Continuation: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[johnny karate]

So when Zimmerman put his hand near his waistband Martin called the police?

You'll have to walk me through this, WildCat.

A strange man who had been following you home at night is standing right in front of you.

He reaches into his pocket, a gesture you perceive as potentially threatening.

At what point in the intervening three seconds until he has produced whatever it was he reached for do you call the police?

 

[johnny karate]

No, not the initial punch. I'm talking about the witness who saw Z being hit "MMA" style.

I thought that witness backed off that statement? Perhaps someone who remembers can clarify.

There are so many witnesses and people keep getting them confused. It would really help if you are going to make a claim if you could point to the recorded facts that actually support the claim you are trying to make.

I recall that there was one witness that claimed to see what would be trayvon mounted MMA style on George and either hitting him or restraining him. The "or" in that witnesses statement is important and indicates that the witness did not have a clear view of what exactly was hapening.

Is that the witness you are talking about or is your claim based on a different witness report?

There was exactly one witness who claimed to have seen Martin punching Zimmerman.

That witness has since walked back his statement to say he thought Martin was either punching Zimmerman or restraining, but he couldn't be sure which.

Either way, Zimmerman's own statement contradicts the claim that Martin repeatedly punched him.

So anyone who wants to dishonestly parse the words of this witness is wasting their time. Zimmerman himself tells us Martin wasn't repeatedly punching him.

 

[bookworm]

That could not have occurred without generating physical evidence. No evidenceexists. The event did nhot occur. Witness is, ergo obviously lying or mistaken.

The more likely scenario is that Z already had hisweapon out and Martin was trying to take it away from him, which he is OBVIOUSLY entitled to do under just about any law in the world, maybe even to take it away and kill the slimeball for showing it to him.

I don't agree that your more likely scenario is more likely at all. No evidence exists to support that it happened that way. Plenty of evidence exists to support that Z was on the ground being punched by someone on top of him, exactly as he and a witness have said. Whether you choose to ignore it or not.

 

[bookworm]

I thought that witness backed off that statement? Perhaps someone who remembers can clarify.

Yes, I believe he did. Lots of witnesses seem to have been persuaded, for one reason or another, to change their initial stories. I tend to give more weight to the earliest stories and observations. Especially when they match the evidence.

 

[johnny karate]

I don't agree that your more likely scenario is more likely at all. No evidence exists to support that it happened that way. Plenty of evidence exists to support that Z was on the ground being punched by someone on top of him, exactly as he and a witness have said. Whether you choose to ignore it or not.

Why don't you cite that evidence, please. Because it's kind of bizarre to accuse people of ignoring something which has yet to be provided.

Yes, I believe he did. Lots of witnesses seem to have been persuaded, for one reason or another, to change their initial stories. I tend to give more weight to the earliest stories and observations. Especially when they match the evidence.

Match what evidence?

 

[This is The End]

Again with the walking and looking. In what universe does a reasonable person have cause to judge another person suspicious simply because they are walking casually and looking at things?

Agreed.

I have a feeling that anyone who says that was never a teenager on the phone with a potential mate!

Which reminds me, they always leave that "on the phone with a girl" out when they talk about it.

You'll have to walk me through this, WildCat.

A strange man who had been following you home at night is standing right in front of you.

He reaches into his pocket, a gesture you perceive as potentially threatening.

At what point in the intervening three seconds until he has produced whatever it was he reached for do you call the police?

Are people seriously still saying that meme while leaving out all other details and circumstances!! We went through that extensively a few pages ago. It is very dishonest.

They say "You think it's OK to punch someone for reaching towards their pocket!!".

Like its at a crowded mall, or with family at Thanksgiving dinner.

They purposefully leave out:

At night.
Unknown stranger.
Followed by that stranger for several minutes.
All alone. The only people outside are you and the stranger.
You ask them if they have a problem and they immediately reach for their pocket while saying "No."
You have zero information about what the stranger is reaching for.

This is all extensively detailed, from Z's own words, in this post:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8840175&postcount=4485

there still is no solid evidence for who attacked whom first.

Yet, ironically, the shooters story of who attacked whom first is somewhat favorable to the the victim.

Yes, I believe he did. Lots of witnesses seem to have been persuaded, for one reason or another, to change their initial stories.

Oh c'mon! That witness clarification sounds very reasonable. There is no conspiracy to persuade people to change their stories.

Especially when they match the evidence.

No it doesn't. Z has no signs of what you call a "MMA beating". Not even close.

 

[Mumbles]

There was exactly one witness who claimed to have seen Martin punching Zimmerman.

That witness has since walked back his statement to say he thought Martin was either punching Zimmerman or restraining, but he couldn't be sure which.

Either way, Zimmerman's own statement contradicts the claim that Martin repeatedly punched him.

So anyone who wants to dishonestly parse the words of this witness is wasting their time. Zimmerman himself tells us Martin wasn't repeatedly punching him.

I honestly don't care about who hit who.

I feel the same away as I do about any encounter where some goon attacks an innocent person. When Zimmerman got out of his car to chase Martn, he started a street fight. Martin was well within his rights to defend himself, and Zimmerman was entirely in the wrong as soon as he decided to chase after Martin. I'm perfectly fine with the minor injuries that Zimmerman caught s a result of his own actions, and I 'm fine with hm being on tral.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

There was exactly one witness who claimed to have seen Martin punching Zimmerman.

That witness has since walked back his statement to say he thought Martin was either punching Zimmerman or restraining, but he couldn't be sure which.

Either way, Zimmerman's own statement contradicts the claim that Martin repeatedly punched him.

So anyone who wants to dishonestly parse the words of this witness is wasting their time. Zimmerman himself tells us Martin wasn't repeatedly punching him.

From page 8, second discovery release:

"Martin then struck zimmerman several times in the face and head"

 

[WildCat]

You'll have to walk me through this, WildCat.

A strange man who had been following you home at night is standing right in front of you.

He reaches into his pocket, a gesture you perceive as potentially threatening.

At what point in the intervening three seconds until he has produced whatever it was he reached for do you call the police?

Probably before I talk to my girlfriend.

How about you?

 

[WildCat]

I honestly don't care about who hit who.

I feel the same away as I do about any encounter where some goon attacks an innocent person. When Zimmerman got out of his car to chase Martn, he started a street fight. Martin was well within his rights to defend himself, and Zimmerman was entirely in the wrong as soon as he decided to chase after Martin. I'm perfectly fine with the minor injuries that Zimmerman caught s a result of his own actions, and I 'm fine with hm being on tral.

Just to be clear, you think it's OK to punch someone who is following you, yes?

 

[quadraginta]

<snip>

Furthermore, if you feel something is odd or out of place about someone - without being able to be more specific than that - that says nothing about that person, but rather says something about you. Suspicious behavior is not defined as someone else thinking you seem odd or out of place.

The only specifics Zimmerman could offer about Martin's behavior were that he was walking around and looking at things. Two ridiculously mundane activities. Everything else was just vague tautologies.




Again with the walking and looking. In what universe does a reasonable person have cause to judge another person suspicious simply because they are walking casually and looking at things?

<snip>

This has also puzzled me since the beginning of this debate.

A teenager is ambling home from a walk to the quickie-mart. It's dusk, or just past. He's chatting on a cell phone.

I might even be a little more suspicious if he wasn't walking casually and looking around at things.

It isn't the sort of behavior that would prompt me to call the cops, much less start tracking the dude.

 

[This is The End]

I honestly don't care about who hit who.

I feel the same away as I do about any encounter where some goon attacks an innocent person. When Zimmerman got out of his car to chase Martn, he started a street fight. Martin was well within his rights to defend himself, and Zimmerman was entirely in the wrong as soon as he decided to chase after Martin. I'm perfectly fine with the minor injuries that Zimmerman caught s a result of his own actions, and I 'm fine with hm being on tral.

Well, obviously if Z was a cop in uniform it would be different.

Since Z was not in any uniform he should have immediately voiced his intentions the very moment he saw M (mutually/up close). Especially when M asked him what his problem was.

Something like "Hello, I was just wondering who you are and what you are doing." if he is not in neighborhood watch mode.

Or something like "Hello, I am part of the neighborhood watch, I was just wondering who you are and what you are doing." if he was in neighborhood watch mode.

Yet, from Z's own admission, when he first saw M face to face, and M asked him what his problem was, he said a "negative" and reached for his pocket.

If he had said "I don't have a problem, I was just wondering who you are and what you are doing." (without making any sudden movements towards his pockets) then I seriously doubt that there would have been a killing that night.

Of course hindsight is 20/20, and perhaps Z did not think about it logically and just reacted on impulse.

