George Zimmerman’s Re-enactment: My Opinion

162 replies
  1. gtuyon
    gtuyon says:

    Thanks eyes..I am not following this case, so your take is a good measuring stick.
    Still busy with Knox, I am.

  2. cannedam
    cannedam says:

    I watched only the second video and what kept coming to my mind is “he’s making it up as he goes!” Anyone who has teenagers who’ve tried to tell a storied lie to get out of trouble can recognize a story that’s being made up on the spot and that’s what he was doing. Oh Florida, don’t fail Trayvon.

        • AJ
          AJ says:

          The whole thing is one sad mess. But please try not to demonize opposing viewpoints from yours, saying how you disagree would be much more helpful.

          • Renaissance Girl
            Renaissance Girl says:

            How is TLars demonizing (melodramatic much) you? She simply said that your comment is sad. Sheesh.

      • WhereTheTruthLies
        WhereTheTruthLies says:

        AJ,

        I think that Cannedam’s comment ” Oh Florida, don’t fail Trayvon” was expressing her hope that Florida will hopefully not fail TM by letting GZ walk free. She did not say that Florida or anyone had already failed him.

        It seems to me that you kind of piggybacked your own agenda onto a comment she really didn’t make.

        • AJ
          AJ says:

          Looking at the case, Florida would fail GZ if they convicted him, because just given the evidence at the trial, he is not guilty BEYOND DOUBT of second degree.

          TM’s parents failed him by not teaching him how to act in society, by not watching him when he was suspended 3 times (I believe most of us would have been on a tight leash with our parents if we were suspended at all) and by generally letting him get taught by thug culture.

          And I do think GZ is guilty of manslaughter for setting in motion the events.

          I still think if ONE person had shown common sense and explained their point of view before the fight started, there would be one less corpse. So yes, I believe TM was the aggressor, and his parents are partially to blame for where he is now. Tough I know, but so is life.

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            AJ,

            I see what you mean now … I was just in a mood during my post and accusing you of responding to something she didn’t say. Thanks for your neutral informative response to my accusation 🙂

            The evidence I saw in court was a fail for the prosecution, I thought. I think the defense should just rest and say they didn’t prove anything … especially with two biased mothers touting their ‘views’.

            TM’s dad and brother I think both had said they didn’t recognize the voice the first time they heard it. I think TM’s mom heard what she wants to hear on that tape, albeit, given the JUSTIFIED emotional state she was in at the time.

            I’m sure if she had been introduced to the tape independently, before she knew her son was dead (let alone, potentially on the tape), and just had someone play the tape and say, “what do you think?”, there’s no way she would have said, “that sounds like my son” What a crock!

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            AJ,

            I’m hearing too that people think manslaughter isn’t a big deal. But if GZ gets convicted of that, because it involved a gun, it’s lights out for GZ.

            So, it’s not like it’s some slap on the wrist like I think people think it is.

            At least, that’s what I’ve heard.

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            AJ,

            I even think there were police witnesses on the stand that seemed to feel “the only reason we’re here in court is cause Al Sharpton had a @#$%!! Fit.” After his debacle with the Duke Lacrosse team a few years ago, I don’t know how he can show his ugly face.

          • Fanta Kissme
            Fanta Kissme says:

            GZ is guilty beyond doubt because he has told too many lies already given the facts if he stayed in his car and allowed Sanford Police to investigate his suspicions instead of taking the law into his own hands. Fact is he educated himself on Stand Your Ground, and he went on Hannity and lied. He lied and said he did not follow him to Sanford Police, It is all taped recorded either by video and audio devices. I say GZ stuck his own foot up his rear end on this because he will be found guilty.

          • schoolmarm
            schoolmarm says:

            Being a pain or truant or a weed smoker are not capital offenses. We would have time to do little other than put adolescents to death if they were. Luckily, none of those behaviors are things we put people to death for, no even in Fla.

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            schoolmarm,

            I can’t find the post above where AJ said those things were capital offenses. I had understood people were making a big deal about what medications/drugs GZ was on, so I would think it is relevant for state of mind and decision making to know if TM had anything in his system.

          • schoolmarm
            schoolmarm says:

            Using the phrase ‘capital offense’ was a rhetorical device, a way of engendering empathy. I failed to realize how literal you are in your thinking. But I won’t cry over spilt milk…

        • WhereTheTruthLies
          WhereTheTruthLies says:

          Kelly Payne,

          Let me know if this explanation helps.

          If someone thinks GZ is innocent, they’re going to point out how he’s Hispanic, and that a grandparent was black, and that he was merely concerned about his neighborhood, and got surprise attacked, and was on the bottom.

          If someone thinks GZ is guilty, they’re going to say he profiled, and was stalking, and was angry at all the punks always getting away.

          If someone thinks SM is innocent, they’re going to say things like unarmed child, gun vs. skittles, walking while black, shouldn’t have had to run or explain himself.

          If someone–like I assume AJ–thinks SM is guilty, they’re going to assume GZ is innocent, and was only doing his ‘duty’, speaking with police, telling a consistent story, and that GZ got jumped, and that GZ was on the bottom yelling for help. In their mind then, GZ is the angel, and TM did all the bad things. Based on their assumption then that TM did all the bad things, and that he was still a teen, then they are assuming that the only place TM must have learned such behavior was at home … with his parents. So he is in effect, saying that his parents failed him–based on his belief that SM was guilty and GZ was innocent.

          At least, that’s what I assume AJ meant by it.

          • AJ
            AJ says:

            Not what I meant at all.

            I believe that GZ was on the bottom, and TM was on top, and TM was the one who initiated the assault after being challenged by GZ (and I’m sorry, but evidence so far supports me). TM’s parents have been (in my opinion) a huge negative factor in his life. His dad is an ex- thug (who flashed gang signs in old photos) who probably taught TM about the thug lifestyle.

            TM wasn’t afraid when he was talking about GZ following him, he was pissed and made racial remarks. If TM had been taught by his parents to never resort to violence first (since he was a child still), or jump to racial hate, there would be one less dead person, because I DO NOT believe he would have been shot if he had said to GZ that he was just living a few houses down instead of trying to “thug up” and beat up someone who challenged him.

            I think GZ is guilty of manslaughter like I have said many times, and that the media and people putting race into this trumped up the charges enough so that he will now walk, because second degree is just not provable beyond doubt with the evidence.

            I do not support GZ, but I don’t think TM was an angel in this, and if he had been raised better would not have been suspended 3 times and not be dead. *my opinion. *also someone with TM as their profile picture is not going to be objective about anything, especially the much younger picture the media first presented…

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            AJ,

            Thanks for the clarification. I appreciate your patient and polite response, especially after I went off on assumptions and included your name in my hypothesis. Thanks, I’m re-reading your posts.

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            AJ,

            Did I read this right?

            “…I do not support GZ, but I do think TM was an angel …”

          • Renaissance Girl
            Renaissance Girl says:

            No, you’re not reading it right. You had typos too with SM instead of TM in your post though.

          • Fanta Kissme
            Fanta Kissme says:

            What you believe is not what at least 2 other witnesses stated. They saw George on top and George admits he was on top, but he wants you to believe he was on top to spread out his arms, but no one witness him coming from underneath Trayvon Martin. That pretty much makes you a cac right.

  3. Russ Conte
    Russ Conte says:

    Superb analysis. You pointed out many items that i missed. I learned a lot reading this, and greatly appreciate all that you do! Keep up the great work!

    Hopefully justice is served in this case!

  4. jeff
    jeff says:

    you know I was recently walking home from work and a car started following me. i freaked out and ran, switched directions etc, but the car continued behind me. Suddenly the car put on his lights and siren. It was a cop and he said: “Sorry I confused you for a teen Vandal”

    It was a very scary experience. I honestly thought the guy in the car wanted to kidnap me; I had no clue up against how many people I was, or what guns etc they had. It never crossed my mind that he thought I could be a criminal and that was why he was following me. I also didn’t expect the car following me to be a cop (a person seeking to protect the neighbourhood.)
    Tayvon martin must have been so scared and I am really sorry 🙁

    People have to understand that there is a limit between keeping your neighbourhood safe and hunting down young men walking down the street. I mean, it tells us all that fear has driven us to the point were we cannot walk down the street. That is wrong and very sad. 🙁

    If I had not lived this experience myself, I don;t think I would have understood how amazingly scary it is to be followed by a car in the dark; and how it never crosses your mind that it is a person watching over the neighbourhood.

    I don’t know what the best outcome for this case should be. Perhaps a guilty verdict would be a wake up call to all of the george zimmerman out there. It is scary that you cannot freely walk down the street anymore, without you being considered a threat.

    I also want to ask. Was it legal what the cop did to me? follow me a bit and then put up his sirens? Once he put on his sirens I was completely visible to him, and he saw I was a regular guy just walking home from work. But before, when he was following with his lights out, it was very very scary. Any feedback?

    BTW, Great post eyes

    • AJ
      AJ says:

      And I have to address this, because it’s been staring me in the face for a few days. Without being rude, yes it’s entirely legal for a cop to follow you briefly and put his lights on. Please get some tougher skin, the real world will eat you alive. Btway I am a combat vet, and your post (and the amount of upvotes) makes me wince at what Americans currently think is illegal or what infringes their rights by making them feel “uncomfortable”. You should visit another country sometime and see what the rest of the world gets scared about. I wonder how many of your rights you would trade in to feel more secure?

  5. OrlandoGuy
    OrlandoGuy says:

    What a crock! I live five miles from this area, and yes it’s a haven for crime. Just read the weekly crime report, mostly black but we are not supposd to say something politically incorrect, although,true.

    Who calls the police before they willfully shoot someone? When he is asked by the police who,shot him, he honestly answers he did. And later goes on to explain this.

    Your opinion, eyes,,is just that. Starting to doubt your,ability to detect lies. You seem like Nancy Grace to verge on the side of politically correct.

    On the flip,side, who,goes out in the rain to buy skiddles and tea? Especially when you are suspended from school for,ten days, and in an unknown neighborhood at night. Quite frankly he should have been grounded, but parents these days don’t want no,discipline their punk,kids.

    Judging by travyons cracker remarks, he,sounds like,a,racist looking for a fight.

    • jeff
      jeff says:

      exactly my point. You say: “who,goes out in the rain to buy skiddles and tea? ”
      People are now living in fear and can’t even go out to buy skittles and tea, without being considered a criminal…
      That is horrible.

      It is completely normal to take a walk and buy stuff from the corner store.

      • AJ
        AJ says:

        see the link I posted, Skittles and tea plus robotussin is a popular drink the kids use these days to get high. TM had posted online previously that he was a fan of exactly this recipe.

