Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice

[Unabogie]

Hadn't seen this picture before, but it has a pretty good view of the "T":

http://current.com/1a7e4kc

One thing I notice is that there's a tree and a doggie bag dispenser that I hadn't seen in any of the other pictures of the crime scene. Does anyone have another shot of that shows the "T" in the same frame as the police tape or the body bag?

In this photo:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/39658729@N07/6962092266/

I don't see that doggie bag dispenser anywhere. Isn't Zimmerman's story that he was attacked while walking back across the T?

 

[Unabogie]

Actually, looking at those two photos, I now think we've been wrong about the location of the body. It appears that the person shooting the video was standing in between the row houses, which corresponds with the two trees on the left of the first photo. That puts the altercation off to the far side of the short sidewalk, not along Trayvon's path home. This would have put Zimmerman in between Trayvon and his house. That means that in some way, Zimmerman was impeding or could have been perceived as impeding Martin's way home. It also doesn't correspond to Zimmerman being on his way back to to his truck, since it's on the opposite side of the row houses.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Hadn't seen this picture before, but it has a pretty good view of the "T":

http://current.com/1a7e4kc

One thing I notice is that there's a tree and a doggie bag dispenser that I hadn't seen in any of the other pictures of the crime scene. Does anyone have another shot of that shows the "T" in the same frame as the police tape or the body bag?

In this photo:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/39658729@N07/6962092266/

I don't see that doggie bag dispenser anywhere. Isn't Zimmerman's story that he was attacked while walking back across the T?

That's because the 2nd photo is taken from approx. 1210 twin trees lane sanford fl.

You simply can't tell where the yellow tarp (body bag?) is in relation to anything from that screen cap.


ETA: more like the back yard of 3121 Retreat View Cir

 

[RandFan]

I'm sorry, is that a hint that we should abandon the streets in case we get into a scary situation? Or are you hinting that we should blame the victims of assault (ooh maybe someone was walking too close, or had a nice watch or a lady had too short a skirt - how reckless!!)?

Sure, there are ways in which we can minimize risk; you're unlikely to be run over, mugged or raped if you never leave the house... but that doesn't mean that you should get judged as morally culpable if you do. How about we save the finger pointing for whoever actually behaves criminally?

You are making stuff up again. None of this has anything to do with my position. People with weapons must exercise personal responsibility. The facts are:

• GZ was armed.
• GZ was suspicious of TM.
• GZ had no basis to believe that a crime had been committed.
• GZ had no basis to believe there was any imminent danger.

If you drive a car you have responsibility to ensure you minimize risk to others. Don't drink and drive. Likewise, if you have a firearm and see a suspicious person and you are scared of that person, stay in your ******* car.

Any questions?

 

[Giz]

You are making stuff up again. None of this has anything to do with my position. People with weapons must exercise personal responsibility. The facts are:

• GZ was armed.
• GZ was suspicious of TM.
• GZ had no basis to believe that a crime had been committed.
• GZ had no basis to believe there was any imminent danger.

If you drive a car you have responsibility to ensure you minimize risk to others. Don't drink and drive. Likewise, if you have a firearm and see a suspicious person and you are scared of that person, stay in your ******* car.

Any questions?

Yeah, just one: why don't you stop blaming the victim?

 

[Unabogie]

That's because the 2nd photo is taken from approx. 1210 twin trees lane sanford fl.

You simply can't tell where the yellow tarp (body bag?) is in relation to anything from that screen cap.

Actually, take a closer look. You can see two trees that have lost all their leaves. In the first photo, the leaves on the right are still there while the two trees on the left are bare. Imaging taking the photo from behind the second bare tree, looking slightly off to the right. You'd see the brown door that looks like a small garage door (not sure what that is) against the yellow rowhouses, and two leafless trees. None of the row houses are white, but in the "body" shot, you see a white house in the background. That puts the videographer NOT on the street, but coming up the long walkway between the row houses, looking at the T, but slightly to the right.

 

[Rare Truth]

...
And then we learned GZ was on his way to target, not performing whatever 'watch duties' he may or may not have ever had.

