Yes, I do.
Again, deals happen.
Pleas happen all the time.
This is the real world.
Yet you’re not willing to put your money where your mouth is.
It’s easy enough saying that, but when TM turned down the length of the T towards home, he’d have thought Z was still in his car and he wasn’t to know that Z hadn’t drove ahead to the first gap between the houses and was waiting there for him. He’d also seen Z on the phone. It’s not too hard to imagine a concerned 17yr old imagining all sorts of sinister implications to that phone call.
I’m aware of that. My point is, while Z was following TM and on the phone to the dispatcher, TM wasn’t confrontational in any manner, and the suggestion seems to be that Martin deliberately led Z into a darkened area, but then decided to give Z warning of his presence, for some strange reason. Go on, why don’t you suggest it was to impress his gf Dee Dee, while you are dragging TM’s name through the mud?
That says nothing of who was walking towards who.
All Dee Dee’s call does is add further weight to the fact that TM was doing nothing that warranted being profiled as a criminal when Z made him a person of interest.
So, you think Z was totally calm while he was trailing a potential criminal, with not even a hint of nerves?
The back of Martin’s father’s house, where Martin was heading, faces the sidewalk.
So, Zimmerman follows Martin, Martin loses him, Martin makes it all the way to the back of his father’s house. Then Martin comes back down the T away from his father’s house, in case Zimmerman was waiting for him on the T. Or in case Zimmerman was pulled around in front of Martin’s father’s house. This makes sense to you? It doesn’t to anyone else.
Martin made it to the back of his father’s house, and could have walked in the door and been safe from the scary white guy. But he turned around and came back looking for him. Dee Dee told him not to, but he did it anyway.
That’s because he wasn’t anywhere in sight. Dee Dee and Zimmerman agree on this, and the transcript of the 911 call back this up. Martin didn’t confront him because Martin didn’t see him. Then Martin went back looking for Zimmerman, and confronted him.
No one has made any such suggestion.
Martin had already made it back to his father’s house. Then he doubled back to confront Zimmerman. In other words, Martin was walking towards Zimmerman.
No, it doesn’t address it at all, and it isn’t a fact in the first place.
Martin was standing in the rain, looking into houses. There had been a number of burglaries in that neighborhood. Zimmerman was the neighborhood watch guy, and had volunteered in part to prevent that sort of thing. And indeed, had stopped a possible burglary in progress some time earlier. Dee Dee said nothing that contradicts any of that.
No. So what?
I don’t believe that Zimmerman expected that Martin would attack him, punch him in the face, break his nose, and bash his head on the ground. If he had expected that, he would probably have approached Martin with his hand on his gun, if he approached him at all. Since he didn’t, I don’t believe he expected it.
Martin was the one looking for trouble, not Zimmerman.
Regards,
Shodan
I know it’s not acceptable practice for neighbourhood watch personel to reach for a gun at the merest threat of aggression, but, it being Florida, maybe that’s not the case for general do-gooders. I don’t suppose you can clarify?
The whole idea that TM would have gone all the way home, not knowing for sure where this strange dude was going to pop up next, then when he’s finally safe, head back looking for the same guy who’s been following him, could only come from a Zimmerman apologist.
Of course he was. 17yr old males are well known for their tendency to target older, larger adults when they are alone and in neighbourhoods where they barely know a soul and certainly have no idea of who not to fuck with in these hoods.
Just check the police records for how many adult males are attacked by smaller, lone criminals who don’t even carry a weapon.
Yes, they can. Or not.
It comes from the mouth of Trayvon Martin. He told his girlfriend that he was next to his house.
In both of those examples, there was more evidence.
The evidence was later shown to be unreliable, yes. But that is not the same situation as having no evidence presented at trial.
It’s against neighbourhood watch guidelines to carry a gun whilst doing neighbourhood watch rounds. Those guidelines have no legal force, and Zimmerman was not making his rounds when he saw Martin, so that’s not particularly relevant.
The injuries to Zimmerman suggest that there was more than a mere threat of aggression, and there’s no reason to think he reached for his gun before he’d been punched.
Unless you have any evidence to the contrary you’d care to share with us, of course,
You’re saying Martin’s girlfriend is a Zimmerman apologist. That’s an… interesting… take on the situation. Makes as much sense as anything else you’ve written, though.
Even if he’d said those exact words, it doesn’t have to mean he was being literal. I’d be interested to hear how much more of Dee Dee’s statement you think is factually correct.
It wont surprise me in the slightest if this is the only thing she’s said that you are inclined to believe.
