May 04 2012
Zimmerman’s Excuses Falling Apart
A good (but not perfect) tell for when someone is trying to cover up is how they ‘refine’ their story over time. And apparently someone is trying to refine Zimmerman’s claim that 17 year old Trayvon Martin – armed with a bag of Skittles – was a threat to George Zimmerman and, therefore, had to be killed. Here’s the new twist being ‘leaked’ to the media:
George Zimmerman told investigators that while he was on the phone with a Sanford police dispatcher reporting Trayvon Martin as suspicious, the teenager was circling his vehicle on foot, a source familiar with the investigation told the Orlando Sentinel.
The source said Zimmerman’s account of events hasn’t changed in his several statements to police — in which he said he was so unnerved by the teen’s behavior that he rolled up his window to avoid a confrontation.
I call BS on this. If George Z is so damn wigged out by Trayvon, why did he get out of his truck? Why did he reject the dispatcher’s direction to not follow Martin? Why was he so angry when he said over the 9-11 call:
“These assholes they always get away”
Is this why he grabbed his gun? So scared he rolled up the window, then grabbed his gun and chased the suspect behind buildings – out of sight of most people?
This is complete incoherence in terms of a rationale for an unnecessary death. A death that would have been avoided if George Zimmerman did not try and play policeman and chase Martin into a confrontation he ended up losing – until he pulled the gun and killed a good kid.
Sorry, but this little trial balloon is not helping Zimmerman at all. The story goes on to shoot (no pun intended) more holes in Zimmerman’s quickly concocted excuse:
One of those inconsistencies: Zimmerman told police Trayvon had his hand over Zimmerman’s mouth during their fight on the night he shot Trayvon.
The Sentinel’s source confirmed that Zimmerman’s statements include that allegation. But authorities do not believe that happened, the source told the Sentinel, because on one 911 call, someone can be heard screaming for help. If it were Zimmerman, as he claims, his cries were not muffled, the source said.
Zimmerman also told police, the source told the Sentinel, that while the two were on the ground, Trayvon reached for Zimmerman’s gun, and the two struggled over it.
Those portions of Zimmerman’s account are not corroborated by other evidence, the source said.
I have always suspected the calls for help began when Zimmerman threatened Martin with his gun and Martin realized he was in real trouble. The right to stand your ground conveys to Martin as much as Zimmerman. More so if one realizes a kid being tracked by some lune in a truck is more threatening than a kid eating candy in a hoody. Who was experiencing the more threatening scenario?
Zimmerman is trying to claim it is him, but each time he does he argues against why he got out of the truck with his gun. Martin had the right to stand his ground – and Zimmerman killed him when he did.
Beat me to it, Layman.
“So all you folks who *think* Zimmerman stopped chasing have no facts… Just some lack of breathing??
As I suspected. Making it up as you lose ground.”
Where are your facts that contradicts Zimmerman’s statement that TM confronted him? Or didn’t take the first swing? Or the second? Or third?
B/c the state admitted they have NOTHING that contradicts Zimmerman’s statements.
Where is your evidence that Zimmerman was brandishing his gun? Waving it around?
Surely you’re not just making it up as you go along?
“Anyone who thinks it was Martin’s responsibility to get away from Zimmerman is being silly.”
No one has suggested this.
What was mentioned was how a frightened kid would normally behave if he felt his life was being threatened. A frightened kid, who was being chased by a nut w/ a gun, would call 911. Not continue to talk to his GF. A frightened kid would not circle the guy’s truck, staring him down.
“Try this little thought experiment: Regardless of race, etc, if you were wandering around a friend’s neighborhood on the phone do you think I have the right to come up to you armed and demand anything of you?”
As long as you’re not brandishing a weapon, you absolutely have the right to ask me what I’m doing in your neighborhood.
And then I have to right to answer you or not answer you. I’ll tell you what I would not have the right to do, and that is take a swing at you.
Marsh,
No, I have no right to detain or question. Your out!
And prove Zimmerman did not brandish the weapon – go for it.
Marsh, what do you mean no one said Martin should have gone home!!
Are you actually reading the comments????
Layman – I am not the one who needs a chill pill.
