George Zimmerman /Trayvon Martin General Discussion #6

[ncgramma]

Maybe he should have but again that does not make it murder. It was his neighborhood. He had every right to be out there and walk around. I don't think we have any proof of what TM did. None. He was there and he was gone. His friend Rachel has a reason to be biased and also is only going on what she heard. Her alone. To me she was not a credible witness.

When you listen to the 911 tapes that were admitted into evidence, you notice that in the TM/GZ call, the responder askes GZ a number of times to let him know where TM is going. In the other calls that didn't happen. I'm beginning to think that GZ left his truck THAT time in order to provide the requested update information. When the responder said that he didn't need to do that, GZ says ok, and you hear "the wind" and GZ's breathing slow down and quiet.

 

[EGirl]

Disagree. I don't think identifying yourself to someone and letting them know you have a gun is a crime. That seems the responsible thing to do. That ends any confrontation or anything right there in its tracks. No one is going to attack a person or run from a person with a gun.

Don't know enough about guns to know that'll get your permit revoked but that doesn't sound accurate to me.

The quickest way to escalate a situation is to mention or show a gun!

Never, never, never mention the gun until LE arrives and you advise them you have a concealed handgun and where it can be found. (unless you have to use the gun to defend yourself. You NEVER pull a gun unless you are intending to use it)

JMO!

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

TM had every right to not go into his home, he had every right to stay and talk on the phone.

We don't know how GZ got his head scratched, he could have scratched it on the pavement while in his struggle. Where were GZ hands while TM was on top? I don't believe that TM had the upper hand the whole time. I believe TM saw the gun and there was a struggle over it, even if GZ was on bottom. TM had a right to defend his life, he had no weapon, GZ did. :twocents:

Sure TM did. AS did GZ.

The proof shows the TM has no injuries on him that show he was beaten. GZ's has a bloodied nose, cuts all over his head and big lumps on his head.

One of them was beat up and it was not TM.

That is just evidence.

 

[Just K]

no proof whatsoever. Just people making stuff up.

No one knows that except GZ and anyone he told, like his best buddy and/or his wife. "Just tell her I shot someone."

Do you really believe that he and Shelly never discussed what GZ would do if the subject tried to get away and subsequently tried to defend himself.

IMPO, Shelly knows what GZ's plan was for that night or under any other similar situation..

 

[iluvmua]

That seems remarkably unconstitutional.

even BDLR wanted this to go to the grand jury but AC bypassed that.

http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/...orey-trayvon-martin-case-not-going-grand-jury

 

[m00c0w]

Disagree. I don't think identifying yourself to someone and letting them know you have a gun is a crime. That seems the responsible thing to do. That ends any confrontation or anything right there in its tracks. No one is going to attack a person or run from a person with a gun.

Don't know enough about guns to know that'll get your permit revoked but that doesn't sound accurate to me.

If there is a confrontation, do you believe this individual has your best interests at heart? Do you think that they're getting ready for a physical altercation if necessary?

If you tell this person, "I have a gun", what do you think their reaction will be? If they are actually pissed at you, it is incredibly easy for them to call 911 at this point and say "Look, this dude threatened me with his gun."

What happens when the police arrive to this "Man with a gun" call? They find you with a gun, and the person claiming you told them you have a gun without one. They also find the person claiming you threatened to shoot them, and how can you prove otherwise? Obviously they knew you had a gun, even though you're carrying concealed and shouldn't unless they saw it or you said something.

A weapons violation is usually a disqualifying factor for obtaining a gun permit, as it should be. If you are charged and convicted with something like "brandishing", or whatever relevant charge applies in your jurisdiction, it is likely that your permit will be revoked.

Why put yourself in that situation? Just leave. Guns don't need to be brought up.

:twocents:

 

[PaperDoll]

This is the problem IMO

if GZ stayed in car...

if TM had just run home...

But it is what it is. Both were on a public sidewalk, a fistfight ensued, then the guy who had a bloody head and face and also was lawfully carrying a gun deafened himself against further bodily harm.

Why should TM just run home, he wasn't doing anything wrong. GZ KNEW TO STAY PUT!!! He was the one who suspected TM was up to no good, not the other way around. TM was minding his own business and his own right to stand around and not run home. :twocents:

 

[MeeBee]

No. That is fact.

GZ was beaten.
Gz shot to defend his person.
Those are facts proven by evidence.

That is not necessarily a fact proven by evidence. It is one interpretation of the evidence.

 

[Nymeria]

BBM

Not true, and that can go so wrong, so fast. You start telling someone you have a gun, and that quickly turns into, "Officer! He threatened to shoot me with his gun!" And since you're carrying concealed, how does he know you have a gun unless you told him or he saw it?

Nice way to get your permit revoked.

*BBM*
Better permit revoked than a dead kid.


PS- No offense m00c0W, that sentence just bothers me.
I think this boy being dead gets lost sometimes in all the arguements about whose fault it is.
PPS- I told myself I would not post today...I slipped, going to try and abide by it starting....NOW! :blushing:

 

[PaperDoll]

Everything he is saying so far is supported by evidence so i highly doubt he would come up with a story and it just so happens that everything he says fits with the evidence.

Some fits the evidence, but again, TM isn't here to tell his side

 

[MeeBee]

Can you explain why GZ wouldn't give the police a location to meet up with him if his intent was to go back to his vehicle?
I think it is clear from the call to police that GZ intended to continue looking for Martin.
Even after GZ says "okay" in response to the dispatcher saying 'we don't need you to do that' his voice sounds strained while giving his name as though he is still running.
IMO

This is the biggest thing to me. He acts very elusive when asked for a location and then just tells them to call him back. This shows to me he planned on continuing to pursue Trayvon. It tells me he knew he shouldn't have gone what he did but did it anyway. If he had gone back and waited in his car none of this would have happened, either. That is my issue with declaring George completely innocent, regardless of who was screaming and why he fired his gun.

 

[iluvmua]

Why should TM just run home, he wasn't doing anything wrong. GZ KNEW TO STAY PUT!!! He was the one who suspected TM was up to no good, not the other way around. TM was minding his own business and his own right to stand around and not run home. :twocents:

Because if he would have just ran on home, GZ would not have had to call the NEN and have the police come look for TM and GZ would have been able to get in his vehicle and continue to drive to Target and this thing would have never happened.

JMO

 

[DIBSY]

He was only pumped full of fear. There is nothing to prove any of what you said. Only your opinion.
And that is the problem. The states case is solely based on opinion and no fact.

From all I've seen and read, the Prosecution has an abundance of solid evidence, reliable witnesses and forensic evidence as well.
We've been discussing that evidence daily and I find the proponderance of it believable. IMO.

 

[Nymeria]

OK ONE MORE THING!

I was bothered by the PA report saying "HIS Psychologist" and wondered if she meant he already had one or should "see" one.

The thread got closed down Friday before she said it, but she did clarify he was seeing one when this all occured.

How is this not being delved into by the State?
Wouldn't his mental condition be evidence of his state of mind at the time of the "incident" (as JA would term it)?

 

[Sonya610]

BBM

Not true, and that can go so wrong, so fast. You start telling someone you have a gun, and that quickly turns into, "Officer! He threatened to shoot me with his gun!" And since you're carrying concealed, how does he know you have a gun unless you told him or he saw it?

Nice way to get your permit revoked.

I completely agree! It would be stupid and downright dangerous to tell people you were carrying unless you have already drawn the weapon and are ready to shoot.

Otherwise it will often take a few seconds to pull the weapon and possibly rack the slide (though in GZ's case obviously it was chamber loaded). Telling someone "I have a gun" sounds like an individual that thinks "having one" gives him power and it does NOT until it is drawn and ready to fire.

 

[iluvmua]

This is the biggest thing to me. He acts very elusive when asked for a location and then just tells them to call him back. This shows to me he planned on continuing to pursue Trayvon. It tells me he knew he shouldn't have gone what he did but did it anyway. If he had gone back and waited in his car none of this would have happened, either. That is my issue with declaring George completely innocent, regardless of who was screaming and why he fired his gun.

If you listen to the 911 call, he says he does not know where TM is.

He was trying to go back to his vehicle but TM stopped him from doing that.

JMo

 

[PaperDoll]

Sure TM did. AS did GZ.

The proof shows the TM has no injuries on him that show he was beaten. GZ's has a bloodied nose, cuts all over his head and big lumps on his head.

One of them was beat up and it was not TM.

That is just evidence.

I do not believe all those bumps on GZ head are from that night, people have bumps on their heads. Yes, he had a bloody nose and I believe TM punched him, but why? Do you think GZ is going to tell all, do you think GZ is going to say he pushed TM first?

 

[TexMex]

Why should TM just run home, he wasn't doing anything wrong. GZ KNEW TO STAY PUT!!! He was the one who suspected TM was up to no good, not the other way around. TM was minding his own business and his own right to stand around and not run home. :twocents:

PD my point was we could IF this case for days

if George this or if Trayvon that...

But in the end two guys were both legally on a public sidewalk, a fight started then the guy who was injured and also hapended to be legally carrying a firearm defended himself from further bodily injury

 

[PaperDoll]

If you listen to the 911 call, he says he does not know where TM is.

He was trying to go back to his vehicle but TM stopped him from doing that.

JMo

Yes, but then GZ said to have the police call him, this is when I think GZ saw TM :twocents:

 

[ncgramma]

Well, Brandi Green said that TM was on her porch.

Zimmerman v. Trayvon - Proof Martin Went Home, Then Back Out To Get George? - YouTube

Yup, and therein lies the problem for where the altercation takes place and whether GZ was pursuing or intercepted.