May 15 2012

Trayvon’s Girlfriend Key To Martin Case

Published by at 9:50 am under All General Discussions,Trayvon Martin Case

This should be the last post on the Trayvon Martin case for a while – unless some details pop out this week from the discovery. As I was doing my last round of news searches, something came out last night from the Zimmerman camp that caught my eye, and confirmed my suspicions (that it would be the testimony of Martin’s girlfriend that seals Zimmerman’s conviction). The source of the enlightening comment? Zimmerman’s father (apparently a judge):

He [Zimmerman’s father] believes medical records and photos – released to the defense on Monday – will prove his son was injured by Trayvon [1] when the two met in a gated community’s dark pathway. He said voice tests will show George Zimmerman didn’t lie and an eyewitness will back up his account. The girl who claims to have been on the phone talking to the teenager when the incident occurred will be proved a liar [2], Zimmerman insists.

Oh good Lord – this is how they plan to win a trial? First off, no one disputes the physical altercation or that George Zimmerman got some scrapes and bruises. The issue is who instigated the confrontation, who pushed this to a head. And in this situation we have ear-witness testimony that the instigator was Zimmerman, contrary to his statements to police. Here is what little we know about the girlfriend’s testimony:

In a dramatic press conference on Tuesday, the Martin family’s lawyer Benjamin Crump detailed how the unnamed girl – a minor who was so traumatised by Martin’s death she was taken to hospital at his wake – was talking to him on his cell phone in the minutes leading up to his death, and heard the altercation with his killer.

Crump said that during the final phone call with his girlfriend, who was back home in Miami, Martin told her that a stranger was following him, according to an affidavit she recorded. Martin had then tried unsuccessfully to get away from the stranger.

“He says: ‘Oh, he’s right behind me. He’s right behind me again,'” Crump said the girl told him. “She says: ‘Run.’ He says: ‘I’m not going to run, I’m just going to walk fast.’

She then heard Martin saying “Why are you following me” and another voice saying “What are you doing here? She told Crump they both repeated themselves, and then she thinks she heard Zimmerman push Martin “because his voice changes, like something interrupted his speech.” She heard an altercation and then the phone call was cut off, Crump said.

This does blow Zimmerman’s statement made to police at the time out of the water. I would suspect Zimmerman had no idea Martin was on the phone and someone was listening in. So he makes up a story about being ambushed from behind to augment his self defense claim. Little did he know a 3rd person was there that night – virtually.

This testimony is in complete contradiction to Zimmerman’s, and it is powerful (and of equal weight to anything Zimmerman claims). It indicates Martin tries numerous times to get away from Zimmerman who stalks the kid (armed of course). It indicates Zimmerman was not ambushed, but came up to Martin and challenged him. And it also implies Zimmerman started the physical altercation.

If Zimmerman’s father believes the defense will prove her a liar (which is way too harsh) and that will save his son – he is being foolish. She is going to be an unimpeachable witness. She is going to provide details Zimmerman thought he could cover up when he concocted his story.

And it is clear from the elder Zimmerman’s harsh statement it is the girlfriend’s testimony that is most dangerous to his son’s defense.

Zimmerman is now caught in a lie, and somehow must prove to judge or jury the girlfriend made up her testimony. Won’t happen. There is no motive. The defense has relied on this all about Zimmerman being attacked. Now we have confirmation it was Martin who was attacked.

And under stand your ground he had every right to beat Zimmerman’s head against the ground in self defense.

93 responses so far

93 Responses to “Trayvon’s Girlfriend Key To Martin Case”

  1. Redteam says:

    “TM says the GZ is BEHIND him again! ”
    This was on April 2, 6 weeks after the shooting. She sure has excellent recall for someone that up until that day had refused to talk to the police.
    She sure was ‘anxious’ to get the story out.
    but, anyhow. She has no knowledge that GZ is BEHIND TM only that she remembers TM saying that he was behind him.

    See in that statement “TM ‘says’ ” hear say.

