What evidence does the prosecution have?

[tehcloser]

Not sure how anything was out of context. "Cousin" was in parenthesis. The rest hardly needed an explanation, poor as it was.

As for any of it being "a take on daily life" and it's on "most social media", I disagree. If this is a normal take on the daily life of a junior high student, their parents shouldn't be surprised or offended when their kids are caught with guns and drugs, and getting their 16 yr. old girlfriends pregnant. Nothing personal toward TM, just speaking to the sentence in bold above and JMO.

The way it was quoted I thought it was one "tweet", not several. No worries, that's why.

 

[Just K]

Tough friends that would beat up his sister?

My take on that: He enlisted some friends to take care of someone who was giving his sister problems. Down south, brothers have been known to hire a few tough guys to knock on doors and break the knees/legs and elbows/arms, with baseball bats, of guys who beat on their sisters.

This is my theory about GZ's comment about "his boys."

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

Got a statute available for that?



Your first sentence is 100% correct. They have every right to follow someone, just like everyone else.. unless of course you have a statute as mentioned above.

BBM
I'm sure I can find ONE that could fit into what GZ did...also TM has civil liberties, just as GZ does...

It's akin to stalking...

784.048 Stalking; definitions; penalties.—(1) As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Harass” means to engage in a course of conduct directed at a specific person that causes substantial emotional distress in such person and serves no legitimate purpose.(b) “Course of conduct” means a pattern of conduct composed of a series of acts over a period of time, however short, evidencing a continuity of purpose. Constitutionally protected activity is not included within the meaning of “course of conduct.” Such constitutionally protected activity includes picketing or other organized protests.
(c) “Credible threat” means a threat made with the intent to cause the person who is the target of the threat to reasonably fear for his or her safety. The threat must be against the life of, or a threat to cause bodily injury to, a person.
(d) “Cyberstalk” means to engage in a course of conduct to communicate, or to cause to be communicated, words, images, or language by or through the use of electronic mail or electronic communication, directed at a specific person, causing substantial emotional distress to that person and serving no legitimate purpose.
(2) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person commits the offense of stalking, a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(3) Any person who willfully, maliciously, and repeatedly follows, harasses, or cyberstalks another person, and makes a credible threat with the intent to place that person in reasonable fear of death or bodily injury of the person, or the person’s child, sibling, spouse, parent, or dependent, commits the offense of aggravated stalking, a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

more at the link
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...ng=&URL=0700-0799/0784/Sections/0784.048.html

 

[AJ Noiter]

BBM
I'm sure I can find ONE that could fit into what GZ did...also TM has civil liberties, just as GZ does...

It's akin to stalking...

And you'll notice in EVERY occurrence the word "repeated" is also shown. This is not accidental. What I asked for was a single statute or case where someone was jailed for simply following, NOT stalking.

To put this shortly, I'm tired of the circular argument "he was following" or somehow trying to say that Mr. Zimmerman followed Mr. Martin was an illegal act. If you can not show me how following (not STALKING) is illegal then can we PLEASE stop acting as if it is an illegal act? The same for chasing, failure to id, and all of the other legal things that people have been throwing about.

Edit: To be more specific, I mean like the example where I started asking for the statute, where the person stated "No one had a right to follow Mr. Martin that night." which is wrong.. EVERYONE has a right to follow Mr. Martin that night.

 

[MaryAnn]

Sure we do, the GF claims that TM said "Why are you following me?" Before that there was no confrontation, just a lot of watching (or following depending on your take)

I don't believe that asking someone "are you following me" is a confrontation?

 

[AJ Noiter]

I don't believe that asking someone "are you following me" is a confrontation?

"Are you following me?" and "Why are you following me?" aren't really the same.

 

[Concerned Papa]

BBM

Welcome to WebSleuths! I'm glad to see a new member who's familiar with time/distance calculations.

Using the same average walking speed for the 7-11 trip, how long do you figure it would take to walk 317 feet?

BBM

Thank you for the welcome.

317 feet at 3mph would be 72 seconds. (380 feet would be 86 seconds.)

3mph is 4.4 feet per second.

3mph is just a very rough average for walking speed though, so there is some guesswork involved in the equation since actual speed easily could have been a little slower or faster.

Here's my reason for asking.

After conversations with his son, AND having watched George's reenactment with SPD on February 27th, Robert Zimmerman said the following on the Sean Hannity show:

ZIMMERMAN: From where George's vehicle was, there's a sidewalk that goes to the next street over. Off of that sidewalk there's another sidewalk that goes between two rows of townhomes……George was walking down the main sidewalk to see if he could see where Trayvon was going. [2:08]

ZIMMERMAN: When the dispatcher said we know longer need you to do that, and George acknowledged OK. [2:26] He no longer knew where Trayvon was.

