Continuation: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[skepteen314]

If "skepteen" is indeed a teen, they should be given credit for asking questions and some people should be a little easier on them IMO. skepteen, there was another page in this forum that went about 300 pages and got to large it had to be continued with this one. You might want to look for that thread and read through it if you're interested in learning more about the case.

For those who think I am not who I say I am, YES I am in fact a teenager and not a troll. I would have better uses for my time than to " troll" you.

 

[sgtbaker]

I refer to my wife's vagina as the 'happiest place on earth'.

Evidence or I call BS!

 

[Amazer]

Evidence or I call BS!

Ignorance is bliss....

 

[TheL8Elvis]

As you do below in defense of Zimmerman, you could simply deny the facts.
Maybe Martin didn't actually have that jewelry and screwdriver.
Maybe the school official was mistaken or confused.

Maybe you could help me with your analogy and point where I claimed GZ did not have any money or passport ? I doubt you will be able to, since I never denied those things.

Zimmerman hid a passport and a large sum of money from the court. I'm open to hearing an alternative explanation that accounts for these facts rather than denying them.

BTDT

And there's that denial I was talking about. At least you didn't insult my intelligence by claiming the hiding of the money was an honest mistake too.

Please present all of evidence that explains how it came to be that he had a second passport in his posession.

I see... so after the serendipity of an honest mistake, Zimmerman realizes a second passport might come in handy if he decides to flee, but he never actually planned to flee.

Right. That would be giving GZ the benefit of the doubt.

He just kept that "plan" in a different part of his brain from where he keeps his actual plans, and that's how we split that particular hair.

Think 'contingency planning'

BTW - you forgot to explain why he instructed his wife to pay of his debts ? And what country was he going to go to - certainly he and his wife discussed that ? And bought a plane ticket ? Or were they going to drive ? And how did transferring the money around help them in that plan ? They didn't actually take cash out of their accounts, did they ? Were they going to flee and hope that the bank didn't freeze their account ?

Please, I need more facts regarding this great escape plan.

Keeping that in mind, here's a thought: Maybe Martin practiced self-hypnosis, and at the time he was caught with the screwdriver and jewelry he wasn't consciously aware of any wrongdoing he engaged in to acquire those items, so realistically he couldn't at that time be culpable for that wrongdoing.

I know that seems farfetched, but don't you think we owe him the benefit of the doubt?

You had no problems giving TM the 'benefit of the doubt' earlier in that discussion. Now, when it is claimed Judge Lester gave GZ all the benefit of the doubt, it seems there are no alternatives. All the benefit of the doubt appears to be the same as no benefit of the doubt.

Please, tell me what would be different had Lester given him no benefit of the doubt ???

No, you want to pretend "honest mistakes" were made by two people conspiring to decieve the court in contradiction to the evidence. There's actually not a whole lot that's reasonable about that.

No, I want you to back up your claim that having possession the second passport was an intentional act, done with forethought of keeping it to flee the country. Not keeping it for the extra days, but actually having it in his possession at all.

When did he find it ? Where was it - how did you know ? When was Shellies passport issued ? When does it expire ?

Yeah, I'm actually looking for an alternative explanation to Zimmerman planning to flee. So we seem to be in agreement that this is the only reasonable conclusion to draw about a man who hides a passport from the court.

Again, there is a difference between having a plan, and acting on it.

Why do think it needs to be proven? You certainly didn't require anything be proven before deciding Martin was involved in a burglary.

I disagree with the conclusion that was based on circumstantial evidence. I am simply giving GZ every benefit of the doubt, as was claimed about Judge Lester.

Because people usually make plans with the intention of carrying them out. Otherwise they wouldn't be called "plans". So Lester drew the very reasonable conclusion that the guy making a plan to flee must have been thwarted.

And if prepare for a hurricane, it must mean that it is a foregone conclusion I will actually be in one ? Not that I just planned for the possibility ? Can you present your evidence this plan was not contingent upon any other factors ?

And you've yet to offer as a basis for that doubt an alternative explanation why a man facing a lengthy prison term would hide a large sum of money and a passport from the court.

I did. That fact that you don't agree/chose to ignore/whatever doesn't make repeating myself any less boring.

 

[Rare Truth]

Re: My post 2361, in regards to O'Mara bringing up the GPS. I amend that now, as I have just reviewed, and he did indeed bring it up first, in the first bond hearing.