    “TM” “whh – oof!” interrupted by what sounded to be a push or punch”

    I really like that one. Play for me the ‘recorded sound of a push or punch. ” Wait a minute, it wasn’t a push or punch, it was a trip and fall, they sound very similar when you’re trying to recall it 6 weeks later.
    and remember, this “whh – oof!” is not the actual sound that she heard, it is her recollection of what she remembered it sounding like 6 weeks before. What if it were really just “wh – of!”? is that a harder/softer push/punch?

    This dialog: Was this recorded somewhere or is it a recollection from someone 6 weeks later?
    “”TM: “Why are you following me?”
    GZ: “What are you doing here?”

    TM: “Why are you following me?”
    GZ: “What are you doing here?”

    TM” “whh – oof!” interrupted by what sounded to be a push or punch””

    Sounds iron clad to me.. Except it’ll never show up in a courtroom if the prosecutor is very smart, no wait, she’s not. she’s a political appointee…..

  2. Marsh says:

    I have never seen a case before where ALL of the evidence backs up the version of the defendant. This is about as cut and dried as a case can get.

  3. Redteam says:

    Marsh, I agree. I have seen stories that say that Zimmerman voluntarily made statements the night of the death that never varied; without an attorney present. It was stated that he was going to be questioned again to see if the story changed. It never did. The following day, he went to the scene and re-enacted the whole thing with the police video’ing it. No variations, exactly the same as the night before.
    Every single piece of evidence favors Zimmerman’s story, not a single contradiction. The only lies have been told on Martin’s side, ie:, the funeral director clearly lied about wounds on Martin’s body.
    I suspect more neighbors will eventually turn up that actually witnessed the whole thing. They are just silent now for fear they will be threatened (as all on Zimmerman’s side have been)
    Absolutely nothing said by Martin’s parents sound plausible, it’s as if they’re making it up as it goes along and constantly changes.(That doesn’t matter tho because they won’t be witnesses because nothing they can say would have any bearing on the case)

  4. Layman says:

    Ah, AJ. You are right about one thing. GZ does not get to decide what’s life threatening. A jury will – based on the “reasonable man” arguement. And if GZ uses Marsh’s scenario a lot of reasonable people will think he was reasonably in fear for his life.

  5. Layman says:

    An AJ, one question about the timeline bugs me. If TM was running away or walking fast to get away from GZ then why didn’t he make it home? Lots of people have put together the timeline and he had plenty of time to get home – unless he was doing something else. It doesn’t fit. Should bug you too.

  6. momdear1 says:

    The latest released reports say that TM’s autopsy reveals no injuries except a bullet hole and skinned knuckles. whereas GZ’s hospital report reveals two black eyes, a broken nose and and wounds on the back of his head where TM tried to bash his brains out on the sidewalk. Sounds likea cut and dried case of self defense to me. I would have shot this 6 ft. 3 in. gangsta teen in a hoodie if he had me on the ground and was trying to bash my brains out on the sidewalk too. For the record, I too have wondered why TM didn’t go on home when he had the chance instead of sticking around for the confrontation. .

  7. ivehadit says:

    AJ, I think your experience is different from this case but I will have to see. I have to say that I am confused that you are not waiting for ALL the facts to come forth before you make your judgements on this.

    As an aside, for the record, my neighborhood is going to be protected by my neighbors, all within the scope of the law.

  8. Louctiel says:


    “The point still stands – Zimmerman made up an alibi about being attacked form behind without realizing a witness was on the phone and can prove he lied. ”

    Except the girl cannot testify the direction from which the alleged attack came. She did not see the altercation at all. At best her testimony is hearsay.

    Your point not only falls, it is flatter than a pancake.

    “And you have NO idea when or how she interacted with police. ”

    Actually we do. Your refusal to acknowledge that is typical of your posts. The incident took place on February 26. According to her own attorney, she refused to talk to the police until her statement of April 2. (It is amazing that you are willing to accept the statements of the attorney when they support your contentions, but dismiss them when they blow holes in your opinions.) Furthermore, on April 20, Detective Gilbreath swore under oath there was no evidence as to who started the fight. His statement was made in support of the charging affidavit which was filed on April 11 – a full 9 days after the statement by the girlfriend.