        • auberge
          auberge says:

          So wait, how does that have anything to do with his getting shot to death? I love cough syrup, it does seem to sharpen my wits or settle my nerves or something, but I never expect that if i did take some for that reason it would absolve someone from guilt if they killed me right then?

        • AKRNC
          AKRNC says:

          No, it’s not used to make the drink you refer to called Lean. That’s a rumor started by the Conservative Treehouse and if you google it as I did after I first heard it, the only mention of Lean containing Skittles came from the CT. They have been spreading rumors about TM since day one just like the lie about the video in which he was beating up homeless men that turned out to be nothing close to true. It was a blatant lie. TM NEVER posted that he was a fan of Lean or any such recipe. How dare you defame an innocent kid who can no longer defend himself thanks to an irresponsible wannabe cop with an inferiority complex looking to be a hero?

          • Trigmund Freud
            Trigmund Freud says:

            leave it to a graduate of the palingates advanced research institute in right wing fuckwittery to be at the fore in debunking one of sundance cracker’s (aka: mark ivor bradman) more repellent conspiracy theories. well done, akrnc.

          • AKRNC
            AKRNC says:

            Thanks, TF 🙂 This need for these nutjobs to try to ruin the reputation of a young man who needlessly died due to an overzealous NW member is infuriating. I remember seeing this in April ’12. The ONLY place on the web that mentioned Lean being made with Skittles and AZ fruit drink was the CT. There was only a few hits on google at the time and all of them led to there. However, they never explained where TM was allegedly getting the cough syrup used? He certainly had enough $$$ with him to purchase what he needed yet he didn’t. Just more of the CT b.s.!

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            AKRNC,

            They should never have tried to ruin his reputation and just stuck to the facts. As much as it pains me to say this, you got your wish: justice was done!

          • AJ
            AJ says:

            Our definition of innocent kid differs, especially when you take into consideration I believe (through the evidence presented) that TM initiated the assault. I agree that GZ should be brought on manslaughter. Regardless if TM was a fan of Lean or not, there are many things in his past that indicate he was going down the wrong way in life, and quickly. This whole thing is quite sad. But in life, rarely are things ever true black and white.

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            AJ,

            Yeah, regarding AKRNC’s definition of a kid, I told him this:

            “I would love to have seen you walk up to TM while he was still alive,
            hanging out with his friends, and call him a “boy” or a “kid”: the
            reference you so fondly use in your skewed deference to his overall
            innocence … it wouldn’t be GZ that needs the gun then.”

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            Obviously, although no one can do it now because TM is dead …

            I would love to have seen you walk up to TM while he was still alive, hanging out with his friends, and call him a “boy” or a “kid”: the reference you so fondly use in your skewed deference to his overall innocence … it wouldn’t be GZ that needs the gun then.

          • tuesdayprichard
            tuesdayprichard says:

            Absolutely UNTRUE. I work with younger people and they have absolutely confirmed “Lean” and it’s not with tea. So much for your research, eh? It was NOT tea that Trayvon bought. Did you even LOOK at the photos? It was a Watermelon cocktail by Arizona, exactly what many use to make that toxic drink. (Yeah, I know the media scrubbed the watermelon because apparently they consider it a racial epithet — big deal — blacks also typically like grape soda and chicken. Is that racist? NO, it’s CULTURAL). Its [lean] effects are similar to PCP, hence it’s name — poor man’s PCP. Actual PCP is also not made and circulated as it once was back in the 80’s. Why? It’s because so many people became dissociated — jumping off buildings, walking into machinery, and doing other insane activities that caused untimely death. Abuse of “lean” can cause a person to become daring, aggressive, and dissociative. Trayvon spoke about using this on his Tweets. That is not a rumor. His autopsy also confirms liver damage — look it up! 17 year old’s should NOT have liver damage. . So I’m not sure how it is you think you can attack someone when it’s clear you did NOT go over the entire facts of this case — which is EXACTLY why you support the conviction of an innocent man. So just please stop.

            Also, 17 is NOT a kid, so knock off the hyperbole. It’s bad enough you don’t know the facts or the law apparently so, calling him a kid only further damages your credibility. 17 year olds have fought in wars for this country. 17 years old’s have been convicted as adults and apparently Trayvon’s parents considered him an adult — leaving him alone, unsupervised, even after his THIRD suspension from school. That’s not a kid; that’s a loser with loser parents.

            The wannabe cop line is a bunch of crap as well but, hey I can see why you’re still repeating it because you are not interested in facts. Had you really done research, you would have EASILY found many stories about “lean” and Trayvon’s use of said drink. Had you done research you would not be repeating lies.

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            AKRNC,

            I agree, TM NEVER posted that he was a fan of Lean or any such recipe. As much as it pains me to say this, you got your wish: justice was done!

    • Eric S. Smith
      Eric S. Smith says:

      “…who,goes out in the rain to buy skiddles and tea? Especially when you are suspended from school for,ten days…”

      Sometimes when you want a snack, you want a snack. And I think you’ll find that the corner store will serve you regardless of your academic status.

  6. AJ
    AJ says:

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/what_the_media_choose_not_to_know_about_trayvon.html

    The skittles and tea is not quite so innocent, and Eyes information is quite outdated in this case.

    Eye witness testimony so far backs up GZ, and you can see him answer questions in the vid we know are facts in the same way he answers everything else.

    He might be guilty of manslaughter for placing himself in this, but I 100% believe Treyvon was the aggressor, as in first to start the fight. GZ most certainly followed him at first, but that is not illegal. Why didnt Treyvon just tell him he lived nearby? Because he was trying to be a (self described) thug and answer GZ’s accusatory stance with violence. The whole thing is a shame, and GZ is an idiot who should be charged with manslaughter, not second degree.

    • WhereTheTruthLies
      WhereTheTruthLies says:

      AJ,

      I’m unclear as to what you mean about Eyes information being outdated?

      Eyes is indeed commenting on a video that happened long ago, and you are correct in that we now have more details and RECENT testimony.

      But Eyes comments are about the deception she is experiencing on the video at the time GZ was making the statements: whether new information has come in the meantime or not.

      GZ may be innocent as hell–as we are now learning in the most recent testimony. However, GZ can be innocent of the crime, and still have made deceptive statements when the video was made. And I believe that is what Eyes is contending.

      • tuesdayprichard
        tuesdayprichard says:

        Yes but if he was all about lying, why didn’t he just say that he told Trayvon he was with the neighborhood watch. Apparently this is all he had to say to him and all would be forgiven…that’s what Trayvon supporters are saying. So why didn’t George just lie? I mean, after all, we are supposed to believe that he was this depraved mind who was filled with aggression, and he knew this and knew that and knew how to think about this ahead of time, etc. I swear these people are just as fruity as the drink Trayvon was carrying or those 911 conspiracy nuts.

        The fact is, they have NO narrative. Anything new that has come to light does nothing. They stick with their desired end and manipulate the story to “fit” their predetermined conclusions. Rather than just thinking, “hey maybe this guy is telling the truth,” they favor any and every narrative that makes him into a liar. So yeah, George is lying, the police are lying, the witnesses — all liars!

        Ugh. It’s almost laughable at this point. Why do all these mental gymnastics when all you have to do is look at facts?

  7. WhereTheTruthLies
    WhereTheTruthLies says:

    Eyes,

    I’ve been waiting for you to chime in on this case. I saw a lot of the same problems with GZ ‘reenactment’ testimony: making it up as he goes along, contradicting himself right and left (it’s surprising that the cop testimony in court didn’t indicate much contradictions) At this point, though, I still believe he shot Martin in self defense from the bottom.

    The witness John Good testified that based on clothing color, GZ was on the bottom. And also stated that the “help help” sounded like it was coming from the bottom immediately before the shot.

  8. WhereTheTruthLies
    WhereTheTruthLies says:

    Inasmuch as people focus on GZ’s “profiling” & “being fed up with the thugs always getting away” as a motive for his actions, no one is really talking about TM’s “being fed up” and how that may have affected his decisions and actions that night.

    For instance, TM goes through life getting constant prejudice heaped upon him, daily, hundreds of times a day. He has people looking at him suspiciously in stores, clutching their purses as he walks by, TM has to be weary of cops, and endure constant judgement and sneers,

    Often times in life, he is able to ignore it, shake it off, and know that he’s OK, that it has nothing to do with him, and that it’s really about “them” projecting on to him and abusing him.

    He’s probably gone through various coping strategies, feeling hurt, being numb, ignoring it, being “polite”, “Uncle Toming” his way out of situations. Consoling himself with the knowledge that it’s their ignorance, and trying to protect himself by “keeping the ‘peace'”

    And then TM arrives at a point in his life of coping, where he realizes he doesn’t have to and shouldn’t have to put up with it any more. In part because he’s getting older, stronger, smarter, more worldly. And partly because it’s built up and he’s sick of it, and no longer wants to kowtow.

    So, on that evening, TM had a choice …

    Upon realizing he was once again “being looked at in a prejudicial way”, he could run straight for his dad’s house and immediately go inside and thereby once again risk feeling as though he’s compromising himself and kowtowing by “running” instead of “standing up” (this had to be an option given the fact that he’s got to be faster and in better shape than GZ ever was–AND had a head start on someone sitting in their car).

    Or he could “stand up for himself”: either by (whatever the truth is, whichever scenario you believe) hanging around, hiding in the bushes, confronting GZ, or ALLOWING GZ to catch up to him, discover him, confront him.

    I’d say, TM was sick of “those people always getting away with it” too!

    • AJ
      AJ says:

      Evidence points to TM being the person who initiated the assault, and the whimsical story you just spun of “what could be” by no means justifies this. It is quite irresponsible to think that assault is an answer to a problem. If just ONE of these people (TM or GZ) had backed down from the tough guy stance, there would be one less dead body in this case. As it is, I believe (according to the florida self defense laws, however misguided they may be on concealed carry) this case comes down to who initiated the assault first. TM in his conversation to his friend right before the incident already was filled with hate to make racial slurs. I believe he struck first and attacked GZ (who lost the fight entirely, being ground and pounded) in a rage for being followed and challenged. Unfortunately for TM GZ was packing that night. Just goes to show why assault should NEVER be the answer in a confrontation. And no, I do not think GZ should have been following TM, he was extremely overzealous as a watchmen. HOWEVER he did nothing illegal up to the fight (as the evidence is showing). If anything he is slightly exaggerating his claim of how bad he was beat up, and this I think is an understandable human reaction, and was a stupid thing to do because it calls into question his honesty.

      aside: the media then spun this case entirely, and what could have been a manslaughter conviction on GZ will now be GZ being acquitted because the state cannot prove second degree.

      I usually agree with Eyes, but her analysis is based on older information and just the video.