No one challenged me on that, but as I always try to present the most truthful accounts, I wished to make sure the record was corrected here.

 

[Dancing David]

For those who think I am not who I say I am, YES I am in fact a teenager and not a troll. I would have better uses for my time than to " troll" you.

Hi skepteen314,

Some of the people in this thread are really rude. I am sorry for that, this thread is much ruder than most on the forum. Most of us do not think you are a troll.

 

[Dancing David]

Evidence or I call BS!

Sorry, she is monogamous.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Is there any indication that a Total station was used? I would think that generation of a map would be a trivial process with any modern survey system so that hand drawing such a map would be a waisted exercise. The existence of the hand drawn map would therefore be a counter indication that automated surveying equipment was used.

The map that says 'total station' on it. Last page of second discovery.

 

[johnny karate]

Maybe you could help me with your analogy and point where I claimed GZ did not have any money or passport ? I doubt you will be able to, since I never denied those things.



BTDT



Please present all of evidence that explains how it came to be that he had a second passport in his posession.



Right. That would be giving GZ the benefit of the doubt.



Think 'contingency planning'

BTW - you forgot to explain why he instructed his wife to pay of his debts ? And what country was he going to go to - certainly he and his wife discussed that ? And bought a plane ticket ? Or were they going to drive ? And how did transferring the money around help them in that plan ? They didn't actually take cash out of their accounts, did they ? Were they going to flee and hope that the bank didn't freeze their account ?

Please, I need more facts regarding this great escape plan.



You had no problems giving TM the 'benefit of the doubt' earlier in that discussion. Now, when it is claimed Judge Lester gave GZ all the benefit of the doubt, it seems there are no alternatives. All the benefit of the doubt appears to be the same as no benefit of the doubt.

Please, tell me what would be different had Lester given him no benefit of the doubt ???



No, I want you to back up your claim that having possession the second passport was an intentional act, done with forethought of keeping it to flee the country. Not keeping it for the extra days, but actually having it in his possession at all.

When did he find it ? Where was it - how did you know ? When was Shellies passport issued ? When does it expire ?



Again, there is a difference between having a plan, and acting on it.



I disagree with the conclusion that was based on circumstantial evidence. I am simply giving GZ every benefit of the doubt, as was claimed about Judge Lester.



And if prepare for a hurricane, it must mean that it is a foregone conclusion I will actually be in one ? Not that I just planned for the possibility ? Can you present your evidence this plan was not contingent upon any other factors ?



I did. That fact that you don't agree/chose to ignore/whatever doesn't make repeating myself any less boring.

What has become boring is your mental gymnastics to give Zimmerman "the benefit of the doubt" based on a standard to which no one - in particular Judge Lester - is required to adhere.

Lester plainly said he made a reasonable finding based on the evidence at his disposal. He didn't claim to make a statement of fact, or assert that Zimmerman was "clearly guilty" of anything

If you can point to some legal or factual justification for disagreeing with how Lester worded his order, go ahead and post it.

Until then, I'll just assume your disagreement with the guy who writes these things for a living is based on nothing more than your own personal preference.

And for the record, I acknowledged on more than one occasion that Martin was most likely involved in something improper, and only argued the point to demonstrate the glaring double standard in this thread.

A double standard that has once again been demonstrated.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

What has become boring is your mental gymnastics to give Zimmerman "the benefit of the doubt" based on a standard to which no one - in particular Judge Lester - is required to adhere.

That's different than being given every benefit of the doubt, yes ? Because that is what I am claiming. So let's stick to that, ok ?

Stating as a fact GZ was going to flee the country based on circumstantial evidence is not really what I consider 'every benefit of the doubt'. It's actually sort of the opposite.

Lester plainly said he made a reasonable finding based on the evidence at his disposal. He didn't claim to make a statement of fact, or assert that Zimmerman was "clearly guilty" of anything

If you can point to some legal or factual justification for disagreeing with how Lester worded his order, go ahead and post it.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8456216#post8456216

Until then, I'll just assume your disagreement with the guy who writes these things for a living is based on nothing more than your own personal preference.

And for the record, I acknowledged on more than one occasion that Martin was most likely involved in something improper, and only argued the point to demonstrate the glaring double standard in this thread.

