Trayvon Martin, Vigilante Justice - Page 236

Unabogie · 9th May 2012, 02:38 PM

Originally Posted by TheL8Elvis

The map goes with this (not mine)
http://justoneminute.typepad.com/mai...win-lakes.html

I disagree with a number of things on that map, but the body was approx where that red circle is. Just below the T on the left side. And that is where you see it in the pic you linked to, just a little N of that red circle.

But the trees don't match from that angle. Which is why I am questioning the accuracy of that map.

TheL8Elvis · 9th May 2012, 02:53 PM

Originally Posted by Unabogie

But the trees don't match from that angle. Which is why I am questioning the accuracy of that map.

The police report states the body was found between the 2 end townhouses. (1231 twin trees and 2821 retreat view).

Go to 1:32 in the video here:
http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news...#ixzz1phFMGCu4

Its the same shot, pulled back more:

a_unique_person · 9th May 2012, 03:06 PM

Originally Posted by LTC8K6

GZ apparently thought so, which is really all that will matter in court. (Or possibly not, if a judge/jury don't agree)

I was not there. I didn't see how TM was behaving. I don't know if I would have thought TM was a criminal.

It was not unreasonable, imo, for GZ to want to see where TM went.

He couldn't do that from the truck, even if he moved the truck, as far as I can tell.

So an unknown person is quite clearly following TM in the dark, for no apparent reason, other than the one GZ gives us, TM is an *******. I see no reason why TM wouldn't feel threatened, and wouldn't want this unkown person to know where he was living.

If we look at the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, you can't observe something without affecting it. "Just following" is not "just", it is just as likely to change the situation.

Giz · 9th May 2012, 03:25 PM

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

If we look at the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, you can't observe something without affecting it.

So when GZ knew that TM was faster than him he couldn't also know where TM was located? Physics!

I would love to see that tried in court. However I think that if the prosecution introduces the uncertainty principle the jury will probably be left with reasonable doubt.

Natural Born Skeptic · 9th May 2012, 03:28 PM

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

If we look at the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, you can't observe something without affecting it. "Just following" is not "just", it is just as likely to change the situation.

So IF TM attacked GZ, GZ is the one who actually affected it by attempting to observe TM?

PhantomWolf · 9th May 2012, 04:06 PM

Originally Posted by a_unique_person

So an unknown person is quite clearly following TM in the dark, for no apparent reason, other than the one GZ gives us, TM is an *******. I see no reason why TM wouldn't feel threatened, and wouldn't want this unkown person to know where he was living.

So instead of taking

option a) keep running or moving quickly away
option b) call the police while running or moving away

or...

option c) go to one of the other houses nearby and knock on the door

The best option is

d) hide and wait for four minutes to see if you're being followed and then confront your follower when they finally appear?

Unabogie · 9th May 2012, 04:07 PM

Originally Posted by TheL8Elvis

The police report states the body was found between the 2 end townhouses. (1231 twin trees and 2821 retreat view).

Go to 1:32 in the video here:
http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news...#ixzz1phFMGCu4

Its the same shot, pulled back more:
http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting...ae75a07701.jpg

You might be right, but I'm not convinced one way or the other. I think the actual locations are still unclear.

Natural Born Skeptic · 9th May 2012, 04:16 PM

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf

So instead of taking

option a) keep running or moving quickly away
option b) call the police while running or moving away

or...

option c) go to one of the other houses nearby and knock on the door

The best option is

d) hide and wait for four minutes to see if you're being followed and then confront your follower when they finally appear?

Yep! I mean, if someone's following you and you didn't want them to know where you live, isn't that what you'd do? I mean suggesting that if they don't want the "stalker" to know where they live that the logical thing to do would be to get as far away as possible, back on a public street or to a store where there are people, that's just crazy

. Unless of course you weren't actually afraid and had other intentions.

Dan O. · 9th May 2012, 05:02 PM

Originally Posted by TheL8Elvis

The map goes with this (not mine)
http://justoneminute.typepad.com/mai...win-lakes.html

I disagree with a number of things on that map, but the body was approx where that red circle is. Just below the T on the left side. And that is where you see it in the pic you linked to, just a little N of that red circle.

If anybody gave a damn about these sorts of things they could use ~~Google~~ Sketchup to create a model of the area and use the built in photo matching tool to align the images and determine the actual camera positions with enough overlapping detail that nobody but a JREF skeptic^TM would question the result. I've done this befor but really don't want to put in the effort for the immature audience here to throw poo at.

TheL8Elvis · 9th May 2012, 05:12 PM

Originally Posted by Unabogie

You might be right, but I'm not convinced one way or the other. I think the actual locations are still unclear.

Well, that's pretty much where the police report, interviews and the rest of the Internet think the body is. It seems likely to me as well. YMMV

Unabogie · 9th May 2012, 06:43 PM

Originally Posted by TheL8Elvis

Well, that's pretty much where the police report, interviews and the rest of the Internet think the body is. It seems likely to me as well. YMMV

Fair enough.

Mumbles · 9th May 2012, 06:52 PM

Originally Posted by Xulld

Making things up is VERY different than relating a witness statement. Zimmerman is a witness. If you think you have evidence which conclusively shows his statement is unreliable, we are all ears. So far every attempt has failed to be conclusive, or was based on speculation.

The "John" Witness backs up part of Zimmerman's account, so does the 911 tapes, so does other witness statements. The physical evidence appears to also favor Zims story. I am sure we will see all the details soon, and even more speculation come out, but right this minute, does not look good for the narrative that Zim attacked Martin.

So far it appears Zimmerman's statement is intact, and well founded.

This is the problem.

Actually, Zimmerman's claim of how the fight started is flat-out bizarre. So Zimmerman, after completing his police call, wanders through the cut through, in order to look at a street sign that won't be there, on a street that he already knows the name of. He then begins to walk back to his truck, when a now angry Martin emerges from the south route, and angrily approaches him. Zimmerman, who has already identified him as "up to no good or on drugs", sees his angry approach, and then *drops his guard and likely his gaze*, to reach for his cell phone. Martin then punches him and knocks him down in one blow, and then straddles him and begins bashing his head on the concrete, even though this punch would have put Zimmerman north of the T-junction, where there is no concrete. Martin also tries to smother Zimmerman, who is clearly screaming despite being unable to breathe.

