Continuation: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[Dan O.]

"The keys are in my truck"???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bn6ji1A7C6o&feature=relmfu

I'm surprised that nobody else picked up on this. It could explain why George is hanging around the Tee for so long after he hangs up with the operator.

Something that should be answerable is whether the door chime we hear indicates that the keys were in the ignition or if it only signals that something was amiss like the headlights being on. Also, is the key an integral part of the remote dongle and if separate, does the evidence log indicate if there's was actually a key on the ring.


Since this wouldn't be JREF without a CT angle, could keys instead be referring to kilos and is that why he then stops directing the cops to where his truck is but talks about the back gate and calls his wife to immediately pick up his truck before it gets trapped in the crime scene and she performs that task instead of coming to comfort her injured baby.

 

[LTC8K6]

Not only that, but it is a 15,000 page thread! It's like a list is being kept of each time someone makes a crazy suggestion.

Note that nearly all of it is from the "M side" too. So assume whatever you want from that.

I think the few people convinced earlier today that perhaps M had blood on his hands and it either A) Washed off; or B) went completely unnoticed by all investigators, medical, and funeral personal is just as weird as some of the claims that person likes to keep listing.

As I said earlier, this is not a court room, there is nothing wrong with everyone bouncing any idea they can think of off the wall.

Who was convinced that TM had blood on his hands? I recall those discussions and I don't recall anyone being convinced that TM had blood on his hands. I think I was the only one who mentioned that it was a plausible idea, and I don't recall anyone joining me.

 

[WildCat]

I didn't read any of the new info. Anything of note, besides the voice stress test?

The Chicago Tribune is reporting that Zimmerman missed 2 chances to talk to Martin.

Apparently he was supposed to get involved with the suspicious person after all?

 

[This is The End]

Who was convinced that TM had blood on his hands? I recall those discussions and I don't recall anyone being convinced that TM had blood on his hands. I think I was the only one who mentioned that it was a plausible idea, and I don't recall anyone joining me.

Good catch. I meant the people that were convinced it was possible that M had blood on his hands and that it either A) Washed off; or B) went completely unnoticed by everyone (all investigators, medical, and funeral personal, etc.).

I, on the other hand, find that extremely unlikely.

 

[This is The End]

The Chicago Tribune is reporting that Zimmerman missed 2 chances to talk to Martin.

Apparently he was supposed to get involved with the suspicious person after all?

Perhaps they mean that, instead of stalking M suspiciously, Z could have said something like:

"Hello, my name is G.Z. and I am with the neighborhood watch. I don't remember seeing you around here before. Do you need any help finding someone?"

 

[LTC8K6]

Good catch. I meant the people that were convinced it was possible that M had blood on his hands and that it either A) Washed off; or B) went completely unnoticed by everyone (all investigators, medical, and funeral personal, etc.).

I, on the other hand, find that extremely unlikely.

I not only found it unlikely, I explained why I thought TM wouldn't have blood on his hands.

 

[LTC8K6]

Perhaps they mean that, instead of stalking M suspiciously, Z could have said something like:

"Hello, my name is G.Z. and I am with the neighborhood watch. I don't remember seeing you around here before. Do you need any help finding someone?"

You don't do that with someone you think is suspicious.

You keep an eye on them from a distance and call the police.

You certainly do not tell them who you are.

 

[LTC8K6]

http://theconservativetreehouse.com...o-and-abcs-matt-gutman-busted/#comment-146513

Treehouse seems to be taking credit for outing Serino as the leaker.

 

[Unabogie]

The Chicago Tribune is reporting that Zimmerman missed 2 chances to talk to Martin.

Apparently he was supposed to get involved with the suspicious person after all?

Yeah, that's very old. They mean, as OTT says above, that in the two instances where in George's version he comes in contact with Trayvon, he does not do the sensible thing and introduce himself as a concerned citizen. In fact, if you want to fully discount DD's story, he never says a word other than "I don't have a problem".

A simple "how are you, I'm just part of the neighborhood watch. do you live around here?" would have sufficed and Trayvon would be alive today.

But again, that's not new. That came out weeks ago.

 

[This is The End]

I not only found it unlikely, I explained why I thought TM wouldn't have blood on his hands.

Well then you weren't one of the people who said it was possible.

You don't do that with someone you think is suspicious.

You keep an eye on them from a distance and call the police.

You certainly do not tell them who you are.

WildCat was apparently confused about what the Tribune article was implying.

I said what I thought the Tribune article was implying, not what own opinion on the situation was. Just to make that clear.

Obviously, we know from Z's own words in the not911 call that he was in no frame of mind to approach M in a friendly way to say the least.

OTOH, even though I hate to bring profiling up, I imagine if it was an old lady looking lost and not M, then Z would have acted completely different.

I doubt he would have called not911, he would probably approach and say something like "Are you lost ma'am?" Or just ignored her completely and went about his day.

http://theconservativetreehouse.com...o-and-abcs-matt-gutman-busted/#comment-146513

Treehouse seems to be taking credit for outing Serino as the leaker.

