May 29 2012
Zimmerman’s Snap Alibi Comes Back To Bite Him
More news is out on the Trayvon Martin case, and it will be a test for all those ‘open minds’ who have decided Zimmerman is innocent in his killing of an unarmed 17 year old boy who was simply out walking and talking to his girlfriend. The news confirms my suspicions that Zimmerman was the aggressor (not someone defending himself) and is guilty of at least manslaughter (if not 2nd degree murder).
Zimmerman’s past includes well documented incidents of his hot temper and his desire to be Enforcer of The Law (which sets him apart from those who look to law enforcement as a profession – versus the ego trip). Zimmerman has all the signs of wanting to be better than others and prove his superiority. His gun is not protection, but a crutch to his ego. I have seen his type too many times not to notice all the parallels. Age and experience do count at times.
Zimmerman is also an easy liar – as he did in court when he apologized to the Martin family and claimed he thought Trayvon was much older (hinting he thought Trayvon was in his mid 20’s). Of course Zimmerman forgot he told the 911 dispatcher he had made Martin to be in his late teens when he went stalking the kid – supposedly because he looked ‘suspicious’. That ability to spew a falsehood to save his skin is an indicator, something not to be dismissed or overlooked. If that is part of his core nature, a lot of good people have probably put their faith in someone who does not deserve it.
After the incident it was clear no one immediately knew of witnesses nearby and the ear-witness on the phone with Martin (listening up to seconds before his death). George Zimmerman was especially ignorant of these people who could easily challenge a quickly concocted alibi.
As I noted before, Zimmerman’s statements are inconsistent. He claims to get out of his truck to find street names or house numbers, but then finds himself behind buildings where there are neither. He acknowledges being told to stay away from Martin until police arrive, but then somehow gets to a point behind buildings where he is ‘jumped’. Except the ear-witness on the phone hears Zimmerman talking to Martin. Clearly he was not ‘jumped’ once a dialogue is engaged.
All this led me to predict the case would be built around the ear-witness and holes in Zimmerman’s statements to police which will prove him to be untruthful (at best). Now the prosecution has confirmed my prediction:
“Defendant (Zimmerman) has provided law enforcement with numerous statements, some of which are contradictory, and are inconsistent with the physical evidence and statements of witnesses,” the prosecutors said in their court filing.
They said the statements by Zimmerman were admissible in court and “in conjunction with other statements and evidence help to establish defendant’s guilt in this case.”
Emphasis mine. Note how both testimony of witnesses AND physical evidence combine to prove Zimmerman lied in his statements to police about what happened. And why would Zimmerman lie? Because he knew he went beyond the bounds of lawful activity in stalking, confronting and killing Martin. He believed with all his twisted mind he had found a burglar in his community, and he was going to make sure this one did not ‘get away’. He was wrong. Plain and simple. No racial issues, no gun rights issues. Just one person who was probably the wrong person to be armed and playing sheriff.
The evidence must be pretty damn good, or else the prosecutors would not want to keep out of the public square. The defense will not have a chance to try this part of the case in the news media. And in fact, the defense is already starting to cede ground:
In a separate court filing on Thursday, Zimmerman’s lawyer Mark O’Mara joined in the motion to keep his client’s statements out of the public eye for the time being.
“There is the possibility that these statements may be subject to motions to suppress, if there is a potentially involuntary statement elicited from Mr. Zimmerman,” O’Mara said.
Clearly the defense has realized some of Zimmerman’s own words are going to convict him, so now they have to try and keep those words out of court. Not likely to happen, but not surprising when your case is in this kind of hole.
So all those open minds who have acquitted Zimmerman based on partial information are challenged to prove they can learn as more information becomes available. Here is a challenge to show how justice must work, even when our first impressions are wrong. Actually, the hardest part is making the change when our first impressions are wrong. But that is the sign of wisdom and fairness.
gcotharn/mata
“Obviously it’s not an opinion based ”
do you realize what that means, someone thinks you don’t share the same opinion. imagine?