    You are left with either saying the detective lied under oath (in both the hearing and in the affidavit) which means the charge must be dropped, or the state viewed the girl’s statement as not supporting the very thing you claim. Pick your poison.

    “Sorry dude, but GZ does NOT get to decide what is life threatening…”

    Sorry dude, but once again you are wrong on the law. The statute says “However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
    (1)?He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony”

    The term “reasonably believes” is not what you or I believe, it is what the individual believes at the time of the incident. (Beard v. United States – 158 U.S. 550) Even if it were not, it is difficult to believe anyone would not think that a person having their head repeatedly slammed against concrete is not imminent “great bodily harm.”

    Once again, one must wonder why you repeatedly misrepresent facts. Failing that, you ignore those facts that are against your opinion. Is that part of your “scientific method?”

  9. gcotharn says:


    I doubt that Dee Dee heard any sounds of a scuffle. I strongly suspect Crump made that up, and made the claim during his initial press conference (when he was trying to raise the media profile of the incident). Crump can always say that Dee Dee told that to him, then changed her story, later, when she spoke to federal authorities (Crump can play the “flighty teenaged girl” card). Dee Dee’s testimony to feds does not include any mention of her hearing sounds of a scuffle. That testimony indicates the line went dead. The end.

    Second: if Dee Dee DID hear sounds of a scuffle: there has been no definitive indication that the scuffle was begun by Zimmerman. She could have heard Trayvon throwing the first punch. I reiterate what others have said: the investigator, under oath, testified that they have no evidence which indicates that Zimmerman threw the first punch.

    A.J., why do you give no serious credence to the possibility that Trayvon was going through a punk phase in which he idolized and played out a thug lifestyle? A gangster thug doesn’t shrink back to his apartment, like a shirking dog. A gansta goes back and throws down on a punk.

    The publicly known evidence indicates that Trayvon was, tragically, going through a thug phase, and that Trayvon doubled back and confronted Zimmerman and beat Zimmerman’s head against concrete. Clear cut self defense.

    Pretty much all commenters, here, are willing to let the evidence lead where it leads. If new evidence emerges, if Zimmerman is proven a murderer, then we all want to see justice done: let Zimmerman pay the price. But, at this time, the publicly known evidence is heavily in Zimmerman’s favor. I do not understand why you give so little serious credence to the possibility that Trayvon was playing out a thug lifestyle, as he understood a thug lifestyle, and that Trayvon legitimately threatened Zimmerman’s life with a deadly weapon.

  10. gcotharn says:

    I’ve gone back and reviewed audio of what Dee Dee said to ABC News. She said: “Then somebody pushed Trayvon, because the headset just fell.”

    All she actually knows … is that the headset sounded as if it fell, and then the line went dead.

    In the written story which accompanies the video story, ABC characterizes Dee Dee as saying “Trayvon was cornered.” But ABC does not provide audio of Dee Dee saying such a thing. It is odd, to me, that ABC would have such audio, yet would not play it in public. Also, from what we know of the geography of the scene: it was impossible to corner someone.

    In the written story, ABC directly quotes Dee Dee as saying “Next thing I hear is somebody pushing, and somebody pushed Trayvon because the head set just fell.” Again, ABC does not provide audio of Dee Dee saying “I hear is somebody pushing.” It is odd, to me, that ABC would have such audio, yet would not play it in public. Also, notice that Dee Dee is quoted as saying “somebody pushing.” Even according to ABC’s direct quote, Dee Dee does not know who began the altercation.

    The March 20 story is filed by Matt Gutman. From the beginning, Gutman reported information which was fed to him by the Trayvon Martin attorney and PR firm. The story includes assertions of some key Crump lies and exaggerations, such as that Dee Dee was Trayvon’s girlfriend. The media took this story, and these exaggerations and combustible wordings, and ran with it. The story uses photos of the angelic Trayvon, aged 13-15. The story creates this false impression: How could anyone have felt threatened by that angelic child? But, no one felt threatened by THAT angelic child. 17 is not 13.