A double standard that has once again been demonstrated.

You forgot to explain why he instructed his wife to pay of his debts ?
And what country was he going to go to - certainly he and his wife discussed that ? And bought a plane ticket ? Or were they going to drive ? And how did transferring the money around help them in that plan ? They didn't actually take cash out of their accounts, did they ? Were they going to flee and hope that the bank didn't freeze their account ?

Does Shellie have a passport ? Is it reasonable to assume you and your wife are going to flee the country if your wife doesn't even have a passport ?

 

[WildCat]

Wow, read (for comprehension) what you quoted! And then read your response. See your mistake?

I did not claim that you denied he said he was scared in his truck!

My claim is that you are denying that Z would still be scared 1 minute after being scared. Which is just wow.

But more importantly:



Btw, did you read the transcript from the tape yet? It was posted for you 2 pages ago?

Yes, the transcript shows quite clearly that Zimmerman never claimed he was scared at the T. And that Unabogie lied about Zimmerman claiming he was scared at the T and that's why he waited there.

Why would Zimmerman be scared of Martin when Martin was no longer in sight, as opposed to when he was next to Zimmerman's truck?

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

You forgot to explain why he instructed his wife to pay of his debts ? And what country was he going to go to - certainly he and his wife discussed that ? And bought a plane ticket ? Or were they going to drive ? And how did transferring the money around help them in that plan ? They didn't actually take cash out of their accounts, did they ? Were they going to flee and hope that the bank didn't freeze their account ?

Does Shellie have a passport ? Is it reasonable to assume you and your wife are going to flee the country if your wife doesn't even have a passport ?​

There you go again, thinking about pesky little details. I mean, transferring money is evidence they are going to flee! On top of it there are people that report seeing GZ read the newspaper. Why would he be reading the newspaper if he didn't intend to flee?!​

 

[Unabogie]

What are you basing your time off of?

In the walkthrough, when they ask him to walk straight back to the T from RVC, you can time it. From memory, that takes him about 13 seconds. The other side is equidistant, and so is the distance from where he parked to the beginning of the first house on Twin Trees.

So three legs, each about 13 seconds to walk. By the end of the first leg, his lights would be off. Remember, it's your contention that he wasn't running during this time. I say he was, which I contend would actually fit his story better. If he was running, it would actually explain how he got to the other side before the lights went out and make his statement about the flashlight true. However, if he's walking, as you claim, then he would have only completed the first leg of the walk and the headlights, which we both agree would go off after 15 seconds, would be off. Therefore, if he was concerned about light, he would not have crossed over to RVC in the first place.

Logical conclusions:

1. He was running, or...
2. He walked, but wasn't really concerned about light and didn't walk straight back to his truck.

ETA: To show my work, I added the three legs to the Google Maps page.

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msi...ll=28.793067,-81.329547&spn=0.001991,0.003447

 

[johnny karate]

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8456216#post8456216

Did you just cite your own post as evidence that Lester was wrong?

Ha ha... Classic.

You forgot to explain why he instructed his wife to pay of his debts ?
And what country was he going to go to - certainly he and his wife discussed that ? And bought a plane ticket ? Or were they going to drive ? And how did transferring the money around help them in that plan ? They didn't actually take cash out of their accounts, did they ? Were they going to flee and hope that the bank didn't freeze their account ?

Does Shellie have a passport ? Is it reasonable to assume you and your wife are going to flee the country if your wife doesn't even have a passport ?

You forgot to explain why Martin was never arrested or even disciplined after being caught with evidence of a felony. Or why no one ever claimed their stolen wedding bands.

What house did Martin break into? Who were his accomplices? When did these break-ins take place?

Since this issue has been on the table much longer, I think it's fair you answer my questions first.

 

[Dan O.]

The map that says 'total station' on it. Last page of second discovery.

Have you got a link to that discovery? I seem to have missed it.


What I'm finding is that a Total Station was used to map the scene but the question is: When? The hand drawn sketch was made the night of the murder by the photographer. A map drawn from the total station data was drawn by SCLA Orta on April 30th. (link found here). I believe the evidence markers were picked up by the next morning so they would have had to bring the Total Station in that night or early the next morning in order to use it to measure the marker locations.

