Zimmerman to be charged in Trayvon Martin Case!

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Zimmerman should join the Xtreme Justice League.

Mr. Xtreme awaits your application

[video=youtube;odbxTef45ks]
 
From the article you praised:

Ten days after his father was hospitalized, Zimmerman noticed another young man in the neighborhood, acting in a way he found familiar, so he made another call to police.

"We've had some break-ins in my neighborhood, and there's a real suspicious guy," Zimmerman said, as Trayvon Martin returned home from the store.

The last time Zimmerman had called police, to report Burgess, he followed protocol and waited for police to arrive. They were too late, and Burgess got away.

This time, Zimmerman was not so patient, and he disregarded police advice against pursuing Martin.

"These assholes," he muttered in an aside, "they always get away."

After the phone call ended, several minutes passed when the movements of Zimmerman and Martin remain a mystery.

Moments later, Martin lay dead with a bullet in his chest.



Is there other evidence now? I know the police said this all could have been avoidable if he didn't leave the car.

I don't know why you are being such a slypokerdog about this. Usually people can disagee without being a jerk. To answer your question papag, yes I have read a single thing in this thread (see above quote), but thanks for asking.

Seriously, can you read? He didn't follow the guy the last time. A robbery ensued. This time, he followed the guy, until dispatch told him the didn't need him to do that. He said "these assholes always get away" as he went back to his vehicle. 30 or so feet from his car, Zimmerman ended up killing Martin. Martin had two noticeable wounds. A bullet through his chest, and a finger lacerated from beating Zimmerman. Zimmerman had no injuries other than to his head.

I just wonder why you're so gung-ho to convict a guy who apparently was just trying to protect himself.
 
Last edited:
zimmerman got his ass kicked by a 17 year old, and then shot him out of embarrassment

might not be a crime though, i mean, he was about to get beaten to death, amirite?
 
Seriously, can you read? He didn't follow the guy the last time. A robbery ensued. This time, he followed the guy, until dispatch told him the didn't need him to do that. He said "these assholes always get away" as he went back to his vehicle. 30 or so feet from his car, Zimmerman ended up killing Martin. Martin had two noticeable wounds. A bullet through his chest, and a finger lacerated from beating Zimmerman. Zimmerman had no injuries other than to his head.

I just wonder why you're so gung-ho to convict a guy who apparently was just trying to protect himself.

I guess I can't read. The article you cited said he disregarded police advise. It doesn't say he went back to the car. Is that in another article you are talking about. (I'm hoping oldguy can find that because I can't yet)

I'm not gung ho to convict Zimmerman. I already acknowledged that Martin hit Zimmerman and that Martin probably had attitude because he ws being confrtonted and this time wasn't doing anything wrong which probably gives him more of an attitude. But I don't see this obvious he was "apparently just trying to protect himself." I understand that is what he is saying, but that is for a jury to decide . . . you get that right?

The big question is who was the aggressor. If Zimmerman was the aggressor then Martin hit Zimmerman and Zimmerman shot Martin, I don't think jury gives Z-man the self-defense. If they think Martin was the aggressor, then I think he will be not guilty because of self defense.

Why are you so quick to believe someone with a violent past, has done court order anger management, has racially stereotyped both in this case and in the past, was taking a cocktail of medication dealing with anxiety, disregared 911 dispatch and said he wasn't going to let this one get away . . . why are you so convinced he was not the aggressor? Self-defense? Maybe . . . maybe not
 
I had some time at lunch today, so I went looking for the transcript of the 911 call that I referenced above. I thought I had lost my mind, until I checked to see if there were two GZ/TM threads. The quote below was posted by PapaG (Post #438) of the "Imagine if You Were George Zimmerman" thread, which is currently on page 8 or 9 of the OT forum thread list.

I don't have a lot of time these days, so I'll have to wait to comment further.

