Continuation: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[TheL8Elvis]

We presume that they record the time on the camera in relation to a standard time because that is what the FBI best practices says they should do. If they aren't following these written best practices then they have serious problems. .

I agree - I assume they did that and we will know at some point.

You care enough to argue your beliefs on the internet but don't care enough to challenge your own beliefs.

Incorrect. I care enough to argue on the internet, but not enough to go out of my way to a convenience store in a different state and ask how the, how their security cameras work. As if a) it's all the same b) the clerk would know and c) the clerk would feel comfortable telling me about their security practices.

Very few people would deliberately seek information that could prove themselves wrong. I do it all the time. That's how I learn.

If it were the 18:30 termination that we see there on the video, look at that call log and notice what else should be seen on the video.

IDK, what else should we see ?

There is also a question of the meaning of these overlapping series' of calls. If they are all Dee Dee's calls going to Trayvon's phone then T-Mobile may be over billing. The call series labeled only as "Incomming" terminates with the time of Trayvon's death so we can associate that series with Dee Dee. The North Dade series may be going to Trayvon's dad's phone.

http://media.nbcbayarea.com/documents/call+log.pdf
Destination: incoming = deedee or someone calling TM
Destination: North Dade = TM calling DeeDee

I don't know why your original post had both North Dade and incoming together on the same line. Above is the link to my source of the phone bill. What is your source ?

TIME       Destination Minutes     WHO CALLED
------------------------------------------------
14:20 - 14:23	Incoming 3
14:45 - 14:47	Incoming 2
15:02 - 15:04	Incoming 2
15:04 - 15:07	Incoming 3

14:38 - 16:21	Incoming 103       DeeDee calling TM
16:28 - 17:09	North Dade 41     TM calling DeeDee
17:09 - 18:30	North Dade 81     TM calling DeeDee

18:23:57 -- Call disconnected while Trayvon is at checkout

18:30 - 18:43	North Dade 13     TM calling DeeDee
18:41 - 18:45	Incoming 4          DeeDee calling TM
18:45 - 18:50	North Dade  5      TM calling DeeDee
18:46 - 18:48	North Dade  2      ???
18:49 - 18:53	Incoming 4          DeeDee calling TM
18:53 - 18:54	North Dade 1       TM calling DeeDee
18:54 - 18:55	North Dade  1      TM calling DeeDee
18:54 - 19:12	Incoming 18         DeeDee calling TM
19:04 - 19:05	Incoming 1          ??? CHAD ?
19:12 - 19:16	Incoming 4           DeeDee calling TM
19:16:55 -- Gunshot heard on 911 call

If Trayvon was juggling two separate callers that night I think we would have heard about it by now.

I don't think the above requires much juggling. There are stories that chad supposedly called TM, so that could be one of the calls. Other than that, IDK that anyone else is required.

 

[quadraginta]

<snip>

When you start out with 'so you're saying' it is likely what follows is a bunch of nonsense. See above, for example. That is not what I was saying. But at least you agree that taking 40 minutes to walk that distance home is suspicious.

<snip>

I don't know about him, but I sure don't.

Why on earth should it be? In addition to "walk that distance home" add "talking to girlfriend" and "teenager". Not only is forty minutes not particularly suspicious but ... as any parent of a teenager can tell you ... is surprisingly restrained.

Before the era of cheap cell phones parents with sufficient gelt would get their teenagers their own phone lines just so they could manage to get calls of their own in the evening. The ones that couldn't afford it had to ration phone time.

I'd be more interested in hearing what logic you use to interpret it as suspicious in the first place.

And since Zimmerman, as far as we know, had no idea how long Martin had been on his journey to the store and back anyway, how is it of any possible relevance?

 

[Dan O.]

http://media.nbcbayarea.com/documents/call+log.pdf
Destination: incoming = deedee or someone calling TM
Destination: North Dade = TM calling DeeDee

I don't know why your original post had both North Dade and incoming together on the same line. Above is the link to my source of the phone bill. What is your source ?

Oh my, that is embarrassing. I have been using that same document posted by you last April in the first thread. But I took a shortcut and grabbed a transcription of the data from the web from here: http://evidencegeorgezimmerman.blogspot.com/2012/07/trayvon-martin-phone-records.html


So as to alleviate any further confusion, I transcribed the original myself and converted all the times again to 24 hour Eastern time.

<code>
Note:
Usage screens on "My T-Mobile" display the customer's time zone for voice calls. For messaging and data, the date and time are displayed in Pacific Time (PST/PDT).

