17 yo Trayvon Martin Shot to Death by Neighborhood Watch Captain #33

[LambChop]

Why would LE be in trouble for taking a photo of GZ's injured head? Isn't that what they are supposed to do?

No. At 7:19 there was an injured person lying face down on the ground so any LE officer, which would have been the second officer, who arrived recorded at 7:19 should have been on the ground trying to help TM. At 7:19 there were only two officers on the scene. Another officer arrived and they started CPR on TM. No one should have been taking pictures at that time much less sending said picture off to the media right before the bond hearing. How did they decide it might be a great time to suddenly reveal the picture after people have been asking since GZ claimed he was injured to see pictures? It makes it appear that someone was holding out for the price paid to them on the pictures to go up, IMO. Haven't we seen enough the past couple of years to believe that this is a possibility??? jmo

 

[Adrienne37]

You do realize all the unconfirmed,incomplete information, in regards to Zimmerman's past,will never make it into the court room, don't you? IMO That is, if this case goes to trial.

It doesn't matter. This is a message board, not a courtroom. What's going on with Zimmerman is no different than what has happened to Casey Anthony, Scott Peterson, Terri Horman, the DiPietro family, Jarred Harrell, John Gardner, the Irvin's, nor any of the rest. If they are accused of a crime, we talk about it. There was a lot of Scott Peterson that was never brought into the courtroom but does that mean we can't discuss it? If that's the case, then they just as well shut every website down that follows crime cases. I can certainly understand not allowing conversation if Zimmerman wasn't charged with a crime, and in fact, we weren't allowed to discuss him until such time that he was arrested.


~jmo~

 

[Dr.Fessel]

You do realize all the unconfirmed,incomplete information, in regards to Zimmerman's past,will never make it into the court room, don't you? IMO That is, if this case ever goes to trial.

That might be right but you have to wonder why the friends and family keep putting it out there? IMO

 

[cityslick]

Maybe because Trayvon is the victim and GZ is the admitted killer? After Trayvon's death what did it matter what he had done before? It's the circumstances of his killing that matter and why and how it happened. It was known from the beginning, since it took a while to go public, that all he was doing THAT NIGHT was walking home. He was not doing any of the things named above, was not armed and was trying to avoid a conflict. He did not deserved to be killed by someone who was following him for no reason and would not identify themselves.

Yes but if this was a different case, where someone truly was defending themselves from an attack, would you not bother to look into the background of the person who got shot simply because they are now dead?

 

[Adrienne37]

They at least exist on the internet. They were linked up thread.

The actual email threat that Shelly Zimmerman said she received is now on the internet and are linked here on this board?



~jmo~

 

[cityslick]

The actual email threat that Shelly Zimmerman said she received is now on the internet and are linked here on this board?



~jmo~

No, death threats in general.

 

[Adrienne37]

No, death threats in general.

My post was not in reference to death threats they've received in general. My post was in response to the death threat that Shelly Zimmerman stated under oath in the bond hearing that has never been turned over to law enforcement or anyone else for the purpose of finding out who did it. If she has specific threats that she has received, then it should be turned over to law enforcement to investigate; however, in the bond hearing she stated that she had not done that and that she had only received one email threat herself.



~jmo~

 

[uvamerica]

Opinions.....

Yes, opinions, I've been reading around and found that many people are taking these "opinions" as the truth or fact.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I'm not sure myself, and I did pose that as a question in the original post. But I can't think of any other reason why she would not turn in the threats to LE, seems she would want them to find out who sent them for possible charges.

Is there any other reason why she would not give those threats to LE?

The only reason that I can think of is that Shellie Z distrusts the people who are trying to put her husband in prison. JMO.

 

[Just K]

Actually Just K, there are 2,269,252 signatures on the petition at Change.org right now. However, I refuse to believe that Angela Corey would risk her career to appease anyone. I feel 100% sure that there is evidence that points to Zimmerman doing exactly what he is charged with.


http://www.change.org/petitions/prosecute-the-killer-of-our-son-17-year-old-trayvon-martin


~jmo~

Thanks for the update...it was at or near 1/2 a million when the charges were officially brought against GZ. Quadrupling is, IMO, a good thing.