911 call shows Zimmerman stopped following Martin after dispatcher’s request. You have to love a media that just makes up "facts" and reports them as the truth.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/04/02/91...borates-story/





911 call shows Zimmerman stopped following Martin after dispatcher’s request, corroborates story
By Simon Templar 1:57 PM 04/02/2012


It’s bad enough to see the media make assumptions in advance of the facts. What is so depressing about the coverage of the Trayvon Martin shooting is the extent to which the media made assumptions not only before the facts were available but in spite of contradictory evidence that was already available.

The 911 call George Zimmerman made on the night of Martin’s death is perhaps the most crucial piece of evidence cited by the media to drive the narrative that Zimmerman attacked Martin. Yet listening to reporters and talking heads discuss the case, it is as though not a single one of them has ever bothered to listen to the full call. In fact, as Breitbart.com has already revealed, NBC deceptively edited the tape of the 911 call to make it look like Zimmerman was motivated by racial animosity or bias, something that has been widely reported as factual from the beginning.

To this day, even relatively responsible journalists and commentators begin their commentary by saying things like, “There is a lot about the Martin shooting we don’t know, but what we do know is Zimmerman continued following Martin even after the police told him to stop.” The original story, still maintained by various CNN analysts, was even worse: that Zimmerman hunted down and murdered Martin in cold blood.

I have no idea where this assertion of fact could possibly have come from, but it is absolutely universal. Even now, pundits on every channel maintain that Zimmerman disobeyed a police order (though it wasn’t even an order) and continued chasing Martin. Zimmerman’s story from the beginning to police and to the media has been that he stopped following when the dispatcher told him to. There have been no witness statements to the contrary. For that matter, there are no witnesses claiming to have seen what happened before the physical altercation took place. But what does the 911 tape tell us?

From the call released by the Sanford Police:

At 2:07, Zimmerman tells the dispatcher, “He’s running.”

At 2:09, you can hear a car door open and an alarm begins that is undoubtedly the “door open, keys in ignition” warning on Zimmerman’s truck.

At 2:13, you can clearly hear the car door slamming shut, and the alarm stops.

At 2:17, Zimmerman’s voice wobbles and he starts breathing heavily into the phone, indicating that he has started running.

At 2:22, without any prompting other than the aforementioned noises and breathing, the dispatcher asks “Are you following him?” to which Zimmerman responds, “Yeah.”

At 2:26, the dispatcher says, “Okay, we don’t need you to do that,” to which Zimmerman responds, “Okay.”

Zimmerman proceeds to give the dispatcher his name. Then he says, “He ran.”

Zimmerman can still be heard breathing into the phone until about 2:39, at which point the heavy breathing stops entirely, a mere 13 seconds after the dispatcher asked him to stop following. A very calm and collected Zimmerman then proceeds to give the dispatcher his own information, directions and a description of his location for another 1 minute and 33 seconds.

The difference between someone running while on the phone and not running can be heard quite clearly, and I encourage readers to listen for themselves.

There’s another reason to believe that Zimmerman stopped following Martin: After he gives the dispatcher his personal address, at 3:35, he says, “Oh crap, I don’t want to give that all out. I don’t know where this kid is,” meaning he is worried Martin might hear where he lives. If Zimmerman doesn’t even know where Martin is, would it even be possible for him to still be following Martin at this point? Would it even be possible for him to have continued following Martin after hanging up the phone — a full two minutes after he first got out of his car and a minute and a half after he fully stops breathing heavily — unless Martin came back and revealed himself?

It was a mistake for Zimmerman to leave his car in the first place. But while the audio may not decisively prove that Zimmerman stopped following Martin when the dispatcher asked him to, it is very strong evidence that he did, especially when coupled with his testimony to police the night of the incident. But that isn’t even the point.

The point is this: With no witnesses stating that Zimmerman defied the dispatcher’s wishes and continued following Martin and no evidence to suggest he did, how did the idea that he pursued Martin after the dispatcher told him not to become a universally recognized, undisputed fact?

That it did is a testament to Al Sharpton’s ability to manipulate the media — and the media’s willingness to be manipulated.
 
Nice work, oldguy.

The more I hear about this story.... the more I feel that while GZ made some bad decisions, he isn't the bloodthirsty racist that he was originally painted out to be.