I'm sorry, I don't buy this one for a second, it simply makes no sense. Which is why I keep waiting for his actual statements to come out, instead of the various false and often contradictory leaks we've heard so far.

Quote:

The only rebuttals have been that becuase he was armed he should have known better than to put himself in such a situation, or that becuase he was an adult he should have known better, or that becuase he was frustrated by criminals taking advantage of his neighborhood and wanted police to confront martin that he was deranged.

I knew better than to chase people around by the time I was twelve. Zimmerman apparently knew better as well, given his previous police calls, but chose to do it anyway.

GWCarver · 9th May 2012, 06:59 PM

Originally Posted by Mumbles

Actually, Zimmerman's claim of how the fight started is flat-out bizarre. So Zimmerman, after completing his police call, wanders through the cut through, in order to look at a street sign that won't be there, on a street that he already knows the name of. He then begins to walk back to his truck, when a now angry Martin emerges from the south route, and angrily approaches him. Zimmerman, who has already identified him as "up to no good or on drugs", sees his angry approach, and then *drops his guard and likely his gaze*, to reach for his cell phone. Martin then punches him and knocks him down in one blow, and then straddles him and begins bashing his head on the concrete, even though this punch would have put Zimmerman north of the T-junction, where there is no concrete. Martin also tries to smother Zimmerman, who is clearly screaming despite being unable to breathe.

I'm sorry, I don't buy this one for a second, it simply makes no sense. Which is why I keep waiting for his actual statements to come out, instead of the various false and often contradictory leaks we've heard so far.

I knew better than to chase people around by the time I was twelve. Zimmerman apparently knew better as well, given his previous police calls, but chose to do it anyway.

You know there is no evidence available to us that shows Zimmerman was chasing TM around.

How do you think TM ended up on the end of the sidewalk where Zimmerman is known to have been talking to the police instead of the other end where he would have been safe?

johnny karate · 9th May 2012, 07:55 PM

Originally Posted by Xulld

The burden of proof is squarely on the accuser. What evidence contradicts the statement? If none then there is no case. This has nothing to do with belief, we can still believe any narrative we want, or not believe any of them and remain skeptical, but a conviction requires more.

Innocent until proven guilty and all that . . . .

Uh huh... that's terrific. This was your statement to which I was responding:

Originally Posted by Xulld

You have failed to create a conclusive narrative that refutes Zimmerman's statement.

Does your understanding of "innocent until proven guilty" mean we have to automatically believe everything the defendant says? Or is there another reason you think anyone here need refute Zimmerman?

johnny karate · 9th May 2012, 08:00 PM

Originally Posted by bookworm

Well, since that was the statement he gave immediately after the incident....

I'm not sure what your point here is. Are you contending that it's not possible for Zimmerman to have lied immediately?

Originally Posted by bookworm

...and since someone saw M on top of Z and since he did have a bloody head to back it up, I would say that's the logical conclusion.

No, the logical conclusion is that Zimmerman struck his head on something. It would take a leap of logic to assume Martin bashed Zimmerman's head on the pavement because there's no evidence that actually occurred.

Andrew Wiggin · 9th May 2012, 09:16 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

And just how would Zimmerman know Martin was unarmed? Psychic powers?

If GZ didn't know TM wasn't armed, then he crossed an even greater boundry of common sense and prudent behavior by leaving his truck rather than leaving IN the truck.

GWCarver · 9th May 2012, 10:50 PM

Originally Posted by Andrew Wiggin

If GZ didn't know TM wasn't armed, then he crossed an even greater boundry of common sense and prudent behavior by leaving his truck rather than leaving IN the truck.

The operator had told Zimmerman twice to let him know if TM did anything else. With the cops on the way, and TM off and running, it is entirely probable that he simply wanted to see where TM was heading so he could inform the police when they arrived. But, he lost track of TM, and thought he was gone, probably through the opening in the back entrance. You know, "these ** always get away".

It is not like Zimmerman was in a combat zone or a distant city, he was in his own neighborhood. Getting out of his truck put him in his very own common area. He was right down from where everyone stopped every day to pick up their mail, so it wasn't unusual for residents to be out an about in that area. The "he should have stayed in the truck" straw man is getting old and is a very flimsy one at that. TM running, in any other scenario, would be called by police "consciousness of guilt", and would give Zimmerman and the police even more reason to believe he was a bad guy, NOT A RESIDENT of the community. It would also cause Zimmerman to believe TM wasn't a physical threat because he was running away.

But, TM doubled back and got into it with an armed man. Big mistake. Criminals in Memphis do dumb stuff like this all of the time. Maybe I'll do a top ten list of Memphis' dumbest criminals and their pathetic attempts a pulling off the perfect crimes.

So, Andrew, how much longer do you think Zimmerman should have screamed and fought for the gun before using lethal force? It would be nice to hear it in minutes and seconds. Precise timing is important in life or death situations.

PhantomWolf · 9th May 2012, 10:54 PM

Originally Posted by johnny karate

I'm not sure what your point here is. Are you contending that it's not possible for Zimmerman to have lied immediately?

My problem with him having lied immediately is that I don't think he's smart enough to come up with a lie that matched witnesses and could be repeated multiples times to different people, and remain consistant, yet he seems to have done that if you assume he's lying.

Quote:

No, the logical conclusion is that Zimmerman struck his head on something. It would take a leap of logic to assume Martin bashed Zimmerman's head on the pavement because there's no evidence that actually occurred.

This is incorrect. There is evidence, you just don't accept it as true, but that doesn't mean it's not evidence. GZ's witness statment is evidence whether you like it or not.

Natural Born Skeptic · 9th May 2012, 11:05 PM

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf

My problem with him having lied immediately is that I don't think he's smart enough to come up with a lie that matched witnesses and could be repeated multiples times to different people, and remain consistant, yet he seems to have done that if you assume he's lying.

This is HUGE. It's exceptionally difficult to lie about this type of thing and be consistent about it. Yet after 4 hours of questioning without an attorney and reenacting the event on video, the first prosecutor decided there was no evidence to prosecute. On top of it his statements just happened to coincide with information as well as eyewitness testimony he could not possible have known existed.

