Continuation: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[WildCat]

I don't see what basis you have for imagining what is in my head

I limited my statements to those attested by the only living person who saw the entire event.

Now I supose in your head Martin could have been thinking "If I act uppity then run, i can lure this cracker into chasing me, then I can leap out of the bushes and bust his ass" (while being on the phone most of the time), but there is no evidence of that.

Do you have a link where Zimmerman says he chased down a fleeing Martin and shot him?

I doubt you do, because it's obvious you just made that up.

 

[Noztradamus]

Do you have a link where Zimmerman says he chased down a fleeing Martin and shot him?

I doubt you do, because it's obvious you just made that up.

AS I never said that, I''ll let it go though to the wicket-keeper

 

[Unabogie]

Do you think it demonstrates that they don't want one at all, or that they just don't want one 45 days before the trial ?

When the judge gives you parameters and you decline to meet them, the most reasonable interpretation is that yes, they don't intend to have one. They passed up the hearing. I don't understand why you want to keep spinning something so obvious as something it's not.

Since the burden of proof is on GZ in an immunity hearing, and on the state in a trial, if GZ or his attorney doesn't think, for whatever reason, that they judge will grant an immunity request, it does it make sense to request one before the trial. If he is found not guilty (or not found guilty, however you like it) then he can request a an immunity hearing and probably have much greater odds of winning, don't you think ? If he loses the trial, he probably wouldn't have won immunity anyway.

That's fair, but it's also what we've been saying all along. He wouldn't have won an immunity hearing. Note that many other defendants HAVE won theirs in Florida, which indicates that George's case is not a strong one.

And you gleaned these problems from you deep legal knowledge, or where?

We've already discussed them. If he puts on an immunity hearing during a trial, the burden of proof switches over to him, doesn't it? He has to present a case, and he has to go first. In a trial, the state goes first. How do you reconcile that switch in the middle of a single proceeding?

How about if GZ simply files for immunity, the judge says no, and he appeals and has his motion granted because there is nothing associated with the law stating a particular time frame, is there ?

Can you appeal an immunity hearing?

You realize it's that kind of thing that makes it difficult to have a reasonable discussion, right ?

Get over yourself. If we can be called "Trayvon Truthers" then you guys can withstand a little rhetorical threat to George's honor.

You realize it's that kind of thing that makes it difficult to have a reasonable discussion, right ?

People who donated to George had their money spent on a lavish lifestyle. They spent $125,000 on personal expenses alone. That money does not include "security" or legal expenses. Anyone who donates their money to people like the Zimmermans are rubes, in the purest sense of the word. Please tell me you didn't send them cash?

 

[johnny karate]

How does that support the claim Martin was fleeing? Martin could easily have been in his father's condo by the time Zimmerman got off the phone if that was the case.

Martin was running away from Zimmerman. That is the definition of fleeing.

Zimmerman sure doesn't sound like he's running while on the phone, just walking.

I have no idea why you think that your uninformed opinion of what walking sounds like versus running should be greeted with anything other than laughter.

But again, all your doing at this point is splitting a hair between "following" and "pursuing". A far cry from your ridiculous claim that Noztradamus was making things up in his head.

eta: are you still sticking with your ridiculous assertion that the red smudge on Zimmerman's face isn't smeared blood?

I never made that assertion. I only challenged the assertion someone else made that - absent any forensic evidence - it was.

If I was engaged in a discussion with a person interested in honest debate, I'd certainly concede that the smudge was most likely blood.

But since I'm not, I don't see the point in doing so.

You let me know when you're ready to be honest about how and why the charges against Zimmerman were dropped, and maybe we can talk about that smudge.

 

[johnny karate]

Do you have a link where Zimmerman says he chased down a fleeing Martin and shot him?

Do you have a link where Noztradamus said that?

 

[Unabogie]

I have no idea why you think that your uninformed opinion of what walking sounds like versus running should be greeted with anything other than laughter.

But again, all your doing at this point is splitting a hair between "following" and "pursuing". A far cry from your ridiculous claim that Noztradamus was making things up in his head.

Even still, I clearly hear him huffing and puffing once he gets out of the car. That's not the sound of a man leisurely walking, looking for an address. You hear the car door open, then you hear the wind against the phone, and a clearly out of breath George who almost can't string two words together, he's so winded.