But you throw the black leaders (like Sharpton) out there, ranting to the media.... and it riles everyone up, and even a whiteboy like myself starts thinking, "Yeah, that dude must be racist." And I start feeling guilty for Trayvon, like our society built up this institution of racism.

Then, slowly, after we've already found GZ guilty and left him hanging in the public opinion, facts start coming out that would seem to soften the stance against GZ, and maybe, just maybe, he didn't provoke and instigate the situation with the intent to kill.
 
So I haven't really been following this very closely, really just thru this thread. But slowly I am sucked up into this case (damn it). With all the articles, photos, analysis . . . I found listening to the 911 call one of the more facinating pieces of evidence to all this. It doesn't reveal what happened at the confrontation between the two, but it is a very interesting piece of evidence that can be interpreted two different ways.

I don't hear that call as someone who is heading back to the car. I heard that call as someone who was pursuing. I also heard a person(Zimmerman) who was pissed at Martin and felt threatened by him but was calm and collected. He thought Martin had some kind of weapon which fits with the end result of this incident. Just a very interesting call, and for me, gives a lot of sight into the case. I think Zimmerman pursued Martin who knew he was being pursued (girlsfriend's statements). A confrontatation where both were feeling threatened by the other . . . . words, shoves, punches . . .. bang.

Anyways, anyone who is interested in this case should listen to the 911 call and judge for themselves (that is what the jury will be doing)

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/vide...e-Zimmerman-911-call-reporting-Trayvon-Martin
 
Last edited:
Four witnesses in the Trayvon Martin case have changed their stories, some "in ways that may damage" George Zimmerman, the Orlando Sentinel reports.
According to records released last week in the second-degree murder case, the witnesses--all of them neighbors--were interviewed multiple times by police and special prosecutors about what they saw on Feb. 26, the night Zimmerman fatally shot Martin in Sanford, Fla.
[Related: Should the murder charge be dropped?]
Four days after the shooting, one woman told police she "saw two guys running" and then "a fistfight--just fists, I don't know who was hitting who." But on March 20, she told investigators she saw just one person.
"I couldn't tell you if it was a man, a woman, a kid, black or white," the woman, "Witness 2," said. "I couldn't tell you because it was dark and because I didn't have my contacts on or glasses. I just know I saw a person out there."
Another witness, who was initially interviewed on March 20, said she saw two people on the ground immediately after the shooting, but was not sure who was on top.
But in another interview with investigators six days later, the paper reported, she was sure: It was Zimmerman on top.
"I know after seeing the TV of what's happening, comparing their sizes, I think Zimmerman was definitely on top because of his size," the woman, "Witness 12," said.
[Related: Lies, mistaken eyewitnesses top reasons for wrongful convictions]
A third witness, "Witness 6," told police on the night of the shooting he saw a black man on top of a lighter-skinned man "just throwing down blows on the guy, MMA-style." He said the light-skinned man was calling for help. Interviewed later by investigators, he said he was not sure who was calling for help, and is not sure any punches were thrown.
A fourth witness also interviewed on the night of the shooting said he heard the shooting, ran outside, and saw Zimmerman standing with "blood on the back of his head." According to "Witness 13," Zimmerman told him that Martin "was beating up on me, so I had to shoot him."
A month later, the same witness described Zimmerman's demeanor: "[It was] not like 'I can't believe I just shot someone!' It was more like, 'Just tell my wife I shot somebody,' like it was nothing."

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout...change-stories-ahead-zimmerman-133743219.html
 

Crazy shit. The problem I see with all of this..... You had all these witnesses who gave their story right after the accident.

Now, after a lot of time has passed.... everything that has been said and happened through the media.... about the events, the individuals involved, the theories and GZ's racist tendencies..... all the pressures of being a witness in such a volatile crime.... people's "memories" can change or be altered. Not saying that's what's happened here, but it certainly wouldn't be the first time. But who's to say the media and the attention this case has received hasn't altered the memories of the witnesses? That can create a lot of pressure, doubt, and uncertainty.

It wouldn't be the first time....
 