On top of it, so far as I have seen, every bit of the story makes sense and "fits". People just hate it because they don't want to believe it, and therefore convince themselves it's unbelievable.

RandFan · 9th May 2012, 11:09 PM

Originally Posted by GWCarver

Getting out of his truck put him in his very own common area.

Perfectly reasonable given that TM was a suspicious person that GZ said he was scared of. How did that work out for him?

johnny karate · 9th May 2012, 11:14 PM

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf

My problem with him having lied immediately is that I don't think he's smart enough to come up with a lie that matched witnesses and could be repeated multiples times to different people, and remain consistant, yet he seems to have done that if you assume he's lying.

His lie didn't "match witnesses" as no one witnessed Martin bashing his head onto the ground. And I don't see how difficult it is to repeat a lie. Especially when no one knows what went on during the questioning at the police station. We have no idea how hard he was interrogated. For all we know, the police were predisposed to believe his story and were therefore very accommodating.

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf

This is incorrect. There is evidence, you just don't accept it as true, but that doesn't mean it's not evidence. GZ's witness statment is evidence whether you like it or not.

You're not the first person to make this point, and quite frankly, it's a stupid one.

We're not in a court of law, so the term "evidence" isn't being used in the legal sense. (And even if we were, Zimmerman's testimony only becomes evidence if he actually testifies. If he doesn't take the stand - and no other evidence surfaces that Martin bashed his head on the ground - there will be no evidence that it happened. It doesn't automatically become evidence just because Zimmerman claimed it.)

I'm pretty sure that if I claimed to have seen Bigfoot, and in being asked to provide evidence said my claim itself is evidence, few people here would accept that.

Natural Born Skeptic · 9th May 2012, 11:27 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Perfectly reasonable given that TM was a suspicious person that GZ said he was scared of. How did that work out for him?

Better evidently than deciding to hide and then attack and beat GZ turned out for TM. You can repeat the same point 1000 times but it was not crazy behavior as you'd like to make out for GZ to think after TM ran off that he could see from afar if TM was still loitering somewhere. Imprudent perhaps with 20/20 hindsight, but not crazy.

GWCarver · 9th May 2012, 11:32 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Perfectly reasonable given that TM was a suspicious person that GZ said he was scared of. How did that work out for him?

TM was the one who was running. GZ was trying to locate him for the police.

RandFan · 9th May 2012, 11:34 PM

Originally Posted by GWCarver

TM was the one who was running. GZ was trying to locate him for the police.

Facts not in evidence.
GZ thought TM was suspicious.
GZ said he was scared of TM.
TM is dead.

So, again, perfectly reasonable.

Rare Truth · 10th May 2012, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PhantomWolf

My problem with him having lied immediately is that I don't think he's smart enough to come up with a lie that matched witnesses and could be repeated multiples times to different people, and remain consistant, yet he seems to have done that if you assume he's lying.

Originally Posted by Natural Born Skeptic

This is HUGE. It's exceptionally difficult to lie about this type of thing and be consistent about it. Yet after 4 hours of questioning without an attorney and reenacting the event on video, the first prosecutor decided there was no evidence to prosecute. On top of it his statements just happened to coincide with information as well as eyewitness testimony he could not possible have known existed.

On top of it, so far as I have seen, every bit of the story makes sense and "fits". People just hate it because they don't want to believe it, and therefore convince themselves it's unbelievable.

I don't think it's *huge* at all. We know from testimony GZ was there with a number of witnesses right there at the scene right after the incident.

O'MARA: Would it be safe to assume then in giving him, and him giving that statement to the police wherein he said one, "I turned around and went back to my car"; and two, that he did not start the fight and that he was assaulted by Mr. Martin. When he gave that statement, did he have any indication that there were or were not half a dozen witnesses who saw the whole thing?

GILBREATH: I have no knowledge of that. I don't know what --

O'MARA: any insight you can give us as to --

(CROSSTALK)

GILBREATH: I have no indication what he picked up from other officers at the scene. I know from reading reports there were witnesses gathered around while he was still at the scene. And this was prior to their having statements taken from them. So I don't know what he picked up from overheard conversations.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP...20/cnr.02.html

OnlyTellsTruths · 10th May 2012, 01:28 AM

Originally Posted by TheL8Elvis

I don't understand the whole 'my address is a secret' thing either. If the choice is between the safety of your home, or choosing to not reveal your address and staying in danger, you choose to not reveal your address ? Because you think anyone who follows you is going to do what ... come back and murder you later ? Especially if you don't even really live there ? That's ridiculous.

Yeah you've said plenty of times that not wanting to show a person following you where your loved ones live is ridiculous. Some of us don't agree.

OnlyTellsTruths · 10th May 2012, 02:16 AM

Originally Posted by Xulld

Making things up is VERY different than relating a witness statement. Zimmerman is a witness.

Technically you are correct. But normally we don't call the person on trial for murder a witness.

a_unique_person · 10th May 2012, 02:17 AM

Originally Posted by Giz

So when GZ knew that TM was faster than him he couldn't also know where TM was located? Physics!

I would love to see that tried in court. However I think that if the prosecution introduces the uncertainty principle the jury will probably be left with reasonable doubt.

No, I just said, you can't observe something without affecting it. Usually at macroscopic sizes, the effect is quite small and negligable, but in this case, it was very apparent. By following TM, GZ changed the course of events that night, and turned a trip to the store into a killing. We know that GZ was prejudiced to TM, because he called him an *******.

OnlyTellsTruths · 10th May 2012, 02:34 AM

Originally Posted by Mumbles

I knew better than to chase people around by the time I was twelve. Zimmerman apparently knew better as well, given his previous police calls, but chose to do it anyway.

We have evidence as to why Z may have made that change if he did. In previous calls to the not911 where he did not maintain visual of the suspicious person(s) they were gone by the time the police arrived.

We have a good idea that Z didn't want that to happen again because we have him on tape saying "these ******** always get away" during his surveillance of M.

It is reasonable to conclude that Z kept a closer watch on this suspicious person than he had on previous ones.

That also may explain why, as RandFan keeps asking, if Z was (admittedly) "afraid"* why did he get out of his truck.

*(Or was it "scared" I don't remember offhand.)