Maybe a visual will help:

So if your entire point is GZ had been told he shouldn't be following people, that's probably correct. It was not, however, a rule/order/directive that he was required to follow - so I don't understand why you keep bringing it up.
Reality - GZ probably should have stayed in his car, and TM probably should have run home.

And if and buts were candy and nuts, oh what a Christmas there'd be.

;p

How does any of this play into the legality of case ?

I think it will. It will certainly clarify he should have known better, as he was instructed in the rules by SPD, and not only that, was the appointed captain.

 

[RandFan]

Yeah, just one: why don't you stop blaming the victim?

What are you talking about? I'm not blaming anyone. TM is dead and GZ's life is ****. Both are paying the price for GZ's decision to get out of his car.

Trust me on this, GZ knows that what he did was dumb and if he could go back and do it differently he damn sure would.

Facts are stubborn things Giz.

• GZ was armed.
• GZ was suspicious of TM.
• GZ had no basis to believe that a crime had been committed.
• GZ had no basis to believe there was any imminent danger.

 

[RandFan]

BTW:

Yeah, just one: why don't you stop blaming the victim?

Why don't YOU stop blaming the victim?

 

[Xulld]

What are you talking about? I'm not blaming anyone. TM is dead and GZ's life is ****. Both are paying the price for GZ's decision to get out of his car.

Trust me on this, GZ knows that what he did was dumb and if he could go back and do it differently he damn sure would.

Facts are stubborn things Giz.

• GZ was armed.
• GZ was suspicious of TM.
• GZ had no basis to believe that a crime had been committed.
• GZ had no basis to believe there was any imminent danger.

You left out some facts.

• TM could have ran home after GZ lost him.
• TM likely attacked GZ for the heinous crime of following him, which cannot be justified without additional evidence.
• GZ had called the police and knew they were on their way.
• GZ's motivation was to have the police confront what he thought was a suspicious person.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Actually, take a closer look. You can see two trees that have lost all their leaves. In the first photo, the leaves on the right are still there while the two trees on the left are bare. Imaging taking the photo from behind the second bare tree, looking slightly off to the right. You'd see the brown door that looks like a small garage door (not sure what that is) against the yellow rowhouses, and two leafless trees. None of the row houses are white, but in the "body" shot, you see a white house in the background. That puts the videographer NOT on the street, but coming up the long walkway between the row houses, looking at the T, but slightly to the right.

ETA: more like the back yard of 3121 Retreat View Cir - does that seem about correct to you ?

 

[GWCarver]

The exact source was the STATE PROSECUTOR, or more correctly, from Zimmerman himself.
SA De La Rionda said the word "circling." That term was from the report Zimmerman himself gave to the police that night.

Didn't you even see the Bond hearing?

Feel free to post your source. I believe you also owe me a source on Zimmerman's "indictment".

Here is the headline from the Sentinel four days ago:


Source tells Orlando Sentinel George Zimmerman said Trayvon Martin circled SUV

Here is the first sentence:

ORLANDO, Fla. — George Zimmerman told investigators that while he was on the phone with a Sanford police dispatcher reporting Trayvon Martin as suspicious, the teenager was circling his vehicle on foot, a source familiar with the investigation told the Orlando Sentinel.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

What are you talking about? I'm not blaming anyone.

Yes you are. You do it right below. It's all GZ's fault because he got out of the car.

TM is dead and GZ's life is ****. Both are paying the price for GZ's decision to get out of his car.

But IF TM attacked and beat GZ, neither of them are paying the price for that. Because GZ got out of the car. Makes sense to me.

 

[Giz]

What are you talking about? I'm not blaming anyone. TM is dead and GZ's life is ****. Both are paying the price for GZ's decision to get out of his car.

Trust me on this, GZ knows that what he did was dumb and if he could go back and do it differently he damn sure would.

Facts are stubborn things Giz.

• GZ was armed.
• GZ was suspicious of TM.
• GZ had no basis to believe that a crime had been committed.
• GZ had no basis to believe there was any imminent danger.

GZ getting out of his car wasn't wrong (just perhaps a little rash). TM attacking him, initiating the physical confrontation, was wrong.

Tell me, If a girl decides to walk around at night and she gets raped, do you say "if she'd stayed in your car that night then that wouldn't have happened" or do you blame the rapist?