      • WhereTheTruthLies
        WhereTheTruthLies says:

        AJ,

        I agree with many of your points.

        Especially, when I think of Al Sharpton (you know, the guy who whipped up the frenzy around the Duke lacross team, even though he was, in the end dead wrong) and how he was back on the trail of limelight and frothy lather in this case.

        I also agree, GZ shouldn’t have owned a gun, shouldn’t have been on the watch, shouldn’t have carried while on the watch, shouldn’t have pursued TM. But all of which are, as you say, not legal points of contention. I would even go so far as to say that the person who started the fight (whatever that means) isn’t a legal issue either.

        The issue is, if/when GZ was getting his head pounded, did he think he would receive great bodily harm or death. I think he did. And he shot ’em.

        And yes, it’s too bad that both came to this evening with just the right ingredients for what happened to happen.

      • Keith D.
        Keith D. says:

        Her analyses are always based on just the video (or audio in the case of 911 calls).

        • AJ
          AJ says:

          True Keith, and I am familiar. However, some of the things she challenged with GZ’s video have now been corroborated by eye witnesses. Truth detectors have a high degree of accuracy yes, but are sometimes wrong (as they are human). At this point, I think depicting GZ as the one who initiated the assault is disregarding a fair bit of testimony in the case. The Detectives on the ground chose not to purse the second degree before the special prosecutor was appointed (because of the sudden media spin), which means a lot to me.

          I am interested in Eyes analysis of Jeantel however, being the defenses only real witness (besides using GZ’s previous statements against himself). More in particular, that she believes “cracker” to be a non racist term, and that she heard TM say “get off get off”.

          I think the legal guardians of TM should really be ashamed of themselves, as they did nothing the title suggests. Why was Trey out that late by himself as a minor? What were his consequences for being expelled, and starting fights? Also, they apparently already won a 25 million dollar claim, which suggests to me that the media really spun this thing in a way to exploit race relations. The state of Florida is going to have egg over their face over this.

          Parents, this is an excellent time to teach your children that violence should never be the first response, and also to be involved in your children’s lives.

          • Russ Conte
            Russ Conte says:

            In reply, ” some of the things she challenged with GZ’s video have now been corroborated by eye witnesses.”

            I believe there are eight calls to 911 and five in person witnesses. My interpretation of the witnesses is that virtually any conclusion can be drawn because the accounts are so far apart. A 13 year old boy has George beating Trayvon, a witness identified as “John” has the reverse. Two roommates said there was no confrontation at all before the shooting. Another witness said George Zimmerman walked away from the shooting with no blood on him. Another witness said that George was beating Trayvon. And so on and so on.

            Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin#Witness_accounts

            So while it’s true that some witness accounts have supported George’s account, others have not. Which ones are trustworthy? And how do we know those are trustworthy and the others are not?

          • AJ
            AJ says:

            If you have watched the trial you have seen the testimony of PRIMARY witnesses, as well as the pictures from GZ post incident. No blood? Please. These things have already been handed out in giant placard picture form and discussed. If you wish to get serious about the information please inform yourself as to the current happenings of the trial. I believe common sense, from looking at the pictures, the map of the area, and the history of GZ and TM clearly reveal what happened.

            If the defense of “oh well all these witnesses said different things” worked, don’t you think they would have used that to discredit?

            We have testimony from TM’s friend that he uttered racial slurs before the incident, giving enough weight to the TM started the fight incident. He had enough hate in his heart to fight someone who challenged him, and unfortunately it was the worst fight he could have chosen.

            If there wasnt major problems with the witness being called (for instance the motherof the 13 year old, who did not witness a thing insisting something happened) they would have been called to the stand to bolster the prosecution.

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            AJ,

            “… as well as the pictures from GZ post incident. No blood? Please.”

            Did you think that Russ Conte was saying there was “No blood”?

          • ImOpining
            ImOpining says:

            The “guardians” of TM was his father. Nothing wrong w/ a 17 year old being out at 7:15 in the evening alone. He was suspended 3 times: #1 tardiness, #2 Grafitti, #3 pipe & pot residue. The fighting you are thinking of is George Zimmerman getting arrested for fighting w/ a police officer a few years back. Research is key in getting facts, AJ.

          • AJ
            AJ says:

            http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/07/18832092-jurys-look-into-trayvon-martins-past-has-its-limits?lite

            I like how this is upvoted, despite omitting nearly everything we know about TM. There is some research for you, anything you didn’t know?

            I think there is something wrong with a 17 year old being out alone at night when he was been suspended multiple times. Really, how can you think this is acceptable by his guardian? Not to mention the evidence that suggests TM was looking for a gun, and was in numerous previous fights.

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            AJ,

            This was a great article, thanks for posting the link. I didn’t know a lot of that stuff … you’re keeping me informed.

            Was the evidence of TM looking for a gun in that same article, or was that somewhere else?

            All I could find in the article was this:

            “Texts and photos …’U gotta gun?’ reads a text from Martin’s phone … The defense cited a photo of a hand holding a gun, taken with Martin’s phone, and another picture of a gun on a bed.”

          • AKRNC
            AKRNC says:

            TM’s legal guardians as you call them were his parents and there’s nothing “late” about going to the store at 6:15 P.M. on a Sunday night. TM was returning home or at least trying to, until confronted by GZ, at 7:00 P.M. Please get the facts straight before you spout things that aren’t true. There was no $25 million dollar claim! LOL, where do people get this outrageous stories from? The HOA settled for an undisclosed amt but it is suggested that it was approximately $1M rather than go to court and fight what their attorneys obviously believed was a losing case for them. They knew GZ had complaints lodged against him and did nothing about it.

          • AJ
            AJ says:

            SO what you edited your post with was that they did win an undisclosed amount of money from the home owner association, before the trial ever even got started.

            They were pressured by the irresponsible media spin, unless you think that the preponderance of evidence supported TM (which it never has, it has always been hazy).

            This statement ” rather than go to court and fight what their attorneys obviously believed was a losing case for them” is especially wrong if you have been watching the trial so far.

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            AJ,

            Right on. Agreed.

            And the $1M that came out of their insurance coffers was probably pretty close to what the lawyers would have cost them during a dragged out legal process.

            So, once again AKRNC’s blind bias has him spouting “obviously was a losing case, blah blah blah”. And he’s the one who wants true justice done. Whatever AKRNC.

          • tuesdayprichard
            tuesdayprichard says:

            Trying to go home? Really, you’re just not following this case. Not at all. Did you see the timestamps on the 7 Eleven video? By the time George called the NON Emergency line, it was 40 minutes after Trayvon left the 7 Eleven. How in the world does it take a person 40 minutes to walk just a little under a mile? Are you kidding me? The guy was wandering around and looking like he was on drugs, just like the 7 Eleven video proves, just like what George described. He literally tries to walk out the door, turns around, walks down the middle of the main aisle, bends down as if to pick something up, walks towards to cooler at some point, then turns around and back to the exit. All this, not to mention his learning and pocket digging at the counter. How can you say he looked sober? Unbelievable.

            I’m not even getting into the HOA settlement. If you can’t see how political this is by now, you truly are hopeless.

            Just make sure never to get out of your car if you see a black man! You”l be considered a stalker and if you get attacked — oh well, better not have a weapon and if you do, just hang in there — the police will be there any minute I promise.

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            AKRNC,

            Looks like at least the jury got the facts straight. As much as it pains me to say this, you got your wish: justice was done!

      • WhereTheTruthLies
        WhereTheTruthLies says:

        AJ,

        “… and the whimsical story you just spun of “what could be” by no means
        justifies this. It is quite irresponsible to think that assault is an answer to a problem.”

        I had no intention of creating a story to be used as a justification. I feel badly that it came off that way, because it means my message didn’t get across and I wasn’t heard.

        My purpose of writing my beliefs about TM’s experiences in life, was only to balance out what I see as one sided perceptions about GZ’s being guilty based on him being the only one who was “fed up”.

        And that “being fed up” consequently supports people’s beliefs that he profiled TM, stalked TM, hunted him down, and murdered him, all because he was fed up.

        And by contrast, these people further bolster their case by perceiving TM as an innocent child who had no history of bad experiences that would influence HIS OWN decisions that night.

      • WhereTheTruthLies
        WhereTheTruthLies says:

        AJ,

        I agree with most of your summary. There are two questions in my mind though:

        What constitutes “starting the fight”?
        What is the true legal issue with the one who starts the fight?

        Is throwing the first punch, starting the fight? Or invading someone’s space to such a degree that you are compelled to throw the first punch (aka “start the fight”) even though it’s thrown in self defense?

        And on the second issue, what if GZ started the fight. And for the first few minutes of the fight, it was just that, a fight. Non-lethal, and both of them knew it as such.

        THEN, at one point the fight turns into something one considers life threatening? And at that point, defends his life with the gun????

        Is that LEGALLY possible? In other words, in the situation above, would it matter who “started the fight”? Or would it matter only legally who turned a “fight” into a “life or death” struggle, at which point self defense was ultimately justified?

        I’d like to know the legal nuance for that one, not just emotional opinions.

  9. Christopher Dennison
    Christopher Dennison says:

    He passes up the house on the right (at the beginning) which has an address in order to walk behind a bunch of houses (seems dangerous to me, and I wouldn’t do it), gets all the way to the end, and doesn’t say, “And then I told the operator THIS address.” It’s completely missing. Then he says to meet him by the clubhouse, basically negating his entire reason for walking that far. Crazy. (Good catch on the hand gestures!)

    • AKRNC
      AKRNC says:

      In fact, after walking to RVC to allegedly get a house # to give to dispatch, when dispatch asks him only a minute later for an address, GZ says he doesn’t have one. All of his actions, despite agreeing to not following TM when dispatch advised him not to, indicate that GZ continued to follow and search for him. He admitted in the SPD interview that he went to RVC and looked around the corner and told dispatch, “He’s gone”. He did say that on the phone with NEN, he just didn’t admit to where he was until he was at the police station. GZ’s behavior speaks volumes about his state of mind. He wasn’t about to let this one get away.

      I believe that after listening to Taaffe and GZ speak about the break-in’s at RATL, that they had been actively trying to catch someone in the course of breaking into a home. TM walked PAST Taaffe’s home because it’s next to a shortcut that is regularly used by residents. It was seen on videos, done by news teams that went there to film the area, with kids walking on this path in groups and individually. GZ knew it was a shortcut yet pretended there was something unusual about TM being there. Only two weeks prior to GZ shooting TM, he called about someone being near Taaffe’s house. However, when the police got there, the windows were unlocked and up w/only the screens in place and the door was unlocked. Why would Taaffe leave his home like this, dark, unlocked and with windows open if there were so many burglaries in the area? When Taaffe was called by either the police or GZ, he didn’t return home for several hours despite being only 10 to 15 minutes away. Does anyone else think this sounds suspicious or at the very least, unusual behavior?

