Unarmed black 17 year old shot by Neighborhood watch captain in gated community...

Page 1757 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Tom

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
13,293
1
76
As opposed to Zimmerman being on a recorded phone call saying "these assholes always get away." & " Fucking punks " when he had not seen Trayvon do anything wrong. This gives us insight into Zimmerman's thinking because those statements clearly indicate that at the time he got out of his car, he'd already in his mind convicted Trayvon of things based primarily on his skin color.

It's also an important note that after confirming he was following Trayvon, and saying ' ok ' to the operator telling him they didn't need him to follow, He then went on to tell them to have the police call him ( because he was not returning to his vehicle ).

And then if we bring DeeDee's statements into the conversation, she directly contradicts Zimmerman's official story with regards to how the altercation started.

There's no point in bringing up facts about Zimmerman's role in this.

Its part of their code that carrying a gun for self-defense is a good thing. And they want the maximum freedom to kill for that reason.

The facts in this case are a threat to that. They have to find reasons why Martin should be dead. So Martin has to be a bad guy who did bad things. It doesn't matter if there's no evidence of that, unless it can be proven he was a normal person then obviously he was bad and did bad things, that way the right to kill is protected.

That's why a broken nose is evidence of assault. Not evidence of a fight. To admit that Martin could have been fighting for his life is to question the right to kill him.

That's why Zimmerman wasn't pursuing Martin. Despite him saying "they always get away." And his recorded heavy breathing that prompted the operator to ask if he was following him.

No, there's no way Zimmerman could have been pursuing Martin. That might lead to questions about why he shot him. No Zimmerman has to be completely innocent of any culpability.
 
Last edited:

airdata

Diamond Member
Jul 11, 2010
4,987
0
0
It is also important to note that on the same call GZ said "He's gone... He ran"

Which very likely means:
- TM is so far away GZ cant see him
- TM was nearby but hiding
how can you follow something when you are not sure where it is?

He says ' he ran ' 8 seconds after he says ' ok ' in response to them telling him they don't need him to follow.

So the same question I posed in my last post.

If he didn't return to the car... just what the fuck was he doing? Because he had no business being out there to begin with. He was on his way to the store when he stopped to racially profile trayvon... So he'd observed and reported already...

If he wasn't returning to his car... what the fuck was he doing?
 

echo4747

Golden Member
Jun 22, 2005
1,976
155
106
If find this a bit unusual: (hope I don't have any facts wrong)

During the video footage of TM at the 7-11, I think there is a video of him ans an incoming call. You can here him say "Hello". He exits the store at 6:24pm
It would make sense that this call would have come in around 6:22 or 623pm.
If you look at the phone bill info (released by B. Crump) It shows no record of this call In fact he was on a call he made at 5:09 this call lasted for 81 min according to T-mobile records.

here is the T-Mobile info:

http://trayvon.axiomamnesia.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/trayvon-martin-call+log.pdf

Any explanation other than this is not the correct T-Mobile phone bill for the phone TM was using?
 

Tom

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
13,293
1
76
If find this a bit unusual: (hope I don't have any facts wrong)

During the video footage of TM at the 7-11, I think there is a video of him ans an incoming call. You can here him say "Hello". He exits the store at 6:24pm
It would make sense that this call would have come in around 6:22 or 623pm.
If you look at the phone bill info (released by B. Crump) It shows no record of this call In fact he was on a call he made at 5:09 this call lasted for 81 min according to T-mobile records.

here is the T-Mobile info:

http://trayvon.axiomamnesia.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/trayvon-martin-call+log.pdf

Any explanation other than this is not the correct T-Mobile phone bill for the phone TM was using?

He put the person on hold while he completed the 7-11 transaction. Either actually on hold or figuratively, it would be normal to say hello to resume the conversation.
 

echo4747

Golden Member
Jun 22, 2005
1,976
155
106
If he wasn't returning to his car... what the fuck was he doing?
probably walking very slowly pausing every now and then ...looking around with his flashlight hoping to see if TM was around.
Maybe not wise .. but not illegal..
 

