That’s true, but it is rather rude to the other dopers. If you link directly to the articles in the NT Times, then their paywall doesn’t kick in.
Since he was talking to the EMT and the police officer overheard him and added it to his report, he is practically diabolical.
Why do you think this matters? The existence of potential witnesses wouldn’t suddenly make a guilty Zimmerman less likely to lie, would it? He would never not have an incentive to lie, with or without the presence of witnesses who could corroborate his story.
Not sure how you figure that. If Martin had been screaming his head off for help for almost a minute before the gun went off, surely Zimmerman wouldn’t want anyone to think he’d shot someone in cold blood. So it surprises me not one bit that he went out of his way to say he’d yelled for help.
“I needed help from this thug and no one helped me so I* had *to shoot him” is exactly what I would expect Zimmerman to say. What would you expect him to say?
“Martin yelled for help, but I shot him dead in his chest anyway because he was kicking my ass and threatening to kill me at the same time he was yelling for help too?”
There is definitely an incentive not to be very specific and NOT to volunteer for five hours of interrogation when you’re lying your head off. When you have no idea what witnesses saw, the best thing to do is to shut up, lawyer up, and work on the story later.
Zimmerman voluntarily going to the police station and talking to the police for five hours without a lawyer present may be incredibly stupid, from a lawyer’s point of view, but IMO is an indication of him not thinking he was guilty and trying to clear things up with the police.
So you are assuming he grabbed Martin’s wrist, but not hard enough to cause any bruising? Keep in mind that during the autopsy they can examine under the skin and find any capillary damage at all. That is a pretty well calibrated grab.
If you had actually read my statements, then you would know that I always considered Robert Zimmerman an unreliable source (not a witness. Everything he says is hearsay.)
Zimmerman has a history of not making the best decisions. He lucked out this time despite going against common sense, but that doesn’t mean he is speaking the truth.
That said, he probably had a good idea no one was there to see the main events occur, so it wasn’t like he was totally operating blindly. The conflict occurred away from the street, on a dark parkway behind some houses.
If Zimmerman is 100% stupid, then it stands to reason that this stupidity would extend to all his actions, regardless of his guilt or innocence. Him doing something as stupid as talking to the cops for 5 hours without a lawyer should therefore not be taken as a sign of innocence, but rather a sign of stupidity.
It’s also disingenuous to say he didn’t talk to a lawyer, when he spoke with his father.
He could have grabbed his hoodie sleeve. I didn’t say anything about his wrist. Again, all he had to do is try to impede him and that’s it. Assault.
He didn’t need to squeeze him, or cause any injury that would show up on the autopsy, and it would constitute assault which one could defend oneself from.
All Zimmerman had to do is just not mention that he grabbed him or that he tried to stop him. You guys are making it seem like he would have to be some master criminal to just leave one detail out of his story.
(For the record, I’m not asserting that this definitely happened, I’m just trying to illustrate that he wouldn’t have to go to any monumental lengths to keep his story straight when this one detail, which he could easily not mention during the 5 hours, would give Martin the right to punch him in self defense.)
Are you saying you think a combination of stupidity, arrogance, and self righteousness indicates a lack of guilt?
Do you think it’s impossible to believe you did nothing wrong and still be guilty according to law?
What I’m saying is that his training would be not to tell the police anything until he had perfected his story. Not to go down to the police station and spill his guts immediately.
But it has already been established that he is stupid and makes poor decisions.
The entire point of that post was to illustrate that there is more than one way of looking at your fact. The fact that he has studied criminal law could tell you that he would know what to do if he was innocent.
It could also tell you that he would know what to do if he was guilty too.
So I’m just saying that his schooling doesn’t prove anything.
Do you have a cite for that. I’ve read that his family was waiting at the police station, but not that he talked to his father. It would be rather difficult for him to call his father since his was handcuffed. They would have took his phone as evidence in any case.
Frankly if he talked to his father, I doubt that he would be talking to police. His father might be an idiot also, but he would be a more experienced idiot.
[QUOTE=JoelUpchurch]
Do you have a cite for that. I’ve read that his family was waiting at the police station, but not that he talked to his father. It would be rather difficult for him to call his father since his was handcuffed. They would have took his phone as evidence in any case.
[/quote]
Why do you think they would have kept him handcuffed all night?
I can’t find a cite right now, so let me rephrase my statement to: “It’s also disingenuous to say he didn’t talk to a lawyer, if he spoke with his father.”
You said arm and now you say sleeve. You are now saying he grabbed a sleeve and not his arm?
I don’t think Zimmerman is the only one having a problem telling a consistent story.
Oh for god’s sake, it doesn’t matter what he may have grabbed.
The result is exactly the same. Besides his arm is in his sleeve right?
That is pretty much the least important word in my post. It makes zero difference to the content.
And this also ignores the fact that Martin’s girlfriend is a witness that Zimmerman knew nothing about. And not surprisingly, her statement about who said what contradicts Zimmerman’s.
Well come back when you find a cite. As I recall, we discussed this in the previous thread and it not be normal procedure to have family present during questioning.
It is important because you changed it when I pointed out that grabbing an arm would leave forensic evidence.
No it wouldn’t if he didn’t squeeze it.
My point stands. You originally said that it would be difficult to reconcile Zimmerman assaulting Martin first from the condition of their clothes and the autopsy report.
I pointed out why that is absolutely incorrect. I have heard nothing to counter what I said besides your pointless nit pick about arm/sleeve.
Ain’t no one saying family was present. Only that he might have talked to his dad at some point during the interview.