What you presented was not just hearsay, it was hearsay about hearsay. Neither the father or the brother, in the articles you quoted, said anything about any inadvertent reveal of the gun.
Well, no offense, but the only cite that mentions an inadvertent display of a gun is the third one, which is a neighbor recounting what she remembers Zimmerman’s parents saying about what Zimmerman told them.
On preview, what Terr says.
Regards,
Shodan
I wasn’t expecting to change your mind, Terr. You asked me for some cites and I provided them.
When I first heard both the father and brother mention the “reaching for cellphone” in the story, I thought that it was an excuse for reaching for a gun. Then when the leak article came out later on, it was mentioned again, this time mentioning explicitly that the gun was revealed at that time.
IMO, it will come up again when we get more information. Let’s see…
No offense taken. It’s my speculation, based on what has been released so far, which I was kind enough to cite on request. I’ll change my mind if new information contradicts this hearsay, but as of now, it makes sense to me that the gun was revealed at that time in the encounter, and that is what led to the physical struggle.
Fair enough.
At this point, I am taking anything and everything Zimmerman’s father says with about four and a half shakers of salt. I would think a retired judge would know better than to go around shooting his mouth off like this.
Regards,
Shodan
That’s interesting. Zimmerman’s previous arrest records were included as exhibits, which is not what I’d expect for info deemed inadmissible. The police report describing his assault on an officer is particularly revealing. I’m glad I read this.
And I agree with camille about the phone. It’s about as a pat of an explanation as Scott Peterson claiming that he went on a solo fishing trip, in the dead of winter, the same day his wife disappeared. Oh rly, now?
What kind of holster are you assuming in your scenario? Also where was he carrying his cell phone? If Zimmerman revealed his pistol every time he got his phone, it wouldn’t be very discreet.
The prosecution referred to it during the bond hearing. Apparently the Judge wasn’t impressed based on his comments. Zimmerman contended that the police officer didn’t identify himself or show his badge. I assume by your comments that you assume that police officers tell the truth 100% of the time.
Between an officer of the law and George Zimmerman–a man who has been arrested three times in 28 years and is now on trial for murder–whose testimony should I have the most confidence in, pray tell?
Hasn’t it been established that he had a waistband holster? I don’t know exactly where his cellphone was, obviously, but the key here - whether he revealed the gun or not - is that he made a sudden, reaching movement during this confrontation. Under those circumstances, would you assume the person confronting you was reaching for a cellphone or…? Would you wait patiently to find out? Ask Amadou Diallo how that worked out for him when he reached for his wallet to show the police…
I would take anything Robert Zimmerman Sr. with about 5 pounds of salt, since a reporter identified something he said that he said George told him and it turned out to be from an episode of Justified that aired after the shooting. I don’t know that he is lying, but he apparently isn’t good at keeping fact and fiction straight. Robert Jr. needs a gag also.
Maybe confabulation runs in the family…
Whichever one’s testimony fits the observable facts better. In the absence of observable facts, a slight presumption to the officer is normal, but shouldn’t be enough to hang a case on.
The fact that he has been arrested and is now on trial do not in any way affect Zimmerman’s credibility, though.
Not that I know of. It wouldn’t be unreasonable with that jacket, but neither would a small of the back holster. We had some discussion of that back thread. Apparently most people’s knowledge of holsters are limited to what they see on television.
Why would someone make a sudden reaching motion for his cellphone? I prefer a more deliberate motion so I don’t drop my phone.
I’ll wait until I see his police statements. He gave his first statement a 1.5 hours after the shooting, so he didn’t have time to work out a really good tight lie. My sister could have done it, but she was a superb liar.
Based on the fact that the charges were dropped and Zimmerman’s record was expunged - I would say Zimmerman’s testimony was more reliable in that case.
According to the courts, Zimmerman.
Regards,
Shodan
Cite that either arrest was expunged? Seems to me if that is the case, they wouldnt be listed as court exhibits.
That said, it should matter to you why the charges were dropped. If the cop’s account is true and the charge was dropped because Zimmerman’s dad pulled some strings, thats very different than if the whole thing had been one big ole misunderstanding.
This much is clear, though. There are folks on this board willing to bend over backwards defending Zimmerman. I dadgum guarrantee ya if it was Martin with the same record, the same folks defending Zimmerman would be treating it like a given that Martin deserved to be shot. This is both fascinating to me and horribly depressing.
Damn right people are trying to defend him from people who want him punished with such meagre evidence against him. That people like you are calling for his head in these circumstances I find depressing, but neither fascinating or surprising.
That said, it doesn’t take any form of bending over backwards to defend him, just a dispassionate observation that the evidence doesn’t prove his guilt. Until such point as I’m convinced there is such evidence, I will continue to say he shouldn’t be punished, and that people who say he should be are both wrong and dangerous.
My understanding is that both Zimmerman and Martin have had minor run-ins with authority, and that neither has any criminal record, and that this fact has no bearing whatsoever on the case.