Open Thread on Zimmerman Trial

  • Thread starter Thread starter Seamus_L
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
EmperorNapoleon said:
Lets look at two key excerpts of the call:

All of this transpired before Zimmerman got out of the car. So, riddle me this: Why did Zimmerman need to get out of the car to allegedly look for an address when he already provided the address where Martin was walking to the Dispatcher? Unless of course he was following Martin in direct contradiction with his own statements and needed a different address. Lets continue.

Indeed he was following Martin in direct contradiction with his statements. In fact, it is apparent in the remainder of the call that he was not looking for an address. He told the dispatcher that he didn’t know an address where he ended up next to the mailboxes (hello?), didn’t want to provide his own address, and just wanted to meet an officer where his truck was parked at the mailboxes. Next question: If Zimmerman was attacked by Martin while getting into his truck then how is it that the fight actually occurred on a side walk between two rows of buildings and practically on the other side of the complex from where the truck was parked?
Click to expand...
There’s only three streets in the neighborhood and the lead investigator Serino even asked why after 3 years of living there he didn’t know the name of the street.

You can look it up if you need his answer. Hmmmmmmmmmmm…
 
vz71 said:
Why not? Would you have him sent to prison simply because he does not live up to your standard for consistency?
Click to expand...
There are plenty of people on CAF who have been ready to do that well before it went to trial. Apparently, “beyond a reasonable doubt” no longer applies. 🤷
 
vz71 said:
Why not? Would you have him sent to prison simply because he does not live up to your standard for consistency?
Click to expand...
No that’s why no one here is on the jury; everyone here but two posters have already formed an opinion or enough of an opinion to preclude them from a jury.
 
rlg94086 said:
There are plenty of people on CAF who have been ready to do that well before it went to trial. Apparently, “beyond a reasonable doubt” no longer applies. 🤷
Click to expand...
There are more people on this thread that feel this should not have gone to trial at all.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
Lets look at two key excerpts of the call:

Indeed he was following Martin in direct contradiction with his statements. In fact, it is apparent in the remainder of the call that he was not looking for an address. He told the dispatcher that he didn’t know an address where he ended up next to the mailboxes (hello?), didn’t want to provide his own address, and just wanted to meet an officer where his truck was parked at the mailboxes. Next question: If Zimmerman was attacked by Martin while getting into his truck then how is it that the fight actually occurred on a side walk between two rows of buildings and practically on the other side of the complex from where the truck was parked?
Click to expand...
Wish you would have included the exchange immediately after your second transcript where Zimmerman responds, OK, and as noted earlier his breathing slows down as if he’s stopped moving and the conversation shifts to meeting the police vice additional info on the suspicious person. As someone earlier noted in far more detail.

One of the witnesses noted how poorly marked the streets were and how difficult it was to see addresses. Which is what Zimmerman claimed he was trying to do at this point, confirm the address.
 
styrgwillidar said:
Well, it would be nice if that information is presented to the jury if true.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
vz71 said:
However, without his testimony, we are left with his injuries and the testimony of the other witnesses. There is no indication that he confronted anyone and no evidence of it. And there is plenty of doubt that Zimmerman broke any laws at all.
Click to expand...
I think the evidence exists in the contradiction of his version of events with the facts. Zimmerman claimed that Martin lept from the bushes and attacked him. That might make sense if the fight had happened where his truck was parked near the mailboxes because there are bushes there. But, the fight actually occurred on a sidewalk between two rows of buildings and practically on the other side of the complex from where the truck was parked and there are no bushes there. Zimmerman claimed that he was walking back to his truck, but he was actually walking away from his truck towards Martin’s path. Why would he need to go wandering around looking for address after telling the dispatcher where he wanted to meet the police officer and after the call had ended? Why would he need to go so far away from the truck and past multiple buildings to find an address anyway? I think he intended to apprehend Martin and force him back to the mailboxes so that he could rendezvous with the police with a burglary suspect in tow. Clearly it didn’t work out that way.
 