RandFan · 10th May 2012, 02:58 AM

Originally Posted by OnlyTellsTruths

We have evidence as to why Z may have made that change if he did. In previous calls to the not911 where he did not maintain visual of the suspicious person(s) they were gone by the time the police arrived.

We have a good idea that Z didn't want that to happen again because we have him on tape saying "these ******** always get away" during his surveillance of M.

It is reasonable to conclude that Z kept a closer watch on this suspicious person than he had on previous ones.

That also may explain why, as RandFan keeps asking, if Z was (admittedly) "afraid"* why did he get out of his truck.

*(Or was it "scared" I don't remember offhand.)

Thanks, I think the tone of my statement has colored my point. It wasn't a question it was a bit of advice. In such instances, stay in your car. I will admit that it is in fact rhetorical. I think GZs actions reckless. Assuming for the moment that I'm correct then the question then becomes, should a reasonable person have known that it was reckless? I think it's along the lines of drunk driving. There was a time when it was difficult to get convictions for DUI manslaughter because of ignorance on the part of the driver. It is no longer the case.

IMO: Now that we have SYG then we need to make clear, like we did for DUI, that actions have consequences and that people with guns should accept some personal responsibility. Ignorance ought not be an excuse. GZ may very well have innocently left his truck armed that evening but in my opinion his actions were reckless. JMO. YMMV.

LTC8K6 · 10th May 2012, 04:03 AM

Originally Posted by johnny karate

I'm not sure what your point here is. Are you contending that it's not possible for Zimmerman to have lied immediately?

No, the logical conclusion is that Zimmerman struck his head on something. It would take a leap of logic to assume Martin bashed Zimmerman's head on the pavement because there's no evidence that actually occurred.

We can entirely dismiss what GZ said. We don't need his testimony.

We have a witness that's pretty sure TM was beating up GZ. Perhaps two witnesses.

Logically, that's how GZ was injured.

kedo1981 · 10th May 2012, 04:14 AM

When GZ said
"these ******** always get away"
What did he actually say?
It’s been held up a proof of GZ’z “prejudice,
But if he said “a-hole” “SOB’s” “Bastards” is that proof of a white man hunting down a black man like so many here are arguing.
It’s kind of unlikely he used racial slurs when talking to the police dispatch.

LTC8K6 · 10th May 2012, 04:29 AM

If GZ believes that TM is an intruder who does not live there, and GZ believes that TM got away via the back entrance on Retreat View Circle, it would mean that when GZ gets out of his truck, or shortly thereafter, he thinks TM has probably left the compound.

If GZ thinks TM is running for the back entrance, it would be safe for GZ to exit his truck, because TM is either leaving the compound, or has already left the compound.

GZ would be going to see which way TM went on Retreat View.

Dancing David · 10th May 2012, 05:01 AM

Originally Posted by TheL8Elvis

That's true. Should we not speculate or discuss theories and timeline and such until then ? That would be a long wait.

A number of posters have pointed out the horrors of having a bad man who pursues you know where you live, and have supposed that TM hid instead of going home.

Therefore, I was just drawing the conclusion that cowering in the bushes is preferable to being home safe and having a scary man know your home address.
Disagree ?

I stated what I stated, people should use words like speculative when discussing hiding in bushes and the like.

Your angry face is strange, I merely said that people should label speculation as such, no where did I say anything about discussing.

Any discussion of why TM did not go straight home is likely to not be part of any court case, as they did not find a bag marked swag, as far as we know. I would say that such statements are foolish.

My comment is about people who are making the statement that TM hid and attacked GZ, which I now realize may not have been your statement.

Dancing David · 10th May 2012, 05:04 AM

Originally Posted by Natural Born Skeptic

Better evidently than deciding to hide and then attack and beat GZ turned out for TM.

I may have missed this, was this presented as testimony or potential testimony somewhere, it may have been. I am very likely to have missed it, or is it speculative?

(Up until yesterday I was reviewing for an exam)

Dan O. · 10th May 2012, 05:18 AM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Ignorance ought not be an excuse. GZ may very well have innocently left his truck armed that evening but in my opinion his actions were reckless. JMO. YMMV.

Didn't you hear, Zimmerman was just picking up his mail. It's natural for people to get out of their cars in that area. He could have been walking his dog and had every right to be walking his dog in the dog walk area. Maybe he has two dogs that poop a lot so he calls them his ********. It makes perfect sense that he would talk about "those ******** always get away" while setting out to look for them.

Rare Truth · 10th May 2012, 05:25 AM

Originally Posted by Dancing David

I may have missed this, was this presented as testimony or potential testimony somewhere, it may have been. I am very likely to have missed it, or is it speculative?

(Up until yesterday I was reviewing for an exam)

There's no evidence of that. It's speculative.

Rare Truth · 10th May 2012, 05:26 AM

Originally Posted by Dan O.

Didn't you hear, Zimmerman was just picking up his mail. It's natural for people to get out of their cars in that area. He could have been walking his dog and had every right to be walking his dog in the dog walk area. Maybe he has two dogs that poop a lot so he calls them his ********. It makes perfect sense that he would talk about "those ******** always get away" while setting out to look for them.

Such a very strange post.

WildCat · 10th May 2012, 05:30 AM

Originally Posted by Andrew Wiggin

If GZ didn't know TM wasn't armed, then he crossed an even greater boundry of common sense and prudent behavior by leaving his truck rather than leaving IN the truck.

Don't leave your house today Andrew, people out there may be armed!

WildCat · 10th May 2012, 05:34 AM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Facts not in evidence.

The fact is in evidence. Zimmerman says he ran, Martin's girlfriend said he told her he ran.

9th May 2012, 02:53 PM	#9402
TheL8Elvis Illuminator Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 3,527	Originally Posted by Unabogie But the trees don't match from that angle. Which is why I am questioning the accuracy of that map. The police report states the body was found between the 2 end townhouses. (1231 twin trees and 2821 retreat view). Go to 1:32 in the video here: http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news...#ixzz1phFMGCu4 Its the same shot, pulled back more:
TheL8Elvis Illuminator Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 3,527

9th May 2012, 03:06 PM	#9403
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Mt Disappointment Posts: 33,341	Originally Posted by LTC8K6 GZ apparently thought so, which is really all that will matter in court. (Or possibly not, if a judge/jury don't agree) I was not there. I didn't see how TM was behaving. I don't know if I would have thought TM was a criminal. It was not unreasonable, imo, for GZ to want to see where TM went. He couldn't do that from the truck, even if he moved the truck, as far as I can tell. So an unknown person is quite clearly following TM in the dark, for no apparent reason, other than the one GZ gives us, TM is an *******. I see no reason why TM wouldn't feel threatened, and wouldn't want this unkown person to know where he was living. If we look at the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, you can't observe something without affecting it. "Just following" is not "just", it is just as likely to change the situation.
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes Last edited by a_unique_person; 9th May 2012 at 03:08 PM.

