But all of those things you just said are open to interpretation. I listened to the call where it said Zimmerman was on top. I can’t tell if that call was made before or after Martin was dead, and if the witness saw Zimmerman on top of Martin before or after he was dead. If it was after the shooting, it isn’t evidence of anything. If Zimmerman shot Martin in self defense but then tried CPR or something (I have read one article that says he may have) that would explain that scenario.
I know Martin’s family lawyer is saying he was screaming for help, I heard the screaming in one of the tapes and if you really believe that is Martin or think anyone could make out who was screaming you have far better ears than me. It sounds like an animal screaming for all I know, I don’t even know that I would recognize a close family member on that tape, making those sounds.
I keep arguing counter-points not because I believe them one way or the other, but just to illustrate nothing in this case is as simple and straight forward as you believe. You may know fucked-upness when you see it, but I find it strange a former Federal prosecutor and (apparently) the prosecutors in Florida think this is a shaky case against Zimmerman, with a SYG statute or not. I think that suggests to me you may be believing things about the legal situation that aren’t true, in essence you want things to be a certain way, but things aren’t that way. I can understand that, but our law enforcement officials in this country have to respect the way things are, not how we might want them to be.
I notice that while you accuse some people of giving Zimmerman’s account and the evidence undue weight in favor of Zimmerman, you’re always presenting the evidence as absolute condemnation of Zimmerman. In a criminal trial the system actually starts out massively tilted towards the defendant. On any questionable piece of evidence (like a difficult to interpret scream on a 911 tape) all it takes is one juror who doesn’t buy the prosecutor’s argument and you’re looking at a hung jury. That’s why prosecutors love evidence that they can soundly represent in one way, and which any counter-points are mostly seen as weak and ineffectual by the jury. The evidence we’ve seen so far in this case isn’t evidence like that, it’s more like the kind of evidence anyone could interpret anyway, and if you throw a bunch of that at a jury you have no real confidence of anything.
Actually I have already said in this thread I think the political ramifications of this case will impact how the State’s Attorney decides to go forward.
FWIW to me that just argues more for a prosecutor system like they have in Canada, where at no level of the government are prosecutors politicians, they are all civil servants removed from public outrage.
A prosecutor isn’t supposed to be a victim’s advocate or an enemy of the suspect, a prosecutor (unlike a defense attorney) has an obligation to do the right thing for society at large, which sometimes means they won’t pursue a case against someone who they think isn’t guilty, or they won’t use the limited resources of the public against a case they do not believe they can win.
Listen to it again. She says when she first saw them out there (before she heard the screams), the guy in the t-shirt was on top. So it had to have been before the shooting.
And if it was before? What are we allowed to think then?
Let’s say 2 shots were fired as the article says. Let’s say Martin was heard crying and begging for his life, as his family’s lawyer says. Still not enough for a possible conviction, do you think? Do you still fill comfortable letting the State make that judgment call?
You can’t say that unless you’ve listened to all the tapes, which you just admitted you didn’t.
Seriously, suppose Martin was carrying a elgal handgun (probably impossible as he was 17, but let’s just pretend) and was found standing over the dead body of George Zimmerman. I don’t believe anyone can say with a straight face he wouldn’t have been arrested.
There’s a definite pop at about :27 right after she says “but I don’t know.” In an article the Martin family attorney charactarizes it as a warning shot but it’s significantly less loud than the definite gunshot later in the tape.
Since you can hear screaming on the Flash Audio on the right hand side of the page, we can assume this is the call the article refers to.
There is a loud noise at :23 seconds, but the caller does not mention any shot at this time. I think it was something banging inside the callers house.
The screaming continues. At :41 seconds, there is ONE clear gunshot, which the caller mentions. The screaming stops. The 911 dispatcher asks how many gunshots; the caller says “Just one.”
Until I see better evidence, I am going with there was only one shot.
wow, that was a very distinct cry for help in that feed. It know this is a subjective opinion, but that “Haaaaalp!” screamed teenager to me. Nothing about it sounded like Zimmerman’s voice based on how he spoke on the phone earlier.
The parents would know better than anyone whose voice that was. I feel so bad for them.
It was hard for me to make out 2 gunshots though. But I trust the witnesses more so than the cops and Zimmerman, sorry.
I listened again. It does sound like a gunshot at :26, but it is not as loud as the other shot. The lady might have not heard it because she was talking and was preoccupied with her family.
The scream for help ends abruptly when the last shot is fired. Then there is silence.
