Did Zimmerman Hasten Trayvon Martin’s Death Via Positional Asphyxiation?

George Zimmerman has admitted straddling Trayvon Martin’s back, who was lying face down in the grass after he shot him, and stretching out his hands in a crucifiction position to prevent him from getting away and possibly getting control of his gun, which was lying in the grass just beyond his reach.

He did not explain how the gun ended up there or how Martin’s hands ended up tucked under his chest when the police arrived.

In her handwritten statement dated February 26, 2012, Mary Cutcher wrote inpertinent part (p. 102/184):

I was in the kitchen and I heard someone yelling: almost crying. Then I heard a gunshot. I went outside and saw a man on top of a guy laying on the ground. He was putting his hands on his neck or chest. I yelled “everything ok” and he did not reply. I said it again, “is everything ok?” He said to call the police. My roommate called 911.

[Emphasis supplied]

On March 1st during a telephonic interview, she said the larger nman “appeared to be holding the person on the ground by pressing on his back.” (p. 47/184)

[Emphasis supplied]

In my article posted yesterday, I detailed what Zimmerman did and did not do to delay the arrival of emergency medical assistance at the scene, despite his own injuries, which he claimed were so serious that he believed he was imminent danger of suffering death or serious bodily injury.

I suggested that his motive for delaying the arrival of medical assistance might have been to assure that Trayvon Martin would be dead when they arrived.

Keep in mind that he could not have known whether Trayvon Martin would die when he shot him and, despite the shot that destroyed his right ventricle and collapsed both lungs, Trayvon might have remained conscious for several minutes, according to two forensic pathologists interviewed by Rene Stutzman of the Orlando Sentinel.

My article yesterday has a link to her article.

Today, I follow-up on my article yesterday and discuss what George Zimmerman might have done to assure that Trayvon would not live long enough to tell anyone what really happened when George Zimmerman shot him.

Wikipedia defines positional asphyxiation as:

a form of asphyxia which occurs when someone’s position prevents them from breathing adequately. A significant number of people die suddenly during restraint by police, prison (corrections) officers and health care staff.[1] Positional asphyxia may be a factor in some of these deaths.

Prone Restraint

Research has suggested that restraining a person in a face down position is likely to cause greater restriction of breathing than restraining a person face up.[2] Multiple cases have been associated with the hogtie or hobble prone restraint position.[3][4] Many law enforcement and health personnel are now taught to avoid restraining people face down or to do so only for a very short period of time.[1]

Risk factors which may increase the chance of death include obesity, prior cardiac or respiratory problems, and the use of illicit drugs such as cocaine.[5] Almost all subjects who have died during restraint have engaged in extreme levels of physical resistance against the restraint for a prolonged period of time.[5] Other issues in the way the subject is restrained can also increase the risk of death, for example kneeling or otherwise placing weight on the subject and particularly any type of restraint hold around the subject’s neck. Research measuring the effect of restraint positions on lung function suggests that restraint which involves bending the restrained person or placing body weight on them, has more effect on their breathing than face down positioning alone.

Physical Forceful- Prone Restraint is defined as:

placing an individual’s body FACE-DOWN (“prone”) upon ANY surface (such as the ground, a long back board, an ambulance wheeled stretcher, a bed, or any other surface), and Restrainers physically applying pressure with their HANDS (and/or OTHER BODY PARTS) to the Victim’s shoulders, posterior torso (“back”), hips, and/or upper legs – physically preventing the Victim from moving out of the PRONE position.

Choke holds have been banned by most emergency services because they can cause death two ways::

(1) Obstructing the airway and/or

(2) Carotid artery compression cutting off blood to the brain.

If I were a member of the prosecution team, I would do everything possible to investigate this possible theory of the case because I cannot think of any valid reason for George Zimmerman to be straddling Trayvon Martin’s back, unless he was attempting under cover of darkness to surreptitiously and furtively finish him off by positional asphyxiation while surrounded by witnesses, including children.