9th May 2012, 04:06 PM	#9406
PhantomWolf Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Lost Deimos Moon Base Posts: 9,968	Originally Posted by a_unique_person So an unknown person is quite clearly following TM in the dark, for no apparent reason, other than the one GZ gives us, TM is an *******. I see no reason why TM wouldn't feel threatened, and wouldn't want this unkown person to know where he was living. So instead of taking option a) keep running or moving quickly away option b) call the police while running or moving away or... option c) go to one of the other houses nearby and knock on the door The best option is d) hide and wait for four minutes to see if you're being followed and then confront your follower when they finally appear?
	__________________ It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871) My Apollo Page. 1 on 1 Debating Forum for Skeptics and sceptics.

9th May 2012, 04:16 PM	#9408
Natural Born Skeptic Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,156	Originally Posted by PhantomWolf So instead of taking option a) keep running or moving quickly away option b) call the police while running or moving away or... option c) go to one of the other houses nearby and knock on the door The best option is d) hide and wait for four minutes to see if you're being followed and then confront your follower when they finally appear? Yep! I mean, if someone's following you and you didn't want them to know where you live, isn't that what you'd do? I mean suggesting that if they don't want the "stalker" to know where they live that the logical thing to do would be to get as far away as possible, back on a public street or to a store where there are people, that's just crazy . Unless of course you weren't actually afraid and had other intentions.
	Last edited by Natural Born Skeptic; 9th May 2012 at 04:44 PM.

9th May 2012, 05:02 PM	#9409
Dan O. Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 8,771	Originally Posted by TheL8Elvis The map goes with this (not mine) http://justoneminute.typepad.com/mai...win-lakes.html I disagree with a number of things on that map, but the body was approx where that red circle is. Just below the T on the left side. And that is where you see it in the pic you linked to, just a little N of that red circle. If anybody gave a damn about these sorts of things they could use ~~Google~~ Sketchup to create a model of the area and use the built in photo matching tool to align the images and determine the actual camera positions with enough overlapping detail that nobody but a JREF skeptic^TM would question the result. I've done this befor but really don't want to put in the effort for the immature audience here to throw poo at.
Dan O. Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 8,771	__________________ Permanent solution to national fiscal problems: Collect UNDIEs from dead rich people. (link)

9th May 2012, 02:38 PM	#9401
Unabogie Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 5,860	Originally Posted by TheL8Elvis The map goes with this (not mine) http://justoneminute.typepad.com/mai...win-lakes.html I disagree with a number of things on that map, but the body was approx where that red circle is. Just below the T on the left side. And that is where you see it in the pic you linked to, just a little N of that red circle. But the trees don't match from that angle. Which is why I am questioning the accuracy of that map.

9th May 2012, 03:25 PM	#9404
Giz Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: UK/US Posts: 3,442	Originally Posted by a_unique_person If we look at the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, you can't observe something without affecting it. So when GZ knew that TM was faster than him he couldn't also know where TM was located? Physics! I would love to see that tried in court. However I think that if the prosecution introduces the uncertainty principle the jury will probably be left with reasonable doubt.

9th May 2012, 03:28 PM	#9405
Natural Born Skeptic Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,156	Originally Posted by a_unique_person If we look at the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, you can't observe something without affecting it. "Just following" is not "just", it is just as likely to change the situation. So IF TM attacked GZ, GZ is the one who actually affected it by attempting to observe TM?

9th May 2012, 04:07 PM	#9407
Unabogie Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 5,860	Originally Posted by TheL8Elvis The police report states the body was found between the 2 end townhouses. (1231 twin trees and 2821 retreat view). Go to 1:32 in the video here: http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news...#ixzz1phFMGCu4 Its the same shot, pulled back more: http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting...ae75a07701.jpg You might be right, but I'm not convinced one way or the other. I think the actual locations are still unclear.

9th May 2012, 05:12 PM	#9410
TheL8Elvis Illuminator Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 3,527	Originally Posted by Unabogie You might be right, but I'm not convinced one way or the other. I think the actual locations are still unclear. Well, that's pretty much where the police report, interviews and the rest of the Internet think the body is. It seems likely to me as well. YMMV
TheL8Elvis Illuminator Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 3,527

9th May 2012, 06:43 PM	#9411
Unabogie Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Portland, OR Posts: 5,860	Originally Posted by TheL8Elvis Well, that's pretty much where the police report, interviews and the rest of the Internet think the body is. It seems likely to me as well. YMMV Fair enough.

9th May 2012, 06:52 PM	#9412
Mumbles Muse Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 627	Originally Posted by Xulld Making things up is VERY different than relating a witness statement. Zimmerman is a witness. If you think you have evidence which conclusively shows his statement is unreliable, we are all ears. So far every attempt has failed to be conclusive, or was based on speculation. The "John" Witness backs up part of Zimmerman's account, so does the 911 tapes, so does other witness statements. The physical evidence appears to also favor Zims story. I am sure we will see all the details soon, and even more speculation come out, but right this minute, does not look good for the narrative that Zim attacked Martin. So far it appears Zimmerman's statement is intact, and well founded. This is the problem. Actually, Zimmerman's claim of how the fight started is flat-out bizarre. So Zimmerman, after completing his police call, wanders through the cut through, in order to look at a street sign that won't be there, on a street that he already knows the name of. He then begins to walk back to his truck, when a now angry Martin emerges from the south route, and angrily approaches him. Zimmerman, who has already identified him as "up to no good or on drugs", sees his angry approach, and then drops his guard and likely his gaze, to reach for his cell phone. Martin then punches him and knocks him down in one blow, and then straddles him and begins bashing his head on the concrete, even though this punch would have put Zimmerman north of the T-junction, where there is no concrete. Martin also tries to smother Zimmerman, who is clearly screaming despite being unable to breathe. I'm sorry, I don't buy this one for a second, it simply makes no sense. Which is why I keep waiting for his actual statements to come out, instead of the various false and often contradictory leaks we've heard so far. Quote: The only rebuttals have been that becuase he was armed he should have known better than to put himself in such a situation, or that becuase he was an adult he should have known better, or that becuase he was frustrated by criminals taking advantage of his neighborhood and wanted police to confront martin that he was deranged. I knew better than to chase people around by the time I was twelve. Zimmerman apparently knew better as well, given his previous police calls, but chose to do it anyway.
Mumbles Muse Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 627