Zimmerman will be acquitted. No doubt about it. And he should be based on the evidence presented so far.
 
the evidence points to a racist conspiracy against mexicans
 
Crazy shit. The problem I see with all of this..... You had all these witnesses who gave their story right after the accident.

Now, after a lot of time has passed.... everything that has been said and happened through the media.... about the events, the individuals involved, the theories and GZ's racist tendencies..... all the pressures of being a witness in such a volatile crime.... people's "memories" can change or be altered. Not saying that's what's happened here, but it certainly wouldn't be the first time. But who's to say the media and the attention this case has received hasn't altered the memories of the witnesses? That can create a lot of pressure, doubt, and uncertainty.

It wouldn't be the first time....

I guess no one can say media attention hasn't altered their memory, but who to say that media has altered it. Witness testimony changes all the time during reflection of the events. Zimmeraman himself has given 4 contradictory statement (according to prosecutor). If ture, I don't think one should say he is lying, just after time and thought, you remember the incident differntly.

Changing testimony after thinking about an event happens and it too wouldn't be the first time, in fact happens all the time. I think factoring why a witness says they changed their testimony should be considered before automatically chalking it up to media pressure? I thought one witness gave a reasonalbe explanation of why she is changing her initial statement.

What did you think of the 911 call? Do you hear like I do (and some media ) that Zimmerman continued to pursue Martin after dispatch told him not to or the way papag (and some media) hears it which is Zimmerman stopped pursuit and went back to his car.
 
Last edited:
Seriously, can you read? He didn't follow the guy the last time. A robbery ensued. This time, he followed the guy, until dispatch told him the didn't need him to do that. He said "these assholes always get away" as he went back to his vehicle. 30 or so feet from his car, Zimmerman ended up killing Martin. Martin had two noticeable wounds. A bullet through his chest, and a finger lacerated from beating Zimmerman. Zimmerman had no injuries other than to his head.

I just wonder why you're so gung-ho to convict a guy who apparently was just trying to protect himself.

Funny papag, you ask me if I can read as you completely mix up the facts.

Frist, believe it or not, I can read, "seriously". Show me in the article I just posted and you said I can't read where it says he returned to the car. You can't because it doesn't say that.

Next how do you get off asking if I can read when you say something as stupid as:

This time, he followed the guy, until dispatch told him the didn't need him to do that. He said "these assholes always get away" as he went back to his vehicle.

You ask everyone to listen to 911 tape, maybe hoping they don't, then you murder what was on the tape. He said the comment about assholes way before the question of if Zimmerman is following him. In fact Zimmerman sounds like he is in his car when he said this. And no where does he say he is going back to his vehicle.

You finally got me into this case and I can see how much you are distorting this. Watch out papag, I'm starting to follow the facts and going to call you out when you misrepresent them.
 
I guess no one can say media attention hasn't altered their memory, but who to say that media has altered it. Witness testimony changes all the time during reflection of the events. Zimmeraman himself has given 4 contradictory statement (according to prosecutor). If ture, I don't think one should say he is lying, just after time and thought, you remember the incident differntly.

Changing testimony after thinking about an event happens and it too wouldn't be the first time, in fact happens all the time. I think factoring why a witness says they changed their testimony should be considered before automatically chalking it up to media pressure? I thought one witness gave a reasonalbe explanation of why she is changing her initial statement.

What did you think of the 911 call? Do you hear like I do (and some media ) that Zimmerman continued to pursue Martin after dispatch told him not to or the way papag (and some media) hears it which is Zimmerman stopped pursuit and went back to his car.

I'm assuming you just didn't read the last part of my post:

"Not saying that's what's happened here, but it certainly wouldn't be the first time. But who's to say the media and the attention this case has received hasn't altered the memories of the witnesses? That can create a lot of pressure, doubt, and uncertainty.

It wouldn't be the first time...."

All I did was speculate that this is could have happened, but I leave it very open, and was just talking about the possibility, not definitively saying it is the case.

But, ultimately, I'd be far more inclined (and I believe most reasonable people would agree) to believe that after self-reflection and taking the time to reflect on the events of the night..... that witnesses' perspectives and memories had changed to more accurately reflect the events of this situation IF the media hadn't gotten so involved, calling this racially-motivated, hate-motivated, etc.... As soon as this case hit the media, you have Al Sharpton involved. Zimmerman's face is plastered everywhere. People were threatening Zimmerman's life, and other people connected to him. Zimmerman was immediately found guilty, and declared a racist, in the media. Martin's pictures show a young, clean-cut boy. Zimmerman looks angry in his.

There has been so much media manipulation, you just simply can't rule out the suggestion that the media could have influence on any and all witnesses.
 
To be convicted Zimmerman would need to be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. This isn't like a civil case where it only requires a preponderance of evidence. If he is tried by a jury of his peers I see no way he can be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
 
The saddest part about this incident is that Zimmerman is light skinned enough for people to assume he's republican.
 
I'm assuming you just didn't read the last part of my post:

"Not saying that's what's happened here, but it certainly wouldn't be the first time. But who's to say the media and the attention this case has received hasn't altered the memories of the witnesses? That can create a lot of pressure, doubt, and uncertainty.

It wouldn't be the first time...."

All I did was speculate that this is could have happened, but I leave it very open, and was just talking about the possibility, not definitively saying it is the case.

But, ultimately, I'd be far more inclined (and I believe most reasonable people would agree) to believe that after self-reflection and taking the time to reflect on the events of the night..... that witnesses' perspectives and memories had changed to more accurately reflect the events of this situation IF the media hadn't gotten so involved, calling this racially-motivated, hate-motivated, etc.... As soon as this case hit the media, you have Al Sharpton involved. Zimmerman's face is plastered everywhere. People were threatening Zimmerman's life, and other people connected to him. Zimmerman was immediately found guilty, and declared a racist, in the media. Martin's pictures show a young, clean-cut boy. Zimmerman looks angry in his.

There has been so much media manipulation, you just simply can't rule out the suggestion that the media could have influence on any and all witnesses.

I read it all, but skimed it and read it as you giving a likely explanation for the different statements.

If your point is that could be one explanation for it, I would agree. I also agree that given the nature of this case, that possiblity is much more real than in other cases. I though one witness gave a reasonable explanation that I accepted at face value rather than wondering if she deceptively lying because of the media pressure. But whatever, I get your point that maybe they all changed their story because of media pressure. (I have read a lot of media in favor of Zimmerman including neighbor and friends swearing what a good guy he is. These witnesses appear to live in area and might relate more with Zimmerman than Martin. Maybe witnesses change their story to try and help Zimmerman. Although, IMO, I don't think any of these witnesses would purposely lie to law enforcement in a high profile case like this)

I'm genuinely interested in what you thought of the 911 tape. Did you get a chance to listen to it . . . and if so is Zimmerman pursuing Martin or did he back off?
 
I read it all, but skimed it and read it as you giving a likely explanation for the different statements.

If your point is that could be one explanation for it, I would agree. I also agree that given the nature of this case, that possiblity is much more real than in other cases. I though one witness gave a reasonable explanation that I accepted at face value rather than wondering if she deceptively lying because of the media pressure. But whatever, I get your point that maybe they all changed their story because of media pressure. (I have read a lot of media in favor of Zimmerman including neighbor and friends swearing what a good guy he is. These witnesses appear to live in area and might relate more with Zimmerman than Martin. Maybe witnesses change their story to try and help Zimmerman. Although, IMO, I don't think any of these witnesses would purposely lie to law enforcement in a high profile case like this)

I'm genuinely interested in what you thought of the 911 tape. Did you get a chance to listen to it . . . and if so is Zimmerman pursuing Martin or did he back off?

I didn't necessarily have a direct point in this part of the discussion, other than I just think it offers further reason (and I say reason -not proof- because it's a potential argument, not that we have any sort of actual proof in this case) that people need to give the police and justice system a fair chance to sort through the facts before overreacting and drawing all sorts of warranted and/or unwarranted facts, circumstances, attention to a case like this. Give the justice system a chance to work its proper course. The publicity involved in cases like this, I believe, only increases the odds that justice is NOT served in the end. I don't have actual stats to back that up, but it's just something I feel like I've noticed in the public cases that I have followed. It's like when a remark is struck from testimony, and the judge tells the jury to disregard a comment - you can't un-ring that bell in the end. It's like there's so much outrage and anger and calls for immediate action because the suspect is immediately found guilty in the court of public perception, everyone starts with the belief that the suspect is guilty. Jurors are picked, they likely have their belief of guilt or not (they aren't supposed to, but let's be honest - with this much publicity, how can potential jurors not already be swayed one way or another??). Basically, people need to chill the fuck out and stop rushing to judgment - that's why we have a justice system.

As for listening to the tape, I have only listened to part of it. Planned on listening through it all tonight when I get home, since I'll have a free house for a bit. I'll post my thoughts after listening, but from what I have listened to, I didn't really get the feeling that GZ was going after Trayvon. But we'll see once I get through it.
 
I read it all, but skimed it and read it as you giving a likely explanation for the different statements.

BTW, totally cool. I do that too sometimes. At least I didn't ask you if you could read. :devilwink:

But I studied law for 4 years, and I have a high belief and standard for our justice system and equality (as much as it may not seem like it because I often am a smart ass and try to push limits/buttons). There's just a million reasons the statements could have changed, and with all the attention and scrutiny that this case receives, we may never see justice served, whatever that is.
 
[video]" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>[/video]

The above is an uncut audio of the 911 call. I was struck by a couple of things.

First, GZ is very calm throughout the 911 call. He's not agitated and, to me is not someone who is considering killing some kid because he's black, or because GZ is on a macho trip.

He says that TM was wandering around "looking at all the houses." This would seem to be something that would always get the attention of a Neighborhood Watch captain.

He freely gave his full name to dispatch. Doesn't seem like something he would do if he was going to do some vigilante style justice.

The "these assholes always get away" comment seems more like frustration that the police weren't going to get there in time, since TM was running.

If he was still following TM after dispatch told him he didn't need to do that, and he said "OK", why was he worried about giving his address to dispatch because he "didn't know where this kid is." If GZ was still following TM, he would have know where TM was, seems to me.

Go Blazers
 
If he was still following TM after dispatch told him he didn't need to do that, and he said "OK", why was he worried about giving his address to dispatch because he "didn't know where this kid is." If GZ was still following TM, he would have know where TM was, seems to me.

You can hear him continue to follow, the wind sound picks up when he starts running, and continues after he is told he doesn't need to follow. Then the wind sound dies back down. He only says he doesn't where TM is at because he couldn't keep up.
 
This isn't a hate crime, but it's clearly some kind of manslaughter.
 
[video]" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>[/video]

The above is an uncut audio of the 911 call. I was struck by a couple of things.

First, GZ is very calm throughout the 911 call. He's not agitated and, to me is not someone who is considering killing some kid because he's black, or because GZ is on a macho trip.

He says that TM was wandering around "looking at all the houses." This would seem to be something that would always get the attention of a Neighborhood Watch captain.

He freely gave his full name to dispatch. Doesn't seem like something he would do if he was going to do some vigilante style justice.

The "these assholes always get away" comment seems more like frustration that the police weren't going to get there in time, since TM was running.

If he was still following TM after dispatch told him he didn't need to do that, and he said "OK", why was he worried about giving his address to dispatch because he "didn't know where this kid is." If GZ was still following TM, he would have know where TM was, seems to me.

Go Blazers


So as you might have read, I listened to the recording and found it very interesting too. I can see how it can be interpreted different ways.

I too found GZ to be calm . . . but also paranoid and a bit delusional. He isn't agitated, but his first words to the dispatch is he see some suspicious looking guy . . . "who is up to no good or on drugs or something because it is raining and he is jsut walking about". Well maybe race doesn't play into this but what the hell is that. If some 60 year old woman was just out walking about in the rain, would he consider her on drugs?

After that GZ gets concerned that he is staring at him and says "he got his hand his wasintband . . . something is wrong with him . . . he is coming to check me out . . . he has something in his hands, I don't know what his deal is, please get an officer over here" . .. so at this point he sounds a little scared. Of course we later learn that all his assumtions about Martin are wrong. he wasn't on drugs or had any weapon on him

Then after Martin passes you here him say "these assholes always get away" as he opens his door and starts to follow.

So we know that GM thinks Martin is up to no good, that he may have some kind of weapon and that he doesn't want these assholes to get away again.

After that, it gets confusing as to wht happens. I hear someone who is trying to folllow someone. First he runs and then walks, but alwyas trying to keep an eye on Martin. But I could see how some might hear it as he stopped following.

Now Martin never says he is going back to his car. He does say yes to the quetion of if he wants to meet with the officer but when asked to give location he eventually says to have dispatch call him to get his location. That last line is very telling to me.

So if GZ wasn't following Martin, why couldn't he give dispatch a location of where to meet police. Especially when dispatch suggested the mailbox area?

Lot's of questions surrounding this case . . .
 
Last edited:
You can hear him continue to follow, the wind sound picks up when he starts running, and continues after he is told he doesn't need to follow. Then the wind sound dies back down. He only says he doesn't where TM is at because he couldn't keep up.

That is how I heard it.
 
That is how I heard it.

Prove it. You're the DA ... prove Zimmerman initiated contact. It's not up to Zimmerman's lawyer to prove he did not.

Although the entire "he didn't listen to 911 dispatch" is irrelevant, anyhow.
 
This Zimmerman guy is clearly a racist and a criminal mastermind. I mean, who would think to go to a public meeting a year prior to murdering a black person solely to defend a homeless black man beating by a white? It's ingenious!

http://tampa.cbslocal.com/2012/05/2...ating-of-black-homeless-man-by-white-officer/

ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — George Zimmerman accused the Sanford police department of corruption more than a year before he shot Trayvon Martin, saying at a public forum the agency covered up the beating of a black homeless man by the son of a white officer.

“I would just like to state that the law is written in black and white,” Zimmerman said during a 90-second statement to city commissioners at a community forum. “It should not and cannot be enforced in the gray for those who are in the thin blue line.”

The forum took place on Jan. 8, 2011, days after a video of the beating went viral on the Internet and then-Sanford Police Chief Brian Tooley was forced to retire. Tooley’s department faced criticism for dragging its feet in arresting Justin Collison, the son of a police lieutenant.

“I’d like to know what action the commission is taking in order to repeal Mr. Tooley’s pension,” Zimmerman said to the commission. “I’m not asking you to repeal his pension; I believe he’s already forfeited his pension by his illegal cover-up in corruption in what happened in his department.”

Zimmerman’s public comments could be important because the Martin family and supporters contend the neighborhood watch volunteer singled Martin out because he was black. Zimmerman has a Peruvian mother and a white father. His supporters have said he is not racist.

The Miami Herald first reported details from the January 2011 community forum Wednesday. The Associated Press obtained a copy of the tape from the meeting.

In the speech, Zimmerman said he witnessed “disgusting” behavior by officers when he was part of a ride-along program, though the agency said it did not know when, if ever, Zimmerman was in that program.


“The officer showed me his favorite hiding spots for taking naps. He explained to me he doesn’t carry a long gun in his vehicle because in his words, ‘Anything that requires a long gun requires a lot of paperwork and you’re gonna find me as far away from it.’”

Zimmerman also said the officer in question “took two lunch breaks and attended a going away party for one of his fellow officers.”

Sanford Mayor Jeff Triplett and interim police chief Richard Myers were both unavailable for comment.

Zimmerman is free on bond awaiting his second-degree murder trial for shooting Martin. Martin was walking back to a townhome he was staying at when he got into a fight with Zimmerman, who shot him in the chest at close range.

Zimmerman, who claims the Feb. 26 shooting was self-defense, was initially not arrested. But after protests around the country and an investigation by a state prosecutor, he was charged.

Tooley’s successor, Bill Lee, temporarily resigned his post following a no-confidence vote by city commissioners.

Lee offered to resign permanently, but his commissioners turned down his request. He is on paid leave.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top