George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin General discussion #2

[Schuby]

But why isn't GZ's following him, being the aggressor, what put me on the defense?

And like I said, why TM said "Why are you following me?" (stated a few different ways, but GZ said this is what happened) what was GZ's response?

GZ told us what TM did...what did GZ do?

Did he identify himself as NW, saying the police are on their way and we will let them sort this out?

If so, how did TM respond?

I still feel that no one has the right to demand my information or know what I am doing anywhere...except someone in authority. I have even tried to not supply it to them - because I truly was doing nothing wrong (had police called on me because the business didn't want my Service Dog in their establishment).

Guess what. I MUST GIVE IT TO THEM!!! No choice. Or I am going downtown and can give it there.

But no one else has the right to demand that. If I refuse to give it and you decide to try to detain me, I get to defend myself.

I can't prove - yet anyway - one way or another. However, it seems like for some people, this CANNOT possibly be the case.

And for me, it absolutely - and even more, is likely - what happened.

Because following someone isn't assaulting them physically. It is a mathematical reality. 1 is equal to 1. 1 is not equal to 2.

Anyone has the right to demand anything they want. You have the right to ignore their demand. You do not have the right to respond by hitting them.

 

[Karmady]

There is no evidence to support the claim that Trayvon was loitering or lurking beyond GZ's own self-serving claims. My belief is that GZ was a little overly suspicious and not the best judge of whether someone was loitering or lurking.

The evidence that Trayvon was trying to avoid GZ comes from GZ own lips "He's running" just as we hear GZ's truck door open. And "These *******s always get away". I don't take that to mean that Trayvon was running towards GZ.

Why was Trayvon running. He clearly noticed that GZ was following him or watching him. GZ says "Now he's staring at me".

Actually, I think we will see from the time line that Trayvon was doing something other than going to the store and right back. It took too long, otherwise. What exactly he was doing, we'll probably never know other than based on the testimony of George and maybe Rachel.

 

[gxm]

Why did she lie about being in the hospital? Do you know? It seems an odd thing to lie about.

Maybe as an excuse for taking so long to come forward? Just a guess.

 

[Tricia]

Dear Websleuths Members,

Tonight Sheryl McCollum joins me on Tricia's True Crime Radio to discuss the case.

Feel free to post questions for Sheryl on the thread [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9598198#post9598198"]RIGHT HERE [/ame]

 

[iluvmua]

Actually, I think we will see from the time line that Trayvon was doing something other than going to the store and right back. It took too long, otherwise. What exactly he was doing, we'll probably never know other than based on the testimony of George and maybe Rachel.

Rachel was in Miami, so she could not have possibly heard everything that went down.

 

[cityslick]

Actually, I think we will see from the time line that Trayvon was doing something other than going to the store and right back. It took too long, otherwise. What exactly he was doing, we'll probably never know other than based on the testimony of George and maybe Rachel.

Exactly, the evidence proves that TM didn't run straight home and didn't run out of the neighborhood. The argument that comes after this is 'well he had every right to be there, why should he run home'. But then I'll say that if your making that argument, you can't turn around and say he was 'scared' because a scared person, as far as I know, doesn't stay in the exact same area if they see a scary person.

 

[Karmady]

Maybe as an excuse for taking so long to come forward? Just a guess.

It was offered by Crump as an excuse for why she didn't attend the funeral, iirc

 

[gxm]

Except GZ had no hair.

Yes. I know. But I just wanted to clarify for people who think that having your head bashed into a hard surface will automatically result in a lot of blood. George was much bloodier than I was, and I was severely beaten. I think that's because of the rough surface of a sidewalk, as opposed to (in my case) a tile floor.

 

[Lulu67]

Haha, if the cops ever made my 911 calls public, folks would here a lot of "dead animal on the road" "broken down car on the interstate" type things. They probably see my number and roll their eyes....."another dead deer!"

 

[Karmady]

Rachel was in Miami, so she could not have possibly heard everything that went down.

I just meant we may hear her version of what she claims to have heard going down over the phone.