9th May 2012, 06:59 PM	#9413
GWCarver Muse Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 595	Originally Posted by Mumbles Actually, Zimmerman's claim of how the fight started is flat-out bizarre. So Zimmerman, after completing his police call, wanders through the cut through, in order to look at a street sign that won't be there, on a street that he already knows the name of. He then begins to walk back to his truck, when a now angry Martin emerges from the south route, and angrily approaches him. Zimmerman, who has already identified him as "up to no good or on drugs", sees his angry approach, and then drops his guard and likely his gaze, to reach for his cell phone. Martin then punches him and knocks him down in one blow, and then straddles him and begins bashing his head on the concrete, even though this punch would have put Zimmerman north of the T-junction, where there is no concrete. Martin also tries to smother Zimmerman, who is clearly screaming despite being unable to breathe. I'm sorry, I don't buy this one for a second, it simply makes no sense. Which is why I keep waiting for his actual statements to come out, instead of the various false and often contradictory leaks we've heard so far. I knew better than to chase people around by the time I was twelve. Zimmerman apparently knew better as well, given his previous police calls, but chose to do it anyway. You know there is no evidence available to us that shows Zimmerman was chasing TM around. How do you think TM ended up on the end of the sidewalk where Zimmerman is known to have been talking to the police instead of the other end where he would have been safe?
GWCarver Muse Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 595

9th May 2012, 07:55 PM	#9414
johnny karate ... and your little dog too. Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 7,837	Originally Posted by Xulld The burden of proof is squarely on the accuser. What evidence contradicts the statement? If none then there is no case. This has nothing to do with belief, we can still believe any narrative we want, or not believe any of them and remain skeptical, but a conviction requires more. Innocent until proven guilty and all that . . . . Uh huh... that's terrific. This was your statement to which I was responding: Originally Posted by Xulld You have failed to create a conclusive narrative that refutes Zimmerman's statement. Does your understanding of "innocent until proven guilty" mean we have to automatically believe everything the defendant says? Or is there another reason you think anyone here need refute Zimmerman?
	__________________ Lost your faith in humanity? Click here to have it restored. Or here.

9th May 2012, 08:00 PM	#9415
johnny karate ... and your little dog too. Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 7,837	Originally Posted by bookworm Well, since that was the statement he gave immediately after the incident.... I'm not sure what your point here is. Are you contending that it's not possible for Zimmerman to have lied immediately? Originally Posted by bookworm ...and since someone saw M on top of Z and since he did have a bloody head to back it up, I would say that's the logical conclusion. No, the logical conclusion is that Zimmerman struck his head on something. It would take a leap of logic to assume Martin bashed Zimmerman's head on the pavement because there's no evidence that actually occurred.
	__________________ Lost your faith in humanity? Click here to have it restored. Or here.

9th May 2012, 09:16 PM	#9416
Andrew Wiggin Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: A small planet named for its dirt. You'll find it filed under 'mostly harmless' Posts: 2,914	Originally Posted by WildCat And just how would Zimmerman know Martin was unarmed? Psychic powers? If GZ didn't know TM wasn't armed, then he crossed an even greater boundry of common sense and prudent behavior by leaving his truck rather than leaving IN the truck.
	__________________ "Everyone takes the limits of his own vision for the limits of the world." - Arthur Schopenhauer "New and stirring things are belittled because if they are not belittled, the humiliating question arises, 'Why then are you not taking part in them?' " - H. G. Wells

9th May 2012, 10:50 PM	#9417
GWCarver Muse Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 595	Originally Posted by Andrew Wiggin If GZ didn't know TM wasn't armed, then he crossed an even greater boundry of common sense and prudent behavior by leaving his truck rather than leaving IN the truck. The operator had told Zimmerman twice to let him know if TM did anything else. With the cops on the way, and TM off and running, it is entirely probable that he simply wanted to see where TM was heading so he could inform the police when they arrived. But, he lost track of TM, and thought he was gone, probably through the opening in the back entrance. You know, "these ** always get away". It is not like Zimmerman was in a combat zone or a distant city, he was in his own neighborhood. Getting out of his truck put him in his very own common area. He was right down from where everyone stopped every day to pick up their mail, so it wasn't unusual for residents to be out an about in that area. The "he should have stayed in the truck" straw man is getting old and is a very flimsy one at that. TM running, in any other scenario, would be called by police "consciousness of guilt", and would give Zimmerman and the police even more reason to believe he was a bad guy, NOT A RESIDENT of the community. It would also cause Zimmerman to believe TM wasn't a physical threat because he was running away. But, TM doubled back and got into it with an armed man. Big mistake. Criminals in Memphis do dumb stuff like this all of the time. Maybe I'll do a top ten list of Memphis' dumbest criminals and their pathetic attempts a pulling off the perfect crimes. So, Andrew, how much longer do you think Zimmerman should have screamed and fought for the gun before using lethal force? It would be nice to hear it in minutes and seconds. Precise timing is important in life or death situations.
GWCarver Muse Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 595

9th May 2012, 10:54 PM	#9418
PhantomWolf Philosopher Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Lost Deimos Moon Base Posts: 9,968	Originally Posted by johnny karate I'm not sure what your point here is. Are you contending that it's not possible for Zimmerman to have lied immediately? My problem with him having lied immediately is that I don't think he's smart enough to come up with a lie that matched witnesses and could be repeated multiples times to different people, and remain consistant, yet he seems to have done that if you assume he's lying. Quote: No, the logical conclusion is that Zimmerman struck his head on something. It would take a leap of logic to assume Martin bashed Zimmerman's head on the pavement because there's no evidence that actually occurred. This is incorrect. There is evidence, you just don't accept it as true, but that doesn't mean it's not evidence. GZ's witness statment is evidence whether you like it or not.
	__________________ It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871) My Apollo Page. 1 on 1 Debating Forum for Skeptics and sceptics.

