Hang on… I’ve just noticed - you’ve listened to the FDLE recording and you still aren’t convinced Z was on the sidewalk and not on TM, as he states.
Definitely cognitive dissonance.
I think you with the face pretty convincingly established that Zimmerman’s own version as given in the reenactment means there was no 30 foot movement. I don’t agree with you that Martin’s injuries alone made such movement impossible, though.
It doesn’t look like a phone in the picture and Witness 13 said it sounded like he was talking to someone on the phone. You’re starting a pointless premise without evidence and after all that is said and done it goes nowhere.
Where Zimmerman was standing EXACTLY is not pertinent information. Witness 13 accurately described Martin’s position as the police found it and as Zimmerman had left it.
Sorry no, you’ve obviously never tried to recall something to the police. I explained that in an earlier post. I was involved in a rather large bar brawl years ago and not one person there agreed with another and that was minutes after it happened. I’ve been to lectures on how to report information regarding accidents and they demonstrate this fact.
pretty much everything so far.
The exact location of the vehicle has no bearing on the case. Martin wasn’t run over, he was shot. Based on his phone call to the police it’s along the section of street he said it would be on. It’s just common sense that he parked it as close to the building he saw Martin run behind and the exact distance plus or minus a few feet is irrelevant.
Yet you haven’t established he was on the phone or the relevance of it. This is another “what if” looking for a place on the wall to stick. And while I’m on the subject of the phone lets look at the photo. The object in his hand appears thicker than a phone, is held at an odd angle in relation to his head, and is casting a shadow which means it’s away from his head. On top of that, if he was talking to someone on the phone when the picture was taken Witness 13 would KNOW he is talking to someone on the phone and not say it sounded like he was talking to someone on the phone as he approached. What we do know from the conversation is that he asked what caliber it was. He’s asking about the traits of an object. An object that is the width of something like you see in the picture. An object held far enough away from his head that it casts a shadow. A shadow cast by a flashlight held above Zimmerman’s head which causes overexposure of the top of his head.
No. Witness 13’s job is not to take notes for the police or give statements that benefit or hurt Zimmerman. He gave a statement based on what he remembered. He starts out recalling 2 shots which we know is wrong.
No it’s not contrary to what Zimmerman said happened. Zimmerman said Martin was face down and he spread his arms out. This is how the body was found. He said he asked the guy with the flashlight for help as he approaches. So if he’s got his back to the guy talking, who is he talking too? I’d say he’s talking to the guy with the flashlight who can’t hear him clearly because his back is turned. As Witness 13 approaches he says Zimmerman doesn’t want him to call the police but to call his wife because he had already called the police (which he had). This is consistent with Zimmerman’s account of the conversation. If Zimmerman had a phone in his hand he would have called his wife himself. The guy taking the picture is obviously holding a phone because he said he’s calling the police. It would have taken Zimmerman longer to recite his phone number for Witness 13 than speed dial it. It doesn’t make sense that he’s holding a phone at this point.
What wandering? He’s right there next to the body. He’s gone nowhere based on the information at hand. You’re throwing out a huge IF on top of the testimony from Witness 13 that his wife saw someone hunched over. Again, consistent with Zimmerman’s account. She didn’t see Zimmerman wandering off and Witness 13 didn’t see him wander back.
In the re-enactment he states that he doesn’t remember exactly how Martin got on top of him and he said he was trying to push him away. It’s clear from his description that it was a moving event.
More bullshit Steophan?
yes, it’s also possible when I daydreamed today that I was abducted by Martins and beamed back to earth.
I guess then it was possible that Martin sang a song too after he was shot.
It’s possible.
Films, Steophan?? More bullshit. I don’t need to watch films to know that what you’re saying is utter garbage.
If you want to accept possibilities, why don’t you accept the possibility of Martin defending himself against Zimmerman?
Yet, you want me to entertain the possibility that Martin did certain things after he was shot, however nonsensical they are.
Possibilities, right?
As long as they fit your bullshit narrative.
Those are the only possibilities you want.
I think you completely missed why I said what I did…
But then again, that seems to be a pattern.
looking at the photo taken at the scene the object in Zimmerman’s hand shows a reflection along the top that ends partway to the right. The gunhe used had a beveled edge on top that ends in the thumb grip cut into the back.
Based on this and the odd angle to the head and the shadow cast from it that would not be seen if it was next to his head I’d say he’s holding his gun in the picture.
So at what point did Zimmerman straddle him?
You mean, Zimmerman said he wasn’t sure how he got on top of Martin.
Unless we’re supposed to believe The Lord Christ Jesus put him there, the obvious way he got in that position is purposefully by putting himself there. Doesn’t take a genius to figure that out.