(I'm giving you an emotional example as you appear to argue from emotion rather than from reason)

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Maybe a visual will help:

[qimg]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y221/who007/spd1.jpg[/qimg]
[qimg]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y221/who007/spd.jpg[/qimg]

I did not realize police had determined he was performing official neighborhood watch duties. Especially since the watch program was never registered and 'official'.

I'll have to look into that some more, thanks.

 

[Rare Truth]

Feel free to post your source.
...

I posted it weeks ago (#8166).

DE LA RIONDA: Did he, Mr. Zimmerman, the defendant, at one point claim to the police that he was scared because Mr. Martin started circling his car?

GILBREATH: Yes.

DE LA RIONDA: According to Mr. Zimmerman he was so scared he still got out of the car and chased Mr. Martin? Correct?

GILBREATH: He went after him,Yes.

DE LA RIONDA: And isn't it true, based on the evidence, Mr. Zimmerman had two flashlights with him?
GILBREATH: Yes.
<snip /tactical flashlight description>

DE LA RIONDA: Mr. Zimmerman never claimed that he chased - in terms of 'ran after' - Mr. Martin, is that correct?

GILBREATH: No.

DE LA RIONDA: But you still have, is it not true, a witness who describes someone chasing another person from the area where they ended up... in other words, from where, near where Mr. Martin lived to the area where the murder happened?

GILBREATH: Yes.
... ...
O'MARA; You had mentioned, the prosecutor had questioned you about Mr. Zimmerman saying that he was having his head hit on the back, correct?

GILBREATH:Yes.

O'MARA; I thought you said the evidence was inconsistent with that?

GILBREATH: No, I don't believe that was his question.

O'MARA; Oh, then let me ask you. Is the evidence inconstant with the suggestion by Mr. Zimmerman that he was his having his head hit or bashed on the ground?

GILBREATH: His injuries are consistent with trauma to the back of his head, yes.

O'MARA;Ok. What are those injuries?

GILBREATH: There's two lacerations to the back of his head

O'MARA; OK. Did you identify what caused those lacerations?

GILBREATH: No.

O'MARA: Could it have been having his head bashed on the ground as he testified to?

GILBREATH: He suggested, I don't know about testified to, he mentioned that his head was being physically bashed against the concrete sidewalk, and that he...this was just prior to him firing the shot, and that he managed to scoot away from the concrete sidewalk, and that is at that point is when the shooting subsequently followed. That is not consistent with the evidence we found."
​

From the video testimony here: George Zimmerman bond hearing :: WRAL.com - Starts at about 1:46:39 (this portion)

 

[RandFan]

TM attacking him, initiating the physical confrontation, was wrong.

Facts not in evidence.

Tell me, If a girl decides to walk around at night and she gets raped, do you say "if she'd stayed in your car that night then that wouldn't have happened" or do you blame the rapist?

I'm not blaming anyone. I tell my daughter to avoid dangerous situations. Is THAT blaming my daughter.

Tell me, if some kid goes to 7-11 to get skittles and he gets shot do you blame the victim?

 

[Rare Truth]

I did not realize police had determined he was performing official neighborhood watch duties. Especially since the watch program was never registered and 'official'.

I'll have to look into that some more, thanks.

You're welcome.

Once you come to realize that's I'm always right, we'll get along just fine.

 

[Unabogie]

ETA: more like the back yard of 3121 Retreat View Cir - does that seem about correct to you ?

I'm thinking it's more like: the back yard of 3021 Retreat View Cir.

Just to the right of the T, looking from along the long walkway.

ETA: Do you see why this changes the dynamic (if I'm correct?). If they are along the long walkway, then Zimmerman is between his truck and Martin and Martin had a much clearer path home. If the altercation happened where I'm thinking it did, then Martin had Zimmerman in his way in order to get past him.

 

[Xulld]

Facts not in evidence.

Not true, we do have evidence, Zimmerman is a witness and so is the "John" witness.

Also we have motive, the knowledge that police were on there way is STRONG evidence that Zimmerman's motive was to have the police confront Martin. Which is consistent with him following, but not with him attacking.