=== Raw data transcribed from call log PDF ===
http://media.nbcbayarea.com/documents/call+log.pdf

02/26/12
07:12 PM Incoming (F) 4
07:04 PM Incoming 1

04:08 PM North Dade, FL Incoming (S)
01:30 PM Miami, FL Incoming (S)
11:18 AM North Dade, FL Incoming (S)
11:15 AM North Dade, FL outgoing (S)
11:13 AM Hollywood, FL Incoming (S)

04:28 PM North Dade, FL (F) 41
03:04 PM Incoming 3
03:02 PM Incoming 2
02:45 PM Incoming (F) 2
02:38 PM Incoming (F) 2
02:20 PM Incoming (F) 103
02:20 PM Incoming 3

06:49 PM Incoming (F) 4
06:46 PM North Dade, FL 2
06:45 PM North Dade, FL 5
06:41 PM Incoming (F) 4
06:30 PM North Dade, FL (F) 13
05:09 PM North Dade, FL (F) 81

03/02/12
12:47 PM Incoming 1
12:45 PM Incoming 1
12:45 PM Emergency (F) 1

02/26/12
07:12 PM Incoming (F) 4
07:04 PM Incoming 1
06:54 PM Incoming (F) 18
06:54 PM North Dade, FL (F) 1
06:53 PM North Dade, FL (F) 1

=== 02/26/12 sorted calls with converted times ===

14:13 Hollywood, FL Incoming (S)
14:15 North Dade, FL Outgoing (S)
14:18 North Dade, FL Incoming (S)
14:20 - 16:03 Incoming (F) 103
14:20 - 14:23 Incoming 3
14:38 - 14:40 Incoming (F) 2
14:45 - 14:47 Incoming (F) 2
15:02 - 15:04 Incoming 2
15:04 - 15:07 Incoming 3
16:28 - 17:09 North Dade, FL (F) 41
16:30 Miami, FL Incoming (S)
17:09 - 18:30 North Dade, FL (F) 81
18:30 - 18:43 North Dade, FL (F) 13
18:41 - 18:45 Incoming (F) 4
18:45 - 18:50 North Dade, FL 5
18:46 - 18:48 North Dade, FL 2
18:49 - 18:53 Incoming (F) 4
18:53 - 18:54 North Dade, FL (F) 1
18:54 - 19:12 Incoming (F) 18
18:54 - 18:55 North Dade, FL (F) 1
19:04 - 19:05 Incoming 1
19:08 North Dade, FL Incoming (S)
19:12 - 19:16 Incoming (F) 4

Call types:
(F) T-Mobile to T-Mobile direct
(S) Text Message
</code>​

 

[Dan O.]

ETA: my transcription got a little twisted in this section:

02:38 PM Incoming (F) 2
02:20 PM Incoming (F) 103
02:20 PM Incoming 3​

which should have been:

02:38 PM Incoming (F) 103
02:20 PM Incoming 3
​

so the sorted calls table should read:

14:20 - 14:23 Incoming 3
14:38 - 16:21 Incoming (F) 103
14:45 - 14:47 Incoming (F) 2
​

With this change, I confirm that the call times I have match those posted by TheL8Elvis and the only differences between our lists is that I include the call type (F) on those calls where it is indicated and have included the SMS calls (S).

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Oh my, that is embarrassing. I have been using that same document posted by you last April in the first thread. But I took a shortcut and grabbed a transcription of the data from the web from here: http://evidencegeorgezimmerman.blogspot.com/2012/07/trayvon-martin-phone-records.html

Yeah, don't believe what you read on the internet ?
That author of that website appears to be confused why the calls would appear as t-mobile to t-mobile, and which calls are incoming:

The calls that Dee Dee told investigators she made TO Trayvon at 6:54 and 7:12 were outgoing calls, not incoming, as is explained in the detail on the side notes -they were also T-Mobile to T-Mobile, the phone with "Simple Mobile" would not be included in Tracy Martin's family plan

It clearly was an incoming call, and SIMPLE Mobile is a T-Mobile MVNO re-seller, so yeah, it was T-mobile to T-mobile.

So as to alleviate any further confusion, I transcribed the original myself and converted all the times again to 24 hour Eastern time.

Note:
Usage screens on "My T-Mobile" display the customer's time zone 
for voice calls. For messaging and data, the date and time are 
displayed in Pacific Time (PST/PDT). 