TerryMathews

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,473
2
0
There's no point in bringing up facts about Zimmerman's role in this.

Its part of their code that carrying a gun for self-defense is a good thing. And they want the maximum freedom to kill for that reason.

The facts in this case are a threat to that. They have to find reasons why Martin should be dead. So Martin has to be a bad guy who did bad things. It doesn't matter if there's no evidence of that, unless it can be proven he was a normal person then obviously he was bad and did bad things, that way the right to kill is protected.

That's why a broken nose is evidence of assault. Not evidence of a fight. To admit that Martin could have been fighting for his life is to question the right to kill him.

That's why Zimmerman wasn't pursuing Martin. Despite him saying "they always get away." And his recorded heavy breathing that prompted the operator to ask if he was following him.

No, there's no way Zimmerman could have been pursuing Martin. That might lead to questions about why he shot him. No Zimmerman has to be completely innocent of any culpability.

A fight is two people striking each other. Where is the evidence Zimmerman struck Martin?

Again, not guilty is not the same as innocent.
 
Last edited:

Tom

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
13,293
1
76
He says ' he ran ' 8 seconds after he says ' ok ' in response to them telling him they don't need him to follow.

So the same question I posed in my last post.

If he didn't return to the car... just what the fuck was he doing? Because he had no business being out there to begin with. He was on his way to the store when he stopped to racially profile trayvon... So he'd observed and reported already...

If he wasn't returning to his car... what the fuck was he doing?

What probably matters the most isn't what he actually was doing for the 2 or so minutes his walkthrough doesn't account for.

Its that his walkthrough doesn't add up. In other words, its a lie.

So why lie about what happened before you killed someone ?
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
He says ' he ran ' 8 seconds after he says ' ok ' in response to them telling him they don't need him to follow.

So the same question I posed in my last post.

If he didn't return to the car... just what the fuck was he doing? Because he had no business being out there to begin with. He was on his way to the store when he stopped to racially profile trayvon... So he'd observed and reported already...

If he wasn't returning to his car... what the fuck was he doing?
Preparing to observe and report again.

The fact that Martin ran raised his suspicions w/ respect to the profiling.
Zimmerman continues to try to observe and report.

We do not know physically where Zimmerman was when he acknowledge the dispatcher request. And at what pace he decided to go back to his vehicle.

Because he had no business being out there to begin with.
He had every business being there. Or do you not understand what the NW program is for?
 

Londo_Jowo

Lifer
Jan 31, 2010
17,303
158
106
londojowo.hypermart.net
What probably matters the most isn't what he actually was doing for the 2 or so minutes his walkthrough doesn't account for.

Its that his walkthrough doesn't add up. In other words, its a lie.

So why lie about what happened before you killed someone ?

All you and the prosecution have to do is prove that it's a lie beyond a reasonable doubt in accordance with the law. At this point based on all available evidence (physical/witness statements) doesn't prove GZ story to be a lie, in fact the evidence tends to support his story.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
What probably matters the most isn't what he actually was doing for the 2 or so minutes his walkthrough doesn't account for.

Its that his walk-through doesn't add up. In other words, its a lie.

So why lie about what happened before you killed someone ?

What was he doing doing the walk-through.

Using his flashlight and peering into porches/bushes along the top of the T going from West to Est until he got to the road.

Looks into the road; does not see anyone running; so he heads back, against looking around in case me missed anything.

What does not add up; that it took him 2-3 minutes from the vehicle to walk along the T and back?
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
Tom - did you try the experiment that I suggested last week in terms of size/leverage
 

Tom

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
13,293
1
76
All you and the prosecution have to do is prove that it's a lie beyond a reasonable doubt in accordance with the law. At this point based on all available evidence (physical/witness statements) doesn't prove GZ story to be a lie, in fact the evidence tends to support his story.

Well, I can't vouch for the accuracy of the tv show someone posted a link to a while back. But according to them there's a couple of minutes of time that don't fit Zimmerman's account.

