Continuation: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[bookworm]

I can't believe they expected GZ to introduce himself at a time when GZ claims TM is coming towards him in a threatening manner. Twice.

Plus, he wasn't supposed to get out of the vehicle, according to Serino. I guess GZ was expected to yell out the window as TM came towards his vehicle.

Then, I can't believe NW procedure is to approach and address a suspicious person.

Eh...maybe it's just me.

Anyway, it seems that the security camera we'd all like to see footage from, was not working that night.

Sorry, but IMO if you tell a burglar (that's what Z thought he might be) "Hi, I'm from the neighborhood watch" he's most likely going to say something like "yeah, *******, what are you watching ME for, I'm gonna **** you up!" and most people know that.

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

Ha ?

You were called out for implying his wife broke his nose for him, and now you want to re-write history ? How dishonest can you be ?

But go ahead, spin a story how that's not what you meant ....

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8254271&postcount=8724

You caught him red handed and he still denies it and insults our intelligence by suggesting he meant something else. I've noticed he's one of several posters that seems to have a disconnect from reality. Now in his mind he was made fun of for saying GZ's wife was a nurse when what he was really made fun of was his insane suggestions that GZ's injuries were self-inflicted (or inflicted with the help of his wife).

 

[LTC8K6]

I thought Guttman denied it was Serino and that this was taken out of context?

You can't have read Jeralyn's post...since she covers that pretty well.

 

[bookworm]

I have some advice for you. Not all strangers in your neighborhood are "suspicious persons". As someone else noted, had Trayvon been a 30 year old white woman, there's little doubt George would NOT have called the cops. Had he been a 50 year old white woman, George would have likely asked "are you lost? can I help you out?"

This sounds true to me because the reason Z found M suspicious is because there had been break-ins by young, black males.

I'm sorry, but I think approaching those kids in the woods instead of just calling the police is the same thing people have been condemning Z for.

 

[Unabogie]

This sounds true to me because the reason Z found M suspicious is because there had been break-ins by young, black males.

I'm sorry, but I think approaching those kids in the woods instead of just calling the police is the same thing people have been condemning Z for.

I didn't say I approached kids in the woods.

 

[LTC8K6]

I have some advice for you. Not all strangers in your neighborhood are "suspicious persons". As someone else noted, had Trayvon been a 30 year old white woman, there's little doubt George would NOT have called the cops. Had he been a 50 year old white woman, George would have likely asked "are you lost? can I help you out?"

My neighborhood ends in a wilderness kind of park (common in Portland). Kids like to go drink down there and occasionally there are break ins. I have no problem talking to the kids I see there and reminding them to clean up the beer cans. I never strap on a gun or go following them around.

I don't think my approach is unreasonable at all, but I know people are different, so I wouldn't say it was required to talk to the person. However, if you choose to call the cops and choose to NOT talk to the person, don't get out of your damn car with a gun and chase them!

-------------------------------


On a side note, which camera are you referring to and why would it help us?

GZ thought TM was a suspicious person, therefore that is assumed. We are talking about what GZ should/should not have done, therefore we should use his mindset, to the best of our ability to judge it.

When discussing what GZ should have done, TM is considered a suspicious person.

Your only alternative would be to first show that GZ really did not think TM was suspicious.

When discussing what you or I would have done, we can't really say whether we would have considered TM suspicious that night, because we did not see him, or what he was doing, or how he was acting.

 

[LTC8K6]

Well, duh!

But the point that we're trying to make, is that if you do get out of your car to chase someone who you have not witnessed doing anything wrong but "looking suspicious", then the least you can do is let them know who you are and defuse the situation. It's such basic common sense that I don't know why it's controversial.

I agree with that.

Now, if I only had some evidence that GZ chased TM.

 

[crimresearch]

I said there was compelling evidence that Zimmerman didn't commit a crime, and that is true. I don't care when it is used. If you wish, you can go through each line item and explain individually why each one isn't evidence that supports Zimmerman's innocence or lack of guilt.

You say a body and a shooter are evidence of a crime. What crime? Pull one out of thin air, fill out the charge space with whatever one feels like, then describe in the body of the Capias what you had for lunch? Will that suffice? When that cop shot the naked cannibal a couple of weeks ago, there was a body and a shooter. That would be evidence of a crime, according to you. What was the cop charged with?

Shooting and killing someone in self-defense is not a crime, as long as the shooting is righteous, so having a body and a shooter in a case doesn't necessarily constitute a crime, or evidence of a crime. It is evidence of a homicide, not a crime. I'll ask again - please copy and paste the relevant portions of the unredacted Capias in which Serino describes Zimmerman committing a crime. In this case, it would specifically be manslaughter. If you can't do it, just admit it. Jeralyn Merritt has said there is no crime described in the redacted version of the Capias, and I see nothing in the unredacted version that changes that.



_______________________
Hey, Only Tells Truth. I see you are kidding me in another post by saying something about my getting scooped. I don't plan on bringing things like that over here anymore, so I'm always going to be scooped. We've been talking about the Serino/Gutman connection elsewhere tonight. There are those in here who wish to remain in the dark about certain parts of the case that I think are very important, so in the future I will do my best to help them stay there.