=== 02/26/12 sorted calls with converted times ===

14:13		Hollywood, FL Incoming (S)
14:15		North Dade, FL Outgoing (S)
14:18		North Dade, FL Incoming (S)
14:20 - 16:03	Incoming	(F)	103
14:20 - 14:23	Incoming		3
14:38 - 14:40	Incoming	(F)	2
14:45 - 14:47	Incoming	(F)	2
15:02 - 15:04	Incoming		2
15:04 - 15:07	Incoming		3
16:28 - 17:09	North Dade, FL	(F)	41
16:30		Miami, FL Incoming (S)
17:09 - 18:30	North Dade, FL	(F)	81
18:30 - 18:43	North Dade, FL	(F)	13
18:41 - 18:45	Incoming	(F)	4
18:45 - 18:50	North Dade, FL		5
18:46 - 18:48	North Dade, FL		2
18:49 - 18:53	Incoming	(F)	4
18:53 - 18:54	North Dade, FL	(F)	1
18:54 - 19:12	Incoming	(F)	18
18:54 - 18:55	North Dade, FL	(F)	1
19:04 - 19:05	Incoming		1
19:08		North Dade, FL Incoming (S)
19:12 - 19:16	Incoming	(F)	4

Call types:
	(F) T-Mobile to T-Mobile direct
	(S) Text Message

Yeah, I already had the exact same information in the post above yours (with the exception of the text messages). I'm not sure why you felt the need to re-invent the wheel, so to speak.

TIME       Destination Minutes     WHO CALLED
------------------------------------------------
14:20 - 14:23	Incoming 3
14:45 - 14:47	Incoming 2
15:02 - 15:04	Incoming 2
15:04 - 15:07	Incoming 3

14:38 - 16:21	Incoming 103       DeeDee calling TM
16:28 - 17:09	North Dade 41     TM calling DeeDee
17:09 - 18:30	North Dade 81     TM calling DeeDee

18:23:57 -- Call disconnected while Trayvon is at checkout

18:30 - 18:43	North Dade 13     TM calling DeeDee
18:41 - 18:45	Incoming 4          DeeDee calling TM
18:45 - 18:50	North Dade  5      TM calling DeeDee
18:46 - 18:48	North Dade  2      ???
18:49 - 18:53	Incoming 4          DeeDee calling TM
18:53 - 18:54	North Dade 1       TM calling DeeDee
18:54 - 18:55	North Dade  1      TM calling DeeDee
18:54 - 19:12	Incoming 18         DeeDee calling TM
19:04 - 19:05	Incoming 1          ??? CHAD ?
19:12 - 19:16	Incoming 4           DeeDee calling TM
19:16:55 -- Gunshot heard on 911 call

See, it's all the same...

So, back to the questions. You said

If it were the 18:30 termination that we see there on the video, look at that call log and notice what else should be seen on the video.

I don't know. What would we expect to see on the video ?

An now that you (presumably) don't think the calls are incoming from miami dade to TM dad - do you agree with my guesses as to who the callers are where I have labeled them ?

Are there any of your previous statements based on your incorrect data that you would like to withdraw ?

 

[TheL8Elvis]

I don't know about him, but I sure don't.

Why on earth should it be? In addition to "walk that distance home" add "talking to girlfriend" and "teenager". Not only is forty minutes not particularly suspicious but ... as any parent of a teenager can tell you ... is surprisingly restrained.

Before the era of cheap cell phones parents with sufficient gelt would get their teenagers their own phone lines just so they could manage to get calls of their own in the evening. The ones that couldn't afford it had to ration phone time.

I'd be more interested in hearing what logic you use to interpret it as suspicious in the first place.

And since Zimmerman, as far as we know, had no idea how long Martin had been on his journey to the store and back anyway, how is it of any possible relevance?

Once again, I was trying to determine if the facts we knew fit the circumstances claimed. GZ claimed TM was walking really slowly, while it was raining. And GZ claims found it odd (suspicious) that he didn't appear to be trying to get out of the rain.
From what we know of the timeline, it appears TM was traveling very slowly back from 7-11.And he was on a headset, so GZ didn't know he was on the phone, so that may have made his behavior look more suspicious.

Also, I thought I already answered this same question for you:

Me neither. But clearly the speed with which TM was walking was much slower than normal, much slower than "someone just returning home from an errand at the corner store.", someone who may want to get out of the rain, as most people do.

