• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Continuation: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

Status
Not open for further replies.
We KNOW Zimmerman was told by police this, as Z was the one who helped facilitate the NW meeting with the Sanford Police Chief for guidelines, and as contact and Captain would necessarily need to be informed of the rules.

Those rules I just posted are in the Discovery documentation, as well as Newsletters from the HOA that lists George as the go-to person to call regarding NW.

There is also a letters there from Wendy Dorival (SPD liaison) to GZ and Back discussing Chief Lee coming to talk to the group. I think this was sometime in Dec, a few months before the shooting. There are also emails from Chief Lee to GZ (and/or vice versa). Feel free to verify it.
 
Because it was his neighborhood, he had a legal right to walk in it... it had been beset by burglaries and he was attempting to be proactive and help put an end to that. That's a noble and good goal.

Trayvon had a legal right to be in the neighbood as well. As to the rest of this statement, I agree.

He was trying to have the most up to date information of where the suspect was at when the responding officer called him back. Giving that officer an address on Twin Trees, which Trayvon was getting further and further away from... wasn't going to be much help.

When Trayvon ran and attempted to remove himself from George's presence (and this confrontation), that was the end of George's duties and responsibilities. Period. SPD were en route, and all he had to do was wait in his vehicle for them. Once they arrived, he could point them in the direction Trayvon was last seen moving.

Zimmerman was taking steps to try to actually bring about a confrontation. A confrontation between Trayvon and a police officer, that is. I don't believe Zimmerman ever desired to come into direct contact with Trayvon. I don't think he dreamed Trayvon would come back north. I don't think it was unreasonable for him to think he wouldn't.

Maybe George didn't desire to come into contact with Trayvon, but it happened.

It's unfortunate what ended up happening, but I don't think there was any way Zimmerman could have foreseen that outcome.

George should have stayed in his vehicle and awaited the police. He was even advised by SPD not to follow. ("We don't need you to do that.")

I can understand why Trayvon might have been alarmed that George had gotten out of his truck, but I think he had a lot of good options if he was scared, and most didn't even involve contact with George.

Fight/flight is different for everyone. Doesn't matter though, Trayvon then decided to turn and stand his ground, to confront his follower. He doesn't know George from Adam.

I think the proper way for that evening to conclude would have been George sheepishly realizing he'd gotten an officer out there for no reason, the officer never finding Trayvon, and Trayvon could've just told his dad about some guy who was tailing him.

We agree 100%

But personally, I think Trayvon knew who George was on the phone with. I think he was sick of getting in trouble and acted on his frustrations. I think his goal was a one punch knockout, and he improvised very poorly when that didn't go to plan. That's just my speculation, though.

Speculation is correct.

And guess what? At the end of the day, George shot an unarmed teenager. He and his defense (and his supporters) have to spin the rest of the story to justify him shooting an unarmed teenager.
 
I'll add to the above, for pb:

DO NOT CONFRONT!

Excerpts from Neighborhood Watch manuals:

"What you will not do is get physically involved with any activity you report or apprehension of any suspicious persons. This is the job of the law enforcement agency." -- City of Sanford (where Trayvon Martin slaying occurred)


"Neighborhood Watch is an observe and report type of program. Neighborhood Watch members are encouraged not to stop and question people, but to observe and report their observations to the Sheriff's Office and a trained officer will respond and investigate the incident." -- Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office


"It should be emphasized to members that they do not possess police powers and they shall not carry weapons or pursue vehicles. They should also be cautioned to alert police or deputies when encountering strange activity. Members should never confront suspicious persons who could be armed and dangerous." -- National Sheriff's Association

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/n...t-palm-beach-county-police-agencies--1/nLhqY/
 
I'm saying he dishonestly tried to make he seem like his injuries were worse than they actually were when asked about them by the police.

And I'm saying you have no proof that he didn't honestly relay what the doctor said to him about those injuries.
 
That reminded me of another lie George told.

He said to the police he (get this) KNEW ALL THE RESIDENTS of that community.

(!)
 
More on the NW set up...

In September, the Sanford police helped the Retreat start a neighborhood watch program.

"Some residents called me wanting to do a startup," said Dorival, a civilian police employee. About 30 people came to the clubhouse for that first session, she said. "Everyone was enthusiastic." Zimmerman volunteered to be captain.

