17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #30

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
How does that contradict the question? I'm not following you.

Of course GZ never mentioned or admitted to chasing or running after TM.

He was too busy walking back to his car a few minutes earlier, remember? :rocker:

The Huffington Post said:
The pursuit, in the direction of Martin's home, indicates that Zimmerman initiated the confrontation, Gilbreath said, under questioning from Rionda.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...n_1440175.html
But that contradicts what De La Rionda asked at the hearing and that Gilbreath agreed to:
DE LA RIONDA: But you still have, is it not true, a witness who describes someone chasing another person from the area where they ended up... in other words, from where, near where Mr. Martin lived to the area where the murder happened?

GILBREATH: Yes.

To me, what De La Rionda asked implies that the chase was away from where Trayvon was staying while what the HuffPost stated was that the pursuit was towards it. That's the contradiction I am seeing and it changes things a lot if Trayvon were being chased away from home!

At one point you did the calculations on how much time it would have taken GZ to get to the end of the block near the townhouse where the Martins were staying - it was from the idea that Trayvon was "sitting on the back porch" as stated by Tracy Martin's fiance. Once it was realized that she didn't mean it literally you scrapped that idea. The timing worked if I remember correctly, even if the premise it was based on didn't.

But what if Trayvon HAD gotten home or nearly home and GZ showed up right there and cut him off? I keep seeing different ideas for where GZ's SUV was parked - I'd really like to know exactly where it was when LE showed up. That could answer some questions.

IMO, JMO, etc.
 
What exactly makes you think LE already cuffed GZ 3 minutes after the shooting? Do they say when exactly they arrived at the scene?

Um....the police report clearly states 'Time Arrived: 2/26/2012 19:17'

If he wasn't handcuffed as soon as LE arrived, I'd like to know why. Especially considering he was armed and had just MURDERED someone (allegedly). He would need to be contained for the safety of the officers.

IMO
 
I don't know why it's generally believed LE was on the scene 1 minute after the shooting. LE don't say they were on the scene 1 minute after the shooting.

I'm not sure why this is a point to argue. It explicitly lists the arrival time on the police report.

Do you take issue with the report, or the time of the shooting?
 
Who threw the first punch may not be the deciding factor. IMO, the Florida legal decision I use as my signature may supersede or cancel out SYG.

Read my signature (below) and let me know what you think...
Where did you find this, because I'm not seeing it in Ballard v. State? At least not in the Supreme Court appeal.
 
It's hearsay. There was no witness to the phone call. I would give her testimony little weight. She is not an independent witness. She has a dog in this race.

As opposed to whom? George Zimmerman himself? Take away his testimony and we have a scratched head and Murder One. We might as well hang him now.

It's not that the gf's potential bias can't be taken into consideration, but in a case where the ENTIRE defense depends on the word of the killer, pointing fingers at prosecution witnesses and calling "bias" is a knee-slapper! :floorlaugh:
 
It depends on which article is correct. I have not been able to find the tape. We may have to wait for doc dump. CNN transcript could be correct or incorrect as well as Huffington. We have to wait to see the real record is my comment that I followed up with.

In the post I linked to is the entire hearing without commercial breaks. Here's the link from that post by HiHater: http://www.wral.com/news/video/11004815/#/vid11004815

The questions about the witness who saw the chase starts at about 1:47:30 mark.
 
I'm not sure why this is a point to argue. It explicitly lists the arrival time on the police report.

Do you take issue with the report, or the time of the shooting?

You should read the report itself. It says he was dispatched at 19:17 in the text of the report. I think it's clear 19:17 is not when he arrived at the actual scene.
 
The Associated Press ‏ @AP

Reply
Retweet
Favorite
· Open

MORE: #Zimmerman, the neighborhood watch volunteer, left Seminole County jail in Florida around midnight EDT: http://apne.ws/Ii9lLx -JM
 
It's hearsay. There was no witness to the phone call. I would give her testimony little weight. She is not an independent witness. She has a dog in this race.

It's not hearsay at all. She is a witness She heard what Trayvon said and the unknown-to-her man said at the beginning of the final confrontation. Her phone records and Trayvon's phone records have undoubtedly been subpoenaed to confirm that the call took place.

I find her a very believable witness. If she wanted to lie to try to settle the matter, it seems to me she would have had Zimmerman saying something like, oh I don't know, "You're going to die tonight" rather than what she reported.
 
Um....the police report clearly states 'Time Arrived: 2/26/2012 19:17'

If he wasn't handcuffed as soon as LE arrived, I'd like to know why. Especially considering he was armed and had just MURDERED someone (allegedly). He would need to be contained for the safety of the officers.

IMO

Yet reading the actual report it's obvious he was not on the scene at 19:17. He says he was dispatched at approximately 19:17 and while at route dispatch advised him they were receiving reports about shots fired.
So it's obvious he was not on the scene at 19:17 because the shot was seconds before 19:17 and he was still at route and being advised of shots. At 19:17 he was dispatched and was advised of shots fired. It would take him time to park, get out of the car, get to the scene, etc, etc, etc.
 
--it's not crystal clear when LE arrived ON scene.

--their reports state "dispatched at 7:17..." "enroute" at 7:17 the one officer arrived and went to the original call address----which was the clubhouse, got word that 911 calls were coming in due to a shot fired----parked in front of the townhomes, then made his way back to 'the scene"...

--without further clarity---the officers could have arrived ON scene, 1st one, then the other----at 7:19 PLUS..

--giving the photog time to snap the pic.( although that seems so gruesome to me..)
hold on, need to resize image...yikes

It's crystal clear to me...

ETA: can't figure out how to make the picture smaller...it says 7:19 though...
 
It's not hearsay at all. She is a witness She heard what Trayvon said and the unknown-to-her man said at the beginning of the final confrontation. Her phone records and Trayvon's phone records have undoubtedly been subpoenaed to confirm that the call took place.

I find her a very believable witness. If she wanted to lie to try to settle the matter, it seems to me she would have had Zimmerman saying something like, oh I don't know, "You're going to die tonight" rather than what she reported.
It is most definitely hearsay. Whether it falls under an exception is another story.
 
In the post I linked to is the entire hearing without commercial breaks. Here's the link from that post by HiHater: http://www.wral.com/news/video/11004815/#/vid11004815

The questions about the witness who saw the chase starts at about 1:47:30 mark.

Yes but unfortunately they were taking commercial breaks so now since that is the only video I really want to see the court transcript. :banghead:
 
I think we have a problem here in that the police were already on their way. Long before 19:17. When GZ was on the phone with non-emergency they were already dispatched and GZ was told 2x in that call that they were on the way.

How long was that taped conversation with GZ? Anyone? I thought in the early days of our sleuthing it was determined the first officer arrived at 40 seconds after the shooting.
 
They waited to move him in dark of night. And of course today MOM made the statement it would probably be a few days or mid-week.
 
I wonder why that would not be in the CNN transcript? NBC moment?

CNN's transcript only covers what they broadcast. They even left in Carol Costello handling the in and out chat for commercial breaks. Nothing nefarious, just really annoying when they could have transcribed the whole thing to fill in the holes from commercial breaks.

IMO, JMO, etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
236
Guests online
1,841
Total visitors
2,077

Forum statistics

Threads
599,545
Messages
18,096,403
Members
230,875
Latest member
SuzyQuinn
Back
Top