He continued walking down the sidewalk directly in front of him to the next street to get an address. He got an address.

He was walking back to his vehicle.

Trayvon came from his left side…from that area where the sidewalks meet…and started beating him.

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hanni...-trayvon-martin-shooting?page=2#ixzz1svJVUFyf

The entire described path of movement is 317 feet. According to the correct calculations of our newest member, it should take an average adult male 72 seconds to walk this distance. George started walking at [2:08] into the 911 call. His story to LE states that he was attacked by Trayvon at, what would have been, [2:08] + [1:12] = [3:20].

That is clearly not true. George was still on the phone with the 911 dispatcher until [4:07] after the call began. Furthermore, to state the attack happened "where the sidewalks meet" when George's OWN ATTORNEY said the evidence suggested the body was located over half a football fields length away seems likely to show a jury the core of his defense is not true.

If the "When" and "Where" of a defense is viewed as untrue by a jury, alleged intrinsic details of "What" or "How" are likely to be non determining in their verdict.

 

[AJ Noiter]

No they don't...he/we have civil liberties...let someone follow me, see what that comes out to be...no one has a right to follow, stalk, chase, bully another person...stop the garbage and look at this GZ for WHO he is and WHAT he did that caused a teen to die where he stood...it's about an egomanial, never do well at anything he tried. He's a wanna be everything and has accomplished NOTHING...he's a waste of space and deserves to be in prison a long time ago..but as always, he and his family think it's always someone elses fault George Zimmerman gets in violent confrontations, it's never GZ fault, he's somehow provoked...and somehow a few here feel the same..So that only makes me believe, you all share his mentality and if that's true, then I'd be in fear of you as well..a person who only has tunnel vision and doesn't include the entire picture not just one frame won't get the full picture, KWIM???

It's absurd to not see the entire picture and only point out that Trayvon Martin somehow caused his own death..when in actuality, I believe if GZ didn't have a loaded weapon, he'd never have stalked, followed or harassed anyone..he's a bully with a big gun...very dangerous person to embrace...

So, which of these does following someone violate?

Civil rights include the ensuring of peoples' physical integrity and safety; protection from discrimination on grounds such as physical or mental disability, gender, religion, race, national origin, age, status as a member of the uniformed services, sexual orientation, or gender identity;[1][2][3] and individual rights such as privacy, the freedoms of thought and conscience, speech and expression, religion, the press, and movement.

Also, wouldn't this be a civil matter and not criminal? Just thinking out loud here....

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

The 5th Amendment states that no one may be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law..

As far as I know, GZ isn't the law....

 

[AJ Noiter]

<snip for brevity>
Furthermore, to state the attack happened "where the sidewalks meet" when George's OWN ATTORNEY said the evidence suggested the body was located over half a football fields length away seems likely to show a jury the core of his defense is not true.

If the "When" and "Where" of a defense is viewed as untrue by a jury, their intrinsic details of "What" or "How" are likely to be non determining in their verdict.

Given that Mr. O'Mara hadn't continued discovery, wouldn't it be more logical to say that he got the information from the press conference where Police Chief Lee stated 70 yards?

Also, I don't believe he started walking back until after he hung up with the dispatcher, though I have nothing to back this up, just seems to be how I remember hearing it.

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

Originally Posted by marlame
My understanding is they DID charge GZ with stalking...
Here's the Florida statute under which George Zimmerman has been charged with second degree murder.
It's 782.04 2n: unpremeditated murder as a result of aggravated stalking.

782.04 Murder.&#8212;
(1)(a) The unlawful killing of a human being:

1. When perpetrated from a premeditated design to effect the death of the person killed or any human being;

2. When committed by a person engaged in the perpetration of, or in the attempt to perpetrate, any:
a. Trafficking offense prohibited by s. 893.135(1),

b. Arson,

c. Sexual battery,

d. Robbery,

e. Burglary,

f. Kidnapping,

g. Escape,

h. Aggravated child abuse,

i. Aggravated abuse of an elderly person or disabled adult,

j. Aircraft piracy,

k. Unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb,

l. Carjacking,

m. Home-invasion robbery,

n. Aggravated stalking,
o. Murder of another human being,

p. Resisting an officer with violence to his or her person,

q. Felony that is an act of terrorism or is in furtherance of an act of terrorism;

Took this from the SYG thread...Thank you, Marlame..

