported of Zimmerman’s account to the police, “John’s” account (as I recall reported contemporaneously to the media), reports from family members to the media more recently, and the fact that they didn’t charge Zimmerman, he was on his back getting beaten by Martin and things got to the point where he could legitimately use deadly force. I.e. he reasonably believe[d] that such force [was] necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself.

      If so, I can see Zimmerman not believing that John’s actions as stated above rose to the level “coming to his aid”. Telling Martin to stop and than he was calling the police, unless they caused Martin to stop his assault, practically amount to nothing, especially since Zimmerman had already called the police and knew they were on the way.

      As for Zimmerman not possibly reporting John seeing him, the sources I’ve read and heard say that in these sorts of confrontations people tend to get “tunnel vision” (sometimes literally), where they’re focusing on the immediate threat to their life, not on details to the side. I submit to you that the way to bet is that that close to 100% of Zimmerman’s attention was on Martin’s assault on him and his fighting back for his life.

      And as noted, I don’t believe we know what Zimmerman said to the police about that sort of thing, it didn’t come up on the scene, which is what the previously released police report covered, ending with their handing Zimmerman over to an Investigator to whom he would have made his detailed statements.

    • Jake says:

      Considering that Zimmerman was (according to both his and John’s account) in the middle of being beaten, the explanation could just be that he simply didn’t hear John yelling at Martin, or that he heard but it didn’t register. He was just a little bit distracted at the time.

  14. MollyOkay says:

    Look at this site.. its nothing major i just want to read your point of views

    http://bcclist.com/2012/03/27/trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-map

    • Harold says:

      Not impressed; see above for stuff that doesn’t to my knowledge exist in the public record as of yet, plus just compare the first map to the Mother Jones supplied transcript of Zimmerman’s call to the police, which I checked against the actual call. Sure, Zimmerman might have tried to intercept Martin as the author admits to speculating, but that’s not what he told the police on the phone at the time.

      We could get into endless speculation of what might have happened; I prefer to deal with what seems to have been reliably reported and then see if that makes sense, which it does.

  15. mike says:

    I appreciate the relatively low amount of flaming and trolling that I’ve read in this blog. This is my first post here, and I hope it’s not considered trolling.

    One thing about a handful of posts I’ve noticed and taken exception with is the seemingly significant number of phone calls to law enforcement Zimmerman made. According to Wikipedia, that community had the police called to it 402 times in the last year or so. If he called 46 of those times that’s barely over 10% of the calls. To me, calling on average less than once a week doesn’t seem unreasonable for a neighborhood watch captain (self-appointed or not).

    • Jake says:

      In fact, those 46 calls were actually over the past seven years, not one year – the “one year” myth was apparently caused by a typo in the original report the police released. So your point is even more true than you originally thought – he called on average every other month, which is certainly not unreasonable for a neighborhood watch captain.

    • Alpheus says:

      How dare you attempt to bring facts into this discussion?!? Troll, troll! Do not feed the trolls! ;-)

      Actually, I’ve been reading Sebastian’s blog for up-to-date information about this incident from the get-go; indeed, I first learned about the incident here–and, for the most part, the discussion has been very civil.

      And your point is certainly valid: Zimmerman’s calling isn’t out-of-the-ordinary, for a Neighborhood Watch Captain. I think the point has been made before, on other posts, but it’s nonetheless an important one to remember when thinking about this incident.

  16. the truth says:

    There’s no use of getting anyone’s blood pressure high! Just know that what ever happened that night Trayvon died, Only the people involved know & sure enough God! So let everything take iti course because if a person does commit a deadly crime & walks free here on planet earth, he/ she won’t be able to do it on judgment day!

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Lies, Liars, Race-Baiters, and the Joys of Thug Life | Daily Pundit - [...] Zimmerman Case Roundup | Shall Not Be Questioned It’s been rather amazing how much of what the family has …
top