So, you’re saying Z had fixed times that he did neighbourhood watch rounds, and this wasn’t one of them? And that he never just did his “rounds” at random times in order not to be too predictable to the criminals out there waiting to take advantage of his lack of vigilance?
You don’t even know that he was punched. Oh wait, I forgot… a broken nose can only be caused by being sucker punched by an attacker. Do you have evidence to back that up?
See my response to Magiver.
What reason do you have to suppose that Martin was being metaphorical when he told his girl friend where he was? What evidence do you have that Martin was given to flights of poetic fancy when he described his location?
Or are you simply picking and choosing what evidence to ignore, based on your desire to see Zimmerman punished?
That last is what we call a “rhetorical question”. Everyone in this thread who is at least attempting to be rational knows the answer.
Regards,
Shodan
My assumption is that he was 3 blocks of houses away from the potential safety of his home when he hid somewhere near where he was eventually found dead. Compared to where he’d been previously, this could easily be construed as “next to” when describing a location to someone who hasn’t got a clue where you are. Why you’d want to assume he was right besides his father’s house and then, after previously making every effort to avoid the man following him in a car, decide to go back looking for him without having even popped indoors for a better weapon than a soft drink can, is anybody’s guess.
But, you’re the guy who wants to believe that Trayvon was the type who’d readily take on a larger adult with his bare-fists, and also give them a heads up that it was about to happen.
Yes. Zimmerman’s statements are evidence, as much as you try to deny it. We know they were in a fight, and we know they both have injuries consistent with Martin punching Zimmerman. It’s not proof, but it is evidence.
That has nothing to do with my question.
It will be hella funny when/if Zimmerman takes the stand and is cross examined by the prosecution:
“Can you tell us again where Trayvon was when you turned onto Twin Trees Lane.”
“Uh, down the street. Near the dog walk.”
“Right. So in the seconds it took for you pass the clubhouse and make the left turn, Martin had transversed the full length of the street and was behind the houses at that point. Is that right?”
“Yes.”
“And then describe what happened.”
“He ran back up to my truck and circled me 3 times.”
“Three times? You sure about that? That sounds like a whole lot of space to travel if we match this up with the dispatcher dialogue. So I want you to think some more. Are you sure this is what Martin did this?”
“Uh, yes. I mean, I don’t know. My memory…”
“Now tell us about the skipping, Zimmerman. When did you see Trayvon skip away?”
“After he circled my truck.”
“And what did you do at that point?”
“I got out of my truck to look for a street sign.”
“A street sign.”
“Yes. A street sign.”
“Not Martin.”
“No. I mean, yes. I wanted to see where he went. But the dispatcher asked me to get an address and–”
“Right. Jury, should we play the call again to see what the truth is? Because the truth is not coming out of this man’s mouth.”
Zimmerman’s statements are evidence that he’s lying through his teeth to anyone who doesn’t believe everything he utters is gospel truth.
Chris Serino knew there was more to Z’s story than met the eye, but was overrode by his superiors. They thought it was a cut and dried self-defence without even knowing who the dead person was, and set Zimmerman free within 6 hrs of his arrest. Would a proper investigation of a crime scene and all potential witnesses only take 6 hrs?
Are you even prepared to discuss the failings of the SPD and how they benefitted Z, or are you just fixated on the actual fight, like most Zimmerman supporters?
I thought it did, but if you’re prepared to restate your question more clearly, I’ll have another go at it.
I feel like I’m repeating myself, but he’s by his father’s house can be interpreted more broadly than he’s standing next to his father’s house. I often tell people I live by a certain landmark. This landmark is not my immediate neighbor; in fact, you cannot see it from my home. And yet everyone seems to accept this as a accurate description of my location.
Also, DeeDee was not an eyewitness to any of this–she is only recounting what she heard. She was not even familiar with the geography. A perfectly plausible scenario is a concerned girl urging her friend to run, and her friend downplaying her worries by assuring that he was by his house–which he was, because being in sight of the unit or even in the complex itself was by the house, compared to the walk to the store.
I know that’s your assumption. But the problem is, you are basing it merely on your desire to punish Zimmerman, and are ignoring evidence that suggests otherwise.
Could you please stop making things up and attributing them to me?
Regards,
Shodan
I could just as easily say that your assumptions are centred around TM being a confrontational thug, mostly based on the say so of someone who has everything to gain from convincing people to believe such a thing, and who can’t even be trusted not to be deceitful when he’s applying for bail conditions.
So, you don’t think TM was a confrontational thug who’d take on an adult with his bare fists? Are you implying he attacked Z with a weapon, now?