The time it took was brought up in the context of my elaborating on what GZ may have found suspicious about TM:
He didn't get permission to go to 7-eleven as mumbles claimed. He tried to buy something that required ID. TM took 40 minutes to walk half a mile, in the rain. That seems to me to be much slower than 'casually walking'. He was talking on his BT headset with his hood up - to someone that didn't know he was on the phone, that may have looked odd or out of place.

Since GZ didn't know it was a teenager ambling along chatting with his girlfriend it seemed not unreasonable to me that he may found TM suspicious or looking out of place for walking casually, and not trying to get out of the rain.

 

[johnny karate]

Once again, I was trying to determine if the facts we knew fit the circumstances claimed. GZ claimed TM was walking really slowly, while it was raining. And GZ claims found it odd (suspicious) that he didn't appear to be trying to get out of the rain.
From what we know of the timeline, it appears TM was traveling very slowly back from 7-11.And he was on a headset, so GZ didn't know he was on the phone, so that may have made his behavior look more suspicious.

And again, this says a lot more about George Zimmerman than it does about Martin's behavior.

People walk, slowly or otherwise, in the rain. It wasn't like it was a typhoon.

People use hands-free devices for talking on the phone. This is such a common occurrence that, quite frankly, it's silly that this behavior keeps coming up on the list of things that Zimmerman might have found suspicious.

It's kind of sad that the place those defending Zimmerman have landed on this issue is that Zimmerman saw someone walking casually in a light rain talking on a hands-free device, and that is what prompted him to call the police.

Because rather than offer a reasonable explanation for Zimmerman's actions, its just makes him look like a paranoid goof.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

I don't know about him, but I sure don't.

Why on earth should it be? In addition to "walk that distance home" add "talking to girlfriend" and "teenager". Not only is forty minutes not particularly suspicious but ... as any parent of a teenager can tell you ... is surprisingly restrained.

Once again, I was trying to determine if the facts we knew fit the circumstances claimed. GZ claimed TM was walking really slowly, while it was raining. And GZ claims found it odd (suspicious) that he didn't appear to be trying to get out of the rain.
From what we know of the timeline, it appears TM was traveling very slowly back from 7-11.And he was on a headset, so GZ didn't know he was on the phone, so that may have made his behavior look more suspicious.

Also, I thought I already answered this same question for you:

ETA: I forgot to mention ... I have two teenagers - a 17 year old and a 15 year old. So ... I guess I can tell myself that 40 minutes is surprisingly restrained ? The point being, I am familiar with teenage behavior, and I don't think that has much to do with the point I was trying to make.

 

[Dan O.]

Yeah, I already had the exact same information in the post above yours (with the exception of the text messages). I'm not sure why you felt the need to re-invent the wheel, so to speak.

The best way to verify the correctness of the data for both of us is to independently transcribe it and compare the results.

See, it's all the same...

Not quite. The call type is actually an important part that you left out.

So, back to the questions. You said

If it were the 18:30 termination that we see there on the video, look at that call log and notice what else should be seen on the video.

I don't know. What would we expect to see on the video ?

What I expected to see is Trayvon answering the phone when Dee Dee called back. With an outgoing call, he may be pocket dialing the return call immediately after the hangup. I'll have to review the video again as this will be harder to determine.

An now that you (presumably) don't think the calls are incoming from miami dade to TM dad - do you agree with my guesses as to who the callers are where I have labeled them ?

Most but not all. As I said, the call types are important. Since Dee Dee also has T-Mobile, all calls to or from her will have the (F) type.

14:13 Hollywood, FL Incoming (S)
14:15 North Dade, FL Outgoing (S)
14:18 North Dade, FL Incoming (S)
14:20 - 14:23 Incoming 3
14:38 - 16:21 Incoming (F) 103 from DeeDee
14:45*- 14:47 Incoming (F) 2
15:02*- 15:04 Incoming 2
15:04*- 15:07 Incoming 3
16:28 - 17:09 North Dade, FL (F) 41 to DeeDee
16:30 Miami, FL Incoming (S)
17:09 - 18:30 North Dade, FL (F) 81 to DeeDee
18:30 - 18:43 North Dade, FL (F) 13 to DeeDee
18:41*- 18:45 Incoming (F) 4
18:45 - 18:50 North Dade, FL 5
18:46*- 18:48 North Dade, FL 2
18:49*- 18:53 Incoming (F) 4 from DeeDee
18:53 - 18:54 North Dade, FL (F) 1 to DeeDee
18:54 - 18:54* North Dade, FL (F) 1 to DeeDee (<1min)
18:54 - 19:12 Incoming (F) 18 from DeeDee
19:04*- 19:05 Incoming 1
19:08 North Dade, FL Incoming (S)
19:12 - 19:16 Incoming (F) 4 from DeeDee
​

Are there any of your previous statements based on your incorrect data that you would like to withdraw ?