9th May 2012, 11:05 PM	#9419
Natural Born Skeptic Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,156	Originally Posted by PhantomWolf My problem with him having lied immediately is that I don't think he's smart enough to come up with a lie that matched witnesses and could be repeated multiples times to different people, and remain consistant, yet he seems to have done that if you assume he's lying. This is HUGE. It's exceptionally difficult to lie about this type of thing and be consistent about it. Yet after 4 hours of questioning without an attorney and reenacting the event on video, the first prosecutor decided there was no evidence to prosecute. On top of it his statements just happened to coincide with information as well as eyewitness testimony he could not possible have known existed. On top of it, so far as I have seen, every bit of the story makes sense and "fits". People just hate it because they don't want to believe it, and therefore convince themselves it's unbelievable.
	Last edited by Natural Born Skeptic; 9th May 2012 at 11:08 PM.

9th May 2012, 11:09 PM	#9420
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,417	Originally Posted by GWCarver Getting out of his truck put him in his very own common area. Perfectly reasonable given that TM was a suspicious person that GZ said he was scared of. How did that work out for him?
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

9th May 2012, 11:14 PM	#9421
johnny karate ... and your little dog too. Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 7,837	Originally Posted by PhantomWolf My problem with him having lied immediately is that I don't think he's smart enough to come up with a lie that matched witnesses and could be repeated multiples times to different people, and remain consistant, yet he seems to have done that if you assume he's lying. His lie didn't "match witnesses" as no one witnessed Martin bashing his head onto the ground. And I don't see how difficult it is to repeat a lie. Especially when no one knows what went on during the questioning at the police station. We have no idea how hard he was interrogated. For all we know, the police were predisposed to believe his story and were therefore very accommodating. Originally Posted by PhantomWolf This is incorrect. There is evidence, you just don't accept it as true, but that doesn't mean it's not evidence. GZ's witness statment is evidence whether you like it or not. You're not the first person to make this point, and quite frankly, it's a stupid one. We're not in a court of law, so the term "evidence" isn't being used in the legal sense. (And even if we were, Zimmerman's testimony only becomes evidence if he actually testifies. If he doesn't take the stand - and no other evidence surfaces that Martin bashed his head on the ground - there will be no evidence that it happened. It doesn't automatically become evidence just because Zimmerman claimed it.) I'm pretty sure that if I claimed to have seen Bigfoot, and in being asked to provide evidence said my claim itself is evidence, few people here would accept that.
	__________________ Lost your faith in humanity? Click here to have it restored. Or here.

9th May 2012, 11:27 PM	#9422
Natural Born Skeptic Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,156	Originally Posted by RandFan Perfectly reasonable given that TM was a suspicious person that GZ said he was scared of. How did that work out for him? Better evidently than deciding to hide and then attack and beat GZ turned out for TM. You can repeat the same point 1000 times but it was not crazy behavior as you'd like to make out for GZ to think after TM ran off that he could see from afar if TM was still loitering somewhere. Imprudent perhaps with 20/20 hindsight, but not crazy.
	Last edited by Natural Born Skeptic; 9th May 2012 at 11:28 PM.

9th May 2012, 11:32 PM	#9423
GWCarver Muse Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 595	Originally Posted by RandFan Perfectly reasonable given that TM was a suspicious person that GZ said he was scared of. How did that work out for him? TM was the one who was running. GZ was trying to locate him for the police.
GWCarver Muse Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 595

9th May 2012, 11:34 PM	#9424
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,417	Originally Posted by GWCarver TM was the one who was running. GZ was trying to locate him for the police. Facts not in evidence. GZ thought TM was suspicious. GZ said he was scared of TM. TM is dead. So, again, perfectly reasonable.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

10th May 2012, 12:48 AM	#9425
Rare Truth Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: The road less travelled Posts: 1,291	Quote: Originally Posted by PhantomWolf My problem with him having lied immediately is that I don't think he's smart enough to come up with a lie that matched witnesses and could be repeated multiples times to different people, and remain consistant, yet he seems to have done that if you assume he's lying. Originally Posted by Natural Born Skeptic This is HUGE. It's exceptionally difficult to lie about this type of thing and be consistent about it. Yet after 4 hours of questioning without an attorney and reenacting the event on video, the first prosecutor decided there was no evidence to prosecute. On top of it his statements just happened to coincide with information as well as eyewitness testimony he could not possible have known existed. On top of it, so far as I have seen, every bit of the story makes sense and "fits". People just hate it because they don't want to believe it, and therefore convince themselves it's unbelievable. I don't think it's huge at all. We know from testimony GZ was there with a number of witnesses right there at the scene right after the incident. O'MARA: Would it be safe to assume then in giving him, and him giving that statement to the police wherein he said one, "I turned around and went back to my car"; and two, that he did not start the fight and that he was assaulted by Mr. Martin. When he gave that statement, did he have any indication that there were or were not half a dozen witnesses who saw the whole thing? GILBREATH: I have no knowledge of that. I don't know what -- O'MARA: any insight you can give us as to -- (CROSSTALK) GILBREATH: I have no indication what he picked up from other officers at the scene. I know from reading reports there were witnesses gathered around while he was still at the scene. And this was prior to their having statements taken from them. So I don't know what he picked up from overheard conversations. http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP...20/cnr.02.html

10th May 2012, 01:28 AM	#9426
OnlyTellsTruths Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 5,811	Originally Posted by TheL8Elvis I don't understand the whole 'my address is a secret' thing either. If the choice is between the safety of your home, or choosing to not reveal your address and staying in danger, you choose to not reveal your address ? Because you think anyone who follows you is going to do what ... come back and murder you later ? Especially if you don't even really live there ? That's ridiculous. Yeah you've said plenty of times that not wanting to show a person following you where your loved ones live is ridiculous. Some of us don't agree.
OnlyTellsTruths Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 5,811	__________________ ________________________

10th May 2012, 02:16 AM	#9427
OnlyTellsTruths Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 5,811	Originally Posted by Xulld Making things up is VERY different than relating a witness statement. Zimmerman is a witness. Technically you are correct. But normally we don't call the person on trial for murder a witness.
OnlyTellsTruths Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 5,811	__________________ ________________________