Which is a classic example of why only trained professionals are supposed to follow suspects and that we should always wait for the professionals instead of following a suspected dangerous individual. They are trained to not make that mistake Z made and/or they are in a uniform that immediately makes clear their intentions.

 

[bookworm]

Why don't you cite that evidence, please. Because it's kind of bizarre to accuse people of ignoring something which has yet to be provided.



Match what evidence?

I'm talking about the evidence that has already been provided here numerous times by numerous people. The stuff we've ALL seen. I don't have the time or the patience to go back digging up posts just because people like to parse words and drag out the arguments. I remember what I've seen and I comment on it and that's just the way it is with me. If something changes my mind, I'll remember that too.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

So when Serino goes on to tell us this...
[Zimmerman] exited his vehicle, in spite of his earlier admission to investigators that he was afraid of Martin...
... you agree that this is another instance in which Zimmerman was being untruthful?

It looks like your own response is appropriate here. Just susbstitute Zimmerman for Martin:

Yeah, apparently Martin either had to be in a state of complete and unrelenting fear, or he wasn't afraid at all.

It's been very entertaining watching some people jump through hoops in order to contort Martin's actions and behavior into their preconceived notions of what took place.

 

[johnny karate]

From page 8, second discovery release:

"Martin then struck zimmerman several times in the face and head"

[URL]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_5004450e4b2a9ac996.jpg[/URL]

Could you attribute that quote? Because I don't see it in the discovery (maybe my page numbers are different that yours), and the only person I can find associated with it is Zimmerman's friend Mark Osterman (which would make it hearsay).

 

[johnny karate]

Probably before I talk to my girlfriend.

How about you?

I think you might be confused in your chronology. Martin had already been talking to his girlfriend by the time Zimmerman was in front of him and reaching into his pocket.

Or are you alleging that in contradiction to the evidence, common sense, and the laws of time and space, Martin somehow managed to call his girlfriend in the time it took Zimmerman to reach into his pocket?

 

[johnny karate]

I'm talking about the evidence that has already been provided here numerous times by numerous people. The stuff we've ALL seen. I don't have the time or the patience to go back digging up posts just because people like to parse words and drag out the arguments. I remember what I've seen and I comment on it and that's just the way it is with me. If something changes my mind, I'll remember that too.

Suit yourself.

But how it usually works around here is that one substantiates their claims. That way, we don't have to rely on something as faulty and unreliable as a memory.

 

[johnny karate]

It looks like your own response is appropriate here. Just susbstitute Zimmerman for Martin:

Except that we are discussing two diffrent situations.

In one, it is claimed that Martin did not exhibit enough fear. He ran from Zimmerman (an indication that he was afraid of - or at least threatened by - him). Detractors have claimed that since he didn't sprint directly home and call the police, it shows that he wasn't really afraid at all. So the issue there is degrees of fear. Martin could have quite possibly been fearful enough of Zimmerman to run away from him, but not fearful enough to do anything more.

In Zimmerman's case, it's about him being afraid at all in accordance with his claim. He says he was afraid of Martin, but exhibited no behavior that would indicate that to be true. As the police investigator whose opinion you hold in such high regard tells us, Zimmerman's "actions are inconsistent with those of a person who has stated he was in fear of another subject". So in this case, it's a matter of contradiction.

 

[leftysergeant]

I don't agree that your more likely scenario is more likely at all. No evidence exists to support that it happened that way. Plenty of evidence exists to support that Z was on the ground being punched by someone on top of him, exactly as he and a witness have said. Whether you choose to ignore it or not.

Absolutely, laughably wrong. Repeated punches leave bruises. No question about it.

No multiple bruises appear on Z's ugly mug at any time subsequent to the murder. The only bruise-like mark is an abrasion on his nose totally inconsistant with the impact of a first, but utterly consistant with a collision with a rough-textured cylindrical object.

So you have one witness who could not see clearly what was happening and whose own words admit the possibility that Martin was trying to take Z's gun away long before the stupid little thug admits having drawn it.

There is no physical evidence that Martin EVER punched the thug.

 

[leftysergeant]

I think you might be confused in your chronology. Martin had already been talking to his girlfriend by the time Zimmerman was in front of him and reaching into his pocket.

Here's another thing that bothers me.

Z says Martin snuck up on him from behind.

All evidence publicly available indicates that Martin was talking on the phone to DeeDee right up to the moment that he confronted Z.

WTF? Is Z deaf from too much time on the target range with inadequate hearing protection?