One step at a time. Of course I will not maintain any incorrect interpretations I made based on the incorrect data.

What I have listed above is the maximized calls to or from Dee Dee. This series represents a continuous conversation from 14:38 until 19:16 which is shortly before Trayvons death. There are only two substantial gaps, 7 and 6 minutes and several overlapping calls from and to other parties.

Do you see any problem with this analysis so far?

 

[quadraginta]

I don't know about him, but I sure don't.

Why on earth should it be? In addition to "walk that distance home" add "talking to girlfriend" and "teenager". Not only is forty minutes not particularly suspicious but ... as any parent of a teenager can tell you ... is surprisingly restrained.

Before the era of cheap cell phones parents with sufficient gelt would get their teenagers their own phone lines just so they could manage to get calls of their own in the evening. The ones that couldn't afford it had to ration phone time.

I'd be more interested in hearing what logic you use to interpret it as suspicious in the first place.

And since Zimmerman, as far as we know, had no idea how long Martin had been on his journey to the store and back anyway, how is it of any possible relevance?

Once again, I was trying to determine if the facts we knew fit the circumstances claimed. GZ claimed TM was walking really slowly, while it was raining. And GZ claims found it odd (suspicious) that he didn't appear to be trying to get out of the rain.
From what we know of the timeline, it appears TM was traveling very slowly back from 7-11.And he was on a headset, so GZ didn't know he was on the phone, so that may have made his behavior look more suspicious.

Also, I thought I already answered this same question for you:

Me neither. But clearly the speed with which TM was walking was much slower than normal, much slower than "someone just returning home from an errand at the corner store.", someone who may want to get out of the rain, as most people do.

The time it took was brought up in the context of my elaborating on what GZ may have found suspicious about TM:
He didn't get permission to go to 7-eleven as mumbles claimed. He tried to buy something that required ID. TM took 40 minutes to walk half a mile, in the rain. That seems to me to be much slower than 'casually walking'. He was talking on his BT headset with his hood up - to someone that didn't know he was on the phone, that may have looked odd or out of place.

Since GZ didn't know it was a teenager ambling along chatting with his girlfriend it seemed not unreasonable to me that he may found TM suspicious or looking out of place for walking casually, and not trying to get out of the rain.

You're going around in circles, chasing your own tail.

Yes, of course it doesn't seem unreasonable to you that Zimmerman may have found Martin "suspicious". That's because you are trying to defend his actions, and it is convenient to assert that.

The question was whether or not anyone else would have. Specifically you were suggesting to Dan O. that he was conceding that he did.

I'm saying that I wouldn't have. And that I don't see any rational reason that anyone else would have, either.

Although I still don't understand how any of these aspects of the trip you mention are germane to Zimmerman's behavior in the first place. Whether or not Martin had "permission" to walk to the corner store (although I don't know why a seventeen yr. old would need permission), Zimmerman would have no way of knowing anyhow. Neither would he know anything about alleged attempts at underage purchases, or how long Martin was taking to walk home.

Although the amount of rain encountered seems somewhat problematic, there is nothing particularly brutal about early evening showers in Florida, even in winter. In fact they are more par for the course than not. And those showers, if all that brutal, might even explain some of the forty minute you seem so concerned about. We know for sure he sought shelter once, because that has been reported. We don't have any way of knowing he didn't do it somewhere else along the way.

Zimmerman's main claim to "suspicious" behavior is that Martin seemed to be walking slowly in the apt. complex. He had no way of knowing anything about any prior circumstances.

So. So what?

It all breaks down to whether a teenager on a cell phone walking home in the early evening is "suspicious" because he was moving too slow to suit Zimmerman. I don't find that reasonable.

I have to wonder if Zimmerman would have found him to somehow be less suspicious if he had been moving faster. I'm not very sanguine about the chances that he would have.

What if he had been running? Would that be even less suspicious still?

I think what Zimmerman found suspicious was a black kid in a hoodie. If Martin had been a white teenager in a letter jacket we wouldn't be having this conversation.

No matter how slow the kid was walking.