You folks are truly funny…
Let me leave you legal beagles with a quote that will be the center of a coming post on Zimmerman’s mistakes:
“To carry a concealed firearm is to take on an immense responsibility. It is very important to understand that a license to carry a concealed weapon does not give the license holder discretionary authority to use that weapon. … you should know that the law will protect you only if your actions in using deadly force have been consistent with the law. “
A policeman would be in trouble for using deadly force against an unarmed teen in this situation. Do you really think a self proclaimed (not sanctioned) neighborhood watch vigilante is going to get a bye on this???
I gotta say, the whole back and forth conversation, about this shooting, certainly exemplifies how different people ‘read’ and/or hear different accounts in the same words, coming to different conclusions about what they ‘think’ happened!
In reading and listening to the non-emergency police calls made by Zimmerman, it appeared he was ‘following,’ not ‘chasing’ after Martin. He told the police that Martin’s actions didn’t seem right to him, that he was wondering around in the rain, and holding something. He did not bring up color until pointedly asked about race. Zimmerman’s voice was calm, almost inquisite, in it’s tones, like he was trying to sort out what Martin was doing. After all, Martin didn’t live in the area, and was only visiting. So to Zimmerman, Martin was an “unknown” character.
And, AJ, through all your own analysis, never once do you bring up the robberies that had been going on in the area. It’s like there was no motive for Zimmerman to be apprehensive about a strange young man walking around in the evening. Nor, was there any reason to be carrying a weapon around, in your opinion, while a neighborhood was undergoing a rash of crime.
In the meantime you stress the folly (calling it vigilante behavior) of Zimmerman following Martin, while brushing off the question of why Martin (if he indeed was uneasy about being tailed) didn’t immediately go back to the place he was visiting. The actual physical confrontation was also closer to Zimmerman’s truck than to to the home Martin was staying. So, it doesn’t seem that Martin was trying to evade a confrontation, but may have been trying to provoke one, which syncs with residents around there seeing Zimmerman on the ground rather than Martin.
The bottom line seems to be, though, that both men were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Also, I wonder why the place where Martin had been staying didn’t warn him about the increased criminal activity that had been going on, and that he should be aware that he fit the profile (young, black male) of people tied into the robberies.
Reading another post of your’s AJ, talks about the responsibiity of carrying a concealed weapon.
No one knows how responsible or irresponsible Zimmerman was with his weapon.
All we know is that Zimmerman had a gun on him (don’t know if it was drawn or out in the open), and that it was discharged, fatally wounding Martin. We don’t know if Zimmerman pulled it out and pointed it at Martin, which may have been the reason Martin jumped him. Or, if Martin was grabbing for it when he was fighting with Zimmerman.
I’ve heard that the wounds on Martin indicate a close-up shot. And, again that would be compatible with a struggle for the gun while both were on the ground.
But, again, it’s not like anyone knows in what context the gun was used.
Jan,
Zimmerman was after Martin -pick your word, his mistake. And all the robberies in the world, even if Zimmerman had been robbed and beaten, does not give him the right to one free killing.
It’s called the law, and it is clear and objective. The assessment goes like this:
If Zimmerman stayed in his car would the incident been avoided?
Yes.
If Zimmerman did not bring his gun out of the truck (which is the only place he is allowed to have it BTW), would Martin be alive?
Yes
If Zimmerman had stayed 50 feet away from Zimmerman at all times would Martin be alive?
Most likely.
These are some of the numerous choices Zimmerman had which he fatefully chose wrong. Sorry, but the amateurs legal experts here are simply demonstrating why they are amateurs.
BTW, are there scenarios which might give Zimmerman a break?
Yep, and I have yet to see one posted here. And no, I will not offer them up in public to give Zimmerman a chance to craft an good alibi.
Oh, and Jan I did address why Martin was still out – go back and read again….
AJ… Dude…
It is said that reasonable people can disagree and have a reasonable discusion but you’re starting to border on unreasonable.
Someone mentions asthma and suddenly (according to you) that means they think that asthma is aviable reason to commit murder.
You use disconnected logic to make your point, i.e “If Zimmerman stayed in his car would the incident been avoided? Yes” Well AJ, what requirement did Zimmerman have to remain in his truck? Could it be the same requirement that Martin has to return home? Conversely, if Martin was under no requirement to return home then how can you put that affirmative requirement on Zimmerman? You seem to want to have it both ways.