 

[Cylinder]

Lester plainly said he made a reasonable finding based on the evidence at his disposal. He didn't claim to make a statement of fact, or assert that Zimmerman was "clearly guilty" of anything

So you're claiming that Lester lied in his order? When a judge makes a finding, he or she is saying - as a matter of law - that finding is true or correct in the eyes of the court. It's a finding of fact. It's an assertion that the court weighed the evidence and found that whatever issue of fact is true.

The fisrt quote is an assertion of reasonableness of the finding. Lester claims that the court would be reasonable to interpret the evidence to reach that conclusion. The second is a finding of fact. There's no way around that.

The problem is the manner in which the court tortured the evidence to come up with that finding (weighing a hypothetical like Zimmerman felt like the monitor would prevent his flight against his past history (staying in touch with police absent any obligation, turning himself in promptly absent any obligation, turning himself in when revoked.)

The more damning part is actually granting bond to someone he claims was actually trying to flee the country to avoid prosecution. If the court beleived it to be true, then it would deny bond. If it didn't, then it's judicial misconduct to assert it in the first place. Or, alternately, you can claim that it's common for judges to revoke bond for defendants who are fleeing the country - only to give them a new bond with money left over for flight.

It's really hair-splitting though, since, the court doesn't get to comment - or even consider - the truth of the defendant's claims of bias. They are limited to finding that they allegations are suffecient to provoke a perception of bias.

 

[johnny karate]

So you're claiming that Lester lied in his order? When a judge makes a finding, he or she is saying - as a matter of law - that finding is true or correct in the eyes of the court. It's a finding of fact. It's an assertion that the court weighed the evidence and found that whatever issue of fact is true.

The fisrt quote is an assertion of reasonableness of the finding. Lester claims that the court would be reasonable to interpret the evidence to reach that conclusion. The second is a finding of fact. There's no way around that.

The problem is the manner in which the court tortured the evidence to come up with that finding (weighing a hypothetical like Zimmerman felt like the monitor would prevent his flight against his past history (staying in touch with police absent any obligation, turning himself in promptly absent any obligation, turning himself in when revoked.)

The more damning part is actually granting bond to someone he claims was actually trying to flee the country to avoid prosecution. If the court beleived it to be true, then it would deny bond. If it didn't, then it's judicial misconduct to assert it in the first place. Or, alternately, you can claim that it's common for judges to revoke bond for defendants who are fleeing the country - only to give them a new bond with money left over for flight.

It's really hair-splitting though, since, the court doesn't get to comment - or even consider - the truth of the defendant's claims of bias. They are limited to finding that they allegations are suffecient to provoke a perception of bias.

I find your legal knowledge on this matter about as compelling as the medical knowledge you displayed when you pasted a bunch of blue arrows on a photo of Zimmerman and tried to pretend it was a documntation of his injuries.

Cite the law that demonstrates Lester improperly worded his order, and I'll give it due consideration.

Until then, I'll just assume you're pasting more blue arrows.

 

[Bob001]

Read it for yourself, You tell me.

http://media.trb.com/media/acrobat/2012-06/107714140-18081033.pdf

In reading this, there seems to be quite a bit of discussion about paying off his credit cards. He even tells his wife to call one to get the total payoff amount. What does it mean that he wants to pay off all his credit cards? From a money management point of view, it might make more sense to pay the minimums to conserve his cash for more pressing needs. On the other hand, he might want to pay them all off so he can get onto a current cash basis with all his newly donated income. Or maybe he really does plan to leave the country, and he's more worried about American Express chasing him than the state of Florida. (I'd be worried too; they have offices everywhere.) But it seems to be an odd concern, all things considered. Has any of this been clarified subsequently?

 

[Natural Born Skeptic]

If the court beleived it to be true, then it would deny bond. If it didn't, then it's judicial misconduct to assert it in the first place. Or, alternately, you can claim that it's common for judges to revoke bond for defendants who are fleeing the country - only to give them a new bond with money left over for flight.

^This^

I'd also be very curious to know if anyone can document ANY case in this country where someone arrested for murder fled while on bond and then was granted a higher bail a second time. After all, I'd think that should be fairly common if we are to believe Lesters ruling.

 

[Rare Truth]

Oh wow.

Frances Robles ‏@RoblesHerald Witness 9 accused George Zimmerman of molesting her beginning when she was 6. "He was bigger and stronger and older." ‪#trayvon‬ @MiamiHerald