According to them its easy to tell exactly what time it waswhen Zimmerman left his truck and the exact time of the shot is also documented.

Zimmerman's account should have matched that time within reason, a couple of minutes is a long time.
 

Tom

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
13,293
1
76
What was he doing doing the walk-through.

Using his flashlight and peering into porches/bushes along the top of the T going from West to Est until he got to the road.

Looks into the road; does not see anyone running; so he heads back, against looking around in case me missed anything.

What does not add up; that it took him 2-3 minutes from the vehicle to walk along the T and back?

According to the investigator on the show someone else listed a couple of pages back, it isn't my info.

I'm not arguing they are right, I am saying if they are its gonna call into question Zimmerman's honesty.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
There is the time that the vehicle door is heard to close on the recording of the NEN

There is the time that the shot is recorded on the 911 tape.

Zimmerman does not dispute that he was walking.
One can walk fast or slow; fast in the dark on a slippery sidewalk is not advisable for safety purposes at a minimum.

Also, with Zimmerman potentially using the flashlight; he would be slow and stopping while shining into the diffent shadows that the light would be able to reach.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
Correct. He was doing what he was supposed to do and had every right to do.

Observe and report as a concerned and stand up citizen about the thug's activities.
 

Tom

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
13,293
1
76
Tom - did you try the experiment that I suggested last week in terms of size/leverage

Actually I didn't see it until i went back to look just now.

Of course I'm not going to do it, and I'm not going to presume to suggest things you should do either.

I'm not going to say your wrong in your underlying assertion, but if its a factor in the case it will be interesting to see what the outcome is.
 

Tom

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
13,293
1
76
There is the time that the vehicle door is heard to close on the recording of the NEN

There is the time that the shot is recorded on the 911 tape.

Zimmerman does not dispute that he was walking.
One can walk fast or slow; fast in the dark on a slippery sidewalk is not advisable for safety purposes at a minimum.

Also, with Zimmerman potentially using the flashlight; he would be slow and stopping while shining into the diffent shadows that the light would be able to reach.

Yes, but a person can only walk so slow. 2 extra minutes is a very slow walk over such a short distance.

You know what would be safer than walking on a treacherous wet sidewalk ? Staying in his truck.
 

spidey07

No Lifer
Aug 4, 2000
65,469
5
76
Yes, but a person can only walk so slow. 2 extra minutes is a very slow walk over such a short distance.

You know what would be safer than walking on a treacherous wet sidewalk ? Staying in his truck.

Yes, we know. All crackers are supposed to cower in fear and remain in their vehicles when the young buck is out casing houses and acting suspicious. Fool didn't recognize and got out disrespectin', fo dat he deserved da pounding. Cracka betta recognize slim, from da streets, YO!
 

TerryMathews

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,473
2
0
Actually I didn't see it until i went back to look just now.

Of course I'm not going to do it, and I'm not going to presume to suggest things you should do either.

I'm not going to say your wrong in your underlying assertion, but if its a factor in the case it will be interesting to see what the outcome is.

Lol. Just like when I suggested deforming a sweatshirt and marking it with a magic marker to observe the deformation of the hole.

You see things the way you want to see them and refuse to consider anything THAT YOU COULD DO YOURSELF to empirically show what might have happened that night.

That, sir, is the very definition of close minded.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
Yes, but a person can only walk so slow. 2 extra minutes is a very slow walk over such a short distance.

You know what would be safer than walking on a treacherous wet sidewalk ? Staying in his truck.


1) What do you consider to be a short distance? A person walking normally will cover about 60m in a minute.

2) Getting out of the truck to walk along a sidewalk is not unsafe. Running on a wet sidewalk is unsafe. Which person within this scenario was doing something unsafe?
 
Last edited:

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,667
440
126
Yes, but a person can only walk so slow. 2 extra minutes is a very slow walk over such a short distance.

You know what would be safer than walking on a treacherous wet sidewalk ? Staying in his truck.

No, you are confused Tom.

