17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #35

[Desdemona]

I believe one of the stories the investigator said GZ told them TM circled his car three times. jmo

I believe BD used the word "circled" as a follow-up question after DG answered yes to BD's question as to whether GZ told LE that TM had "run around" his car.

As for the three times? Still clueless as to where that got started.

JMO

 

[Phoenixfla]

“Do you agree that you changed your story?”


That part deals with the "changing" stories................

And what was his reply?

 

[Adrienne37]

Why would he give five separate statements if it was all the same? That would be one statement, not five separate ones, IMO. The police don't take the same statements over and over. They do take separate different statements, though.

The statements shouldn't have changed but it's just as the investigator pointed out, there were people all over milling about and it's very possible that Zimmerman changed his story based on the things he heard.



~jmo~

 

[Desdemona]

“Do you agree that you changed your story?”


That part deals with the "changing" stories................

And GZ's reply under oath to that question was....???

(JMO)

 

[Aedrys]

And what was his reply?

No. But we don't have to believe it. And again, LE does not take the exact same statement five times. If there are five separate statements, then there are differences in each statement.

 

[Just K]

AFAIK, we cannot discuss it yet.

 

[Desdemona]

Why would he give five separate statements if it was all the same? That would be one statement, not five separate ones, IMO. The police don't take the same statements over and over. They do take separate different statements, though.

Maybe because he had nothing to hide and was willing to continue to talk with LE voluntarily without an attorney?? I dunno. JMO

 

[Phoenixfla]

Why would he give five separate statements if it was all the same? That would be one statement, not five separate ones, IMO. The police don't take the same statements over and over. They do take separate different statements, though.

I'm still trying to figure out where five came from.

Just because he gave more than one statement to SPD does not mean that they were differing. I imagine (JMO) that each time he met with SPD he gave a statement. Possibly one at the scene, one at the police station during the several hour interogation, and possibly one or more at a later time. The fact that he gave more than one statement does not mean in of itsself that the statements are contradicting.

 

[tehcloser]

lmbo..........The original post was asking for a LINK about the 5 different stories.....I gave the link.......so now it's "What did he answer?" of course he said he didn't. :floorlaugh:

 

[Nova]

Do you think the State spent a million dollars on prosecution? That was my question. Also, you seem to be implying that the SA office does not proffer an accurate accounting of expenses. Is that what you are saying?

What you suggested, a million dollars, is a far cry from what the SA stated. And a far cry from what the defence spent. It's one thing to have an opinion, it's another to suggest authority in that opinion. The figures the public received are nowhere near what you suggest. I am not accusing you of anything; I addressed your figures. I just want to know how you came by those figures which don't seem to be anywhere near what has been published. Saying they are hiding something is, I guess, at best, speculation unless you have some evidence to that effect.

Again, the million-dollar estimate came from O'Mara, not from me. I merely said it wouldn't surprise me. (As for authority, except for experience with timekeeping procedures at private law firms, I don't know what "authority" I have claimed.)

Yes, I was speculating about DA costs, based on my understanding of human nature. I don't believe any DA is going to brag about how much money she spent to lose a case, so any estimate given after an acquittal is going to be conservative. (IN MY OPINION. Does that help?)

I haven't seen any itemized accountings from either side in the Anthony case. Did the prosecutor itemize all the police personnel available to her plus the coroner's office plus officials at the jail where CA was held (who pored over surveillance tapes), etc. and so forth? How about media representatives? I really don't care enough to wade through hundreds of pages of spreadsheets and timekeeping, but I doubt those costs were included in the estimate.

I've never heard a defense attorney OR prosecutor who didn't acknowledge that the State has tremendous resources at its disposal that are not available to any but perhaps the richest defendants. The training of defense attorneys deals with how to address the disadvantage.

Why are we arguing about this?

 

[Just K]

lmbo..........The original post was asking for a LINK about the 5 different stories.....I gave the link.......so now it's "What did he answer?" of course he said he didn't. :floorlaugh:

Now, please no asking for links and this is just from audio memory but, IIRC, he said something to the effect that it was only three statements

 

[Aedrys]

lmbo..........The original post was asking for a LINK about the 5 different stories.....I gave the link.......so now it's "What did he answer?" of course he said he didn't. :floorlaugh:

Personally, I think he can't keep track of how many versions he told to LE and other people. I think he keeps changing his story, and that's going to end up biting him in the keister at trial.

 

[Adrienne37]

Personally, I think he can't keep track of how many versions he told to LE and other people. I think he keeps changing his story, and that's going to end up biting him in the keister at trial.