"He ran", followed by a long silence and heavy breathing. How anyone can say they can't hear that is beyond me. They're better off claiming that AFTER that running, he stopped and began heading back to the truck. But to say he wasn't running when we hear him wheezing along like that?

 

[Mumbles]

Do you have a link where Zimmerman says he chased down a fleeing Martin and shot him?

I doubt you do, because it's obvious you just made that up.

The evidence that Zimmerman ran after Martin is in Zimmerman's police recording, where Zimmerman first gets out of his car and runs after stating that Martin is "running", then where he refuses to meet the police at a definite location.

The evidence that Zimmerman shot Martin is Zimmerman's confession to shooting Martin, along with Zimmerman's gun which had discharged one round, and the bullet in Martin's chest.

Neither of the two are disputable.

 

[Unabogie]

The evidence that Zimmerman ran after Martin is in Zimmerman's police recording, where Zimmerman first gets out of his car and runs after stating that Martin is "running", then where he refuses to meet the police at a definite location.

The evidence that Zimmerman shot Martin is Zimmerman's confession to shooting Martin, along with Zimmerman's gun which had discharged one round, and the bullet in Martin's chest.

Neither of the two are disputable.

In their imagination, Trayvon, who was fleeing the creepy man (even as George tells it), was the one who caused them to meet up again, while George, who was actively following Trayvon (even as George tells it), was the one who did NOT cause them to meet up again.

Pretzel logic.

 

[phonebook]

The evidence that Zimmerman ran after Martin is in Zimmerman's police recording, where Zimmerman first gets out of his car and runs after stating that Martin is "running", then where he refuses to meet the police at a definite location.

To specifically address the underlined: GZ was never given a command to meet the police at a specific location; he requested the option to give them a specific location at a later time, to which the dispatcher agreed.

GZ asked: "Actually, could you have them call me and I'll tell him where I'm at?"

to which the dispatcher replied: "Ok. Yeah, that's no problem."

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Get over yourself. If we can be called "Trayvon Truthers" then you guys can withstand a little rhetorical threat to George's honor.

1) quit with the ******** about GZ honor. The only place that defending GZ honor exists is in your head, because you made it up.

2) I haven't called anyone a "Trayvon Truther"

3) tu quoque is still a fallacy

People who donated to George had their money spent on a lavish lifestyle. They spent $125,000 on personal expenses alone. That money does not include "security" or legal expenses. Anyone who donates their money to people like the Zimmermans are rubes, in the purest sense of the word. Please tell me you didn't send them cash?

Because you would believe me if I said I didn't? Call people whatever you want. *shrugs*

 

[TheL8Elvis]

The evidence that Zimmerman ran after Martin is in Zimmerman's police recording, where Zimmerman first gets out of his car and runs after stating that Martin is "running", then where he refuses to meet the police at a definite location.

The evidence that Zimmerman shot Martin is Zimmerman's confession to shooting Martin, along with Zimmerman's gun which had discharged one round, and the bullet in Martin's chest.

Neither of the two are disputable.

If your evidence that GZ followed TM is the NEN, then that's also your evidence that he he both:
a) stopped following him
b) lost track of him

Right ?

 

[WildCat]

AS I never said that, I''ll let it go though to the wicket-keeper

Of course you did, I even hilited the part where you said it.

Apparently now you feel silly for making such a stupid statement, so you're trying to pretend you didn't write what you did. Just like johnny karate denying he said the red smudge on Zimmerman's face wasn't smeared blood.

I don't make you guys say such silly things, I only call attention to them when you do.

 

[WildCat]

Martin was running away from Zimmerman. That is the definition of fleeing.

If he was fleeing they wouldn't have met up a few minutes later, because he would have easily made it back to his father's condo.

I have no idea why you think that your uninformed opinion of what walking sounds like versus running should be greeted with anything other than laughter.[/quote]
I'm quite familiar to what people sound like when they're running and talking at the same time. This isn't rare or rocket science.

But again, all your doing at this point is splitting a hair between "following" and "pursuing". A far cry from your ridiculous claim that Noztradamus was making things up in his head.

You and Noz should consult more, he's walking back his claim just like you now deny you said the red smudge on Zimmerman's face wasn't smeared blood.

I never made that assertion. I only challenged the assertion someone else made that - absent any forensic evidence - it was.

Don't be silly. You don't need forensic examination to conclude that the red stuff flowing from a wound is blood. What else would it be? Ectoplasm? Pixie dust? Kool-Aid?