"I told them, this is not about being a vigilante police force," Dorival said. "You're not even supposed to patrol on neighborhood watch. And you're certainly not supposed to carry a gun."

http://www.tampabay.com/news/humani...afety-within-retreat-at-twin-lakes-in/1221799
 
I think his goal was a one punch knockout, and he improvised very poorly when that didn't go to plan.

Wait, what?

Improvised poorly? I thought George suffered a horrendous beat-down at the hands of Trayvon? So brutal in fact that George's only option was to shoot Trayvon.
 
Well, if I may ask but one thing of you then, and that is for you to point out where you addressed it. I would appreciate it.

Here you go:
I understand that people don't say "I could use stitches" in a casual manner like "I could use a vacation" Or "I could use a cold beer".

Zimmerman either needed stitches or he didn't. The medical report clearly indicates he didn't. Yet, he gave the opposite impression to the police when asked about it.

And I'm saying you have no proof that he didn't honestly relay what the doctor said to him about those injuries.

Sure I do. It's the medical report, the knowledge that it makes no sense to assume a doctor would give out two contradictory pieces of information regarding the same injury, and the ability to recognize that Zimmerman had every reason to lie.

You may not like my proof, or even accept it, but you can't deny it exists.
 
Because it was his neighborhood, he had a legal right to walk in it... it had been beset by burglaries and he was attempting to be proactive and help put an end to that. That's a noble and good goal.

He was trying to have the most up to date information of where the suspect was at when the responding officer called him back. Giving that officer an address on Twin Trees, which Trayvon was getting further and further away from... wasn't going to be much help.

Zimmerman was taking steps to try to actually bring about a confrontation. A confrontation between Trayvon and a police officer, that is. I don't believe Zimmerman ever desired to come into direct contact with Trayvon. I don't think he dreamed Trayvon would come back north. I don't think it was unreasonable for him to think he wouldn't.

It's unfortunate what ended up happening, but I don't think there was any way Zimmerman could have foreseen that outcome.

I can understand why Trayvon might have been alarmed that George had gotten out of his truck, but I think he had a lot of good options if he was scared, and most didn't even involve contact with George.

I think the proper way for that evening to conclude would have been George sheepishly realizing he'd gotten an officer out there for no reason, the officer never finding Trayvon, and Trayvon could've just told his dad about some guy who was tailing him.

But personally, I think Trayvon knew who George was on the phone with. I think he was sick of getting in trouble and acted on his frustrations. I think his goal was a one punch knockout, and he improvised very poorly when that didn't go to plan. That's just my speculation, though.

The best way to stay out of trouble was to punch out Z?:eye-poppi

Why not just go on home?
 
You've recently made two assertions that were untruthful - if not outright fabrications- which demonstrated to me your agenda is to defend Zimmerman at all costs:

The "way" he was running was concealed by multiple large obstructions (town homes), and from GZ's vantage point at the time the dispatcher requested that information of him, the answer was not sufficiently attainable.

I've underlined an important component in the above quote of what I earlier said.

I won't claim that GZ didn't answer the dispatcher's question, but try to convince me that there is but one single "way" to run once you're in the T area.

GAm6kRP.png


Let's say GZ stays in his car, and chooses instead to drive down to the southern end of the T, how hard would it be for someone on foot, to see through those gaps between the houses on the left where that that person following you in his truck is headed? He could have easily doubled back and exited the T north. I count no less than 8 options with which to exit the T, depending on where the person who is watching you is currently located. GZ was trying to see where this person was headed, and because this person went into an area where GZ's truck couldn't go, he could not sufficiently determine where this person went.

The red circled area above is "the back entrance", which is where GZ assumed this person was headed. Listen to this previous NEN call about GZ calling in a similar suspicious incident. Even at that point, he already had ongoing knowledge about the typical behaviors of these kids that were in his neighborhood ("they typically run" "the back gate" "to Calabria Cove"). He applied that previous knowledge in the above linked NEN call, and it's only logical to infer that he used the same reasoning to predict the actions of TM on Feb 26th. The difference in the above NEN call is that he apparently has a direct visual of those kids at the back gate, but once TM disappeared south down the T, he no longer had a confirmed location of where this current "suspect" was.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFwh5jcKgn4&t=0m55s

My only "agenda" is to explain why I currently believe GZ is innocent.
 