Well, if we take the 5 statements that he told to the police, add in the one he told to his father, and add in the one that he told his brother, we would be at Zimmerman 7.0 right now.


~jmo~

 

[tehcloser]

And what was his reply?

BOMBSHELL.....if CRIMINALS always told the TRUTH.....we wouldn't need trials.

 

[Aedrys]

Again, the million-dollar estimate came from O'Mara, not from me. I merely said it wouldn't surprise me. (As for authority, except for experience with timekeeping procedures at private law firms, I don't know what "authority" I have claimed.)

Yes, I was speculating about DA costs, based on my understanding of human nature. I don't believe any DA is going to brag about how much money she spent to lose a case, so any estimate given after an acquittal is going to be conservative. (IN MY OPINION. Does that help?)

I haven't seen any itemized accountings from either side in the Anthony case. Did the prosecutor itemize all the police personnel available to her plus the coroner's office plus officials at the jail where CA was held (who pored over surveillance tapes), etc. and so forth? How about media representatives? I really don't care enough to wade through hundreds of pages of spreadsheets and timekeeping, but I doubt those costs were included in the estimate.

I've never heard a defense attorney OR prosecutor who didn't acknowledge that the State has tremendous resources at its disposal that are not available to any but perhaps the richest defendants. The training of defense attorneys deals with how to address the disadvantage.

Why are we arguing about this?

BBM. That wasn't true for the Casey Anthony case. At one point, there was the very real threat the trial was not going to happen because of budget problems. The judge had to fight to get the funds so that the trial would take place. And after the trial, the state admitted that they didn't have enough in the budget for better presentations of certain evidence during trial. So no, the state doesn't always have unlimited resources, especially not in the economy we've been in for the last few years. Grant it, they do usually have more the defense, I will agree with that, but it's not always unlimited. I do wonder about Florida's budget with this next big trial looming. I hope it's better than when Casey Anthony's case took place!

 

[Desdemona]

lmbo..........The original post was asking for a LINK about the 5 different stories.....I gave the link.......so now it's "What did he answer?" of course he said he didn't. :floorlaugh:

The original post was by rossva:

Just like those who say George Zimmerman has told (at least) five different stories yet ignore requests to show links.

Perhaps it is the word "different" which has caused some confusion?

Different can mean "separate."
Different can mean "differing."

The issue in the OP was that the implication has been presented as a known fact or assumption many times on this board, since the day BD used the number 'five' at the hearing, that GZ has told multiple differing stories, at least five of them. JMO

HTH

 

[Kimberlyd125]

BOMBSHELL.....if CRIMINALS always told the TRUTH.....we wouldn't need trials.

Or, another BOMBSHELL, if everybody charged with a crime were actually criminals (guilty) we wouldn't need trials.

 

[Adrienne37]

That wasn't true for the Casey Anthony case. At one point, there was an argument if the trial was even going to happen because of monetary reasons. The judge had to fight to get the funds to get the trial started. And after the trial, the state admitted that they didn't have enough for better presentations of certain evidence during trial. So no, the state doesn't always have unlimited resources, especially not in the economy we've been in for the last few years. Grant it, they do usually have more the defense, I will agree with that, but it's not always unlimited. I do wonder about Florida's budget with this next big trial looming. I hope it's better than when Casey Anthony's case took place!

Oh yea, I had forgotten about that. This is how we found out that Judge Perry sat in on one of the state committees for budget issues and yes, at the end of the fiscal year, had there not been money that was designated, they would have had to postpone the trial to the next fiscal year which would have started on June 1.


~jmo~

 

[tehcloser]

The original post was by rossva:



Perhaps it is the word "different" which has caused some confusion?

Different can mean "separate."
Different can mean "differing."

The issue in the OP was that the implication has been presented as a known fact or assumption many times on this board, since the day BD used the number 'five' at the hearing, that GZ has told multiple differing stories, at least five of them. JMO

HTH

And, once again...the first part of the quote deals with the changing stories, the second part the number 5...........:banghead: The link I supplied shows where it came from and that it does indeed exist.

 

[Kimberlyd125]

The original post was by rossva:



Perhaps it is the word "different" which has caused some confusion?

Different can mean "separate."
Different can mean "differing."

The issue in the OP was that the implication has been presented as a known fact or assumption many times on this board, since the day BD used the number 'five' at the hearing, that GZ has told multiple differing stories, at least five of them. JMO

HTH

I don't see how anybody that is not "on the inside" of this case can possibly know if there are multiple statements or stories or how they differ.

Giving an exact number and claiming to know is a big stretch IMO.

JMO