If I was engaged in a discussion with a person interested in honest debate, I'd certainly concede that the smudge was most likely blood.

But since I'm not, I don't see the point in doing so.

And here you admit you're just trolling.

You let me know when you're ready to be honest about how and why the charges against Zimmerman were dropped, and maybe we can talk about that smudge.

They were dropped because the prosecutor felt he had a weak case. Happens all the time. Sometimes they get an agreement to undergo counseling or somesuch, because for the defendant that is far cheaper than fighting a case they may lose. After all, innocent people get found guilty all the time.

 

[WildCat]

Do you have a link where Noztradamus said that?

Of course I do johnny. Here's Noz explaining what he thinks happened:

I see the situation as
Party A flees
Party B pursues Party A
Party B shoots and kills Party A
Party B says "it was self defence"

And here's where Noz says this scenario is based exclusively on what Zimmerman said:

I limited my statements to those attested by the only living person who saw the entire event.

Now if only we had a forensic examination to determine what that mysterious red substance was flowing from Zimmerman's wound! It's a real head-scratcher.

 

[phonebook]

If he was fleeing they wouldn't have met up a few minutes later, because he would have easily made it back to his father's condo.

Is it not possible he fled, and even made it to his father's condo, then decided to return to the T area? It's not like this choice to flee was a permanent state that couldn't be altered once set.

 

[johnny karate]

They were dropped because the prosecutor felt he had a weak case.

I'm just going to leave this great big glaring lie here for everyone to see.

I have no interest in engaging with you further.

 

[johnny karate]

If your evidence that GZ followed TM is the NEN, then that's also your evidence that he he both:
a) stopped following him
b) lost track of him

Right ?

There's no evidence in the NEN call that Zimmerman stopped following Martin.

There is evidence that he did continue to follow him in the actual location of the altercation as opposed where Zimmerman claimed it took place.

And yes, Zimmerman lost track of Martin. Because Martin was running away from him. That's why Zimmerman was following him.

 

[This is The End]

The evidence that Zimmerman ran after Martin is in Zimmerman's police recording, where Zimmerman first gets out of his car and runs after stating that Martin is "running", then where he refuses to meet the police at a definite location.

To specifically address the underlined: GZ was never given a command to meet the police at a specific location; he requested the option to give them a specific location at a later time, to which the dispatcher agreed.

GZ asked: "Actually, could you have them call me and I'll tell him where I'm at?"

to which the dispatcher replied: "Ok. Yeah, that's no problem."

You're leaving out the part before that. The part that Z was referring to with the word "actually".

 

[phonebook]

You're leaving out the part before that. The part that Z was referring to with the word "actually".

Ok, that would then be:

dispatcher: "Do you wanna just meet with them right near the mailboxes then?"

GZ: "yeah, that's fine"

dispatcher: "Alright, George, I'll let them know to meet you with you out there, OK?" (that's what I hear anyway).

GZ asked: "Actually, could you have them call me and I'll tell him where I'm at?"

to which the dispatcher replied: "Ok. Yeah, that's no problem."

Doesn't appear the dispatcher had any issue with his request.

 

[This is The End]

So I gather that your only complaint with Mumbles' quote is the word "refuses"??

It should say "reneges" perhaps?? Backs out on??

Isn't that nearly enough synonym for refuse??

The dispatcher suggests a specific location to meet at. Z agrees. (That's the part you left out the first time, coincidentally, I'm sure).

Z then reneges on that plan and asks to instead meet somewhere unspecified and to be determined.

The part you underlined, and specifically pointed out your disagreement to (while only giving the latter half of the relevant section, btw), reads:

where he refuses to meet the police at a definite location.

It's sure looks close enough for government work!

Also the part you left out:

dispatcher: "Do you wanna just meet with them right near the mailboxes then?"

GZ: "yeah, that's fine"

Sure makes this part of your post seem curious:

GZ was never given a command to meet the police at a specific location

It could be argued that it wasn't a "command" (I'm sure we can see that is where you are going by highlighting the word "wanna"), but you are the one that said command, not mumbles...

Mumbles merely said that Z refused to meet at a specific location. I would agree that "refuse" is a bit off, more like reneges, or has second thoughts, or backs out on.

So mumbles' line should read:

where Z "has second thoughts on the agreement to" meet the police at a definite location.