  11. gcotharn says:

    Among many of the persons who suspect Zimmerman murdered Trayvon, there is a politically correct aspect to their take on the incident: those who suspect Trayvon are making racial or racist assumptions, i.e. those who suspect Trayvon was acting out a gangster lifestyle, or who suspect Trayvon initiated the violence, are making racial or racist assumptions.

    Maybe some persons are making racial or racist assumptions.

    Yet, it is irrefutably true that a young man, of whatever background, might act out a thug lifestyle, and might initiate violence. It is also true that evidence exists that Trayvon was living out his conception of a violent thug lifestyle.

    I think the evidence, of Trayvon acting out a thug lifestyle, is compelling. My opinion has nothing to do with Trayvon’s skin tone. I have seen young men, of every skin tone, be seduced by the rap music, hip hop music, violent thug lifestyle. It is always a tragic waste.

  12. AJStrata says:


    I have to admit, I have never seen such biased tripe in my life. I don’t consider politics or race in anything having to do with GZ or TM.

    What I do know is a reckless fool with a gun – having seen my fair share in my life. But you are sure giving them a run for the money here!

    The kid was on the phone, eating candy and wearing his hood up in the rain. Sorry, but it is the epitome of moronic to jump from this to gangster thug …

    Please – leave.

  13. gcotharn says:

    Wow. Goodbye.

  14. gcotharn says:

    Maybe I am too far ahead of the information curve of most observers, and I do not realize it. My last act: evidence to support that Trayvon had embraced the thug lifestyle

    Note, especially, the photos … of the way 17 year old Trayvon actually looked, and actually presented himself in public.

    I had watched the fight club video of Trayvon’s exuberance during a fist fight. Unfortunately, YouTube has now taken the video down. Okay, I’m done.

  15. Redteam says:

    “The kid was on the phone, eating candy and wearing his hood up in the rain. Sorry, but it is the epitome of moronic to jump from this to gangster thug”
    so, where do you get the information that he was eating candy. all the theories are that he bought the candy for his father’s girlfriends 13-14 year old son. (13-14 because both have been reported, those sharp news guys can’t even get a kid’s age correctly)
    so now you have him eating the little kid’s candy. Maybe he should be backhanded for that.

    AJ, if you truly don’t know that Martin was living a thug lifestyle, you truly have not been reading all the information that is available.

    He had gold teeth, he had tattoo’s, he had been suspended from school (once for drug paraphanalia) and actually had to transfer schools all in the current school year. He is a teen-age fight promoter, ring referee. I could list dozens of other activities of his that are typical of thugster activity, but it might be boring to you.

    gcotharn, contrarily, I find your comments to be completely logical and factual. Just read some of the thousands of tweets Martin made in the last couple of months.

  16. Redteam says:

    BGG, so is the point you’re making that the link from gcotharn is not really Martin and the link from you is the ‘real’ martin?

    Wouldn’t you suppose ALL of those photos are the real martin? perhaps when he’s in school or on a date he wants/has to look more presentable than when he’s hanging with his buds. or do you think someone is photoshopping him to make him look better/worse?

    That’s the luxury of not having your mind made up. All of them could really be him. In your mind, I’m sure only the nice, dressedup, clean cut kid is him..
    (without the skittles in his mouth that he bought for his little playmate)

    I notice you shut up about the ‘police can’t charge’ thing after I gave you a few links which clearly stated that they did charge.

  17. browngreengold says:

    “I notice you shut up about the ‘police can’t charge’ thing after I gave you a few links which clearly stated that they did charge.”

    Actually, RT, I visited that thread several times and found that you had not responded at all.

    Now that I’ve been over there, I see that you’ve done nothing but waste my time.

    You didn’t provide any links at all. Just snippets that you pulled from the Interwebz. And nothing more than news stories at that.


    As I said before, Police Officers don’t charge suspects directly for any offense outside of moving violations. For other offenses they have to present their evidence to a District Attorney/Prosecutor in order for the suspect to be charged.

    You remain amusing in your ignorance.

  18. browngreengold says:

    Oh, and that quote you pulled from the Australian story in an effort to try and prove a point about the American justice system….that was priceless.

    Absolutely priceless.

  19. Redteam says:

    “You remain amusing in your ignorance.”

    as opposed to you not being amusing in yours?