Sorry folks, back to back meetings followed by a school concert for the kids…
All comments cleated
June 29 is apparently the new Freedom date for George Zimmerman. Prosecution has now had two chances, in court, to present evidence that indicates that he is guilty and have not done so. They are going to have one more opportunity, June 29, to do so and I’m guessing that they are not gonna be any more successful than previously which will result in GZ being freed and Corey reprimanded for wasting the court’s time. In fact, from what I read, she has performed so poorly that she is in danger of having charges brought against herself for malicious prosecution. Maybe she should quit before the boom gets lowered.
Mata: ““you’re stupid and don’t know what you’re talking about”. Okay… LOL ”
As I said, you’re late to the party. If you were not, you would know that I am one of the persons on this blog that respect everyone’s right to an opinion and do not make statements about people intelligence level or ‘stupidity’ level. I personally don’t think it’s a good interpretation, on your part, that just because you come over from some other sight, where you may or may not be a respected contributor and make a hasty judgment that basically ‘everyone’ on this site, except AJ, is impugning TM’s character and are basing our belief’s on his character. I personally think that you are exactly 100% incorrect in that assessment. His character is certainly part of the equation, but only a part. The ‘supposed’ fact that he was pounding GZ’s head onto a concrete sidewalk can certainly be partially attributed to his character, but it can be attributed to other things as well.
As I said, this case has been rehashed many times and it get’s a little tiresome for a ‘new guy’ to come along and attempt to start at square one and pretend that they are an expert on the case and that if all us here don’t listen to your opinion and respect it then we just don’t know what’s going on. As to the statement about not providing a link. That link has already been on this blog and it has been discussed, so you and your friend that provided ‘the link’ didn’t enrich the world. But it pleases me to know that you acknowledge that all that ‘info’ was already out there. My point, the defense is going to be more free to use DeeDee’s statement than the prosecution, because, as I said, it is almost 100% hear say and the prosecution can not use hearsay evidence. (but since you’re in the ‘inner’ legal circle’ , you already know that. right?)
you said: “Why you would think this is some sort of benefit to GZ is beyond me, but it’s obvious you do not wish it to become part of any presented evidence. ” because many parts of it are exculpatory and none of it inculpatory. The prosecution will not be using it.
Drugs/narcotics. you don’t seem to want to acknowledge that drugs that the tests proved were in TM’s body might have affected his actions, but are anxious to jump on drugs that WE DO NOT KNOW were in GZ’s body and say they would have affected his actions more so than TM’s. Now that’s funny.. you gotta admit….
Anyhow mata, say what you want to say, we’ll read and comment. just don’t expect anyone but AJ to agree with your opinion. At least so far.
(I truly am sorry to hear that little bit about your personal life that you mentioned. No one should have that happen to them. )
“over from some other sight, where”
I spelled that ‘site’, not ‘sight’ it got self corrected? someway
Have you all seen this article by Jack Cashill:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/what_the_media_choose_not_to_know_about_trayvon.html#ixzz1x7Pa1fZZ
This article lists a comprehensive time line. Jack Cashill is a very well respected writer and author.
This has been my beef all along:
fta:”Media obfuscation may still work in the court of public opinion — it got Obama elected in 2008 — but it will not work in a court of law. The truth will out. When it does, the major media will lose a good chunk of whatever credibility they have left, and our nation may lose a good chunk of its urban real estate.”
Trayvon was taller than Zimmerman and only 20lbs lighter…and a NOT so innocent child. Why did the media portray him as such? (Rhetorical question)
ivehadit, good article, thanks for the link. It sums it up very well. one thing caught my attention:
“When it does, the major media will lose a good chunk of whatever credibility they have left,”
They don’t have that to concern them, they haven’t had any credibility in many moons. If it’s in the standard liberal MSM, you can be sure it’s heavily slanted to the progressive view and most often contain very little truth.
My point, the defense is going to be more free to use DeeDee’s statement than the prosecution, because, as I said, it is almost 100% hear say and the prosecution can not use hearsay evidence. (but since you’re in the ‘inner’ legal circle’ , you already know that. right?)
RT, Kindly provide source materials to support this claim.
ivehadit,
Thanks for the link to the excellent summation. This part represents the point many of us have made:
Which is to say: GZ’s story is plausible. Doesn’t mean GZ’s story is true.