We heard lots of speculation form both sides – each backing up their own suppositions about the guilt of the other party. I could make up a scenario right now that fits all the facts (as we know them) and makes Zimmerman totally justified. I could also make up the AJ Strata scenarion and have Zimmerman guilty as sin. Both are made up.
I’m curious why this case has you so set in your judgement when all the facts are not yet out. I may be reading something not there, but I detect a personal animosity toward the situation.
So, when it is clear that Zimmerman is running and breathing heavy it is safe to assume that when he stopped breathing heavy and was carrying on a conversation with the dispatcher about where he was and how the policeman should contact him that he was still running in hot pursuit of Martin. It’s is really strange that he was running full out and it took him from 2:14 til after 4:05 to get to the spot where the attack occurred. He must’ve felt like a squirrel in a cage. All that running in place. It is not recorded, in any record of any conversation I’ve seen, that Martin mentioned to anyone that Zimmerman had a gun. And it would be strange indeed if he did know that he was armed that he would not want to be somewhere else other than where a ‘madman’ with a gun was. The very calm, low key conversation that Zimmerman carried on with the dispatcher doesn’t seem to be something one could accomplish while on a flat out sprint waving a gun in the air.
Will someone tell me where Martin’s phone is? It was not listed as being in his possession when he was found dead.
AJ:
“Sorry, but the amateurs legal experts here are simply demonstrating why they are amateurs.”
Would you elaborate on the training you’ve had that qualifies you as ‘other than an amateur legal expert’.
“If Zimmerman did not bring his gun out of the truck (which is the only place he is allowed to have it BTW), ”
Is that the law in Florida? or Virginia? I live in Louisiana and a CCP gives the right to carry on the person wherever he is (with a few specific restrictions, such as court houses and schools, etc.) but it certainly doesn’t restrict it to being required to be in a vehicle.
RT – no, will not discuss my background (or my family’s). Suffice to say it is equally balanced between law and engineering.
FL law is pretty clear (the upcoming post). The weapon can be carried in the car and stored at your property. Except for specified activities (like bank guards, etc) it appears that using it outside your property is not allowed (i.e., Zimmerman could not use it in his capacity as neighborhood watch). You folks keep missing the point – Zimmerman is not authorized to use deadly force, or even threaten deadly force.
Anyone is authorized to use deadly force when their life is threatened, that’s what the ‘stand your ground’ law is all about.
http://www.usacarry.com/florida_concealed_carry_permit_information.html
Clearly allows persons to carry it on the person except in listed places.
Zimmerman had left his house on an errand to the store and certainly was within his rights to conceal carry. He was not acting in his capacity of neighborhood watch, only as a concerned citizen that saw a suspicious person in a neighborhood that had had a rash of crimes lately. (I would have been carrying under those circumstances)
My apologies, I certainly didn’t intend to ask you to reveal any personal information. Of course you do regularly reveal quite a bit of personal information on your blog. I was just curious since you imply that you are not an amateur legal expert that you have had legal training that makes you something other than that.
I don’t think it takes much legal training to recognize that the legal evidence in the Zimmerman_Martin case has not all been made public and that there clearly has not been any evidence revealed that would allow for a conviction of either party. Unfortunately for those that want to convict Zimmerman, I think they will be disappointed because their just doesn’t appear to be any convincing evidence that he did anything wrong.
Leaving the house carrying a weapon is not illegal with a CCP, spotting someone wandering around in your neighborhood and calling the police to report it is not illegal, shooting someone that attacks you is apparently not illegal in Florida and there just is no evidence that this situation is any more complicated than that.
Layman,
“It is said that reasonable people can disagree and have a reasonable discusion but you’re starting to border on unreasonable.”
I’d say he’s well past the border…
“I’m curious why this case has you so set in your judgement when all the facts are not yet out. I may be reading something not there, but I detect a personal animosity toward the situation.”
^^^^^^^ That^^^^^^^
I’ve been reading here for YEARS and have never noticed this kind of reaction from AJ about anything.
He asked me to prove a negative. Really???
Oh well, live and learn.