You said: “Sir, we are SPECIFICALLY TALKING ABOUT MARTIN MOVING 30 FT AFTER HE WAS SHOT.”
I asked you to cite the 30 feet you are specifically talking about. Cite it or explain why you are specifically talking about Martin moving 30 ft after he was shot.
No, I mean what I said. He stated to the police he didn’t know how Martin got on top of him. He was punched, he stumbled, he tried to push him away.
I think you completely missed why I said what I did…
But then again, that seems to be a pattern.
For magiver. Here’s a picture of Z’s gun.
And here’s the photo in question.
http://weaselzippers.us/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/ht_george_zimmerman_head_dm_120419_wmain-500x281.jpg
Tell us all which part of his gun you think we are seeing.
Not tried, succeeded, it would seem, as despite Z’s state of shock, TM never managed to land another blow on Zimmerman until he was lay on the floor just begging for a stomping.
I’ve never denied that it’s a possibility, I’ve claimed that the law makes it irrelevant if he was.
However, you are still forgetting about “beyond reasonable doubt” again. The possibility of innocence makes him not guilty. The possibility of guilt does not make him guilty. It’s not equal on each side.
But still, your opinions and speculations aren’t based on reality, they are based on films and crime shows, if indeed they are based on anything at all.
If that makes you feel better, Steophan.
No reality whatsoever…
Whatever.
No, it doesn’t make me feel better. It worries me greatly that someone is willing to decide that someone’s guilty of murder based on, well, absolutely fuck all. The reason it worries me is that it could happen to me, or to someone I care about. Hell, it could happen to you and it’d still piss me off.
You want to call Zimmerman a murderer when there is absolutely no way you can know that he is. Indeed, no reality whatsoever. At least, I’d hope that it won’t happen in reality - it has before, and probably will again, and people like you are the reason it does.
Stop basing your opinions on legal matters on films, TV shows, and your own imagination of how they should work, and learn the law, learn how evidence works, and learn how the court system works.
So you think Z was talking to his gun? I don’t think that’s going to help his case, somehow.
No, it goes directly towards proving that when Z says he was doing one thing, there’s a witness with no obvious reason to lie who says it never happened.
Of course it is, if Z is insisting he was still straddling TM’s prostrate figure until he knew a cop was there for sure.
If he can be that mistaken, who can trust anything he says?
You’re wrong. I’ve even been in Z’s position where I was claiming self-defence, but I’d resolved my problem with my fists. I can assure you that my interview lasted a lot longer than Z’s original chat with Serino, and my victim only had a broken cheekbone and jaw.
A large bar brawl is by it’s nature a very chaotic scenario. This if far from the case here. Z is describing a fairly simple series of events, but none of them match up with my own experience of high conflict situations and the kind of people who’ll sucker-punch someone for no good reason.
If you say so.
Of course it has a bearing. If it had been parked further down Twin Trees Lane at a point where Z had got ahead of TM, it changes the entire dynamics of this whole event, so it’d be highly important to know EXACTLY where the vehicle was before it was moved.
The relevance is, if Z wasn’t still sat on TM when the first witness arrived, as he claims, why has he included this bit in his story? It should not be the sort of thing that you could screw up so badly, if he’s really being truthful.
W13’s only obligation is to give as detailed an explanation of his experience of the night’s events as he can remember. It’s the job of the interviewing officer/s to make sure certain things are clarified.
No, it doesn’t, along with a few of Z’s statements about what occurred that night.
Why would he have had his back to W13? TM’s body was found with the head pointing north, so Z would have been facing anyone coming around the corner with a flashlight. What he says happened in the reenactment is nothing like what W13 says occurred.
W13 says he was on the walkway heading in his direction. Until we have a map with an X marking that spot, we can’t say how far away exactly he was, but he certainly wasn’t sat on TM’s back still, as he’d like everyone to believe.
I already did but I restate it. The upper back of the gun. The front of the gun is out of sight to the left.
The back of the gun starting from the ejection chamber. It appears the edge of the ejection chamber is reflecting as well as the beveled edge along the top. The reflection is broken up towards the back of the gun where the finger grips are machined into it.
you’re guess may be correct but he makes 2 different statements that either conflict with each other or are in addition to each other. In the first interview he says he goes outside after the shot. A conversation ensues about calling Zimmerman’s wife. On the second interview he says he goes through the garage and comes around the corner. Zimmerman says his first contact is someone who opened the back door behind him. Witness 13 states that Zimmerman asks him to call his wife and then the police come and handcuff him. He also says the police come to arrest him and then Zimmerman asks to call his wife. He never mentions taking the picture.