Jun 22 2012
Zimmerman Faces Anonymous Witness
The information out on the Trayvon Martin case today is truly damning, and surprising. One of the more intriguing audio clips is this 45 minute ‘last interview’ between SDP and Zimmerman. It should be noted this happened on February 29th, before the public outcries from certain political circles had really spun up. In this clip at time mark 14:07, SDP investigator Serino drops a bomb shell about an anonymous call he received that day. The caller – depicted as a witness – claims there was much more to the altercation, including a verbal give and take long before any punch landed. This could be Dee Dee, or it could be someone else. But it blows a hole in Zimmerman’s statements.
One thins is clear, Serino says the witness claims Zimmerman tried to detain Martin and was not jumped at all.
I will continue listening to audio to see if Zimmerman continues to try and gild his alibi, but that right there is serious.
Also interesting in the clip, is how Serino echos many of the concerns back then those of us not buying Zimmerman’s claims asked. For example, why not roll down the window and ask Trayvon what was going on from the safety of the truck? Zimmerman’s response is he is scared, but then he goes on foot looking for the kid? The whole vigilante thing comes out in this first installment of a 3 part interview. Even the question of how can you not know the names of the 3 streets in the neighborhood (especially the one you turn in from at the entrance which you have to give to anyone when giving directions to your own house) came up.
Then there is this damning analysis at FDL:
The third thing I noticed is that his description of the confrontation makes absolutely no sense because he claims that after Trayvon punched him in the nose knocking him down, Trayvon got on top of him and was using both hands to cover his mouth and nose to prevent Zimmerman from shouting for help. Yet, even with both of his hands free, Zimmerman claimed only to have attempted to wiggle and slide his body farther underneath Trayvon and away from the concrete sidewalk, thereby inadvertently exposing the gun he was carrying in his waistband hoster.
Yeah, with my hands free I would be gut punching and a few other things – but recall there are no injuries to Martin.
Zimmerman did not explain how Trayvon would have been able to see his gun from his position straddling Zimmerman’s body. Apparently, Trayvon was such a vicious and superhuman thug that he could see through Zimmerman’s clothes and legs.
I caught that one as well, using Zimmerman’s own reenactment to prove it could not happen:
Unfortunately for Zimmerman, however, the bullet must have changed course somehow in the 2 to 4 inch distance between the muzzle of his gun and Trayvon’s chest because it entered Trayvon’s chest 1 inch to the left of the midline and 1/4 inch below the left nipple. It traveled straight through from front to back without deviating up or down, left or right and exploded the right ventricle of the heart and right lower lobe of the lung, collapsing both of his lungs (See page 125).
Odd too that no high velocity blood spatter blowback from the shot impacted Zimmerman’s jacket front or sleeves, according to the crime lab.
I tell you what, that is really, really, really damning. That bullet path indicates a gun level, at arms length. Not one coming up from the waist pointed upward through arms grasing around Zimmerman’s head or neck.
Trayvon then either slumps forward or Zimmerman pushes him aside — he does not recall which — so that Trayvon ends up lying face down. Zimmerman climbs on top of him, straddling him. Then he grabs both of Trayvon’s hands and stretches them out, so that Trayvon is in a Y-position.
…
Unfortunately for Zimmerman, Trayvon was found with both of his hands under his body, not stretched out in a Y position.
Hard to keep so many details straight when you make things up on the fly.
Update: For all you timeline junkies this is the recording where police play the recorded dispatch call and you can hear how the timeline from Zimmerman makes no damn sense. Especially the supposed stop at the clubhouse. Amazing
Redteam, such petty stuff is downright embarrassing on top of your already weak grasp of the basics of our judicial system. Your statement, verbatim:
This is where you again prove yourself to be in serious need of some schooling before you type. The *charge* is the crime the enforcement authorities level against you. This is not to be confused with what you did to warrant that charge.
Had you not been so quick to run off at the cyber mouth, and went to the link, you would have not made this mistake because it was laid out so easily that a 6th grader would get it.
So let’s try again… you were driving down the road, chomping on your Big Mac. Part of the patties and sauce spilled down your shirt, and you have taken your eyes off the road and slammed into another car, a motorcyclist, bicyclist or pedestrian… and they die.
You are *charged* with vehicular manslaughter because of your negligence and inattention. This is so common in our judicial system… apparently going on while you’ve been living in a bubble… that it is the reason there is the nanny government push to make laws against “distracted driving”… or, a generic category meant to cover everything from talking on the phone and texting, to eating a Big Mac.
INRE the new evidence… gee, pardon us that you have been privy to Zim’s personal statements that tell you where Martin entered, where he parked to make the phone call, etc etc. But of course, you haven’t, and you still continue to parrot the same, uninformed meme that bears no resemblance to legal or factual realities.
All I can say is, if I’m “late to the dance”, at least I show up. You’ve make it abundantly clear that you don’t even there’s a prom being held.
Mata,
Okay, I have listened to the interview w/the female detective. I have listened to the interview with the female detective and Serino. I have watched the video of the walkthrough.
The confrontational interview, especially, w/ Serino and the female detective stopping and starting GZ’s first listening to his own call to police, is a muddled mess. Proceed (to draw conclusions) with caution. Is my advice.
But, there is something which is not a muddled mess: 694 feet. 231ish yards.
in high school, for conditioning, we used to run series of either 4 or 6 220s (depending on the schedule for that day), w/a max time limit of 40 seconds for each 220. We used to cruise the 220s, going somewhat easy (pacing ourselves, i.e. saving our energy) and trying to finish each 220 in 37-38 seconds, so we could run as easily as possible, yet still not be in danger of exceeding 40 seconds (which would have meant trouble for us, from the coaches).
Draw your own conclusion. Or not.
mata, I said A, you said it’s not A, it’s really A. Again.
You showed up all right, in last year’s gown.
And yes, all the information from that statement had already been made public, whether ‘official’ or not, it was well known. There was not one new fact in it.
If you can cite one case where a person was ‘charged with legally eating a Big Mac’ then I might start to accept that you at least did a google search.
Maybe you should stick with BGG.
For whomever keeps snarking about legal credentials:
Jeralyn Merritt does have legal credentials; is an active criminal defense attorney.
She believes GZ has a valid self defense claim, and should be found not guilty. She narrates the entire storyline of the incident, here: http://www.talkleft.com/story/2012/6/22/143156/459
Her storyline, and her justification of GZ’s self defense claim, are remarkably similar to my and Redteam’s storyline and justification of self defense. Amazingly, she understands how the legal system works, and she believes GZ has a self defense claim, and, though she does not believe GZ followed Trayvon, she doesn’t think it matters whether he did or not. Its hard to believe that she understands how the legal system works.
Redteam, it’s truly exhausting to learn to speak amoeba fluently merely to communicate with you. I’ll give it another shot for a crash course in legal 101 for the preschool bunch… knowing it won’t take… and then just let you staple another cyber “L” your forehead.
You cannot “charge” anyone with cutsy phrases since a prosecutors charge for a crime needs to reference a particular law and stated crime. Ergo… as I originally posited… it is not illegal to eat a Big Mac while driving (yet).
However, if you do eat a Big Mac while driving, and that activity is irresponsible enough to result in a death, you will not be absolved of the responsibility of that death merely because there’s not law about eating Big Macs on the books. You can, and will, both charged with a law that IS on the books (vehicular manslaughter… the tort on the books) and you most certainly CAN be convicted of manslaughter.
Since I know you’re not bright enough to draw any parallels, here it is in black and white:
The series of actions, as revealed and documented from George Zimmerman’s lips, that are what the State considers a “criminal act” are aggressively profiling, following in a car, then pursuing on foot while armed, a teen who had every legal right to be in the neighborhood and was not committing a crime… nor was any threat to him personally.
That, in and of itself… just like eating your Big Mac… is not illegal. However, if your decision to engage in that activity results in a death, you can and will be charged with the crime of second degree murder, or manslaughter. The legality of eating Big Macs or following people around will not save you from that charge.
gcotharn, I tried to make it easy for you to answer a imple question,… just when was Martin supposed to have run down the path, around the corner, returned to circle Zim’s car, and take off again within the dispatcher’s time elapsed?
Perhaps it needs to be rephrased.
Zim’s parked at the clubhouse until at least 1’25” when he’s discussing Martin passing him by.
By 2’08”, GZ is parked at the Twin Trees location… 43 seconds later… after Zim has *followed* (and the Serino interview specifically asks if he is behind or in front of Martin while following him in his car), Zim is at the Twin Trees location.
While GZ is following Martin down that road, there is not play by play description that TM is flat out running anywhere and, in fact, doesn’t start a run until 2’08”.
GZ is out of his car, following him, johnny on the spot.. within six seconds.
I don’t care what you used to run in school. The two burning points are:
1: When was Martin supposed to have circled GZ in his car, parked in Twin Trees Lane, in the time elapsed as compared to the dispatcher log… and
2: If Martin was racing around like an Olympian in training from the moment he passed Zim at the clubhouse, why did he not say that to the dispatcher? Why did GZ not say that Martin was running full speed *toward* him?
Toes tapping…. take your time. Hard to manufacture something that didn’t happen, as I suspect that GZ is discovering the hard way, now that the new evidence of his BS statements have hit the public airwaves.
GZ does have a self-defense claim, altho it’s pure speculation as to whether it’s valid. Ms. Merritt seems to have a bias problem, and has from the start.
But GZ is not charged with imperfect self defense – i.e. manslaughter (why do I see RT’s eye’s glaze over already….), but with second degree murder.
I cannot make this plain enough. GZ expect to beat a murder two charge without addressing the State’s accusations that he hunted down TM without probable cause, and created the fight scene to begin with. Period.
Ms. Merritt knows this. And I also notice that Ms. Merritt is going the extra mile NOT to discuss how O’Mara is going to attempt to combat the State’s charge. It’s far easier to talk about the secondary O’Mara prong of self defense because she thinks she has some substance there. Of course, it’s all based on Zimmerman’s statements alone, and therefore hinges on whether anyone in the jury thinks he’s lying thru his teeth.
Then again, Ms. Merritt doesn’t need to address the State’s charges… she’s a pundit. Not GZ’s defense attorney. If she were in O’Mara’s shoes, she’d be busy working on a way to convince the jury that GZ had genuine justification for tailing Martin in a car, then pursuing him while armed thru the neighborhood.
But then, that doesn’t make for as exciting and hyperbolic discussion, does it?
Correction for left out word above.. hate not being able to “preview”…
GZ cannot expect to beat a murder two charge without addressing the State’s accusations that he hunted down TM without probable cause, and created the fight scene to begin with. Period.
You can talk self defense until you’re blue in the face, but you cannot go in to a court of law and ignore the charges the State accuses you of.
Mata,
You were in the Jeralyn Merritt comment section! You are famous.
And here is a reply to you:
Oh geez gcotharn,. There is no need to prove intent to kill at the moment GZ gets out of his truck for Murder 2! The deranged mind condition means pretty much ‘out of self control’. If he was of the mind to kill TM that is Murder 1.
A.J.,
The first sentence of the quoted reply addressed Mata’s approach to the “out of control” aspect:
Mata,
Why is GZ’s phone call descrip, of Trayvon circling his vehicle, a relevant and important part of a case against GZ?
Are you asserting that GZ, while on the phone with police, was pre-creating an alibi for a physical confrontation which had yet to occur? i.e. was pre-creating a scenario in which Trayvon was an unstable actor, and thus GZ was setting up an excuse, in advance, for GZ to be justified in physically confronting Trayvon during the upcoming couple of minutes?
If you are not asserting that GZ was pre-creating an alibi, or a justification for physical confrontation of Trayvon, then are you asserting that GZ was telling the truth about Trayvon circling his vehicle?
If GZ was telling the truth about Trayvon circling his vehicle, then why does this particular issue constitute a relevant and important part of a case against GZ?
Are you asserting that GZ later lied about the position of his vehicle when Trayvon circled it? If GZ lied about that, to what end?
The alleged “circling” of his vehicle was not a part of the extemporaneous tale that GZ told to the dispatcher over the phone.
That element didn’t get added in by GZ until later during the retelling.
gcotharn,
The reason the circling is important is it is one of many fictions GZ concocted to hide the real events. And each lie he is caught in will add to the evidence of his guilt.
A.J.
Are you and Mata asserting that GZ concocted a fiction … in advance of the physical confrontation? i.e. in anticipation of a potential physical confrontation which had yet to occur?
b/c the “circling my vehicle” occurred during GZ’s phone call to police which occurred in advance of the physical confrontation.
LOL!
Yo, gcotharn, please return to reality!!!
I assume you think GZ mentioned the circling on the police calls? He did not, at least not at the spot he said it happened when he concocted his BS after he executed young Trayvon. Someone he calls ‘kid’ on the police recordings before the incident. He never once mentions circling the car as far as I have heard.
Yes, gcotharn, GZ knew he was following a child, the wannabe cop would never have the balls to follow a full grown man. He followed a child for walking in the rain looking around….
And for that his so called life is probably over.
Now, let me pose this hypothetical…
If, indeed, Martin ran away and then circled back, coming all the way to the point where Z was parked…circled his vehicle…then ran away into the darkness again why didn’t Z mention that when he was on the phone with the dispatcher?
He was giving the dispatcher a play by play, second by second recounting of everything that was going on: “he’s got something in his waistband”, “he’s coming to check me out”, “shit, he’s running”, etc, etc, etc.
Yet…nary a peep to the dispatcher about Martin re-emerging from the darkness after he “ran” and then “circling” and then running off again?
Sorry, not buying that line of BS for a second. Not for a second.
That is why I was asking the questions. So, you are saying that GZ did not say “circled” during the phone call, but instead said “circled” after the fact, and this is evidence that GZ is a liar? I remain dubious, for the original reasons: it would be a clumsy lie, and an easily discoverable lie, which would be of little benefit to GZ. I need a link. I have listened through the interviews, but did not note this part, and do not know where to find it. For instance, Mata listed time stamps, but I do not know where to find the interview for which she included the time stamps.
For all you guys who are nit picking about the what ifs and maybes in this case, take note…If I am sitting on the jury, and the defendant has wounds, ie: a broken nose and banged up head, and the victim only has skinned knuckles and a bullet hole in him, and the prosecution’s only witness says the victim was on top of the defendant and was banging his head on the sidewalk when the defendant shot said victim, I am going to vote that the defendant acted in self defense. Banging someone’s head on a sidewalk is assault with the intention to do bodily harm, if not intent to kill. If the victim of the assault actually thought his life was in danger, he had a right to use his gun to stop the attack. I am sure, if Zimmerman was on the ground and his head was being banged on the sidewalk, he didn’t have much of a chance to aim his gun, he just pulled it out of it’s holster, pointed it at his attacker and pulled the trigger.
All the defense has to do is show an up to date photo of the 6 ft. 3 in. well fed ” child victim” to make it’s case. This “17 year old child” looked like an adult. Zimmerman was acting as a night watchman, therefore he had a right to be armed. And…Regardless of all the parsing and speculations about motives and what preceded the altercation, etc., if a 6 ft. 3 in. black male was on top of me trying to bash my brains out on the sidewalk, I would figure he intended to kill me if I didnt’ use whatever means that were available to stop him.
If I were on the jury, I’d vote to acquit Zimmerman in a skinny minute, unless the prosecution could convince me that Zimmerman was out looking for a black victim to hassle.
After skimming through your time line arguments, my question is why didn’t Martin go on home to wherever he was headed instead of still being out prowling around the neighborhood? If I thought I was being followed, I would make tracks to my destination PDQ.
In other words Momdear,
You would ignore all contrary evidence and not be a fair juror of facts….
Which means you are of no use to the American Justice System.