      • WhereTheTruthLies
        WhereTheTruthLies says:

        AKRNC,

        “despite agreeing to not following TM”

        Saying “OK” is acknowledging that GZ heard what the dispatcher said. He never said “OK, I will not follow”

        “when dispatch advised him not to”

        The dispatch did not ADVISE GZ. According to the dispatcher’s own testimony, his training specifically states to NOT tell callers what to do one way
        or the other, because they could then get sued for giving ‘advice’.

        “There was no $25 million dollar claim! LOL, where do people get this outrageous stories from?”

        • AKRNC
          AKRNC says:

          You can pretend all you like that GZ wasn’t acknowledging that the dispatcher was advising him not to follow but GZ even said this in his interviews w/SPD. It doesn’t matter what the dispatcher said during his testimony, it’s how GZ interpreted what they said.

          GZ said he was no longer following TM after the dispatcher spoke to him. HE LIED, that’s what counts.

          This is my last reply to anything you have to say. I really don’t want to speak to someone who defends a man who murdered an innocent kid.

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            AKRNC: If I were someone with no self control, I’d have shared my need for an Ignore button too. I hope justice is served.

      • WhereTheTruthLies
        WhereTheTruthLies says:

        “GZ knew it was a shortcut yet pretended there was something unusual about TM being there.”

        I always thought GZ didn’t recognize TM as a resident, or someone familiar. I hadn’t heard about “being on the path” as what conjured up his suspicion.

        • AKRNC
          AKRNC says:

          GZ spoke about TM walking between the houses and coming to the front lawn. How long did GZ observe him before deciding he was suspicious? If I was TM, I’d be cautious in regards to a man sitting in a car who stopped to watch me. GZ’s behavior was far more suspicious than anything TM did.

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            AKRNC,

            I agree, TM had the right to be concerned. Especially, given the prejudice and danger he must have experience in his short life already.

  10. writerforhim
    writerforhim says:

    I personally believe that most rationally thinking adults can read the account Zimmerman gives of what happened, even without the commentary by Eyes, and come to the conclusion that something is amiss with his story. I watch the show the First 48, and on this show many of the murder victims are drug dealers or thugs by definition. The detectives see each victim as a life that deserves justice no matter how they chose to live that life. I think it is irrelevant what kind of person Trayvon was and why he was out late that night. The facts are, he was unarmed, George had a gun. George pursued him even though the 911 operator specifically told him not to do so. George had the advantage of age on Trayvon and out of the two of them should have been the adult in this situation and left it to the police. Lastly, Trayvon is dead and his family is most certainly grieving over him. I feel for the family and friends for their loss and I hope justice is done.

    • WhereTheTruthLies
      WhereTheTruthLies says:

      Something “amiss with the story” does mean deception, but not guilt. In a world where innocent people get convicted all the time, I would certainly bend evidence in my favor innocent or not, given such a circumstance.

      The reason I believe “what kind of person TM was” is relevant is because of GZ claim about being attacked. If it were truly irrelevant, his lawyers would object, the lawyer would rule (in agreement with you) and the testimony wouldn’t be allowed in.

      You are stating ‘unarmed’ vs ‘had a gun’ as facts … as if there are no other FACTS. If guilt/innocence were determined by those TWO facts, not only would TM be innocent and GZ guilty, but we wouldn’t need a trial to get the OTHER facts.

      Not only did the “911 operator” (I understood it to be the non-emergency operator) NOT tell GZ specifically not to follow (he said “We don’t need you to do that”), but also his training specifically states (as the operator testified in court) to NOT tell the person what to do one way or the other, because they could then get sued for giving ‘advice’.

      GZ’s age advantage should have had him “be the adult”, but TM’s youth advantage was physical ability, agility, in shape. Certainly, he could have outrun GZ, especially with a head start given GZ was still in his car. All he had to do was run 100 feet, go into his dad’s apt–that argument could be made as well.

      “I hope justice is done” I assume, means you hope GZ gets convicted of 2nd degree murder … reminds me of Jerry Counelis, the 55-year-old unemployed-painter-guitar-player-stealth-juror who tried to lie and hide his Pro-TM stance and sneak onto the jury in order to execute his own form of justice. Then we’d have to grieve for someone else’s parents!

      • writerforhim
        writerforhim says:

        We are certainly all entitled to our own opinions. I am not sure I fully understand most of your points here and you have done quite a bit of assuming. I don’t feel the need to defend my points, I have made them and they stand as they are.

        • WhereTheTruthLies
          WhereTheTruthLies says:

          It’s encouraging to hear you understand some of my points though. Thanks for reading through the long winded assumptions.

      • AKRNC
        AKRNC says:

        TM was over 100 YARDS from his father’s house, not feet. TM’s physical ability is actually unknown but he hadn’t played football in four years. There is no argument to be made about TM going to his father’s house because he had every right to be where he was. I doubt he expected GZ to get out of his car and run after him. When TM heard GZ come running up to the T, chances are he hid behind one of the columns rather than lead GZ to his home. After all, he had no idea who this creepy guy was that was following him. Why didn’t GZ I.D. himself when he was in his car? He tries to say that he was afraid but if he was truly afraid he wouldn’t have jumped out of the car and ran after him.

        As for not following TM, GZ already knew he wasn’t supposed to do that according to NW directions he received at their orientation meeting and in their paperwork. GZ didn’t need to hear anything one way or another from the dispatcher. He also didn’t listen to them despite saying, “OK” when advised not to follow. He actually admits on a video at the SPD that he went around the corner when he got to RVC and told the dispatcher that TM was “gone”.

        I also hope justice is done and that doesn’t mean I’m anything like someone who would want to be a stealth juror in favor of TM or GZ (many of GZ’s supporters claimed they were hoping to be called for jury duty because they would lie to get on jury, too) I think anyone who would be a stealth juror is despicable and should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            writerforhim,

            I think you should be responsible and less passive aggressive and “fight your own battles” with me, instead of jumping on AKRRNC’s bandwagon with a “Well said AKRNC”, just because he was willing to say something in response to me that you weren’t.

            You said that you don’t need to defend your points, that they stand the way they are.

            Well, then live up to your ‘promise’ of not defending, and don’t use passive aggressive statements in support of SOMEONE ELSE challenging my posts.

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            writerforhim,

            As much as it pains me to say this, you got your wish: justice was done!

          • writerforhim
            writerforhim says:

            You must have me confused with someone who thinks George Zimmerman was innocent. Justice to me would have been George being held accountable for his actions that night.

        • WhereTheTruthLies
          WhereTheTruthLies says:

          AKRNC,

          Very good points. I hadn’t thought at all about TM not wanting to lead the creepy guy straight to where he lived. Thank you for your perspective.

          That’s what is great about these blogs, I often think I’ve got the whole situation pegged, and don’t realize it’s just my narrow perspective. I’ll have to do some re-analysis about this.

          What I meant by you and ‘writerforhim’ using the phrase “I hope justice is done” is that I see it as a cloaked statement. If I believed GZ is innocent, I would want him to be freed. And instead of putting myself out there and saying I hope GZ gets off, I cloak it and appear as though I’m really ‘all for justice and honor and peace and happiness” by saying “I hope justice is done”, when really I hope he gets off.

          When you and ‘writerforhim’ use the phrase (from your writing I gather you both believe GZ is guilty) what you’re really saying is I hope GZ fries, but you get to appear all high and mighty by using the phrase “I hope justice is done”.

          Say what you mean. And quit hiding out in your own false belief in your higher self.

          “Well said ‘WHERETHETRUTHLIES'”

          • AKRNC
            AKRNC says:

            Who are you to tell me what I mean? I have no idea what you’re trying to say in your last sentence so maybe you should proof-read what you’ve written prior to sending.

            I have no problem saying that I think GZ is guilty. I’ve said it on many forums and have no reason to hide behind any statement I make. When I say “I hope justice is done”, I mean just that.

            As to high and mighty? You might want to tone it down a bit before you accuse others of doing exactly what you’re doing in your own posts.

            If only there was an “Ignore” button on here for those who have nothing worth reading!

          • unclechopper
            unclechopper says:

            Trayvon not wanting to lead Zimmerman directly to his house is not really that difficult to accept.

            Zimmerman himself, after all, didn’t want to give his address over the phone. He didn’t want Trayvon to know where he lived.

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            unclechopper,

            TM not wanting GZ to know where he lived is not difficult for me to accept at all. I fully support it, as do I for GZ not wanting TM to know.

            However, that logical truth does not preclude the knowledgeable option TM had which was:

            To avoid going in the back door where GZ might have seen him, and instead use his youth and agility to outrun that fat @#$%!! Zimmerman (yes I know he wasn’t fat then) still trying to get out of his car, and go around the building to the front entrance where GZ wouldn’t have seen him enter his dad’s house!

        • WhereTheTruthLies
          WhereTheTruthLies says:

          AKRNC,

          ” TM’s physical ability is actually unknown but he hadn’t played football in four years.”

          How many years do you think it was since GZ played football?

          How ridiculous.

          • Keith D.
            Keith D. says:

            How many years had it been since he had an MMA fighting class? Oh yeah, he did those something like 9 hours per week I think it was? That’s not something you do sitting down.

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            Keith D,

            Gym Class For Grownups

            I like this quote: “… but upon cross examination by defense attorneys it was learned that this was mainly for conditioning and that he was in fact notably bad at it, going so far as to claim in opening statements that the owner of that MMA gym thought he wasn’t very good and just did the basic cardio classes to lose weight and was not there frequently…We should be cautious in attributing skills and abilities of George St.
            Pierre to George Zimmerman. Gyms are full of beginners, but in order to
            get good, one has to dedicate years of daily training, not a few months
            of 3 days per week that essentially constitutes gym class for
            grown-ups.

            Maybe you think poor little agile 17 year old TM was so out of shape from smoking weed he couldn’t run 100 feet to his dad’s house to avoid the lumbering creepy a$$ cracker.

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            The rubber mannequin was introduced as Dennis Root, a law enforcement
            trainer, took the stand for the defense which tried to use his testimony
            to piece together the deadly confrontation.

            “What information were you able to glean concerning Mr. Zimmerman’s physical prowess?” asked Zimmerman’s lawyer Mark O’Mara.

            “Without sounding offensive, he really didn’t have any,” Root said.