If Zimmerman had drawn his gun, how likely is it that this unarmed kid would be attacking him to the extent that Zimmerman was basically bawling for help like a baby? We’ve already established that hes at least 100lbs heavier, but folks in here have dismissed that. Okay. But he has a gun. People with guns don’t need as much help as people without guns, thats why they have guns. So who is most likely to be the one screaming for help in this exchange based on this and this alone?
Nevermind the fact that Zimmerman already shown himself to unafraid of conflict and thus not very likely to be crying for help to begin with. If he was truly afraid of Martin he would have followed 911’s advice and stayed put in his car. According to his own report, the kid showed signs of avoiding conflict by running away from him.
And yet the cops believe that Zimmerman was doing all that yelling? GTFOHWTS.
Your link did not work for me, brought me to a page not found on the OS website.
This (same as your URL, if this link doesn’t work something is wonky w/the Sentinel) is the article I read and this is the relevant passage for me:
I have not been able to find on the OS website a way to listen to all eight tapes, but only four. On the four I heard, I did not hear two loud bangs so I assume that I haven’t heard the tape in question. I note that only the family attorney is saying there is a second shot. As the sentinel article says, though, Trayvon was only hit once and three witnesses have made statements that there was only one shot.
I can say that. I think as a person extremely familiar with firearms I could probably recognize two gunshots on a tape, but the quality of the four tapes I have heard, I don’t know that I would be able to easily distinguish sounds to that degree of accuracy. So to me two loud pops isn’t absolute proof of anything.
If the police found the weapon had evidence of being fired twice that’d be more compelling. I can’t remember what type of weapon Zimmerman was reported as using. If it was a semiautomatic pistol and there were two rounds less than full, that would suggest two shots (not prove it, of course.)
I think that is precisely what the State is for, and precisely what the State’s Attorney exists for; juries should not and do not get to make that sort of judgment call. They get to decide on cases the State decides to bring, that is how our justice system works, and I think for very good reason. “Public outrage” is not supposed to be a criteria in whether a case gets brought or not (in the real world in the U.S. I know it sometimes is), so appeals to the sanctity of the jury are not persuasive to me, a jury is a finder of fact, not executor of prosecutorial discretion.
If 2 shots were fired, but the cops still maintained that Zimmerman’s story still is believable to them, would you still be okay with that? What would be your tipping point?
Then you trust there is only one gunshot, right? Because three witnesses have said (or rather the Sentinel tells us they have said) there is only one gunshot and the caller that newme references says on the 911 call there was only one gunshot.
In one of the tapes I hear what I think is extremely clearly a gunshot, I do not hear two gunshots in the four tapes I have access to.
So I’m assuming you also believe there is only one gunshot, since that is what 3-4 witnesses and a recorded 911 call says.
What you’re showing here is you have predetermined Zimmerman’s guilt, I think that colors your opinions here. My bias does not exist at all, my only point the whole time is the State starts at a disadvantage and the evidence so far is, if viewed with absolute impartiality, able to be interpreted in multiple ways. The defense only has to get one juror to agree with their interpretation.
I think there is some reason that a former federal prosecutor and current law professor is indicating this would be a difficult case.
The cops, and according to recent news articles, the prosecution does not believe any of this evidence you find so compelling is enough for a conviction.
If the police found evidence that two bullets were missing from the gun I’d find that more compelling that two shots were fired, not that the police should have arrested Zimmerman.
Two shots don’t really change my opinion on anything, unless Martin was shot twice and the second shot was an execution style shot, that would clearly invalidate self defense. Martin was only shot once, though.
There is no tipping point for me. My point all along is that police and the prosecutor have the say in whether or not they should pursue a case. It goes back to what we’ve gone over 50 times here and in response to the OP, the police either didn’t arrest because:
They felt they lacked probable cause.
They believed Zimmerman’s story of affirmative self defense. (This could be 1/2 combined.)
They were acting improperly.
They felt they had probable cause but lacked a strong enough case to justify an arrest.
The thread itself was about the police. Recent revelations suggest the prosecutors may have been involved all along, if so then:
The prosecution has said there is not enough evidence for a conviction because that is their professional opinion and have told police not to make an arrest.
The prosecution are acting improperly.
I won’t have an opinion on whether anyone’s acting improperly until this case is essentially resolved and follow up investigations have happened.
I don’t know that. Sadly, i dont trust any of the initial witness statements gathered by the cops because of what some of the witnesses have said in recent days.
You still haven’t explained why you are so hung up on the 1 shot vs 2 shot thing. Do you think it’s a significant either way? I don’t think it changes much, but you seem to because you written several paragraphs about it in a rather passionate way. 1 vs 2, kid is still dead. I’m more concerned about what the cries for help suggest in tandem with the dead shot.