Need some mustard for that pretzel? You said 'no evidence', you were wrong.

The court accepted it, the attorneys accepted it, and it really doesn't matter how deeply you want to bury your head in the sand, that affidavit met the legal standard for evidence that a crime had been committed..

 

[Rare Truth]

Sorry, but IMO if you tell a burglar (that's what Z thought he might be) "Hi, I'm from the neighborhood watch" he's most likely going to say something like "yeah, *******, what are you watching ME for, I'm gonna **** you up!" and most people know that.

Most people know if they are that afraid, THEY DON'T GET OUT OF THE DAMN CAR !

 

[crimresearch]

I can't believe they expected GZ to introduce himself at a time when GZ claims TM is coming towards him in a threatening manner. Twice.

Plus, he wasn't supposed to get out of the vehicle, according to Serino. I guess GZ was expected to yell out the window as TM came towards his vehicle.

Then, I can't believe NW procedure is to approach and address a suspicious person.

Eh...maybe it's just me.

Anyway, it seems that the security camera we'd all like to see footage from, was not working that night.

That's a good point....

As a NW 'agent/Captain/officer', Zimmerman wasn't supposed to be following, getting out of his car, and so forth... *buuuut* he should have been in uniform, flashing credentials, and identifying himself to control the situation??

Interesting theory. Seems to be missing something though... maybe a pinch of salt?

 

[crimresearch]

I don't really see it as an agenda. Possibly prosecutorial misconduct?

Prosecutorial misconduct usually requires an actual prosecutor... just saying.

And didn't the SPD put all this up on their official website for a while anyway?

 

[TheL8Elvis]

I know what the hell I meant, and I and the others know the context and you will not find one post from me saying his wife caused the injuries. I know I made other posts where I said I thought his wife treated him.

We all know what you meant, the context is clear.

I noted she was a nursing student even before that. You didn't even know she was. When I said it, you mocked me, called her a cosmetologist, saying "same thing."

- and this was AFTER the bond hearing, where she stated clearly for all to hear: she was a nursing student.

But be sure to be dishonest and tell only part of the story ...

Cosmetologist ... same thing.

I guess I did not see the entire beginning of the bond hearing, no. And she is a licensed cosmetologist. But I missed the part about nursing, sorry.

90% of your conclusions and observations, imo, are always wrong - so it's good to see you working to keep that average up.

You know what they say about opinons...

 

[Cylinder]

“It’s not a demotion,” Sanford Police spokesman Sgt. David Morgenstern said of Serino, 45, who has been with the department for 15 years. “There isn’t any more prestige in being a detective. We have officers who love uniform patrol. This was of his own free will.”

He probably wanted to spend more time with his family. It's OK, though - he'll have a change to address the change of circumstance in his testimony.

Gonna be some sweet sounds
Coming down on the nightshift
I bet you're singing proud
Oh I bet you'll pull a crowd
Gonna be a long night
It's gonna be all right
On the nightshift
Oh you found another home
I know you're not alone
On the nightshift

 

[KatieG]

Is she a defense attorney?

She's never met a defendant who's guilty. She lacks a certain, oh, ability to be objective when discussing a prosecutor's case in almost any trial.

 

[Cylinder]

Motion to Permit Defendant to Appear in Civilian Clothing and Without Restraints

"The presumption of inncocence requires the garb of innocence, and regardless of the ultimate outcome, or the evidence awaiting presentation, every Defendant is entitled to be brought before the court with the appearance, dignity and self-respect of a free and innocent man" Kennedy v Cardwell, 487 F2d, 101.

 

[Noztradamus]

This sounds true to me because the reason Z found M suspicious is because there had been break-ins by young, black males.
~~

So now George did profile Martin, despite his denial? Man, it's hard to keep track of the shifting legend.

 

[crimresearch]

She's never met a defendant who's guilty. She lacks a certain, oh, ability to be objective when discussing a prosecutor's case in almost any trial.

And what part of this case has she lied about?

 

[LTC8K6]

Most people know if they are that afraid, THEY DON'T GET OUT OF THE DAMN CAR !

After the suspicious person has run away, and is no longer in sight, and is presumed to have gone for the back gate, it's safe to get out of the car and look for a house number, or a street sign, or have a Nutty Buddy, etc.

 

[bookworm]

Most people know if they are that afraid, THEY DON'T GET OUT OF THE DAMN CAR !

True. And most people who are afraid enough to run, keep running and don't stop and go back for a confrontation.

 

[Noztradamus]

After the suspicious person has run away, and is no longer in sight, and is presumed to have gone for the back gate, it's safe to get out of the car and look for a house number, or a street sign, or have a Nutty Buddy, etc.

1. The house number can be seen without getting out of the truck
2. Experienced watchman Zimmerman would know the only street signs are back by the clubhouse intersection
3. Was Frank Taffe there?