Who was it that appointed AC...was it the governor or the major?

I hope you are right and that there is irrefutable evidence because if I were in charge there would be no hiding behind SYG.

I'm a firm believer in the "he who smelt it dealt it" and the "don't start $h!t where there isn't any" theories.

Oddly enough, both of those theories have to do with unpleasant bodily functions.

IMO, no one should be able to run rough shot over others without taking full full responsibility for the consequences which may occur as a result of their actions.

It's one thing for "good mean to speak up" and it is quite another to do so responsibly.

 

[suzihawk]

Perhaps because they do not exist? That's one conclusion that I can reach.


~jmo~

Or perhaps the email didn't rise to the level of an actual threat. Maybe it was someone expressing their opinion on the tragedy of her husband shooting an innocent young man that she interpreted (or embellished) as a threat.

JMO

 

[LambChop]

Zimmerman's wife said she had received one threat and it was by email. Wonder how anyone got her email?

Wouldn't they be able to locate them if she received an threat via email?????

 

[Adrienne37]

Thanks for the update...it was at or near 1/2 a million when the charges were officially brought against GZ. Quadrupling is, IMO a good thing.

Who was it that appointed AC...was it the governor or the major?

I hope you are right and that there is irrefutable evidence because if I were in charge there would be no hiding behind SYG.

I'm a firm believer in the "he who smelt it dealt it" theory and the don't start $h!t where there isn't any.

Oddly enough, both of those theories have to do with unpleasant bodily functions.

IMO, no one should be able to run rough shot over others without being taking full full responsibility for the consequences which may occur as a result of their actions.

It's one thing for "good mean to speak up" and it is quite another to do so responsibly.

Rick Scott, the governor.

 

[Reader]

They at least exist on the internet. They were linked up thread.

In this thread? I must have missed that...what is the post #, please?

 

[Dr.Fessel]

There was a commercial break when she was talking about the threat or hate mail. I swear when I watched the hearing she said email at first. Does anyone have the link to the video of the hearing? TY in advance!

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1204/20/cnr.01.html

DE LA RIONDA: Have you reported that to the police?

S. ZIMMERMAN: No, I haven't.

DE LA RIONDA: Have you reported that to my boss, Ms. Corey, or the state attorney's office so that somebody can investigate?

S. ZIMMERMAN: No, sir.

DE LA RIONDA: Did you keep those threats?

S. ZIMMERMAN: I'm sorry?

DE LA RIONDA: Did you keep that hate mail?

S. ZIMMERMAN: Yes.

DE LA RIONDA: Do you have that available you can turn it over to your attorney?

S. ZIMMERMAN: I'm sure I can.

DE LA RIONDA: There's a difference between hate mail and threats. (INAUDIBLE) threats in that hate mail.

S. ZIMMERMAN: No, sir.

DE LA RIONDA: OK.

I have no further question.

 

[joypath]

It was raining and there could be other evidence on the ground at that location and the tarp was covering it? I don't know. I just know there has been no confirmation I'm aware of that the tarp was over TM's body. Plus the description of where the body was does not match up with the picture. jmo

I'm no crime scene expert but would that even happen? Once Trayvon was pronounced dead, wouldn't his body be placed in a body bag and removed to the ME's office? Wouldn't throwing a tarp over it contaminate possible evidence?

Does anyone know what the proper procedure is?

Here's a protocol that was established in a community where I once lived ....IT IS NOT a universal protocol! (but does reflect basics and it is reviewed annually).
EMS responders:

​

A. Record time of pronouncement of death and names of medical control physician and hospital (if applicable).
B. Notify local police authority (if not on scene).
C. Notify medical examiner’s office.
D. Body or bodies will not be moved until the medical examiner’s office and police authority approves removal.
E. Medical examiner’s office will determine destination of the body (morgue or funeral home).
F. Personal belongings shall not be removed from the body.
G. Leave endotracheal tubes and IV’s in place.