    • AKRNC
      AKRNC says:

      Are you aware that it was 6:15 P.M. when Trayvon walked to 7-11 and only shortly after 7 P.M. when GZ first called 911? He was not out “late” at night by any stretch of the imagination. As to what kind of person he was, he was just like many other teens of this generation and preceding generations. He may have gotten into trouble in school a few times but he came from a loving, caring family and had aspirations and dreams that he’ll never experience due to GZ’s irresponsible behavior the night he followed TM and killed him.

  11. Shoppergalone
    Shoppergalone says:

    Once again you have written a wonderful analysis! I hope you keep doing what you do for a long, long time. You always catch things I hadn’t even noticed. You are awesome!

  12. Karon
    Karon says:

    This was a great analysis, Eyes. I am going to write some more on this tomorrow, but I think the screams were Trayvon’s. I think George couldn’t get on the police force, so he was playing cop. I think Trayvon was screaming for help because George was the one telling him over and over that He was going to die tonight, as George had the gun pointed straight at Trayvon. I can’t believe that a grown man would be screaming for help, over and over, because of the minor lacerations on his head. The medical examiner said the lacerations on George’s head were not consistent with being banged on the cement over and over.

    • WhereTheTruthLies
      WhereTheTruthLies says:

      Karon,

      The ME certainly added to the notion that GZ lied and embellished a lot … doesn’t look good for him. Probably won’t take the stand.

      I always thought, though, that the screams were his (based on very little of course), but I felt confirmed by John Good’s testimony.

      What did you think while considering John’s testimony, did it cause you any doubt or challenge you at all. Or did you think he was lying or not sure enough?

      • Karon
        Karon says:

        WhereTheTruthLies

        I don’t know what to make of John Good. He had the look of being an angry man. He knew GZ, and he was probably angry over the crime in that neighborhood. It was raining and very dark in the area of the fight (from what I have heard. I am not sure John Good really got a clear enough look to determine exactly what all was going on. Trayvon and GZ could have been rolling around, and the one on the top could have changed several times, also.

        This whole story doesn’t make sense to me. Trayvon was afraid of this guy following him, so why would he have attacked GZ? Wouldn’t he have avoided the man and worked his way to his father’s house? I really can’t see Trayvon telling GZ that he was going to die tonight. I really can’t see GZ yelling in fear of this teen since GZ’s injuries were so light. Trayvon was not armed, and GZ was.

        I have picked up on a number of lies told by GZ. He has crossed himself up on several interviews that he gave in a number of ways.

        Another thing that I have noticed is that a lot of people who kill work their way into close contact with the police. GZ took classes, hoping to become a police officer. He wasn’t accepted into the police force, because he had financial problems, so he became the leader of the neighborhood watch program. I think GZ is not a brave man. I think he is a scared weak man and a coward, who panicked when he forced this young man into a fight. Weak people can be a real danger in a lot of instances. They can get really mean, because they are so afraid and ashamed of their own weakness.

        • WhereTheTruthLies
          WhereTheTruthLies says:

          Karon,

          Because of Eyes comment about my opinion of John Good, I’m really having to reexamine my thoughts on this case. I always saw the inconsistencies in GZ’s statements, not only from one interview to another, but from one sentence to another. At times I thought, maybe he’s on dope.

          But even with that, I didn’t waiver from my belief that he acted in self defense. But lately, I’m rethinking that.

          I think that what upset me so right after it happened was the media storm that showed a picture of TM when he was two years old with a halo (exaggeration), and portraying gun vs. skittles, and a bunch of other Al Sharpton half crazed rhetoric–don’t know how he could show his face after the Duke lacrosse fiasco accusations.

          You ask if TM was afraid of GZ, why would he attack him. I’ve got a post (that nobody on this site likes) that explains my view of why TM would “confront” or “hide” or “allow GZ to catch up and confront him”. Let me know what you think.

          To find the post press Ctrl F and enter “Inasmuch as people focus on”.

          Hope to hear from you … you have thoughtful ideas.

          • Keith D.
            Keith D. says:

            It’s understandable to get upset by the media frenzy that followed this case coming to the forefront of national conversation. I don’t like Al Sharpton a bit myself, but what he has to say or not say about this case is utterly irrelevant except from a socio-political point of view. It has zero influence on what the actual truth is whether he supports Zimmerman or Martin, so when evaluating anyone actually involved in the case, outside views need to be discounted entirely– they’re a conversation surrounding a different topic.

            I actually believe that many of the people who defend Zimmerman are people who hate black people, who hate Obama, who hate Sharpton, who hate other black leaders who came out in the media to talk about this case, or who hate the mainstream media itself– almost all entirely for irrational reasons. Their opinions are emotional ones rooted in personal bias, not in science or fact. It’s incredibly difficult to separate those things out even for people who are good at doing it– it is not automatic. So, congratulations, you’re human too. 🙂

          • AJ
            AJ says:

            I believe that the opposite can also be entirely true Keith, racism works both ways, and I have seen supporters of TM spout ideas that are also entirely routed in emotion. I believe your statement to not be true just for the “defenders of Zimmerman” but for both sides in this case. This case happens to be polarizing because of the way it was presented in the media.

            I can say I am not a racist (having to say this brings feelings of McCarthyism), but don’t believe that GZ is guilty of second degree murder beyond a reasonable doubt. Manslaughter is what he should have been charged with. I also don’t view TM as a saint, he was a troubled youth who I believe initiated the assault after being challenged by GZ.

            I do agree that all external influences on the case should be removed when considering the actual crime that took place (something many on both sides are unlikely to do).

            Lumping the media coverage into the defenders of GZ is a different matter. The way the coverage was first presented was in a very biased way, devoid of fact and full of intention to stir the “race card” among the population. I say that the mainstream media did all they could to sensationalize the case, and it’s pretty clear that it has done vastly more damage than good. Instead of going away to prison on manslaughter, he may now walk, and if he is found not guilty who knows what other violence may be carried out by someone looking to settle the score because now it is viewed as a race issue.

            You are entitled to your opinion, but it is an opinion rooted in your own bias as well (as you say, we are all human).

          • Renaissance Girl
            Renaissance Girl says:

            Hmmm. This is telling when you stated:
            “He was a troubled youth who I believe initiated the assault after being challenged by GZ.”

            Then wouldn’t Zimmerman have been the initiator after challenging someone who wasn’t a suspect and especially after he should have stayed in his truck?
            You state that you’re not a racist, too, but I think otherwise, as entitled by my opinion. (^_^)

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            Renaissance,

            My understanding of AJ’s use of “challenged” meant “verbal”. And that SM made it physical. And thus by making it physical “started” the fight.

            Is that correct AJ? Or did I misunderstand you yet again 🙁

          • AJ
            AJ says:

            Why do you think I’m racist? This is the disturbing part to me, the jump to label someone racist because they espouse a different view. I mentioned it with a slight aside to McCarthyism. I kindly reject your opinion, and label you the actual bigot if you are not tolerant of other views in this case.

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            AJ,

            I don’t know how serious I’m taking Ren Girl at this point, given what she went after me for in another post …

            Renaissance Girl: “No, you’re not reading it right. You had typos too with SM instead of TM in your post though.”

          • Renaissance Girl
            Renaissance Girl says:

            Though I don’t agree with everything you said, you do make some good points.

        • WhereTheTruthLies
          WhereTheTruthLies says:

          Holy @#$%!!!, are you serious? I had thought he was the most unflappable, honest witness of the bunch.

          Now I’m truly shaken about my own perceptions and abilities, because I believe in your perceptions, skills and your track record.

          I’m going to have to go back and listen to him again. I had been touting him as the Savior of Rome. Holy @#$%!!! Eyes, you’re doing it to me again. Damn!!!!!!!!!!

          I may have to rethink this whole thing. I’d hate to find all my ‘perceptions’ were actually all based on prejudice.

          Thanks so much for your honesty and your comment, I will take the challenge … as soon as I get up off the floor.

        • jeff
          jeff says:

          maybe you could do an analysis on john good? I think it could be a very very hot post and really help the community.
          thanks eyes. great work. I am addicted to your awesome work

          • AJ
            AJ says:

            I think Jeantel would also be a good candidate for Eyes, as her honesty is in question also

      • Fanta Kissme
        Fanta Kissme says:

        He was lying and he was not sure. My theory is this and I have done the experiment myself RED looks dark at night. Red does not illuminate where you can see it is red without a light being shone on it, so when John Goods says he is sure it was GZ on the bottom he cannot be sure, because red on a dark rainy night with no light takes on black especially with GZ outer jacket color being black the combination of both colors would show up to a normal pupil as dark or black. John lies when he said he could see a white guy on the bottom because his view was obstructed by the person straddle on top. What prove who was on top is the style and technique John Goode state ” He was using a MMA style of aggression not exact but that is what he said the person on top was doing. It is no secret now that the evidence came out GZ was taking Mixed Martial Arts 9 hours a week. GZ had previous encounters with the law that involved aggression. Trayvon Martin had no previous encounters with law enforcement, and neither was he a real suspect the night he was murdered by GZ. It was raining and dark no one could distinguish color they could only see silhouettes and dark clothing. The fact that GZ jacket has red in it under the light doesn’t say he wasn’t on top, however it was his demeanor when he hung up with the 911 that proves ill will.

        • WhereTheTruthLies
          WhereTheTruthLies says:

          Fanta,

          At first I liked your initiative about testing “red” in the “dark”. But there are too many variants in both the color and the lighting.

          If you said you had used GZ’s jacket (of course, impossible to get) and thus had the exact shade of what everyone is describing as “red”, AND you recreated the weather and lighting conditions, I would be more accepting of your ‘verdict’.

          I am however, pondering your comment about the person on top blocking John’s view of the person on the bottom.

          For that to be the case, John would have to have never moved from side to side, or the person on the bottom would have to have never moved at all from side to side (so as to ‘peak out’ in plain view), or the person on the bottom’s hands would never have appeared outside the ‘shadow’ of the person on top, etc. etc.

          John would have had to have been squarely behind the guy on top, with none of the movements suggested above.

          But all that having been said, Eyes says he’s got a lot of deception, so I would like to hear which parts he’s lying about, because I know she’s got the track record to put me in my place.

          I’d also be interested in hearing if you thought GZ was EVER on the bottom? And if not, where did the ‘scratches’ on the back of his head come from?

  13. Karon
    Karon says:

    Hannity’s interview with Zimmerman told me all I needed to know about GZ. Hannity asked him if he was sorry about what happened and would he change anything he did that night, and GZ said no, because he thought it was all in God’s plans. Now, that is one cold person! He killed someone’s teenage child, and now, he is going to blame it all on God. “Wow!

    • Eric S. Smith
      Eric S. Smith says:

      Pretty sure that atheism makes more sense than a god who wants a trip to the corner store to end in a fatal shooting, but I guess there’s a school of thought that says you look more pious on TV if you invoke god, instead of just admitting that you wish you’d stayed in your damn truck.