A point which hasn’t been made here:
One of Trayvon’s monikers for himself: “No Limit Nigga”, identifies Trayvon as a fan of a hip hop singer who glorified drug use and violence and gangsta life, and who is currently serving time for murder. This hip hop singer’s record label is “No Limit Records.” Trayvon was identifying with this singer. Trayvon left ample evidence that his preferred hip hop culture was a gangsta culture; was not a Disney culture.
And the reason any of this is relevant: it means GZ’s story is plausible. Doesn’t mean GZ’s story is true. But his story could be true. Trayvon could have easily taken the exact actions which GZ says he did: those alleged actions were consistent with who Trayvon Martin was at that particular stage of his life. Another Cashill quote:
Yes. Its tragic. Its a stereotype. It might have been a temporary phase. And its true.
So, in essence, Cashill admits that Zimmerman profiled Martin just as the State’s Attorney stated in the charging affidavit.
Hmmm…. Imagine that.
browngreengold,
Your assertion amounts to this:
1. Profiling is immoral or illegal.
2. Zimmerman profiled.
Yet, profiling is both moral and legal. A neighborhood watch person, by definition, is a profiler.
It is not profiling, itself, which is ever a bad thing. Rather, it is incompetent profiling which is suboptimal. Competent profiling is an excellent thing.
If you want to say “GZ was an incompetent profiler”, then make your case for why you suspect that. Cashill did not make that case.
Redteam said: As I said, you’re late to the party. If you were not, you would know that I am one of the persons on this blog that respect everyone’s right to an opinion and do not make statements about people intelligence level or ‘stupidity’ level. I personally don’t think it’s a good interpretation, on your part, that just because you come over from some other sight, where you may or may not be a respected contributor and make a hasty judgment that basically ‘everyone’ on this site, except AJ, is impugning TM’s character and are basing our belief’s on his character. I personally think that you are exactly 100% incorrect in that assessment. His character is certainly part of the equation, but only a part. The ‘supposed’ fact that he was pounding GZ’s head onto a concrete sidewalk can certainly be partially attributed to his character, but it can be attributed to other things as well.
As I pointed out, RT, I am not “late to” any party on the facts and evidence. Simply never commented here but once quite a while ago, and on this thread. But I did keep up on reading the threads. It’s always interesting to watch people morph in their debate over time.. the benefit of a more distant position and not getting caught up in the emotions of the debate. I grinned over browngreengold, schooling you in facts in other threads, when you were behind the eight ball. While you pulled the same (paraphrased) “you don’t know what your talking about” response, I daresay that, if you go back to those threads, you’ll find he was correct in what he was trying to tell you.
I never said “everyone” on this site was impugning TM’s character. In fact, most never had that ammunition to do so until trace levels of THC and THC-COOH were reported in whispered levels of shock and awe. Truly a laugh since not only were these levels could be of much consequence since those levels spike post mortem, but even those levels wouldn’t even get anyone an intoxication ticket were they stopped walking down the street.
Prior to that little tidbit about TM, you yourself spent the first threads on this, pondering just what business TM had being in the neighborhood at all.
After that, there was some disgruntled attitudes towards the prosecutor. Most confidently preferred to believe the legal talking heads in the media, and assume that there would not be an arrest or a charge. The problem with the talking heads media is that they are not privvy to Zimmerman’s statements, and the bulk of evidence that has been compiled since the investigation was re’opened.
The point is, from the beginning, the majority here and elsewhere in the blog world.. not all, nor did I say all… have assumed that GZ’s story was unquestionably true, and use any negativity – whether it was sloughing off the girl’s testimony as unimportant, stating the prosecutor was only politically motivated – whatever they could snag in the daily talking points – just to support a predetermination of Zimmerman’s innocence.
And when Zimmerman and his wife failed to disclose their website funds, the same majority found excuses. You, yourself, didn’t even want to accept the fact that Zimmerman’s own attorney, on his legal site, said
He has also noted:
Instead, you felt the need to lash out at me. No biggie… but it sure reminds me of all that huffing and puffing you did at BGG.