10th May 2012, 02:17 AM	#9428
a_unique_person Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Mt Disappointment Posts: 33,341	Originally Posted by Giz So when GZ knew that TM was faster than him he couldn't also know where TM was located? Physics! I would love to see that tried in court. However I think that if the prosecution introduces the uncertainty principle the jury will probably be left with reasonable doubt. No, I just said, you can't observe something without affecting it. Usually at macroscopic sizes, the effect is quite small and negligable, but in this case, it was very apparent. By following TM, GZ changed the course of events that night, and turned a trip to the store into a killing. We know that GZ was prejudiced to TM, because he called him an *******.
	__________________ *Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.* Everything is possible, but not everything is probable. For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes

10th May 2012, 02:34 AM	#9429
OnlyTellsTruths Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 5,811	Originally Posted by Mumbles I knew better than to chase people around by the time I was twelve. Zimmerman apparently knew better as well, given his previous police calls, but chose to do it anyway. We have evidence as to why Z may have made that change if he did. In previous calls to the not911 where he did not maintain visual of the suspicious person(s) they were gone by the time the police arrived. We have a good idea that Z didn't want that to happen again because we have him on tape saying "these ******** always get away" during his surveillance of M. It is reasonable to conclude that Z kept a closer watch on this suspicious person than he had on previous ones. That also may explain why, as RandFan keeps asking, if Z was (admittedly) "afraid"* why did he get out of his truck. *(Or was it "scared" I don't remember offhand.)
OnlyTellsTruths Join Date: Sep 2007 Posts: 5,811	__________________ ________________________

10th May 2012, 02:58 AM	#9430
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,417	Originally Posted by OnlyTellsTruths We have evidence as to why Z may have made that change if he did. In previous calls to the not911 where he did not maintain visual of the suspicious person(s) they were gone by the time the police arrived. We have a good idea that Z didn't want that to happen again because we have him on tape saying "these ******** always get away" during his surveillance of M. It is reasonable to conclude that Z kept a closer watch on this suspicious person than he had on previous ones. That also may explain why, as RandFan keeps asking, if Z was (admittedly) "afraid"* why did he get out of his truck. *(Or was it "scared" I don't remember offhand.) Thanks, I think the tone of my statement has colored my point. It wasn't a question it was a bit of advice. In such instances, stay in your car. I will admit that it is in fact rhetorical. I think GZs actions reckless. Assuming for the moment that I'm correct then the question then becomes, should a reasonable person have known that it was reckless? I think it's along the lines of drunk driving. There was a time when it was difficult to get convictions for DUI manslaughter because of ignorance on the part of the driver. It is no longer the case. IMO: Now that we have SYG then we need to make clear, like we did for DUI, that actions have consequences and that people with guns should accept some personal responsibility. Ignorance ought not be an excuse. GZ may very well have innocently left his truck armed that evening but in my opinion his actions were reckless. JMO. YMMV.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

10th May 2012, 04:03 AM	#9431
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,695	Originally Posted by johnny karate I'm not sure what your point here is. Are you contending that it's not possible for Zimmerman to have lied immediately? No, the logical conclusion is that Zimmerman struck his head on something. It would take a leap of logic to assume Martin bashed Zimmerman's head on the pavement because there's no evidence that actually occurred. We can entirely dismiss what GZ said. We don't need his testimony. We have a witness that's pretty sure TM was beating up GZ. Perhaps two witnesses. Logically, that's how GZ was injured.
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?

10th May 2012, 04:14 AM	#9432
kedo1981 Master Poster Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: ohio Posts: 2,083	When GZ said "these ******** always get away" What did he actually say? It’s been held up a proof of GZ’z “prejudice, But if he said “a-hole” “SOB’s” “Bastards” is that proof of a white man hunting down a black man like so many here are arguing. It’s kind of unlikely he used racial slurs when talking to the police dispatch.
	__________________ "Prove all things, hold fast that which is good" (I Thessalonians 5:21) I readily admit I don’t know enough to say for sure that there is no God. But I do know enough so say that anyone who claims to know the mind and will of a being such as God is a liar. I have no problem with Jesus, but his fan club sucks!

10th May 2012, 04:29 AM	#9433
LTC8K6 Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Directly under a deadly chemtrail Posts: 12,695	If GZ believes that TM is an intruder who does not live there, and GZ believes that TM got away via the back entrance on Retreat View Circle, it would mean that when GZ gets out of his truck, or shortly thereafter, he thinks TM has probably left the compound. If GZ thinks TM is running for the back entrance, it would be safe for GZ to exit his truck, because TM is either leaving the compound, or has already left the compound. GZ would be going to see which way TM went on Retreat View.
	__________________ What a fool believes, no wise man has the power to reason away. What seems to be, is always better than nothing. 2 prints, same midtarsal crock..., I mean break?

10th May 2012, 05:01 AM	#9434
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 34,736	Originally Posted by TheL8Elvis That's true. Should we not speculate or discuss theories and timeline and such until then ? That would be a long wait. A number of posters have pointed out the horrors of having a bad man who pursues you know where you live, and have supposed that TM hid instead of going home. Therefore, I was just drawing the conclusion that cowering in the bushes is preferable to being home safe and having a scary man know your home address. Disagree ? I stated what I stated, people should use words like speculative when discussing hiding in bushes and the like. Your angry face is strange, I merely said that people should label speculation as such, no where did I say anything about discussing. Any discussion of why TM did not go straight home is likely to not be part of any court case, as they did not find a bag marked swag, as far as we know. I would say that such statements are foolish. My comment is about people who are making the statement that TM hid and attacked GZ, which I now realize may not have been your statement.
	__________________ Hell, dynamiting fish in a barrel is more challenging. - Ladewig I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager

10th May 2012, 05:04 AM	#9435
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 34,736	Originally Posted by Natural Born Skeptic Better evidently than deciding to hide and then attack and beat GZ turned out for TM. I may have missed this, was this presented as testimony or potential testimony somewhere, it may have been. I am very likely to have missed it, or is it speculative? (Up until yesterday I was reviewing for an exam)
	__________________ Hell, dynamiting fish in a barrel is more challenging. - Ladewig I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager