M
MaryT777
Guest
“Fairly” consistent is not a good enough when a man is dead.Actually his story has been fairly consistent.
“Fairly” consistent is not a good enough when a man is dead.Actually his story has been fairly consistent.
When it’s dark, and raining…and that much adreneline is flowing things get a bit blurred…obviously you’ve never been in a life-threatening situation before or you’d know that. Tell ya what…let’s meet someplace dark while it’s raining and I’ll jump out at you…then you tell me how much you remember a few days later.So jumping out of non existing bushes and approaching from 15 feet away is your definition of consistent? Ok then, that explains your viewpoint.
The burden is on the government…not on the defense…and it’s BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT…and his account has been more consistent than anything the prosecution has presented.“Fairly” consistent is not a good enough when a man is dead.
He’d lived in the neighborhood years if I recall.It was dark and it was raining.
According to testimony today, he was on his way to the store when he noticed Martin.He wasn’t even"on neighborhood patrol duty that night.
He was out lookin’ for trouble as he did previously and often; looking for “suspects”
I don’t believe so.Actually his story has been fairly consistent.
And your point is what? He may have known the street name but not the number or the cross street. He did NOT say he was lost. He was asked to get the address. He said he went out of his car to get the address. This is not that hard to understand is it?He’d lived in the neighborhood years if I recall.
Do you want an armed neighborhood watchman that profiles people? He needs to speak to a real officer and not play policeor protecting his neighborhood…
He does have such a history:He does have a long history of being a neighborhood watch member but does not have a history of pursuing and threatening people.
According to testimony he was going to the grocery store.He wasn’t even"on neighborhood patrol duty that night.
He was out lookin’ for trouble as he did previously and often; looking for “suspects”
He was asked to get an address or did he know the address? He was never asked to get any address that I recall from testimony.And your point is what? He may have known the street name but not the number or the cross street. He did NOT say he was lost. He was asked to get the address. He said he went out of his car to get the address. This is not that hard to understand is it?
Lisa
So what? he sure made little ole detour. A young man is dead.According to testimony he was going to the grocery store.
If that is looking for trouble…then I’m in deep.![]()
Mary honestly have you not heard the testimony or read the transcripts or heard the reports? There isn’t the slightest bit of evidence he “profiled” Martin other than that he was a stranger and acting suspiciously. He did report Martin. He said he was getting the information requested by the dispatcher when confronted by Martin. As to what was being “protected” the neighborhood had a rash of burglaries. Martin was walking between houses, under the eves, appeared to be possibly casing the homes. He wasn’t simply walking down the sidewalk with a grocery bag in hand.Do you want an armed neighborhood watchman that profiles people? He needs to speak to a real officer and not play police
What was possibly protected that night? Martin had skittles and an iced tea.
Yes and “Emergency” is the operative word. Too bad it didn’t get nipped then before he could do it again and a young man dead. He was complained about by those in the neighborhood.He does have such a history:
“At an emergency homeowner’s association meeting on March 1, “one man was escorted out because he openly expressed his frustration because he had previously contacted the Sanford Police Department about Zimmerman approaching him and even coming to his home,” the resident wrote in an email to HuffPost. “It was also made known that there had been several complaints about George Zimmerman and his tactics” in his neighborhood watch captain role."
It wasn’t the 911 dispatcher. He called a non emergency number. The dispatcher asked for the address so they could send a patrol car. All of this has been testified to. He was asked if he were following Martin and he said yes. They dispatcher said “We don’t need you to do that” at which time I believe Zimmerman said something like those punks always get away. He did not say “I’m going to collar the guy!”He was asked to get an address or did he know the address? He was never asked to get any address that I recall from testimony.
That makes no sense but I could stand corrected if the 911 dispatcher said
'Hey get out of your car and get an address"
The tape I heard said “we dont need you to DO that” (follow him) when they heard the wind indicasting the door had opened.
He did that on his own as an excuse for why he got out of the car (to get an address)
Obviously we disagree. We’ll see what the jury says.I don’t believe so.
If you read this it says the complaintant was removed, not Zimmerman. Someone sent an email to HuffPo complaining about Zimmerman. Sorry but so what. Do you have a neighborhood association? I do and we get all manner of complaints. Some legit, some not.Yes and “Emergency” is the operative word. Too bad it didn’t get nipped then before he could do it again and a young man dead. He was complained about by those in the neighborhood.
Lisa, I think you’ve missed half the testimony I have no problems with anyone carrying a gun nor have I said any such thing. Maybe if you paid better attention to detail you’d at least understand the other side of the story, even f you don’t agree with it.Mary honestly have you not heard the testimony or read the transcripts or heard the reports? There isn’t the slightest bit of evidence he “profiled” Martin other than that he was a stranger and acting suspiciously. He did report Martin. He said he was getting the information requested by the dispatcher when confronted by Martin. As to what was being “protected” the neighborhood had a rash of burglaries. Martin was walking between houses, under the eves, appeared to be possibly casing the homes. He wasn’t simply walking down the sidewalk with a grocery bag in hand.
I don’t understand why you don’t consider the testimony that contradicts the Prosecution. Its it that Zimmerman has a concealed carry? It’s like anyone with a gun is a bad dude and nothing he says can be trusted. But a thuggish young man, wandering around aimlessly on a rainy night is someone above suspicion…
Lisa
He made a detour after he saw Martin acting suspicious. He wasn’t out looking for someone to hunt down and kill like you were implying.So what? he sure made little ole detour. A young man is dead.
If homes in my neighborhood were being broken into I’d LOVE to have an armed group in the neighborhood…Do you want an armed neighborhood watchman that profiles people? He needs to speak to a real officer and not play police
What was possibly protected that night? Martin had skittles and an iced tea.