      • Fanta Kissme
        Fanta Kissme says:

        Where are you going Eric S. Smith because I am following you. A reasonable person would know that god was as far away from Zimmerman’s mind then he could imagine him. Within reason all the evidence in this case is to compelling . Only a willful ignorant fool would believe GZ. But a Christian may be easily persuaded on a course to believe their god Zimmerman. However his complete testimony after he hung up with 911 becomes a delusion, and anyone who follows him into that sphere of belief can in my opinion be also delusional, which is well rooted in them submitting to religion and it concept of false beliefs. A reasonable person know if Zimmerman had stayed in his truck there would not have been a murder.

        • AJ
          AJ says:

          There is not much in your post to convince someone that you are a “reasonable person” when you use a criminal trial to attack an entire religion (and no I am not religious), you might want to get back on topic.

        • WhereTheTruthLies
          WhereTheTruthLies says:

          it’s all moot now anyhow, except this …

          I could have told you this would be the verdict back when Al “Duke Lacrosse Team” Sharpton was whipping up the masses into a non-factual, self aggrandizing, emotional, media frenzied lather, that had turned anyone who was dumb enough to listen into parrots who mindlessly and righteously spouted their new found catch phrases as though they were somehow based on facts or had any meaning at all: Skittles vs. Gun, Babyvs Man, Black vs. WHITE, Wanna be cop, Vigilante, Liar, No wounds, No
          cuts, no blood, Refusing medical care, Ignored “advice” from dispatcher, Getting out of police car at station with no assistance. I could go on and on.

          The only reason people are as greatly outraged and disappointed by the verdict as they are is because they had so far to fall.

          Shame on Sharpton and his band of self serving sycophants!!!!!!

          Unfortunately though, just like Senator Weiner & Governor Spitzer who are now both re-running for office months after their self sabotaging debacles, a couple years from now, everyone will forget how Sharpton once again lead these sheep down the primrose lane, and they’ll follow him off yet another lemming cliff.

    • Uncle Remus
      Uncle Remus says:

      What was even more telling about the Hannity interview is that in it, Zimmerman claimed he had never heard of the stand your ground law before the shooting happened; then we find out not only did he know about it, but he took a course that had self defense as a primary topic and he got an A in it. Wow. How can anyone believe anything Zimmerman says after being caught in that lie?

      • WhereTheTruthLies
        WhereTheTruthLies says:

        Don’t forget about his ‘secret’ (recorded/monitored) coded talks to his wife about their finances. What an idiot.

        • Karon
          Karon says:

          WhereTheTruthLies
          Right, he and his wife lied to the court right off, claiming they didn’t have any money. It isn’t good to start a trial on those terms.

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            Karon,

            Fortunately, that was to the FIRST judge, before he got ‘fired’, right?

            What a crew!

    • Chris in PDX
      Chris in PDX says:

      it’s a funny thing. If a person says the devil made them do it, it would be bad. If a person said that they heard voices telling them to do it, it would be bad. If a person says it was God’s plan, it’s okay.

      Chris

      • WhereTheTruthLies
        WhereTheTruthLies says:

        This is incredible! Excellent! Never heard such a comparison before. I’m going to use this a lot. Did you make this up or hear it somewhere. I love it. Thanks.

        My favorite phrase before I read this had been: “Conservatism is the worship of dead revolutions.”

  14. MomOfTwins
    MomOfTwins says:

    Ive always thought both parties were in the wrong. GZ is guilty of something. This is clearly a manslaughter case in my view. He needs to go to prison 8 or 10 years and see where being a hothead who doesnt listen to what older and wiser people tell you to do (i.e., the 911 operator, his lawyers) gets you in life. But 2nd Degree Murder, no, I dont agree with that.

    • AKRNC
      AKRNC says:

      Manslaughter carries a minimum mandatory penalty of 25 yrs when you kill a minor with a gun in Florida. I agree the state has definitely proven manslaughter, GZ was reckless and irresponsible. If he had identified himself, he could have avoided the situation and if he had stayed in his truck and not pursued him as they were told by the NW liaison, TM would still be alive and GZ would not be facing a lengthy prison term. I’m of the belief that the state has proven ill will due to GZ’s statements regarding “f’ing punks and assholes always get away” but not sure if the jury will see it that way. Although I don’t see how they could not find him guilty of manslaughter if they don’t find him guilty of M2.

      • AJ
        AJ says:

        you need to understand its all or nothing with this case because of what the DA decided. They can’t retry him on manslaughter if found not guilty of m2. Wrongful lawsuit perhaps, but not hard time.

      • WhereTheTruthLies
        WhereTheTruthLies says:

        AKRNC,

        Wonder of wonder …

        As much as it pains me to say this, you got your wish: justice was done!

  15. nurse474
    nurse474 says:

    How can an expert on deception and credibility give a credible analysis,,form opinions and come to these conclusions without taking into consideration that at the time when this video was made (day after the shooting) Zimmerman had a broken nose, head trauma (visible),in pain and sleep deprived? Your opinions come across as matter of fact but have no common sense applied. Example.. Your logic is that GZ should instinctively remember how he got to the ground via push or fall and how TM got on top of him. When a person lands an unexpected punch to the face it is highly probable that a person would become dazed and temporarily disorientated and would not be able to remember…no notable deception. You think that GZ is being deceptive when he is able to identify his position (head on cement body on grass) and hear a door open while in full mode fight or flight. The physiology of fight or flight is exactly the opposite of your opinion. When GZ was full mode fight or flight he was fighting for his life. In this mode senses become acutely heightened. Making assessments using all senses for preservation of self is instinctive not deceptive. Some of the phrases and words that you used stuck out to me and in my opinion seemed odd coming from a professional who is an expert on detecting deception. To name a few “load of crap” “he knows damn well” “AGGRESSOR!!!!” “i hope he is held accountable for what he did” “I hope justice is swift and just”. Very emotionally charged choice of words. Omitting key facts and applying your logic based on emotions is very deceptive. I question your expertise.

    • Trigmund Freud
      Trigmund Freud says:

      how can a nurse credibly analyze an individual who claims to have suffered life-threatening fear in response to a chimeric beating, yet yielded normal b/p and vitals less than 7 minutes later? i question your expertise.

      • WhereTheTruthLies
        WhereTheTruthLies says:

        Trig,

        With all that GZ has lied about, I would be suspicious of a normal b/p so soon afterwards.

        But I would also be suspicious of a normal b/p of someone who profiled TM, knew he was going to kill him, pursued him, was on top,
        didn’t yell help, and murdered him in 1st degree.

        • unclechopper
          unclechopper says:

          It sounds ridiculous, doesn’t it?

          But if Zimmerman’s story is to be taken as fact, we are expected to believe that Trayvon Martin thought that being followed by George Zimmerman was reason enough to attempt to beat him to death with his bare hands while there were witnesses present.

          Neither the story you present above, or the story we are required to believe from Zimmerman’s account, are believable to me.

          What is more believable to me is that Zimmerman was attempting to apprehend Trayvon and Trayvon fought him off.

          It would certainly explain:

          1) Why the argument and fight went for so long
          2) Zimmerman’s lack of defensive wounds
          3) Zimmerman’s wounds not being consistent with a sustained beating
          4) Why Zimmerman could be heard yelling for help on the 911 call

          I don’t think Zimmerman profiled Trayvon because of his race. I think at it’s heart this is a case of mistaken identity where George believed Trayvon to be one of the people on Calabria Springs Cove that he had reported to police previously. That is where he says they are always running to.

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            Very good points. Especially the one about GZ seeing TM as one of the people he’d reported previously.

            The only thing I see a little differently is that I don’t think TM used being followed as a reason to beat GZ to death. Actually, I don’t think TM was trying to kill GZ at all.

            Nor, do I think, that is the legal issue, even if it were true.

            It’s my understanding that self defense is based on what GZ thought was happening or going to happen to him. If GZ feared grave bodily harm OR death, THAT was the LEGAL issue.

          • unclechopper
            unclechopper says:

            If you were to believe George’s story Trayvon’s specifically told him that he was “going to die tonight.”

            There are many layers of complexity to this case.

            I am no legal expert by any means, but this is my understanding of what is actually going on –

            George is using a classic self-defense argument. The prosecution are trying to argue that George is the aggressor, in that his actions have initiated the conflict. The self-defense argument may succeed in mitigating second degree murder to voluntary manslaughter, where the jury may find it easier to convict Zimmerman. The prosecution has been aiming high so there is still a reasonable fallback position.

            George’s state of mind is that these a**holes, these punks from Calabria Springs Cove (where he believes the burglars are coming from) are going to get away again! He’s sick of the cops taking too long to arrive. He’s going to do something about it, and he chases Trayvon, somehow the two of them come together and he attempts to apprehend Trayvon.
            George wants to be a cop. He walks, talks, acts like a cop on duty. He is surrounded by cops and other law enforcement. It is in his family. They are his friends. His best friend is a US Air Marshall. He wrote on legal homework assignment in 2010 that he wanted to be a US Marshall so that he could apprehend fugitives so that they wouldn’t get away.

            And it was George’s wanna-be cop instincts that led him to believe that Trayvon was up to no good, and it sets forth a sequence of events that ultimately end in the death of a kid that just turned 17.

            I mean, let’s see this for what it really is. In that community, George thinks he is Batman.

            If this prosecution is competent, of which I am having my doubts, it will all come together in the closing argument. There is evidence that has been introduced so far where the significance hasn’t really been revealed yet. The Clubhouse videos, for instance… I have studied these greatly and I believe they document George’s movements for the first 2 minutes of his phone call, shortly before he reports Trayvon running. These videos are very damaging to his claim that Trayvon walked alllllll the way to the townhouses, disappeared, then walked alllllll the way back to circle his car (like he says in the video re-enactment) then disappeared again.

          • WhereTheTruthLies
            WhereTheTruthLies says:

            Yes, certainly, our little Batman has a LOT of credibility issues. IN his reenactment, he couldn’t keep from contradicting himself one sentence to the next, let alone one interview to another separate interview.

            Yes, his state of mind was certainly revealed in so much of GZ’s past and recent past. It’s hard to ignore that. I don’t know if this is true, but I don’t think that Manslaughter is on the table. It’s either 2nd degree or nothing. Please let me know if that’s true … it’s just what I’ve heard, I don’t know for sure. And Manslaughter with a gun is actually like 25 years or something … it’s no slap on the wrist. (That’s what I hear as well … not sure).

            I’m not too impressed with the prosecution so far either. If I didn’t know half those witnesses were FOR the prosecution, I would have thought they were defense witnesses. I don’t even know why they called them.