AJ...the above should put the statute for the 'stalking' of TM to rest, since GZ is charged with it......:maddening:

 

[RANCH]

Took this from the SYG thread...Thank you, Marlame..

AJ...the above should put the statute for the 'stalking' of TM to rest, since GZ is charged with it......:maddening:

The only problem is she quoted the wrong statute. And he wasn't charged with stalking.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/88952000/George-Zimmerman-Information-Document

 

[Concerned Papa]

Given that Mr. O'Mara hadn't continued discovery, wouldn't it be more logical to say that he got the information from the press conference where Police Chief Lee stated 70 yards?

Also, I don't believe he started walking back until after he hung up with the dispatcher, though I have nothing to back this up, just seems to be how I remember hearing it.

All I know is what they say. I've provided the links and have not changed or paraphrased a single word.

GZ was told "We don't need you to do that" at [2:26] of a [4:07] 911 call.

O'MARA: And then he said he went back around and went towards his car, did he not? In his statement.

GILBREATH: In his statement after he was told not to by the dispatcher.

O'MARA: Got you.

GILBREATH: He says that he continued on to find a street sign

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1204/20/cnr.02.html

Chief Lee was not mentioned in this re direct at the Bond Hearing. From the Bond Hearing recording at the [1:19:55] mark:

O’MARA: How do you know he was trying to return to his home?

GILBREATH: Because the location he was found in….is probably….and I don’t have the exact measurements….it’s in the path to the back door of the house where he was staying.

O’MARA: I think the evidence suggested it was 70 yards away, right?

GILBREATH: He came from there; I’m assuming he was going back there.

O’MARA: OK.

http://www.wral.com/news/video/11004815/#/vid11004815

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

The only problem is she quoted the wrong statute. And he wasn't charged with stalking.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/88952000/George-Zimmerman-Information-Document

You missed it at the very bottom of the page..

782.04(2)

775.087(1)

755.087(2)

Those are the three statutes GZ is charged with...

 

[RANCH]

GZ was charged with 782.04(2) which is murder 2. If he was charged with aggravated stalking the state would have charged him with murder 1 which is 782.04(1). Here is the statute that GZ was charge under.

(2)&#8195;The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual, is murder in the second degree and constitutes a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life or as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/88952000/George-Zimmerman-Information-Document

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...ing=&URL=0700-0799/0782/Sections/0782.04.html

 

[AJ Noiter]

Took this from the SYG thread...Thank you, Marlame..

AJ...the above should put the statute for the 'stalking' of TM to rest, since GZ is charged with it......:maddening:

As opposed to o. ? If he were charged with aggravated stalking I'd expect it to be in the charges, not hidden in a single charge which is covered by another claim.

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

775.087 Possession or use of weapon; aggravated battery; felony reclassification; minimum sentence.—

(1) Unless otherwise provided by law, whenever a person is charged with a felony, except a felony in which the use of a weapon or firearm is an essential element, and during the commission of such felony the defendant carries, displays, uses, threatens to use, or attempts to use any weapon or firearm, or during the commission of such felony the defendant commits an aggravated battery, the felony for which the person is charged shall be reclassified as follows:

2. Any person who is convicted of a felony or an attempt to commit a felony listed in sub-subparagraphs (a)1.a.-q., regardless of whether the use of a weapon is an element of the felony, and during the course of the commission of the felony such person discharged a “firearm” or “destructive device” as defined in s. 790.001 shall be sentenced to a minimum term of imprisonment of 20 years.

http://www.myfloridahouse.gov/FileStores/Web/Statutes/FS09/CH0775/Section_0775.087.HTM

 

[RANCH]

You missed it at the very bottom of the page..

782.04(2)

775.057(1)

755.087(2)

Those are the three statutes GZ is charged with...

He was charged with
782.04(2)

775.087(1)

775.087(2)

The 775.087 charges are for using a weapon and minimum sentencing.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...ng=&URL=0700-0799/0775/Sections/0775.087.html
775

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

GZ was charged with 782.04(2) which is murder 2. If he was charged with aggravated stalking the state would have charged him with murder 1 which is 782.04(1). Here is the statute that GZ was charge under.



http://www.scribd.com/doc/88952000/George-Zimmerman-Information-Document

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...ing=&URL=0700-0799/0782/Sections/0782.04.html

I do believe you are wrong in the way you are reading his charges..he's charged with murder 2 aggravated circumstance is stalking...along with the weapons I posted above..

 

[AJ Noiter]

I do believe you are wrong in the way you are reading his charges..he's charged with murder 2 aggravated circumstance is stalking...along with the weapons I posted above..

Where are you getting the bold from?