 

[quadraginta]

ETA: I forgot to mention ... I have two teenagers - a 17 year old and a 15 year old. So ... I guess I can tell myself that 40 minutes is surprisingly restrained ? The point being, I am familiar with teenage behavior, and I don't think that has much to do with the point I was trying to make.

It isn't clear to me why you don't think that, but it has a great deal to do with the point I'm trying to make, e.g.; there is absolutely nothing suspicious about a teenager dawdling along while talking on the phone to his girlfriend, occasional light rain notwithstanding. And forty minutes does nothing to stretch credulity even the least bit.

You're the one who continues to attempt to support the idea that such behavior is somehow suspicious, and apply that description as some sort of justification for Zimmerman's behavior. If you are indeed a parent of teenagers you have to know that this is not the case. The meme is as old as telephones themselves are. It has gone beyond cliche to truism.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

What I expected to see is Trayvon answering the phone when Dee Dee called back. With an outgoing call, he may be pocket dialing the return call immediately after the hangup. I'll have to review the video again as this will be harder to determine.

Since we don't know what headset TM was using, let's assume for the moment it's the one that came with the phone. If so:
http://www.accessorywiz.com/htc/htc...s-earphones-earbuds-for-t-mobile-huawei-comet

• Built-in Microphone featured noise reduction. 3 switch buttons for listening to music and answering calls.
• Voice dial support. Last number redial support. Play/Pause button.
• Send button to answer calls, call waiting switch or redial last number.

So he can answer or redial from the headset. All it requires is touching the controls, he doesn't need to reach into his pocket for either.

Most but not all. As I said, the call types are important. Since Dee Dee also has T-Mobile, all calls to or from her will have the (F) type.
<>
One step at a time. Of course I will not maintain any incorrect interpretations I made based on the incorrect data.

OK. Let me know when you get to this one:

I claim based on the evidence I have already presented that the time from when Trayvon was seen walking away from the store till when George begins his call to the SPD NEN is close to 20 minutes.

What I have listed above is the maximized calls to or from Dee Dee. This series represents a continuous conversation from 14:38 until 19:16 which is shortly before Trayvons death. There are only two substantial gaps, 7 and 6 minutes and several overlapping calls from and to other parties.

Do you see any problem with this analysis so far?

It appears correct based on the t-mobile printout, and assuming deedee is usually the t-mobile caller.

 

[Dan O.]

ETA: I forgot to mention ... I have two teenagers - a 17 year old and a 15 year old. So ... I guess I can tell myself that 40 minutes is surprisingly restrained ? The point being, I am familiar with teenage behavior, and I don't think that has much to do with the point I was trying to make.

Elvis, what is the actual speed of Trayvon's pace? Have you noticed that there are several segments in the store video where Travon is walking in a straight line. It shouldn't be that difficult to measure the speed of that pace against the clock on the video and the grid on the floor. There is even a ruler on the wall by the side door if you need to calibrate the grid.

Trayvon's average speed walking home that night is not relevant since George would not be aware of when Trayvon left the store or even that Trayvon had been to a store, The only thing Geroge would have viewed would be Trayvon walking and Trayvon stoping in the shelter out of the rain. He and even you do not know if Trayvon stopped elsewhere along the route to get out of the rain or to enjoy a cigar.

So, what is the point you are trying to make?

 

[KatieG]

Once again, I was trying to determine if the facts we knew fit the circumstances claimed. GZ claimed TM was walking really slowly, while it was raining. And GZ claims found it odd (suspicious) that he didn't appear to be trying to get out of the rain.
From what we know of the timeline, it appears TM was traveling very slowly back from 7-11.And he was on a headset, so GZ didn't know he was on the phone, so that may have made his behavior look more suspicious. Also, I thought I already answered this same question for you:

So what? Is there any reason TM should have been hurrying home from the 7-11? Because he wasn't walking at a rate YOU deem to be reasonable, GZ was totally justified in being suspicious? That seems to say more about your reactions than GZs.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

You're going around in circles, chasing your own tail.

Yes, of course it doesn't seem unreasonable to you that Zimmerman may have found Martin "suspicious". That's because you are trying to defend his actions, and it is convenient to assert that.

And because you are trying to attack his actions, therefor you find them unreasonable ? How do bare assertions like those accomplish anything ?

The question was whether or not anyone else would have. Specifically you were suggesting to Dan O. that he was conceding that he did.

I'm saying that I wouldn't have. And that I don't see any rational reason that anyone else would have, either.

So all my reasoning is irrational ? I am asserting that based on the circumstances, I find it plausible that GZ could have found TM suspicious. Especially since, as has been discussed, some part of finding someone suspicious is subjective. I disagree with what I will summarize as the position "there is no way TM was doing anything anyone could have possibly found suspicious."

Although I still don't understand how any of these aspects of the trip you mention are germane to Zimmerman's behavior in the first place. Whether or not Martin had "permission" to walk to the corner store (although I don't know why a seventeen yr. old would need permission), Zimmerman would have no way of knowing anyhow. Neither would he know anything about alleged attempts at underage purchases, or how long Martin was taking to walk home.

The permission issue was a claim made by someone else that I was disagreeing with. You are correct, it has nothing to do with what GZ would know or not know at the time.

Although the amount of rain encountered seems somewhat problematic, there is nothing particularly brutal about early evening showers in Florida, even in winter. In fact they are more par for the course than not. And those showers, if all that brutal, might even explain some of the forty minute you seem so concerned about. We know for sure he sought shelter once, because that has been reported. We don't have any way of knowing he didn't do it somewhere else along the way.

Zimmerman's main claim to "suspicious" behavior is that Martin seemed to be walking slowly in the apt. complex. He had no way of knowing anything about any prior circumstances.

So. So what?

It all breaks down to whether a teenager on a cell phone walking home in the early evening is "suspicious" because he was moving too slow to suit Zimmerman. I don't find that reasonable.

Well, no, that's not all. That's the point I was trying to make above.

I have to wonder if Zimmerman would have found him to somehow be less suspicious if he had been moving faster. I'm not very sanguine about the chances that he would have.

What if he had been running? Would that be even less suspicious still?

I think what Zimmerman found suspicious was a black kid in a hoodie. If Martin had been a white teenager in a letter jacket we wouldn't be having this conversation.

No matter how slow the kid was walking.

That's probably true. It's also irrelevant.

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/07/12/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html

In an interview with FBI agents in March, investigator Chris Serino told authorities he "believed that Zimmerman's actions were not based on Martin's skin color, rather based on his attire, the total circumstances of the encounter and the previous burglary suspects in the community," according to an FBI report.
...
The U.S. Department of Justice took up a civil rights investigation after allegations that race played a part in the killing of Martin, 17, in February in a gated community in Sanford, Florida. The reports released Thursday do not draw conclusions in that investigation.


It's not all just about how fast TM was walking.

 

[This is The End]

I would wager that, at trial, the defense will possibly claim that Z is unfamiliar with headset usage.

They will then claim that this made Z think that M was likely talking to an unseen accomplice, perhaps through a window in one of the houses.

 

[Dan O.]

Since we don't know what headset TM was using, let's assume for the moment it's the one that came with the phone. If so:
http://www.accessorywiz.com/htc/htc...s-earphones-earbuds-for-t-mobile-huawei-comet

• Built-in Microphone featured noise reduction. 3 switch buttons for listening to music and answering calls.
• Voice dial support. Last number redial support. Play/Pause button.
• Send button to answer calls, call waiting switch or redial last number.

So he can answer or redial from the headset. All it requires is touching the controls, he doesn't need to reach into his pocket for either.

I'll buy that. Trayvon's headset was white but the functions will be the same.

OK. Let me know when you get to this one:

I claim based on the evidence I have already presented that the time from when Trayvon was seen walking away from the store till when George begins his call to the SPD NEN is close to 20 minutes.

If we exclude that any of those overlapping calls in the 6 minutes from 18:43 to 18:49 were destined for another phone on the family plan then there is some serious juggling going on here.

 18:30 - 18:43	North Dade, FL	(F)	13	to DeeDee
 18:41*- 18:45	Incoming	(F)	4	interruption from third party
 18:45 - 18:50	North Dade, FL		5	call back (3rd party?)
 18:46*- 18:48	North Dade, FL		2	overlapping call to 4th party
 18:49*- 18:53	Incoming	(F)	4	from DeeDee (overlaps with 3rd party)

There would need to be some conversation while juggling these calls and I don't here anything except the hello's so I don't think any of this exchange happened in the store. The 18:53 termination of DeeDee's call was followed by a calllback from Trayvon. This couldn't be a 1 button redial because Trayvon's last call was to another party. There are two more terminations in the 18:54 minute. These could be 1 button redials but only 1 is evident in the store so I'm leaning towards excluding them too.