            I’m uncomfortable, even though TM was 17, a teenager, with calling him “a kid”. Mostly, because I’m remembering the slant the media put on this case from the beginning that showed TM in grade school adn GZ with dark shadows, and GZ as white even though he’s Peruvian with a black grandfather, and “skittles” vs “a gun”, and additionally ABC I think it was, who edited the 911 call to make it look like GZ called TM black instead of ANSWERING the 911’s question of what color he was.

            Also, I can’t imagine having walked up to TM at his high school while he was standing with his friends and calling him a “boy” or a “kid”….

      • nurse474
        nurse474 says:

        A credible nurse would analyze an individual and make an assessments objectively. A nurse who makes assumptions is not a credible nurse. When questioning someones expertise make sure you know the person expertise. You know what happens when you make assumptions.

      • WhereTheTruthLies
        WhereTheTruthLies says:

        i guess it’s all moot now … except for this …

        I could have told you this would be the verdict back when Al “Duke Lacrosse Team” Sharpton was whipping up the masses into a non-factual, self aggrandizing, emotional, media frenzied lather, that had turned anyone who was dumb enough to listen into parrots who mindlessly and righteously spouted their new found catch phrases as though they were somehow based on facts or had any meaning at all: Skittles vs. Gun, Babyvs Man, Black vs. WHITE, Wanna be cop, Vigilante, Liar, No wounds, No
        cuts, no blood, Refusing medical care, Ignored “advice” from dispatcher, Getting out of police car at station with no assistance. I could go on and on.

        The only reason people are as greatly outraged and disappointed by the verdict as they are is because they had so far to fall.

        Shame on Sharpton and his band of self serving sycophants!!!!!!

        Unfortunately though, just like Senator Weiner & Governor Spitzer who are now both re-running for office months after their self sabotaging debacles, a couple years from now, everyone will forget how Sharpton once again lead these sheep down the primrose lane, and they’ll follow him off yet another lemming cliff.

    • AKRNC
      AKRNC says:

      I’m amazed that any nurse would claim that GZ was in pain when he
      only when to see his P.A. due to the fact that he needed a note for
      work, NOT because his injuries were bothering him. He also refused to
      go to an ENT at his P.A.’s suggestion. Head trauma? Please, he had a
      1/4″ scratch and a 3/4″ scratch to his head that weren’t deep enough to
      require sutures. It was also a POSSIBLE FX nose, nothing definite about
      it and since all the blood was coming from the two pinpoint scratches
      on the end of his nose, it’s quite likely it wasn’t broken. If he was
      truly in fight or flight his adrenaline would have been pumping through
      his system and his vital signs should have been elevated. Instead, they
      were normal only moments after being in an alleged fight for his life.

      I’ve treated enough patients in the E.R. as a
      Nurse Practitioner that have been in actual fights where they’ve had 25
      punches land on their face and head. They look like it, too. The
      picture with the blood on GZ’s face means nothing when you look at him
      all cleaned up only a few hours later and you only see a scratch on the
      bridge of his nose and a few very minute abrasions in various places.
      He’s more likely to have run into the branches of a freshly pruned tree
      that was seen in the photos taken the following day than he is to have
      been in a life-threatening fight.

      As for GZ’s
      deceptions, he’s given 4 different versions of what happened at the
      moment of shooting, not similar with just slightly different wording,
      but 4 unique versions. He claims to have been smothered while also
      claiming to be screaming, he claims to have had his head banged at the
      same time he shot TM, he said TM was going for his gun and then in the
      re-enactment, he’s not really certain that TM was attempting to reach
      his gun.

      This is the same man who hatched a plan with
      his wife to hide money and was willing to let his parents put their
      house up for his bail than to use the money he recv’d from donations.
      Then he claims he didn’t know he could use it for bail or that he didn’t
      know it was his to use as he wanted AFTER spending tens of thousands of
      dollars paying off bills, buying new cell phones, bullet proof vests
      and paying for security that event he security team said he didn’t
      need. He later refused to pay his security bill, too. He’s not honest
      and that’s been proven time and time again. He repeatedly told the
      investigators he was going to meet the police at the mailboxes yet he
      had told dispatcher to tell them to call him when they got there and he
      would tell them where he was. If he was going right back to his car,
      why did he want the police to call him?

      Try answering
      these questions and then tell me you think he’s telling the truth or
      that Eyes (who has an excellent reputation) is being unfair in her
      noting deception in his movements and speech. Several body language
      experts have said the same thing.

      • nurse474
        nurse474 says:

        Hi akrnc, if you reread my comment to eyes you can clearly see that I am not debating the guilt or innocence of GZ ,but rather questioning eyes on how an expert on deception and body language can accurately and fairly conclude deception without objectives( head trauma,broken nose, sleep deprivation etc,etc) With that being said, let me turn my attention to your comments to me and give reply. You being a PA, if a patient came into your ER with injury from lets say a fall from a ladder..blood on the back of the head and a bloodied nose. You clean the patient up to get a better assessment of the injuries. You assess that the cuts to the back of the head do not require sutures,you notice the nose has a few cuts and possibly broken. Would you minimize that patients injuries? Would you tell that patient you did not get these injuries from a fall from a ladder? would you say.I have seen plenty of patients with injuries from falling from ladders and they look like they fell from a ladder, you do not look like you fell from a ladder? You got these injuries from the shrubs hitting you on your way to the ladder? The patient tells you that they need a note to return to work would you come to the conclusions and say well he is not in pain he only came in for a note to return to work? Is you assessment of the patient based on objective or based on the looks of the other ladder injuries that came through your ER?

        • WhereTheTruthLies
          WhereTheTruthLies says:

          Nurse, I love you, this is great!

          It’s easy to be armchair quarterback and accuse GZ of just shooting because he was losing a fight. Let’s see AKRNC get his head bashed into the cement and make a rational decision about how far the person on top is or isn’t going to take it. Headlines read “GZ could have used gun, but wasn’t sure if he was gonna die or not, GZ guessed wrong and now GZ is dead”

        • WhereTheTruthLies
          WhereTheTruthLies says:

          AKRNC,

          If jurors believe Zimmerman followed Martin, maybe even racially profiled him and initiated the altercation, can Zimmerman still legally claim he needed to defend himself and walk free? Yes.

          If these jurors have questions or doubts about whether, at the moment he fired the fatal shot, Zimmerman “reasonably” feared that this was the
          only way to stop from getting beaten further, then they have to find him
          not guilty.

          To be clear, if we were talking about Florida’s controversial Stand Your
          Ground Law, who initiated the encounter would be crucial and the
          defendant would have the burden to prove that he should not be held
          legally responsible for the shooting. That law, which can protect a
          shooter from even going to trial, wasn’t designed for someone who starts a fight and then loses the fight he initiated.

          Zimmerman waived a pre-trial Stand Your Ground hearing and went directly to trial (likely because his lawyers knew they would lose) and simply argued classic self-defense, which is different. Now no matter how it started, if Zimmerman shot Martin because he reasonably believed it was the only way to protect himself from “great bodily harm” then he is not guilty. That’s the law.

          • unclechopper
            unclechopper says:

            I do not know if this specifically relates to Florida law, but my understanding was that although Zimmerman is claiming classic self-defense, the prosecution could argue the case for an imperfect self-defense where Zimmerman’s response is considered disproportionate to the threat he faced.

            Self-defense in this context would be a mitigating factor that would see a second degree murder charge reduced to voluntary manslaughter.

            Then again, I’m certainly no legal expert.

        • Keith D.
          Keith D. says:

          Wouldn’t the difference be whether you were treating an injury or reporting an incident to the police or a court of law? For example, in cases of suspected child abuse, even if the parent or child says the injury was caused by something else, the medical professional is still required to report it if the injury is more consistent with abuse. That doesn’t affect how the E.R. would treat the injury, but it would affect the way it was handled outside of that treatment.

      • WhereTheTruthLies
        WhereTheTruthLies says:

        AKRNC,

        Nurse, or not a Nurse. All seems kind of silly now, doesn’t it?

        As much as it pains me to say this, you got your wish: justice was done!

  16. MidnightJustice
    MidnightJustice says:

    I find it a bit disturbing that after such a traumatic experience Zimmerman’s demeanor seems almost too relaxed. I realize that each person deals with different situations in different ways. However, this was an experience in which he allegedly feared his own death was imminent, which was his reason for killing Martin.

    Even throughout the interrogations, Zimmerman doesn’t reflect any strong emotions. At one point in the re-enactment video (Part 2, 5:25) when he was describing how Martin realized he had a gun, Zimmerman makes a sound, what I describe as an exhale/sigh/yawn, almost like he was bored or something:

    —-That’s when my jacket moved up and I had my firearm on my right side hip (pause, inhale)…my jacket moved up (exhale/sigh/yawn) and he saw it…i feel like he saw it he looked at it and he said “You’re going to die tonight MF…”—-

    During one of the interrogations, (I think it was with Singleton) Zimmerman even said that he forgot he had his gun on him. I find it hard to believe that someone who was proactive enough
    to obtain a concealed weapons permit, bought a gun AND holster, and carries a gun on his body
    almost everywhere he travels, would forget. Especially, after he supposedly reached for his cell phone on the same side that he carried the gun. And he still didn’t remember he had a gun? Hmmm….The point of carrying a concealed weapon for self-defense is to be prepared should a situation arise where you have to defend yourself. How could he not be aware that he had a gun?

    Also, I do not believe it was Zimmerman screaming on that tape because of what I stated. I’m not sure if he could even reach that level of emotion for him to scream that way. That scream was coming from someone who was panicked and scared. Yet immediately after the gunshot, the screaming stopped and Zimmerman showed none of these emotions, or at least no one witnessed this. How does a person turn off these emotions so easily?

    How did Zimmerman notice someone opening a door when he supposedly had blood in his eyes and all over his face, with Martin straddling on top of him holding his hands over his nose and mouth, punching him, smashing his head on concrete while he was “losing consciousness”, and reaching for his gun. Zimmerman made it seem like he had a short conversation with the person that opened the door while all of this was happening. I would think he would only be focused on defending himself.

    And why would Zimmerman tell the person with the flashlight not to call the police while he was still holding his gun after shooting someone? Who would run to the aid of a man with a gun?

    I agree with you, Eyes. I don’t buy his story. There are inconsistencies in his statements, his behavior is odd, his timeline doesn’t match up, he’s been caught in lies, his injuries are not consistent with his story of being repeatedly “pounded” and “smashed”. And I say “story” because that’s exactly what Zimmerman’s version is…storytelling.