Since the blog world and media have gone on the quest to pull out Martin’s teenage past, the focus on the demonization of him has been center stage for the Zimmerman devotees. There is no other better example than you giving the ol’ college cheer to Cashill’s article as a good summation. And what does that article do? Nothing more than spend an entire column, putting Martin’s character on trial.
gcotharn also reverts back to Martin’s character. I understand they we have a communication problem… he believes that demeaning Martin lends credibility to Zimmerman’s story. It doesn’t. My answer that GZ may be truthful in saying that Martin was the attacker has nothing to do with Martin’s standard teenage behavior and experimentation. It has to do with the simple logic that he was being followed, couldn’t shake the guy, and may have felt he was under threat. Personally I would. The conversation with Dee also indicates that was the case.
I can’t say this enough times. Even were everything you want to believe that’s negative about Martin true, it’s of no consequence.
Just as AJ’s citation of Dooley several threads back, and my recent citation of the Lowe case in Pennsylvania, Zimmerman’s guilt or innocence will be decided upon two factors… did he contribute to the confrontation with his decisions, and did he use unreasonable force for self defense. Nothing more, nothing less.
When you examine both of the cases mentioned above, the outcome does not bode well for Zimmerman. Frankly, if Lowe can be convicted of the lesser charge of manslaughter, defending himself against a metal pipe, armed criminal in the middle of committing a robbery, Zimmerman should be extremely nervous considering that Martin was not committing a crime, was *not* intoxicated, made attempts to avoid Zimmerman, and was in a location where he had every legal right to be. And if it can be proven he spent all that time, prowling around to find Martin after he said he was afraid of him, he’s right to be nervous.
Let me get this straight. The gated community has had a rash of break ins and burglaries committed by teen age black kids. The neighborhood watch has been told to be on the look out for teen age black kids wandering around aimlessly in the community and report it to the police. okay, that the setting.
so now the head guy of the neighborhood watch is on the way to a target store and he sees a teen age black kid wandering around aimlessly in the neighborhood. He calls the police and updates them on the situation. He attempts to follow the kid to see where he is going so he can relay the info to the police.
Question. What did the neighborhood watch captain do wrong?
Should he have called the police? Or, not make the call?
Should he have attempted to keep him in sight so he could inform the police? Or, just say heck, he’s probably one of the good guys that just happen to fit the profile to the criminals, I’m not concerned where he goes or what he does.
Should he have just allowed the black teen age kid to pound his head onto the concrete until he got tired and stopped? Or, should he have tried to prevent himself from getting killed?
just wondering about this ‘profiling’ thing.
Hey RT…
Don’t neglect the query I posed to you earlier (June 7, 2012 at 1:38 pm) regarding your hearsay claims.
I’ve studied the FRE as well as Florida laws regarding hearsay and, quite frankly, neither of them support what you claim to be true.
Do, please, edumakate all of us regarding hearsay testimony.
Mata,
If we commenters are going back and forth, and are calculating the odds of GZ’s guilt or innocence, we need to consider this truth: pre-existing circumstances primed Trayvon to have a chip on his shoulder and to react with violence. This truth IS of consequence to our mutual conversation, and to our calculations of the odds of GZ’s guilt or innocence. This truth WILL BE of consequence to the jury’s deliberations. If GZ is innocent, and is released into society, this truth WILL BE of consequence to the public’s reaction to GZ over the course of his life.
Second,
If we grant your premise that Trayvon had undertaken “standard teenage behavior and experimentation”, then we can add another premise:
for any individual teenagers who have experienced the same “standard teenage behavior and experimentation” as Trayvon had experienced: said teenagers are primed to have a chip on their shoulder and to react to conflict with violence.
I do not mean “primed” to mean they will react with violence. I mean exactly what I am saying: they are primed to react with violence. All teens who experience this combination of factors: identification with the culture of the hip hop singer who started “No Limit Records” and who is currently incarcerated for murder, usage of marijuana and Purple Drank, celebration of street fighting, three suspensions from school, probable burglary of jewelry, probable dealing of marijuana, lack of supervision (of his social media [thus of his crowd of friends], of when or whether he comes home at night) … all teenager who experiences that combination of “standard teenage behavior and experimentation” … are primed to have chips on their shoulders, and to react with violence.
Third, you say
Let us grant that your premise is correct. The prosecution has already made it clear that GZ’s lack of credibility will be a factor in the jury deciding that GZ had contributed to the confrontation with his decisions, and that GZ used unreasonable force. The prosecution has announced that GZ’s credibility will be a major factor. Therefore, anything which adds to the credibility of GZ’s story is relevent. Thus, Trayvon being primed to act exactly as GZ described … is relevant.