The news show had only 10 second, from the walking part as a discrepancy with the demo that GZ provided. While on the phone with the non emergency police dispatch call, he claims he is walking from his parked truck to the following street and back to the T intersection on the sidewalk. When he does the walk with police for demonstration he reaches the T 10 seconds faster than what he said in the call.

10 seconds is not a big deal and can be attributed to him walking a bit slower than he thought he was. That does not in any way damage his credibility for his story.


The next part they talk about is that GZ says after he got off the phone with dispatch, almost immediately after TM appears in front of him and sucker punches him after a small exchange. A 911 call is placed by a neighborhood resident and the time from the end of the non emergency call until the gun shot is heard on the 911 call is 2 and a half minutes.

The shot in the 911 call takes place about 45 seconds into the duration of the call. During which time the fight was still ongoing with GZ's pleading for help.

We know for 45 seconds GZ has completely under control of TM by the 911 call. What we don't know is how long before that time that it happened. GZ claims that TM came at him immediately after hanging up with the non emergency call. So GZ account has to explain for 1 minute and 45 seconds of what happened between the hangup of the non emergency call and the start of the 911 call. GZ says there was some talking at first, but his account is very short of what was said. Most of which he stated was backed up by Dee Dee as well. We do not know the exact following in the timeline.

1) Exactly how soon did TM appear after GZ hung up with the non emergency call. GZ claims immediately, but his sense could be off. Immediately could have been the second after, or 20 seconds after. Either would feel very damn fast to the average person that is hoped up on adrenaline.

2) We do not know how long or what was said during the initial vocal confrontation between GZ and TM. The verbal part before the first physical part of the altercation started could have been a few seconds or 30. There could have been a bit more said between both parties than GZ stated or there could have been longer pauses as they were eye balling each other up. Again, time dilation here when two people are amped up on adrenaline from fright is going to occur.

3) We do not know the exact time the physical part of the altercation started, nor how long it lasted before the 1 minute 45 second mark which starts the beginning of the 911 call after the non emergency call.


Again, none of this hurts GZ's creditability at all. The time frame in question is very small and can be attributed to small bits unreconstructed from memory. Time seems to change when you are very amped up from fright in a flight or fight response.

Now if the time unaccounted for had been 5 minutes or more and not a measly 1:45 minutes then there would certainly be a problem with GZ's story.
 

Londo_Jowo

Lifer
Jan 31, 2010
17,303
158
106
londojowo.hypermart.net
Well, I can't vouch for the accuracy of the tv show someone posted a link to a while back. But according to them there's a couple of minutes of time that don't fit Zimmerman's account.

According to them its easy to tell exactly what time it waswhen Zimmerman left his truck and the exact time of the shot is also documented.

Zimmerman's account should have matched that time within reason, a couple of minutes is a long time.

Yes, I watched the film. GZ may have walked slowly seeing if he could gain sight of TM after he ran. However, in this same 2 minutes there was plenty of time for TM to reach safety never to be seen by GZ again. I do believe this fact actually works in GZ's favor as it shows that TM had time to set up an ambush as GZ claimed in his statements.

The same show discussed the ballistics data that you want to twist around in several directions as it shows that TM was in fact on top of GZ when the shot was fired.

As I stated before "At this point based on all available evidence (physical/witness statements) doesn't prove GZ story to be a lie, in fact the evidence tends to support his story."
 

soundforbjt

Lifer
Feb 15, 2002
17,788
6,040
136
1) What do you consider to be a short distance? A person walking normally will cover about 60m in a minute.

2) Getting out of the truck to walk along a sidewalk is not unsafe. Running on a wet sidewalk is unsafe. Which person within this scenario was doing something unsafe?

He wasn't walking initially, he was running. Did you even watch the video timeline posted a couple of days ago? The investigator "walked" the first part that GZ was running and still came up with over 2 1/2 minutes unaccounted for by GZ's own re-enactment.

Where TM was for that time doesn't matter, it shows GZ lied yet again. It's becoming a pattern for him. Lied to officers on the scene, lied to booking, etc. Remember, In the SYG/Immunity hearing, it's on the defense to prove their case, not the prosecution.