 

[iluvmua]

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iELN-37G35Ym[/ame]

 

[corundogs]

BBM

I don't think any of us can prove who started the actual fight. But if you can't prove who started the actual fight, how do you prove GZ is guilty of murder, simply because someone is dead? Again, that's not how the law works.

Everyone is saying this is self-defense.

That needs to be proven.

It hasn't been proven to me, yet - either way really - but no one can prove to me that TM wasn't the one who was defending himself.

Yet I see that as more likely, since GZ IMO was the original aggressor - by following him.

He originally spotted him in his car, and then he got out of his car and followed him on foot. DO NOT try to tell me there is no evidence of that.

If there is evidence of NOTHING ELSE in this case, that is 100% proven.

If I see a guy watching me, and then he gets out of his car and follows me, and I am doing NOTHING but heading home...I am terrified.

I did state that I want to know what GZ said TM said in response to his original question. I assume he said that he lived there, or was visiting or whatever.

If you don't believe me...I don't have to prove anything to you! I do have to prove it to a cop, so until a cop asks me, you need to leave me alone. If you try to detain me, just because you don't like what I am doing, you can be darn sure I will try to get away from you.

You trying to detain me is called unlawful imprisonment. TM was doing NOTHING wrong - it's not like GZ caught him committing a crime and held him at gunpoint until officers arrived!

How many times do we hear "we can't do anything ma'am/sir until the person starts to commit a crime".

GZ had no right to do anything that night...including get out of his car and follow TM. NW has no more rights than any other citizen.

 

[DEPUTYDAWG]

If the State has said there isn't proof of who started the altercation, I don't see how there's going to be enough to convict (based on evidence alone). If it really can't be proven whether GZ or TM started it, and how the altercation proceeded, then based on fact alone, I don't see how a jury should convict.

IMO, it's those final moments, and the sequence of events in the altercation, that are critical.

This is one jury I would hate to be on. I don't think it's going to end well, for the public to believe justice was served. We're so divided over this.

 

[Nymeria]

http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/16/justice/florida-teen-shooting/

Don't jump on me for this please, just putting a "suppose" out there....

He went the next day to his doctor. He refused ER the night it happened.
Let's say he was busted up a bit, but not ENOUGH (to prove he was beaten).
So maybe he thinks I need more proof, and enhanced his injuries, so to speak.
Could have the wife give him a shot to the nose, or just bang it into a wall or something, if needed.
NOT saying he did this, NOT saying he didn't have injuries to begin with.
More or less just questioning why not do EVERYTHING possible to provide proof the moment it is all happening?
He had to know this was not going to be something he was going to walk away from, wether LE believed his story to start with or not. Unless he was counting on what he thought "Stand Your Ground" would do for him.

Again, I am just playing Devils Advocate here.


PS- I know you all are gonna say "Who would be dumb enough to hurt themselves?". To be honest, if I thought I would need proof to not go to jail I sure as hell would!

 

[SilkySifaka]

It probably was a weirdo following him who believed he was some kind of authority figure. maybe it was someone sticking his bulbous nose where it doesn't belong. maybe be is was the fact that someone already decided that this child was an "*******" who "always got away" and needed to be dealt with. There is NO evidence that his nose was broken. maybe he should've reported this "suspicious" black male and took himself to target as he planned...hmm. His nose was just as broken as jodi's finger. :drumroll:

I am seeing a few comparisons to JA in personality with this guy

 

[Karmady]

If the State has said there isn't proof of who started the altercation, I don't see how there's going to be enough to convict (based on evidence alone). If it really can't be proven whether GZ or TM started it, and how the altercation proceeded, then based on fact alone, I don't see how a jury should convict.

IMO, it's those final moments, and the sequence of events in the altercation, that are critical.

This is one jury I would hate to be on. I don't think it's going to end well, for the public to believe justice was served. We're so divided over this.

~ bbm

That really is it in a nutshell. Gilbreath testified to it. I'm sure the State will try to rehabilitate that testimony. Not sure how successful they'll be.

 

[gxm]

Everyone is saying this is self-defense.

That needs to be proven.

It hasn't been proven to me, yet - either way really - but no one can prove to me that TM wasn't the one who was defending himself.