LisaA said:
Yet you keep referring to Zimmerman being armed. So what? He had a gun for self defense just as many people have a gun for self defense. If you knew how many people on the streets with concealed carry, you would be VERY surprised. You claimed he was out looking for trouble, “profiling” people. There is NO evidence of that.

I think his story is not only consistent but that it ties right into the other witness testimony. That there are minor differences in the reports makes them more credible. It’s when someone has rehearsed a canned speech and repeats it over and over word for word that there is LESS credibility not more.

Lisa
Click to expand...
No one has been consistent in their testimony at this point that I’ve seen.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
Agreed.

I think the evidence exists in the contradiction of his version of events with the facts. Zimmerman claimed that Martin lept from the bushes and attacked him. That might make sense if the fight had happened where his truck was parked near the mailboxes because there are bushes there. But, the fight actually occurred on a sidewalk between two rows of buildings and practically on the other side of the complex from where the truck was parked and there are no bushes there. Zimmerman claimed that he was walking back to his truck, but he was actually walking away from his truck towards Martin’s path. I think he intended to apprehend Martin and force him back to the mailboxes so that he could rendezvous with the police with a burglary suspect in tow. Clearly it didn’t work out that way.
Click to expand...
I agree.
 
MaryT777 said:
No one has been consistent in their testimony at this point that I’ve seen.
Click to expand...
You will always find that investigating incidents. Witnesses in even minor traffic accidents will make contradictory statements, even things that couldn’t physically have happened swearing they are true. And their stories will morph over time, and I don’t think there is any malice behind it. Note the number who mentioned new information not in previous statements- did they deliberately withhold it, imagine it, make it up, remember it, or really simply not think it relevant enough not to mention it without being asked.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
I think the evidence exists in the contradiction of his version of events with the facts. Zimmerman claimed that Martin lept from the bushes and attacked him. That might make sense if the fight had happened where his truck was parked near the mailboxes because there are bushes there. But, the fight actually occurred on a sidewalk between two rows of buildings and practically on the other side of the complex from where the truck was parked and there are no bushes there. Zimmerman claimed that he was walking back to his truck, but he was actually walking away from his truck towards Martin’s path. Why would he need to go wandering around looking for address after telling the dispatcher where he wanted to meet the police officer and after the call had ended? Why would he need to go so far away from the truck and past multiple buildings to find an address anyway? I think he intended to apprehend Martin and force him back to the mailboxes so that he could rendezvous with the police with a burglary suspect in tow. Clearly it didn’t work out that way.
Click to expand...
So you are theorizing what may have happened.
I find it perfectly reasonable to doubt your take on the events.
 
rlg94086 said:
Yep. That’s is why Zimmerman will probably be found not guilty.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t place a bet either way.

It really should come down to whether the jury believes it was reasonable for Zimmerman to be in fear for his life/of serious bodily injury at that point in the fight AND that he wasn’t in that position because Martin was defending himself.

No one was a witness to the critical point- who attacked.
 
vz71 said:
So you are theorizing what may have happened.
I find it perfectly reasonable to doubt your take on the events.
Click to expand...
Everyone here is theorizing what may have happened; no one here was there or a witness
that they’ve noted anyway.
 
vz71 said:
So you are theorizing what may have happened.
I find it perfectly reasonable to doubt your take on the events.
Click to expand...
Zimmerman really had no reason to lie about it though. It isn’t illegal to wander around your neighborhood. Just as it wasn’t illegal for Martin to do the same.
 
vz71 said:
So you are theorizing what may have happened. I find it perfectly reasonable to doubt your take on the events.
Click to expand...
I welcome an answer to the following questions:
  1. Why would he need to go wandering around looking for an address after telling the dispatcher where he wanted to meet the police officer and ending the call?
  2. Why would he need to go so far away from the truck, passing multiple buildings to find an address?
  3. Why was he walking in the opposite direction of where his truck was parked if he was just walking back to his truck?
  4. If Martin had jumped out of the bushes and attacked him, where are the bushes?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top