Are you trying to scoop GWCarver?

 

[LTC8K6]

Does Serino leaking info to the media affect the case?

Assuming it's true.

 

[Unabogie]

Does Serino leaking info to the media affect the case?

Assuming it's true.

How could it? Would it make George more innocent or more guilty?

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Good catch. I meant the people that were convinced it was possible that M had blood on his hands and that it either A) Washed off; or B) went completely unnoticed by everyone (all investigators, medical, and funeral personal, etc.).

How do you know it went unnoticed ?

I, on the other hand, find that extremely unlikely.

I find it really unlikely that the SPD would not secure GZ car.

I find it really unlikely that the SPD couldn't agree on the pants the victim was wearing.

I find it really unlikely that the SPD would not give GZ a breathalyzer or drug test.

Yet ... those things happened despite my belief.

 

[LTC8K6]

How could it? Would it make George more innocent or more guilty?

Fair trial? Credibility of the investigator? I really don't know. It just seems like having the lead detective leaking info would not look good in court.

The video was widely used to discredit GZ initially since it showed that GZ had no injuries.

 

[LTC8K6]

How do you know it went unnoticed ?



I find it really unlikely that the SPD would not secure GZ car.

I find it really unlikely that the SPD couldn't agree on the pants the victim was wearing.

I find it really unlikely that the SPD would not give GZ a breathalyzer or drug test.

Yet ... those things happened despite my belief.

Unlikely that SPD would not count the rounds in the pistol until 3/5...

 

[TheL8Elvis]

How could it? Would it make George more innocent or more guilty?

No, but it may make Serino more or less credible, as a reflection of how well he did his job ? Is leaking to the media in his job description ? Or does that reflect a possible agenda ?

 

[Unabogie]

No, but it may may Serino more or less credible, as a reflection of how well he did his job ? Is leaking to the media in his job description ? Or does that reflect a possible agenda ?

His agenda is putting killers away?

Funny how this could destroy his credibility but George and his lovely wife's Peter Pan adventure must be viewed as separate and of no bearing as to believing his version of what happened that night.

 

[crimresearch]

Shooting someone isn't necessarily evidence of commission of a crime. Lots of ordinary people shoot another ordinary person and aren't guilty of any crime. If the dead body was evidence of a crime, they could have arrested GZ right then for that crime.

Similar information, observations, circumstances, or set of facts can be interpreted different ways, especially in light of other information, but yes, a dead body and a shooter are pretty much evidence that a crime has been committed in this case.

Change the circumstances, and get different results... an 89 year old shooter in a wheelchair, and a 25 year old escaped killer with a knife their hand, and the prosecutor could be overzealous in filing charges.

Police arriving in time to see George dancing around yelling 'That'll teach you to run away from me!', and the prosecutor would be remiss in *not* filing charges.

The facts available to the prosecution at the time these papers were filed (2 people fighting, one of them shot the other), is at neither extreme, but it does meet the minimum requirements.

Wondering why the prosecutor didn't see things George's way is a valid question, but that's different from saying that there was no evidence.

 

[crimresearch]

Crump would have been blowing a trumpet...at the head of a media parade...

Oh, no doubt about that.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

If someone takes your 9mm out of your inside the waist band holster, and pulls the trigger from a few inches away, it is reasonable to believe that you are going to get hurt or killed.

If someone is on top of you punching you, and they move one hand down as if to take said 9mm, it is reasonable to believe that they are going to pull the trigger should they get it in their hand.

The prosecution, when all is said and done, is going to have to provide proof that not only the jury, but the judge and any possible appeals court will accept that this never happened.

They can't just just spin wild mind reading accusations about GZ's secret plot to commit murder, they must show actual proof... of a negative.

Unless they've got something up their sleeve, it is going to be hard to reach that standard inside the court room, where they can't use the sort of faked evidence that is flying all over the internet.

Or there must be something more to it than you are implying? i.e. do you really think it's that easy to just shoot someone in cold blood, without the police suspecting you are a murderer, and without having your story fall apart if you are making it up and the evidence doesn't support you? Most crimes are heat of the passion and not well thought out. And in the event that they are planned, how many people do you think are going to think "gee, I've got the perfect plan, I'm going to murder them and claim self-defense"? No, it's 10x more likely they are going to murder them and stuff them in a suitcase or do a drive-by or whatever.

I don't think you're considering how most crimes actually take place.

Did you actually read the post I quoted and my response.

Because a reading of your response seems to make it quite clear that you didn't.

Yes, I actually read the post you quoted. And if you think my response makes it "quite clear that I didn't", than it's clear you didn't understand crimresearch's post in the first place.

crim was specifically saying that no other evidence can apply. All that matters is that the prosecution cannot prove the specific event of: "they went for the gun". That is the claim being made.

No, that's not the claim being made, nor did he say no other evidence can apply, and frankly it's amazing that's what you read out of what he said. Why don't you show us where he said either of those things in the above post? It's also obvious he assumed people could fill in the blank spaces for themselves, and understand the context of the situation rather than thinking in absolutes.