Yet I see that as more likely, since GZ IMO was the original aggressor - by following him.

He originally spotted him in his car, and then he got out of his car and followed him on foot. DO NOT try to tell me there is no evidence of that.

If there is evidence of NOTHING ELSE in this case, that is 100% proven.

If I see a guy watching me, and then he gets out of his car and follows me, and I am doing NOTHING but heading home...I am terrified.

I did state that I want to know what GZ said TM said in response to his original question. I assume he said that he lived there, or was visiting or whatever.

If you don't believe me...I don't have to prove anything to you! I do have to prove it to a cop, so until a cop asks me, you need to leave me alone. If you try to detain me, just because you don't like what I am doing, you can be darn sure I will try to get away from you.

You trying to detain me is called unlawful imprisonment. TM was doing NOTHING wrong - it's not like GZ caught him committing a crime and held him at gunpoint until officers arrived!

How many times do we hear "we can't do anything ma'am/sir until the person starts to commit a crime".

GZ had no right to do anything that night...including get out of his car and follow TM. NW has no more rights than any other citizen.

BBM.

It does not need to be proven that it was self defense. The state has to prove that it was not self defense. The defendant is presumed innocent. The burden of proof is on the state.

 

[Karmady]

Don't jump on me for this please, just putting a "suppose" out there....

He went the next day to his doctor. He refused ER the night it happened.
Let's say he was busted up a bit, but not ENOUGH (to prove he was beaten).
So maybe he thinks I need more proof, and enhanced his injuries, so to speak.
Could have the wife give him a shot to the nose, or just bang it into a wall or something, if needed.
NOT saying he did this, NOT saying he didn't have injuries to begin with.
More or less just questioning why not do EVERYTHING possible to provide proof the moment it is all happening?
He had to know this was not going to be something he was going to walk away from, wether LE believed his story to start with or not. Unless he was counting on what he thought "Stand Your Ground" would do for him.

Again, I am just playing Devils Advocate here.




PS- I know you all are gonna say "Who would be dumb enough to hurt themselves?". To be honest, if I thought I would need proof to not go to jail I sure as hell would!

He went because his employer required him to to go back to work i.e. to verify that he was okay to work and that the injuries couldn't be claimed to have been work-related for workers comp purposes. It was discussed back in the original thread.

eta: Also, the head and nose photos were taken the night of the incident right after it happened

etaa: the reasons provided in the medical reports for no sutures was that the wound was not fresh (paraphrasing). George was in the police dept. all night, so he wouldn't have time to injure the back of his head and turn up with non-fresh wounds at the dr's office a few hours later. Even if one were to accept that the possibility that he "enhanced" his injuries.

 

[JudyBolton]

Everyone is saying this is self-defense.

That needs to be proven.

I think the way it works is that GZ is presumed *innocent* and the STATE has to prove that it was NOT self-defense. The burden is not on GZ to prove anything - it is on the state to prove it was murder and IMHO that will be a challenge given the evidence.

 

[Schuby]

Don't jump on me for this please, just putting a "suppose" out there....

He went the next day to his doctor. He refused ER the night it happened.
Let's say he was busted up a bit, but not ENOUGH (to prove he was beaten).
So maybe he thinks I need more proof, and enhanced his injuries, so to speak.
Could have the wife give him a shot to the nose, or just bang it into a wall or something, if needed.
NOT saying he did this, NOT saying he didn't have injuries to begin with.
More or less just questioning why not do EVERYTHING possible to provide proof the moment it is all happening?
He had to know this was not going to be something he was going to walk away from, wether LE believed his story to start with or not. Unless he was counting on what he thought "Stand Your Ground" would do for him.

Again, I am just playing Devils Advocate here.


PS- I know you all are gonna say "Who would be dumb enough to hurt themselves?". To be honest, if I thought I would need proof to not go to jail I sure as hell would!

The problem with that theory is that there is no indication he was under threat of arrest by LE at that time. I could see someone "enhancing" their injuries to avoid arrest but, as far as he knew, he wasn't going to be subject to arrest anyway.