The 19:12 interruption has to be the one DeeDee says was at the mail boxes. But that is also at least 30 seconds after George says Trayvon was running. I'll need to listen again to what DeeDee was trying to say while Bernie was interrupting her with his facts.

19:04*- 19:05	Incoming		1
19:08		North Dade, FL Incoming (S)

Some have said that the 19:04 call was from Chad asking Trayvon to pick up the Skittles. If we accepted that, some might claim that Travon was walking suspiciously fast back from the store

The 19:08 SMS could be DeeDee. I think she says Trayvon didn't text her back when questioned. Anyhow, Trayvon would have been almost back in the neighborhood when he stopped to read it. Would this be suspicious looking? It's about 1-2 minutes before George stops his truck to call SPD.

It appears correct based on the t-mobile printout, and assuming deedee is usually the t-mobile caller.

BTW, here are a couple of random videos I searched for this evening:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQEBiYryO8U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfXAlGSsYeI

We'll see if anyone has been following along and recognizes the significance.

 

[johnny karate]

In an interview with FBI agents in March, investigator Chris Serino told authorities he "believed that Zimmerman's actions were not based on Martin's skin color, rather based on his attire, the total circumstances of the encounter and the previous burglary suspects in the community," according to an FBI report.
...
The U.S. Department of Justice took up a civil rights investigation after allegations that race played a part in the killing of Martin, 17, in February in a gated community in Sanford, Florida. The reports released Thursday do not draw conclusions in that investigation.


It's not all just about how fast TM was walking.

Well, that report refers to Zimmerman's actions, not his suspicion.

But assuming his suspicion is considered part of his overall actions, let's break it down:

his attire

Must be that dreaded hoodie. If the fact that Martin was walking in the rain played a part in Zimmerman's suspicion of him, I'd be curious to know why the fact that Martin was dressed for the rain (i.e. wearing his hood up) also played a part in that suspicion. Kind of like being suspicious of someone for being out in the cold, but also being suspicious of them because they're wearing a ski mask.

the total circumstances of the encounter

A bit of circular reasoning here. This clearly has no bearing on Zimmerman's suspicion, and since his possibly unwarranted suspicion lead to the encounter, I'm not sure how this can at all be looked as a reasonable defense for his actions.

the previous burglary suspects in the community

Unless it's being argued that Martin had some specific traits in common with the previous burglary suspects (and race seems to be off the table, so I'm not sure what's left), then this is nothing more than paranoia.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Well, that report refers to Zimmerman's actions, not his suspicion.

But assuming his suspicion is considered part of his overall actions, let's break it down:

Since he called the NEN (an action) because of his suspicion...

his attire
Must be that dreaded hoodie. If the fact that Martin was walking in the rain played a part in Zimmerman's suspicion of him, I'd be curious to know why the fact that Martin was dressed for the rain (i.e. wearing his hood up) also played a part in that suspicion. Kind of like being suspicious of someone for being out in the cold, but also being suspicious of them because they're wearing a ski mask.

I guess so....

http://edition.cnn.com/2012/07/12/justice/florida-teen-shooting/index.html

In his interview, Serino explained to the FBI agents that African-American gangs in the community "typically dressed in black and wore hoodies," the report said.

the total circumstances of the encounter
A bit of circular reasoning here. This clearly has no bearing on Zimmerman's suspicion, and since his possibly unwarranted suspicion lead to the encounter, I'm not sure how this can at all be looked as a reasonable defense for his actions.

Perhaps include first seeing TM and calling NEN as part of the encounter. I didn't read it to mean just the physical part of the encounter.

the previous burglary suspects in the community
Unless it's being argued that Martin had some specific traits in common with the previous burglary suspects (and race seems to be off the table, so I'm not sure what's left), then this is nothing more than paranoia.

Yep, not sure about that. Perhaps referring to the fact the he was near the side yard where the window was open before, as he talked about in his police interview.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

It's time to step your game up.

First, if the store clerk would refuse to sell Martin some tobacco product from behind the counter, why would he then watch as Martin negotiated with "the three guys", Martin hand them over money, them walk in asking for tobacco products, and then walk out and hand these product to Martin, without objection? Store clerks aren't idiots.

Also, why were there no tobacco products found on Martin?

And having answered those tow, what does any of this have to do with Martin fighting Zimmerman behind some houses?
<snip>

Maybe we'll soon find out the answer to those two questions, and what it has to do with that evening....

http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/0113/motion_for_subpoena_7-11.pdf