Oh, and to the list of standard teenager experiences, I should add: has tattoos and a gold grill for his teeth.
Put it ALL together: the entire package of experiences, en toto. All teenagers, who experience this entire package, are primed for violence. Are primed to become statistics.
And every one of us commenters know it. There is no reason to pretend that we do not know it. You could say that you do not believe that my descrip of Trayvon’s experiences is accurate. But, if the accuracy of my descrip of Trayvon’s experiences is granted, then it cannot be reasonably argued that Trayvon was not primed for violence.
even to the extent of being primed to repeatedly smash someone’s head into concrete.
BGG, you do recall that I am not responding to your comments. That is because you have consistently demonstrated that you can’t carry on a reasonable conversation.
You again are clearly demonstrating that. If, by this time in your life, you don’t know that hear-say evidence is not allowed in trials, then there is no hope that you ever will.
I am only responding to you, this one time, to make sure you understand that I do not consider you a person worthy of attempting a conversation with. have a good day..
mata, wait, hold on a minute til I stop laughing.
First, don’t quote BGG on anything to me. That person has demonstrated such a lack of ability to carry on a civil conversation, that anything he says is a total waste of time. But since you refer to him ‘schooling me’ I will ask you to quote just one single fact that he was right on that I was of a different opinion and, on second thought, don’t waste your time because there is no examples of it.
Let me explain this to you one more time. you are late to ‘this’ party. You come in after all this stuff has been hashed and rehashed and try to resuscitate the same old theories that have been destroyed and, quite frankly, very few are interested in a round 3 (or later) on the same old topics.
My opinion today, as it was day one, is that I don’t have any idea what the ‘true facts’ of the case are. only what I have read on the internet. But it is my opinion, and apparently everyone else’s ( that make comments) opinion on this blog (except AJ, BGG and you) that there is most likely no evidence that willl convict GZ of 2nd degree murder and most likely, not of anything.
But, one example of hyperbole on your part, is: “until trace levels of THC and THC-COOH were reported in whispered levels of shock and awe. Truly a laugh since not only were these levels could be of much consequence since those levels spike post mortem, but even those levels wouldn’t even get anyone an intoxication ticket were they stopped walking down the street.”
even cursory reading on the effects of marijuana and the levels in TM’s body would tell you that he was a habitual user. but you are willing to ‘pretend’ that it is/was of no significance. So, would you be perfectly content with the ‘effects’ of that level of marijuana if they were in your child? Earlier you said the levels of medication prescribed for GZ would have more impact on his actions that the marijuana would on TM. Really? when did prescribed medicine ever have any impact on anyone? Wouldn’t a person have to actually take the medicine rather than just have it prescribed to affect his actions? Do you have any evidence at all, that GZ ever took ANY medicine?
I will point out, once again, that GZ was not dishonest in revealing the amount of money (you know the discussion, so I won’t rehash) but we all know that GZ was not dishonest, because he DID NOT TESTIFY, his wife did. GZ had the right to remain silent, and he exercised that right.
In short, mata, I don’t think you can quote anything that I’ve been wrong on. In fact, I know it. Now you may be able to quote something that we have different opinions about, but since neither of us are privy to the ‘true’ facts, then that’s all we can have. (unless you have a special contact in your ‘inner legal circle’)
So, let me ask you just a few questions:
1. How did GZ get the lacerations on the back of his head?
2. Why did it take TM 40 minutes to walk back from 7-11 to community?
3. Why was TM’s headphone’s in his pocket when he died?
4. Why did TM have a can of Watermelon Juice Fruit cocktail and a bag of Skittles on him?
5. Why was there a major crime scene investigation going on just outside Green’s apartment with her and Martin’s father inside and they didn’t know anything about it?
mata, why do you keep bringing up that ‘Lowe’ case? an ‘examination’ of that case will shed absolutely no light on the GZ case. It is not even remotely similar. Because it is an adjudicated case, then we can assume the known facts are likely what happened. And bear no resemblance to the publicized activities in the GZ case.
So attempting to illustrate something using that case is useless.
hopefully, I don’t need to explain the differences to you.