My issue with the "tarp" (or even a blanket/sheet/coat!) is that it may introduce materials into/onto the death scene UNLESS it is a NEW, pristine unit. Each decedent receives a NEW, opened at the scene body bag, "bagging" the body is a function of the OCME's representative, IN most jurisdictions.
Fortunately this case is NOT a "who done it" but more a "why was it done" and tossing a tarp to protect the body/or evidence on a surface that might be washed away with the rain should/could be of minimal consequence. Decedents are usually protected from the elements by a TENT vs direct material contact.

"crowd control" and a documentation of death/crime scene participants is critical to avoid "mishaps"

Again, JMO, JME, just my fervent plea! :moo::moo::moo::moo:

 

[suzihawk]

You do realize all the unconfirmed,incomplete information, in regards to Zimmerman's past,will never make it into the court room, don't you? IMO That is, if this case ever goes to trial.

It may or it may not. I'm sure the investigators will be looking into all aspects of this crime. Including confirming stories put forth by the family and friends. Especially if it comes to a sentencing hearing.

JMO

 

[Deleted member 39678]

There was a commercial break when she was talking about the threat or hate mail. I swear when I watched the hearing she said email at first. Does anyone have the link to the video of the hearing? TY in advance!

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1204/20/cnr.01.html

DE LA RIONDA: Have you reported that to the police?

S. ZIMMERMAN: No, I haven't.

DE LA RIONDA: Have you reported that to my boss, Ms. Corey, or the state attorney's office so that somebody can investigate?

S. ZIMMERMAN: No, sir.

DE LA RIONDA: Did you keep those threats?

S. ZIMMERMAN: I'm sorry?

DE LA RIONDA: Did you keep that hate mail?

S. ZIMMERMAN: Yes.

DE LA RIONDA: Do you have that available you can turn it over to your attorney?

S. ZIMMERMAN: I'm sure I can.

DE LA RIONDA: There's a difference between hate mail and threats. (INAUDIBLE) threats in that hate mail.

S. ZIMMERMAN: No, sir.

DE LA RIONDA: OK.

I have no further question.

Here's a link Dr F.

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

 

[Adrienne37]

There was a commercial break when she was talking about the threat or hate mail. I swear when I watched the hearing she said email at first. Does anyone have the link to the video of the hearing? TY in advance!

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1204/20/cnr.01.html

DE LA RIONDA: Have you reported that to the police?

S. ZIMMERMAN: No, I haven't.

DE LA RIONDA: Have you reported that to my boss, Ms. Corey, or the state attorney's office so that somebody can investigate?

S. ZIMMERMAN: No, sir.

DE LA RIONDA: Did you keep those threats?

S. ZIMMERMAN: I'm sorry?

DE LA RIONDA: Did you keep that hate mail?

S. ZIMMERMAN: Yes.

DE LA RIONDA: Do you have that available you can turn it over to your attorney?

S. ZIMMERMAN: I'm sure I can.

DE LA RIONDA: There's a difference between hate mail and threats. (INAUDIBLE) threats in that hate mail.

S. ZIMMERMAN: No, sir.

DE LA RIONDA: OK.

I have no further question.

Dr. Fessel, I believe it is around the 25:00 mark or somewhere there abouts because I was rewatching it earlier when she said she had not been with Zimmerman since he had been in hiding.

~jmo~

 

[annalia]

Or perhaps the email didn't rise to the level of an actual threat. Maybe it was someone expressing their opinion on the tragedy of her husband shooting an innocent young man that she interpreted (or embellished) as a threat.

JMO

BBM

That could be. And it could be that she just didn't like someones opinion that was strong but not threatening, the fact that they didn't call LE probably says they weren't in fear of any actual threat. JFTR, Not saying that it makes it ok that anyone sent her an email.

It's very true that there are some hateful people out there, just look at these facebook pages that people put up in different cases, like Casey Anthony, even Lisa Irwin's case, and lots of others, people say some pretty vile things. It's appalling what some people will say and how far they will go and it isn't all one sided.

But there's a difference between that and an actual death threat.

I hope that they're looking into those twitters as well. Some of those do seem to cross the line. Also, I hate to even think this way but given the vile things I've read at different places, I have wondered if some of those have been faked to incite people.

MOM has said that there have been fake twitter accounts with people pretending to be GZ, it isn't hard to believe that it may go both ways.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2...protection-while-out-on-bail-lawyer-says?lite

JMHO