    • WhereTheTruthLies
      WhereTheTruthLies says:

      I agree with a lot of what you said. I’ve always thought GZ story to be inconsistent, even from one sentence to the next. But I always found myself believing in his innocence–at least in terms of his last act of self defense.

      I can’t believe that having his head smashed against the ground, and TM pounding him that TM would notice anything other than GZ’s head and arms. First of all, TM’s legs would have been covering GZ’ s holster, and even if it wasn’t, how could TM be visually ‘distracted’ by something on GZ’s waistband. That seems ludicrous.

      I never thought much about the calm emotions. But that doesn’t lead to me any conclusion–tell me what you think of my logic–let’s say GZ profiled TM, knew he was going to kill him, pursued him, was on top, didn’t yell help, and murdered him in 1st degree. I can’t imagine him being calm after that either.

      Yeah, I didn’t understand why he would tell someone not to call the police after 30 seconds earlier begging for help and wanting someone to call the police???

      And although I don’t think that you said this, I’ve heard other people’s logic say that the shouting for help stopped after the shot, and therefore it was TM yelling. I would suggest that if GZ was yelling for help, and after shooting TM, TM fell off of him (even if GZ didn’t know the bullet hit him), the threat would be lessoned enough with TM no longer on top of him but laying on the ground for GZ to be motivated to stop yelling.

    • paisleybanana
      paisleybanana says:

      GZ screaming actually does make sense, when you realize he knows damn well the cops are on the way the entire time. He’s screaming bloody murder to get their attention and alert them to his location. It’s the only way he can, because the fight has now rendered it impossible for the cops to call GZ regarding his location. Scream, and the cops know where to find him apprehending his “suspect.”

      And that’s what gets me most about his story. Did he REALLY have to shoot Trayvon knowing full well law enforcement was on its way? He’d spoken to 911. He says he heard John Good say he was calling 911. And then, according to John Good’s testimony, 10 seconds or so elapse between that moment and the gunshot. 10 seconds. Law enforcement is for sure on its way. 911 told him so. And yet he pulls the trigger anyway. He doesn’t even wait for John Good to come back and bring help. No. Somehow he manages to pull out his gun in those 10 seconds. And then he pulls the trigger at a moment when he knows neighbors have heard him and are starting to call 911.

      And then the kicker. After GZ shoots Trayvon, he tells Manolo there’s no reason to call 911, because law enforcement already on the way. He acknowledged he knew they were already on the way. GZ claims to have forgotten he had a gun, but the evidence proves without a doubt he knew law enforcement was on its way the entire time.

      How many times can a Neighborhood Watch guy ignore law enforcement in one night? First he ignores their suggestions, and then he shoots someone knowing full well law enforcement is on it’s way? Oy.

      I want to know why GZ pulled the trigger knowing all of this, because self defense starts sounding pretty flimsy when all of those dots of testimony are connected, and what’s scary is those dots are connected directly to GZ screaming, not Trayvon. There comes a point where there’s too many bad decisions made in a row by GZ over a time period longer than the confrontation for my comfort. I’m becoming more and more sure those are the screams of a vigilante, not a victim.

      And don’t most vigilantes claim self defense? Yep.

      • WhereTheTruthLies
        WhereTheTruthLies says:

        Very interesting take on the screaming motivation. Very unique. No one has even hinted at something like this that I’ve heard. I’m going to have to think about that for a while. That could make all his actions suspect of a cover story. Calling 911 … who would be planning to shoot someone if they’d called the cops? That could be a cover. Who, according to Eyes, would be pretending to look for an address when he was actually following TM instead? Another cover.

        I have to disagree with being influenced by knowing the cops were on the way enough to not shoot. I’m putting myself in the situation of being highly emotional on the bottom, and not thinking rationally. Additionally, if I’m getting my head slammed, I would not be thinking “Oh, he’ll probably stop soon” or “I’m just certain the cops will be here before my skull gets cracked open … I’ll think I’ll chance it and wait for at least 6 more skull slams”.

        I’m being somewhat sarcastic in my quotes, but I’m serious about my state of mind on the bottom: “feared grave bodily harm OR death” is my understanding of the statute.

        But let me know what you think … you had some good things to say. I’m sure there’s more.

  17. jeff
    jeff says:

    If Trayvon had his hand on George’s mouth and his nose as George claims, then how was George able to scream help?

    • WhereTheTruthLies
      WhereTheTruthLies says:

      Try and imagine a fight where TM’s hand is on GZ face, then slips off or is pushed off, then GZ yells, then TM puts his hand back on, then GZ pushes it off, kind of thing … I know it’s a stretch, but I think you can imagine it.

      • jeff
        jeff says:

        The screams in the 911 sounded continuous except for when the gun was shot, then it was silence. Your scenario would involve screams that come and go, which was not present in any 911 call

        • WhereTheTruthLies
          WhereTheTruthLies says:

          You mean GZ said that the hands over his mouth coincided with when he was supposedly screaming? Didn’t know that. Where do I look, testimony or youtube?

          I had always pictured knocked to ground, straddled, punched, hands over mouth/nose, THEN screams.

        • WhereTheTruthLies
          WhereTheTruthLies says:

          guess it’s all moot now, except this

          I could have told you this would be the verdict back when Al “Duke Lacrosse Team” Sharpton was whipping up the masses into a non-factual, self aggrandizing, emotional, media frenzied lather, that had turned anyone who was dumb enough to listen into parrots who mindlessly and righteously spouted their new found catch phrases as though they were somehow based on facts or had any meaning at all: Skittles vs. Gun, Babyvs Man, Black vs. WHITE, Wanna be cop, Vigilante, Liar, No wounds, No
          cuts, no blood, Refusing medical care, Ignored “advice” from dispatcher, Getting out of police car at station with no assistance. I could go on and on.

          The only reason people are as greatly outraged and disappointed by the verdict as they are is because they had so far to fall.

          Shame on Sharpton and his band of self serving sycophants!!!!!!

          Unfortunately though, just like Senator Weiner & Governor Spitzer who are now both re-running for office months after their self sabotaging debacles, a couple years from now, everyone will forget how Sharpton once again lead these sheep down the primrose lane, and they’ll follow him off yet another lemming cliff.

      • unclechopper
        unclechopper says:

        Yeah, imagine this fight going for 70 seconds.

        70 seconds, from the moment Trayvon pops Zimmerman to the gun shot. 70 seconds of being punched in the head 25-30 times, including directly in the nose at least twice… Multiple head slammings, each time George’s head felt like it was going to explode.

        70 seconds of a savage and sustained beating from Trayvon Martin where he never really describes fighting back or defending himself, but all he has to show for it is a nose that *might* be broken and two small cuts on the back of the head.

        Hmmm…

        When I hear the unredacted version of that 911 call, the portions that were previously redacted reveal more of the voice yelling “Help me!” over and over. I would have to agree with people that say this is George Zimmerman.

        But they are not the yells of someone who has just been punched to the ground. They are not the yells of someone who is being smothered, or is being repeatedly punched in the head.

        They are the yells for help from George Zimmerman, wanna be US Marshall, yelling for his neighbours (or the nearby police) to come and help him detain Trayvon before he gets away.

    • WhereTheTruthLies
      WhereTheTruthLies says:

      Center Stage,

      Wow, this is hard to listen to. One of the first ladies to speak is saying that GZ was doing something illegal by impersonating a cop, and then goes on to refer to TM as “the baby”.

      I think I’ve heard enough of this impartial panel.

  18. WhereTheTruthLies
    WhereTheTruthLies says:

    They’re expecting the jury to start deliberation late next week. Jodi Arias’ trial could learn something from this.

  19. tuesdayprichard
    tuesdayprichard says:

    I do not understand this analysis at all. In one part you say, “Do you think if you are in a struggle for your life with a guy who threatens to kill you that you will notice your head is half on the cement or only a “small portion of my head [was] on the concrete”? Do you think you would be able to register all of this as your head is getting beaten in while lying on your back? I’m not buying it. ”

    Later on you say, “Notice the missing details again? He doesn’t know what happened.”

    You expect him not to remember and then you demand he remembers everything perfectly? You have a bias and rather than looking at facts, you choose to nitpick what he has said. First of all, his statements have been rather consistent and the police testified to this fact. Nobody who gets into an altercation is going to be able to tell the story consistently every time. People are multifaceted. We have many things going on in our head at all times. When you add stress and a confrontation, you’re not thinking that you are going to be required later on to have total recall. You’re going to be thinking about all kinds of things and trying to make sense of them. The fact that he remembers the first part of the confrontation better than the last part again, makes perfect sense considering his head was slammed against pavement.

    There is nothing in George’s demeanor that indicated he was in fear of Trayvon or expected him to attack and there is that other problem you have — NOT ONE mark on George’s hands AND NOT ONE injury appeared on Trayvon. How do you explain that if George is the aggressor as you claim? Did you ever try to think that George was telling the truth? Or did you base your opinion solely on the BS the media originally put out. They tried saying George had no injuries — lie. George outweighed Trayvon by 50 pounds — lie. George followed Trayvon and attacked him — lie — even Rachel confirms Trayvon LOST Zimmerman and Zimmerman LOST Trayvon. You can’t follow someone you lost. He also did not get out of his vehicle until AFTER he saw Trayvon take off, and Rachel relays nothing to the court that indicates Trayvon saw George get out of his vehicle. Again, not one thing you’ve stated matches up. Witnesses confirm that George was on the losing end of the fight. This isn’t rocket science. The man was defending himself. Also the straddling position Trayvon was in would make it possible for him to feel something and force him to move his arm down George’s side to grab the gun. Fights are not stagnant, people move and this description George gives is perfectly consistent with all evidence and information we have.

    I could go on and on and I most certainly have. I’ve written about this case from its inception and I have never been more convinced that George is INNOCENT. As far as criticizing him for not appearing to feel remorse is absolute conjecture! You don’t know anything about this man or how he thinks or what he thinks. His general demeanor is calm and not hysterically emotional. So why would you expect him to change his overall character when it comes to this incident? Furthermore why should anyone feel guilty when they know they were defending themselves? I know I would not feel a bit guilty if someone attacked me and I was forced to use my weapon, nor would I feel remorse. I would feel justified as does Zimmerman. You’re probably the same type of person that goes around telling others not to judge people — “don’t judge Trayvon” — but you don’t bat an eye judging George. Amazing.

    Try and take a step back from your emotions and look at this case from a legal perspective, a logical perspective, and try to view this in another light.

  20. $4485292
    $4485292 says:

    Around 2:33 of video 2 you can hear Zimmerman breathing heavily pushing his breath. As if he were trying to surreptitiously hint that this is how he breathes when he is walking comfortably. He’s trying to cover all his bases here.

Comments are closed.