From what I’ve read, Zimmerman told police he got out of the truck to look at a street sign and was attacked from behind.
If that was his story at the time, the location of the body (in the backyard or between houses?) could make it implausible, as well as the girlfriend’s statement that Martin asked Zimmerman why he was following him, and possible 911 call evidence that Zimmerman had gotten out to follow Martin rather than to check a sign.
Unless he was captain of the neighborhood followers, Zimmerman should have stayed in his truck and watched.
Seriously, is it so hard to look things up?
The Orlando Sentinel reported that George Zimmerman told police he lost 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in the neighborhood he regularly patrolled and was walking back to his vehicle last month when the youth approached him from behind.
=========================
Where are you getting this “he got out of the truck to look at a street sign and was attacked from behind” crap from? I have seen this repeated a few times already.
I did look it up. The first result that appeared was this one.
“Police said Zimmerman told them he got out of his vehicle to get a look at a street sign, and Martin attacked him from behind”
Of course, this article may be wrong.
Also, unless I missed it somehow your article does not appear to say what Zimmerman gave as his reason for getting out of the truck?
AFAIK it’s in the 911 calls. There is no indication exactly why - he probably got out to follow Martin. But it wasn’t “to look at the street sign”.
No, it almost certainly wasn’t. Which is why IF he gave that reason, it would destroy his credibility.
It also seems odd that he would get out of his vehicle to follow Martin if he had lost him already. And it is odd if the body was found in a back yard or between houses. And it is odd if Martin asked him why he was following him, and Zimmerman promptly turned his back and ignored him after following him intently for so long.
Would you follow someone you suspect to be a messed up criminal, following them through a back yard, and then all of a sudden turn around leaving yourself vulnerable when they asked you why you were following them?
It’s just an odd story any way you look at it.
He did not.
Huh? The girlfriend reports (if you believe her) that the conversation was: Martin: “Why are you following me?”. Zimmerman: “What are you doing here?”. Then the sounds of the scuffle. So Martin’s question could have been while Zimmerman was turned away. When Zimmerman answered, he’d definitely turn to Martin.
You’re making things up.
That’s not the official story. According to the press, Zimmerman claimed that Martin ambushed him, demanded to know if he had a problem, and then–when Zimmerman said no and supposedly reached for his cellphone–Martin proclaimed “Well you do now” and then decked him in the nose and proceeded to batter his head against the sidewalk.
Notice how Zimmerman took care to mention that he reached for his cellphone. Whoever said that everything in his story is oh-so convenient is dead on. Zimmerman wasn’t chasing anyone. No sir! It was Martin who came after him. And he didn’t pull out his gun in an attempt to intimidate the kid. Why gosh, that’s crazy talk! It was his phone that he reached for, you see? Cuz of course if you thought a drugged out weirdo was about to start some mess with you, bursting up out of alcoves and stuff in the darkness like an angry pterodactyl, pulling out the gun on your hip would be the last thing on your mind. You’d go for your phone first, duh. And you’d make sure to tell the cops this, too. And also, Zimmerman didn’t lay a finger on the kid or do anything that could be legally construed as assault. In fact, it was Trayvon who assaulted him. And he didn’t just hit him. But battered him. Holy mother of God the man was battered. Of course we can only take his word for that since there seems to be a shortage of medical evidence attesting to this. But OMG, battered.
Everything in this statement smells funky. I don’t know why anyone would give any weight to Zimmerman’s portrayal of events. He sounded like a paranoid lunatic on the 911 call and his statement sounds the same way.
Cite?
I don’t know where the article got that idea from, and I don’t know if it is true, but you haven’t said where you have your information from either.
But you just said Zimmerman claimed to be attacked from behind. Why would he ask a suspected messed up criminal “what are you doing here?” and then immediately turn his back on him?
You just now claimed to know for sure what Zimmerman’s story was, despite having no cite to back you up.
I never claimed to know, and did provide an article to explain why I gave any credence at all to one possibility.
Who is making something up?
“when the youth approached him from behind”. Reading is hard, isn’t it?
Yes, I did misread that line.
Did you find the cite to explain your certainty about Zimmerman’s story?
As far as I know there isn’t a really good explanation for why he got out of his vehicle. If he lost Martin why get out? Why walk between houses and through back yards (if that is indeed what happened)? Were they playing hide and seek?
I can dig around. Or you can go through the 911 tapes. It’s there.
Why not? Apparently he was following him. Apparently, again, he thought he was up to something no good in his neighborhood. That’s not a crime and is not in any way illegal.
Though it’s possible that Trayvon was walking through the neighborhood and felt threatened because some unknown person was following him through his neighborhood and assumed that Zimmerman was up to no good.
Neither assumption is more logical than the other. Both saw someone suspicious acting in a potentially nefarious manner. The only problem is that one had a gun, and that the law makes it more difficult to do a proper investigation. There seems to be an assumption of complete innocence on the part of the shooter and a presumption of guilt on the part of the victim. I’m well aware that innocent until proven guilty is a rather important part of our justice system, but it seems this law wants to make proving someone guilty unnecessarily difficult. As was said by Bricker, whereas self defense would be a trial defense normally, it’s seems to prevent a trial at all in Florida.
No, it’s not there. The question is about what Zimmerman told the police afterward.
It is possible that he got out of his vehicle to chase Martin, but then lied about it later, saying he was checking a sign. IF he lied about that it would hurt his credibility about everything else.
Florida legislators who sponsored the state’s stand your ground law
have said that the law does not apply in this case:
(link):
Fla. ‘Stand Ground’ lawmakers call for arrest
(from link):
In other developments I have just signed this online petition; I hope everyone
who is on Trayvon’s team signs it:
(link):
Prosecute Zimmerman
(petition text):
It is possible as well.
Both could have been acting in self-defense.
This thread has so many long posts. It would be a lot easier on me if the admins would change everybody’s title to either “Team Trayvon” or “Team Zimmerman” for this thread only.
Admins?
Perhaps because it’s been corroborated by witnesses?
BTW I have no Team. I just don’t like the sights and sounds of a mob rushing to judgment.
They don’t get to decide whether it applies or doesn’t apply in this case.
So let me get this straight. I can stalk you through the night scarring the crap out of you (per the girlfriend’s testimony), ignoring your questions about why I’m acting like a creeper, and you can’t defend yourself from that perceived threat.
What’s your address? I’d like to have some fun.