"I told them, this is not about being a vigilante police force," Dorival said. "You're not even supposed to patrol on neighborhood watch. And you're certainly not supposed to carry a gun."

Perhaps Sanford should have confirmed that those volunteers weren't CCW holders or didn't own guns.

Sounds like joining the NW just limits your freedoms and offers few, if any, advantages/benefits (short of a title, whoop-de-do). Don't join the NW and you get to roam your neighborhood, looking for "bad guys" as much as you want, whenever you want. You are allowed to legally carry a weapon if you have legally obtained a CCW permit. You are allowed to follow anybody you want, in your car, or on foot, and you can even verbally confront them if you so choose. All that and you can STILL call the non-emergency police number to report whatever you wish, or call 911 for crimes in progress, or even partner up with a neighbor to work in unison.

Basically, by forming a NW group, they have put their actions under all sorts of added scrutiny, and limitations, and haven't benefited at all; all because of a desire to be proactive about the ongoing crime in their neighborhood.
 
Nice pb.

I went through all that trouble of bringing you that image of the NW booklet

-- cause you asked for it...I provide not only that but the link to the booklet, some names you could search on, like the SPD liaison Dorival, some links to other NW booklets -- and not even an acknowledgment or thank you.

Usually that stuff doesn't bug me, but with your instance for help on that, and all, the way you...

Nevermind. Just don't be surprised if people will be so kind next time.
 
I guess the fault is with the dispatcher for assuming standard language would be sufficient. They should've explained things using metaphorical sock puppetry.

"Don't get out of the car. Don't follow him. Don't provoke a fight with him. Don't shoot him. Stay there in your car and don't drive anywhere. Stay there until the police arrive. Talk to the police when they arrive. Do what the police tell you to when they are there."

I guess if it isn't spelled out to extremes it doesn't count.
 
Sure I do. It's the medical report, the knowledge that it makes no sense to assume a doctor would give out two contradictory pieces of information regarding the same injury...

You don't have to subjectively find it sensible for it to be true. And still, your argument that there is a contradiction keeps falling flat, again and again. GZ states that she said he did NOT conditionally need stitches ("as long as I didn't mess with my head, 'cause the skin was already healing nicely"), which accurately paraphrases what the doctor stated on the medical report "no sutures needed (conditionally) given well-approximated skin margins". Do you think her literal words to GZ were "No sutures needed given well-approximated skin margins". The medical report is not for the patient to use as reference; it's to document, in the jargon medical professionals would understand, the doctor's assessment of a patient's condtion(s). Like I said earlier, a medical report is not a word-for-word recitation of how a doctor speaks, or explains things to a patient.

GZ's statement did not end with "she said I could use stitches", although you keep quoting only that portion of it. I suppose you will claim that isn't disingenuous.

...and the ability to recognize that Zimmerman had every reason to lie.

What reason did GZ have, in that moment, to lie about whether or not his wounds "could have used" stitches? What was immediately on the line? I'd say he had every reason to tell the truth, as it was obvious at that point that the police were investigating him, so any subsequent lies they uncovered would no doubt put him under greater and greater suspicion.

You may not like my proof, or even accept it, but you can't deny it exists.

I deny what you label as "proof" is proof of what you claim it is.
 
Nice pb.

I went through all that trouble of bringing you that image of the NW booklet

-- cause you asked for it...I provide not only that but the link to the booklet, some names you could search on, like the SPD liaison Dorival, some links to other NW booklets -- and not even an acknowledgment or thank you.

Usually that stuff doesn't bug me, but with your instance for help on that, and all, the way you...

Nevermind. Just don't be surprised if people will be so kind next time.

I've been busy making posts debating (if it can be called that) with JK.

Thank you! I do appreciate your efforts.
 
I guess the fault is with the dispatcher for assuming standard language would be sufficient. They should've explained things using metaphorical sock puppetry.

"Don't get out of the car. Don't follow him. Don't provoke a fight with him. Don't shoot him. Stay there in your car and don't drive anywhere. Stay there until the police arrive. Talk to the police when they arrive. Do what the police tell you to when they are there."

I guess if it isn't spelled out to extremes it doesn't count.

They're not allowed to give any orders (the dispatcher), it could make them liable for anything that happens as a result of that.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom