Continuation: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

[Dan O.]

Zimmerman also specifically told police he was looking for a street sign.

Street signs are typically located on the street, and not in the backyard areas behind houses.

Z is looking for a sign to tell him the name of the street he has lived on for several years.

 

[Rare Truth]

Z is looking for a sign to tell him the name of the street he has lived on for several years.

So, so much just does not add up.

 

[phonebook]

Zimmerman had two small cuts on the back of his head, no skull fractures, and no concussion.

What about those injuries leads you to the conclusion that Martin repeatedly slammed Zimmerman's head into the pavement?

Why are you pointing out the fact that he has no skull fractures and no concussion? Has a concussion even been conclusively ruled out?

This one hasn't been brought up very much, because it has yet to be conclusively settled. But I'm glad you mentioned it, because there has been something regarding those screams I've been meaning to address.

First, let's listen to this:
watch?v=f8HYZXg0UQs

Is that guy in fear? Definitely. In fear for his life? Possibly. In reasonable fear for his life? Absolutely not.

And that brings us back to Zimmerman, because the law demands one must be in reasonable fear for one's life before one can use deadly force to defend it.

So I'd be curious to know how someone can listen to those screams on that 911 call and conclusively ascertain the person screaming was in reasonable fear for his life.

GZ didn't need to scream to be in reasonable fear for his life, it's just another indication that he WAS experiencing some level of fear, if those were his screams. It's the circumstances ongoing at the time he pulled the trigger which will determine if he was in reasonable fear of his life. I don't think there will be a tenable argument that GZ received his injuries after he fired his weapon, so his injuries, and not even the actual extent of them, but the perceived extent of them for someone in GZ's position, will play a factor in determining that. They will also hear "John's" testimony about TM being on top of GZ shortly before the shot was fired, and they will hear the defense's experts that will argue that the ballistics match GZ's story as well.

You have to keep in mind that in order for GZ to be found guilty, the prosecution must first prove that GZ could not have been in reasonable fear of his life, beyond a reasonable doubt (disproving his self-defense claim). They then must also prove each component of 2nd degree murder, again, beyond a reasonable doubt. Do you honestly believe it's going to be a great challenge for the defense to present a story that matches the evidence sufficiently to provide a reasonable doubt to anything the prosecution is going to come up with?

 

[phonebook]

There's a hilarious point in the walkthrough video when George is saying that he didn't know the address, he is raising his arms and practically pointing at that very address behind him.

That was a truly precious moment.

He was supposed to tell the responding officers "Yeah, just come to 1211... um... 1211... uh..." How are you supposed to give an address when you don't even know the name of the street the address is on?

He said he got out of his car to look for a street sign on Twin Trees, but that he continued over to RVC because he knew he could get an address over there and he already knew the name of the street, which both components are required to give someone an address to respond to. The reason he points to "the back of the houses" as he gets out on foot during the reenactment video is because those houses are on RVC.

 

[12AX7]

Why are you pointing out the fact that he has no skull fractures and no concussion? Has a concussion even been conclusively ruled out?

Was a concussion diagnosed?

Do you honestly believe it's going to be a great challenge for the defense to present a story that matches the evidence sufficiently to provide a reasonable doubt to anything the prosecution is going to come up with?

At the rate in which George has lied? Yes. See, his stories matching the evidence is a problem; they don't. Do you honestly believe the prosecution isn't going to zero in on Georges inconsistencies?

 

[Unabogie]

Why are you pointing out the fact that he has no skull fractures and no concussion? Has a concussion even been conclusively ruled out?

Yes, because he refused medical treatment and his cuts didn't even require a band-aid. How can you say he may have had a concussion with that sort of evidence? Can we also rule out Martian flu? I hear it's going around.

GZ didn't need to scream to be in reasonable fear for his life, it's just another indication that he WAS experiencing some level of fear, if those were his screams. It's the circumstances ongoing at the time he pulled the trigger which will determine if he was in reasonable fear of his life. I don't think there will be a tenable argument that GZ received his injuries after he fired his weapon, so his injuries, and not even the actual extent of them, but the perceived extent of them for someone in GZ's position, will play a factor in determining that. They will also hear "John's" testimony about TM being on top of GZ shortly before the shot was fired, and they will hear the defense's experts that will argue that the ballistics match GZ's story as well.

Oh, really? How will they match his story when the shell casing is 50 feet from where he says the fight happened? What exactly do you think ballistics will tell us about how the body ended up where it landed?

You have to keep in mind that in order for GZ to be found guilty, the prosecution must first prove that GZ could not have been in reasonable fear of his life, beyond a reasonable doubt (disproving his self-defense claim). They then must also prove each component of 2nd degree murder, again, beyond a reasonable doubt. Do you honestly believe it's going to be a great challenge for the defense to present a story that matches the evidence sufficiently to provide a reasonable doubt to anything the prosecution is going to come up with?

Yes, it will be a great challenge. The state gets to go first, remember, and they will methodically demonstrate all the ways in which George lied to the police. After that, it will be up to the defense to knock that down. But how do you suggest they do that? How do you get a jury to believe self-defense when the shooter is a proven liar?

He was supposed to tell the responding officers "Yeah, just come to 1211... um... 1211... uh..." How are you supposed to give an address when you don't even know the name of the street the address is on?

He said he got out of his car to look for a street sign on Twin Trees, but that he continued over to RVC because he knew he could get an address over there and he already knew the name of the street, which both components are required to give someone an address to respond to. The reason he points to "the back of the houses" as he gets out on foot during the reenactment video is because those houses are on RVC.

And yet he NEVER TELLS THE DISPATCHER THE ADDRESS. Consider that for a moment. You claim he went over there because he couldn't just tell them the address that was right in front of his truck because he couldn't remember the name of the street. But there were only three streets there. That's it. But let's say you get over that hump and say ok, let's go to the next street and get a DIFFERENT address, one that's not near his truck in any way at all. One that's not near where he said he'd be. Note he didn't wait there where he was getting an address. Why would you get an address from somewhere and then immediately vacate that area and walk, by foot, where the police cars couldn't drive through, to a street you didn't know the name of and hadn't informed the police about? Do you see how silly that sounds? But ok, let's keep going. He got the address or didn't he? Because if he did, why didn't he say so? If he didn't why did he start back? How can anyone possibly believe this ferkakta story?

 

[johnny karate]

Why are you pointing out the fact that he has no skull fractures and no concussion?

Because he claimed to have had his head repeatedly slammed onto the concrete. Having one's head repeatedly slammed onto concrete would likely yield severe impact injuries.

Has a concussion even been conclusively ruled out?

He wasn't diagnosed with one, nor was he symptomatic.

GZ didn't need to scream to be in reasonable fear for his life, it's just another indication that he WAS experiencing some level of fear, if those were his screams.

You've got it backwards. My point was that Zimmerman's screams don't necessarily mean he was in reasonable fear for his life.

It's the circumstances ongoing at the time he pulled the trigger which will determine if he was in reasonable fear of his life. I don't think there will be a tenable argument that GZ received his injuries after he fired his weapon, so his injuries, and not even the actual extent of them, but the perceived extent of them for someone in GZ's position, will play a factor in determining that.

You are incorrect on that point. The nature of Zimmerman's injuries are important in determining the veracity of his account. If it can be proven that his injuries are not consistent with the nature of assault he claimed to have suffered, then it will establish he is lying about the nature of the assault.

They will also hear "John's" testimony about TM being on top of GZ shortly before the shot was fired, and they will hear the defense's experts that will argue that the ballistics match GZ's story as well.

Martin being on top of Zimmerman at some point during the altercation does nothing to prove that Martin a) repeatedly punched Zimmerman in the face, b) Martin repeatedly slammed Zimmerman's head onto the pavement, or c) Zimmerman was helplessly pinned under Martin.

These are all explicit details Zimmerman provided in order to bolster his self-defense claim.

You have to keep in mind that in order for GZ to be found guilty, the prosecution must first prove that GZ could not have been in reasonable fear of his life, beyond a reasonable doubt (disproving his self-defense claim). They then must also prove each component of 2nd degree murder, again, beyond a reasonable doubt. Do you honestly believe it's going to be a great challenge for the defense to present a story that matches the evidence sufficiently to provide a reasonable doubt to anything the prosecution is going to come up with?

I have never claimed that the prosecution has an easy road ahead of them, or that they will necessarily even be successful.

However, they can definitely make a case out of Zimmerman's contradictions and fabrications. And I think the defense is well aware of this. That's why we've already seen the machinations put into motion to make sure Zimmerman and his flimsy story stay as far away from cross-examination as possible.

 

[Noztradamus]

Why wasn't TM already at home ? Remember, the charging affidavit says GZ stopped him from getting home.

In that 2 minutes that we "hear George huffing and puffing his way out of the truck to the time he hangs up" TM could not make it 300 feet home , to get away from the "creepy guy" he was scared of ?

After Martin ran, he doesn't know what George does next.

Two possiblities
1. George leaves the scene. No necessity to keep running.
2. George gets out of his truck and follows on foot. In which case he will be at the T before Martin gets home and may see where Martin is living.
(Three Possibilities)
3. George drives his truck to the bottom of the walkway on Twin Trees Lane. In which case he will see where Martin is living. especially if Martin is noticable by running.

Martin may not have wanted to give out his address because he didn't know where the guy was.

 

[phonebook]

Yes, because he refused medical treatment and his cuts didn't even require a band-aid. How can you say he may have had a concussion with that sort of evidence? Can we also rule out Martian flu? I hear it's going around.

I've read conflicting reports about him refusing medical treatment, at least in regards to going to the hospital immediately after the incident. I only recall him refusing to go see an ENT. Did he have medical insurance? I can imagine that could have played a part in his decision whether or not to further investigate his potential injuries.

I'm not going to argue he had a concussion, but I will provide the below link and quote to show that he did describe something similar.

For some people, even a brief period of confusion or being "dazed" is enough to call the head injury a concussion.

.nervous-system-diseases.com/concussion.html (add www to the beginning of this, I can't yet share links)

Oh, really? How will they match his story when the shell casing is 50 feet from where he says the fight happened? What exactly do you think ballistics will tell us about how the body ended up where it landed?

He didn't say the "fight" happened at the T, he said that's where the first punch was thrown. "John" will testify that TM was on top of GZ very near where the body ended up. The ballistics will show a firing distance consistent with GZ's story, and ballistics will also be consistent with gravity as a likely explanation for why the two shirts were away from TM's body at the time the shot was fired.

Yes, it will be a great challenge. The state gets to go first, remember, and they will methodically demonstrate all the ways in which George lied to the police. After that, it will be up to the defense to knock that down. But how do you suggest they do that? How do you get a jury to believe self-defense when the shooter is a proven liar?

Maybe because the State's star witness will also be "a proven liar" at that point? What did GZ lie about in relation to the events that took place on 02/26/12? I don't know of a single, proven lie.

And yet he NEVER TELLS THE DISPATCHER THE ADDRESS. Consider that for a moment.

I will agree with what you're getting at, IF he did actually make it to RVC while on the phone with dispatch (which I'm not so sure he did).

You claim he went over there because he couldn't just tell them the address that was right in front of his truck because he couldn't remember the name of the street. But there were only three streets there. That's it. But let's say you get over that hump and say ok, let's go to the next street and get a DIFFERENT address, one that's not near his truck in any way at all. One that's not near where he said he'd be.

Prove he knew the name of the street his truck was on. Did he use the name in the NEN call on 02/26? Did he use the name of the street on ANY of the previously recorded calls to NEN or 911? The answer is no in both cases. I understand you don't want to believe it's possible what he's saying, but that doesn't mean it's not the truth.

Note he didn't wait there where he was getting an address. Why would you get an address from somewhere and then immediately vacate that area and walk, by foot, where the police cars couldn't drive through, to a street you didn't know the name of and hadn't informed the police about? Do you see how silly that sounds? But ok, let's keep going. He got the address or didn't he? Because if he did, why didn't he say so? If he didn't why did he start back? How can anyone possibly believe this ferkakta story?

How do you know he didn't wait there? He wanted a police officer to call him when they got there, which they never did apparently, so it makes sense that if he intended to wait over at RVC at the address he found, when the police called him, he could then give them an address closer to where he last spotted the suspect than the clubhouse, and closer to his truck. I imagine he waited there at RVC for a brief time, didn't get a call, then walked back to his truck, probably assuming it was a waste of time, and that the suspect was long gone by then anyway.

 

[phonebook]

Because he claimed to have had his head repeatedly slammed onto the concrete. Having one's head repeatedly slammed onto concrete would likely yield severe impact injuries.

What are you basing this assertion on? I don't want assumptions without expertise to back them up; I'd like to see links showing similar incidents that resulted in the injuries you describe.

He wasn't diagnosed with one, nor was he symptomatic.

The first people on scene described him as appearing out of hit, and he was holding his head. It could have been a mild concussion. I'm not saying he DID have a concussion, I'm just saying I don't believe it can be conclusively ruled out.

You've got it backwards. My point was that Zimmerman's screams don't necessarily mean he was in reasonable fear for his life.

Who stated that was the case?

You are incorrect on that point. The nature of Zimmerman's injuries are important in determining the veracity of his account. If it can be proven that his injuries are not consistent with the nature of assault he claimed to have suffered, then it will establish he is lying about the nature of the assault.

GZ will not be expected to have known the extent of his injuries in the heat of the moment. He wasn't given a "time out" to have them examined and reassured that they weren't likely to kill him. He suffered a broken nose, and many abrasions on his face. Those injuries, along with the injuries sustained to the back of his head no doubt put him in a great degree of pain. Now, if TM did actually attempt to acquire GZ's weapon, then that absolutely put him in a reasonable fear for his life. I'm under the impression that that might not be revealed to the jury without GZ taking the stand though (unsure about that one). And it won't establish he's lying, it will establish that they aren't consistent. It may have appeared to him must worse than it actually was while in the moment. If they are "marginally consistent" like Serino said, then that won't equate to a total fabrication, or a "lie".

Martin being on top of Zimmerman at some point during the altercation does nothing to prove that Martin a) repeatedly punched Zimmerman in the face, b) Martin repeatedly slammed Zimmerman's head onto the pavement, or c) Zimmerman was helplessly pinned under Martin.

It's certainly consistent with that story though, and it just so happens that he was seen on top of GZ the one time any witnesses got a really good look at the two of them.

However, they can definitely make a case out of Zimmerman's contradictions and fabrications. And I think the defense is well aware of this. That's why we've already seen the machinations put into motion to make sure Zimmerman and his flimsy story stay as far away from cross-examination as possible.

His contradictions are minor, and what fabrications are significant and unequivocal? Serino himself said "I have some inconsistencies that don't amount to much"

 

[Unabogie]

I've read conflicting reports about him refusing medical treatment, at least in regards to going to the hospital immediately after the incident. I only recall him refusing to go see an ENT. Did he have medical insurance? I can imagine that could have played a part in his decision whether or not to further investigate his potential injuries.

There are no conflicting reports. He did not seek medical treatment and the EMTs let him go without even a band-aid.

I'm not going to argue he had a concussion, but I will provide the below link and quote to show that he did describe something similar.



.nervous-system-diseases.com/concussion.html (add www to the beginning of this, I can't yet share links)

Good, because he didn't have a concussion.

He didn't say the "fight" happened at the T, he said that's where the first punch was thrown. "John" will testify that TM was on top of GZ very near where the body ended up. The ballistics will show a firing distance consistent with GZ's story, and ballistics will also be consistent with gravity as a likely explanation for why the two shirts were away from TM's body at the time the shot was fired.

This is absolutely untrue. George gave 3 accounts of what happened before the "walkthrough" and in each of those he was very specific: Trayvon hit him once, in the nose, and he went down immediately to the ground and never got up. That's in his written report and the initial two verbal interviews. It's a fact and it's big trouble for him.

Maybe because the State's star witness will also be "a proven liar" at that point?

I don't think she's the star witness and I don't think what she says will be determinative. There are other witnesses and other evidence that will come in before she testifies.

What did GZ lie about in relation to the events that took place on 02/26/12? I don't know of a single, proven lie.

I just gave you one. The hunting for an address is another. A third is the "circling around his car", which can't have happened where he said it did because the timeline doesn't match. He claims he was beaten against the cement and yet has no evidence of this and Trayvon had none of his blood under his nails or on his sleeves.

I will agree with what you're getting at, IF he did actually make it to RVC while on the phone with dispatch (which I'm not so sure he did).

He claims he did. You don't believe it either?

Prove he knew the name of the street his truck w

as on.

I never said that. I said he said he new RVC, but he would not have given that address because that would be silly for the reasons I listed.

Did he use the name in the NEN call on 02/26? Did he use the name of the street on ANY of the previously recorded calls to NEN or 911? The answer is no in both cases. I understand you don't want to believe it's possible what he's saying, but that doesn't mean it's not the truth.

I explained in detail how that excuse doesn't add up. Re-read what I wrote.

How do you know he didn't wait there? He wanted a police officer to call him when they got there, which they never did apparently, so it makes sense that if he intended to wait over at RVC at the address he found, when the police called him, he could then give them an address closer to where he last spotted the suspect than the clubhouse, and closer to his truck. I imagine he waited there at RVC for a brief time, didn't get a call, then walked back to his truck, probably assuming it was a waste of time, and that the suspect was long gone by then anyway.

He didn't wait there (RVC) because by his own story he didn't wait there. Are you following this case at all?

 

[phonebook]

Was a concussion diagnosed?

Nope. It wasn't diagnosed, and it also wasn't ruled out... I'm ok with that compromise.

At the rate in which George has lied? Yes. See, his stories matching the evidence is a problem; they don't. Do you honestly believe the prosecution isn't going to zero in on Georges inconsistencies?

Again, what inconsistencies are significant? Or name a few you feel are significant which have no reasonable explanation other than GZ is lying to cover something up.

 

[KatieG]

He was supposed to tell the responding officers "Yeah, just come to 1211... um... 1211... uh..." How are you supposed to give an address when you don't even know the name of the street the address is on?

He said he got out of his car to look for a street sign on Twin Trees, but that he continued over to RVC because he knew he could get an address over there and he already knew the name of the street, which both components are required to give someone an address to respond to. The reason he points to "the back of the houses" as he gets out on foot during the reenactment video is because those houses are on RVC.

GZ was a self appointed Neighborhood watch guy. There were only 3 streets in the complex. I seriously doubt GZ didn't know where he was. Nice try, though!

 

[Dan O.]

He was supposed to tell the responding officers "Yeah, just come to 1211... um... 1211... uh...", How are you supposed to give an address when you don't even know the name of the street the address is on?

Dispatchers are accustomed to dealing with partial information. The house number and the neighborhood name may be sufficient to uniquely identify the house. If not, there are only a couple of possibilities and George's directions to find his truck would be a sufficient discriminator.

 

[Noztradamus]

~~~I seriously doubt GZ didn't know where he was. ~~~

Let's not rule it out completely though

 

[johnny karate]

I've read conflicting reports about him refusing medical treatment, at least in regards to going to the hospital immediately after the incident. I only recall him refusing to go see an ENT. Did he have medical insurance? I can imagine that could have played a part in his decision whether or not to further investigate his potential injuries.

We have emergency rooms where people with serious injuries can get treated regardless of their insurance status. Despite allegedly suffering a serious assault, Zimmerman managed to come out of it with only minor injuries.

I'm not going to argue he had a concussion, but I will provide the below link and quote to show that he did describe something similar.

.nervous-system-diseases.com/concussion.html (add www to the beginning of this, I can't yet share links)

There is a spectrum of symptoms associated with a concussion. Not just one. They include dizziness, loss of consciousness, headache, slurred speech, and nausea.

According the the medical records, Zimmerman did not experience dizziness, loss of consciousness, headache*, slurred speech, or nausea**.

* This one I find particularly shocking. They guy said he had his head repeatedly slammed onto concrete. And the next day, not even a headache.

** Denial of nausea is listed under gastrointestinal symptoms, but earlier in the report Zimmerman claimed to experience "occasional nausea when thinking about the violence last night".

He didn't say the "fight" happened at the T, he said that's where the first punch was thrown.

Zimmerman claimed he immediately went down after Martin punched him , where he remained helplessly pinned. It wasn't until he saw the geographic impossibility of his story that he started adding embellishments about stumbling around.

You tell me which version you believe, because they directly contradict one another.

Maybe because the State's star witness will also be "a proven liar" at that point?

I have yet to see the State refer to Witness 8 as their "star witness".

All I know is that it has been the defense who has repeatedly attempted to stall the proceedings, and in the very same hearing in which the State's supposed "star witness" was apparently hamstrung, it was the defense who passed up on a chance top exonerate their client.

What did GZ lie about in relation to the events that took place on 02/26/12? I don't know of a single, proven lie.

In his police interview, he claimed to not have been following Martin, despite the fact that he admitted just that during the NEN call.

He was untruthful about where the altercation took place in his original statement. Whether you want to recognize that as a lie is up to you.

But considering that that lie was in service of his claim to not have been following Martin, and that he demonstrably lied to Serino about a previous criminal entanglement, and that he conspired with his wife in an attempt to defraud the court during the bond hearing, I'm not sure how much slack it is reasonable to cut him.

 

[johnny karate]

Nope. It wasn't diagnosed, and it also wasn't ruled out...

But almost all of the symptoms associated with a concussion were.

If the best argument for Zimmerman having a concussion is that the medical professional who examined him just forgot to check, then we've entered some very silly territory.

Zimmerman wasn't even experiencing headaches. The next day after repeatedly having his head slammed onto concrete in a violent assault. Not even a headache.

 

[This is The End]

.1.1 In the seven months prior to Martin’s death, Zimmerman made multiple calls to police about young men in his neighborhood that he considered suspicious. All of them were black Id.

If that is true, and it makes it into the trial, the best Z can hope for is a hung jury. I'm not saying that is right, but it is reality.

 

[This is The End]

You have to keep in mind that in order for GZ to be found guilty, the prosecution must first prove that GZ could not have been in reasonable fear of his life, beyond a reasonable doubt (disproving his self-defense claim).

I thought that part was just in the self defense hearing, which Z canceled.

They then must also prove each component of 2nd degree murder, again, beyond a reasonable doubt.

That part is in the trial.

 

[This is The End]

Prove he knew the name of the street his truck was on.

It's literally like we are in the first thread, 10 months and 10,000 posts ago.

I don't seriously think you should be required to read both threads, but this has been covered ad nauseum.

Here's a link to the first thread:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=231831