A logical place to start would be to find out if he took the CPR course, which is a part of the Criminal Justice curriculum at Seminole Community College. If he did, were they warned about positional asphyxiation and the dangers of choke holds.

I would also check with his fellow private party bouncers to see whether they were ever warned not to use choke and sleeper holds.

I also would check with the police liaison for the Neighborhood Watch Program to see if this subject was covered in the materials and if she ever discussed it with Zimmerman.

This avenue of inquiry might well determine the outcome of the case.

568 Responses to Did Zimmerman Hasten Trayvon Martin’s Death Via Positional Asphyxiation?

  1. Chauncey says:

    George Zimmerman is not a smart man. I don’t believe he hasten Trayvon’s death.

    Now

    What I do believe is the Sanford PD had no sense of urgency to save Trayvon’s life. They let him bleed out. GZ called and said he shot someone. The cops show up, guns holstered, and prevented EMT from entering the scene for minutes.

    Sanford PD wanted Trayvon to die. So they let him bleed out even though he still had a heartbeat when EMT was finally allowed to enter.

  2. heartofhearts says:

    to correct above: But after a gun shot you go outside?

  3. heartofhearts says:

    I was in the kitchen and I heard someone yelling: almost crying. Then I heard a gunshot. I went outside and saw a man on top of a guy laying on the ground. He was putting his hands on his neck or chest. I yelled “everything ok” and he did not reply. I said it again, “is everything ok?” He said to call the police. My roommate called 911.

    What is wrong with this? If you hear someone yelling for help, you don’t go outside but after a gun shot? That doesn’t make sense.

  4. ed nelson says:

    I liked Vicky’s comment, Vicky is too good, she is right on the money, cause I… Ed Nelson, really like that old guy, I read most of his essays,, I don’t get any of his fiction books, can’t understand them, but as he has said, unless one has a good background in histore, he won’t understand those ” books”, unless we probably had the good education, that we sure don’t have… because, only them got that… Hope you dig it!! Because if you don’t dig it… well… and you don’t… you little dweebs from this time… !!!! You have about zero chance to dig/interpret/unnerstannQQ

    And don’t forget… you are in a time when there is not much left!!

    NO, to say it better: you youngsters, maybe you should be ready to get ready… cause the world is about to go… Ka..bluey, and I think a lot of you youngsters already can dig that, just like I do!!

    Dere Vicky, I sure hope to talk to you more in the future, as you have intuited that I am some kind of way… a kind of guy who is a follower of the great GVdahl. (misspell so what…!!).

    I really also like the trueth that Gore has said!!

  5. Patricia says:

    Pliaja, these comments of yours are trulybizarre …

    PLIAJA SEZ: “If his gun was on the ground then I would imagine that’s where Zimmerman dropped/tossed it before trying to restrain Martin.”

    So Pliaja, you agree Zimmerman “tried” to restrain Trayvon Martin – but BEFORE trying to do this he dropped or tossed the Kel-Tec? When was this restraint tried?

    And then he killed the “unrestrained” Trayvon Martin with the absent gun?

    Or are you agreeing that, having mortally wounded (and likely killed) Trayvon Martin, he threw tthe gun away, then grappled with the corpse trying to “restrain” it?

    Or worse, grappled with the DYING Trayvon Martin, adding further pain and suffering? YOU ARE AGREEING TO ALL THIS?

    THEN PLIAJA CONTINUES: “Not really relevant though – we know he shot TM with the gun. Nothing there. Neither is where Martin’s hands were or weren’t. What difference does it really make? If Zimmerman moved his hands out but the first person on the scene is certain his hands were found under his chest then Trayvon probably moved them. Nothing there.”

    PLIAGA, do you really think a skinny teenager that has had a 9mm projectile shot into his heart, where the hollow-point was designed to explode and did, sending shrapnel into the heart, lungs and contiguous tissue, with an internal cascade of hemorraging blood, IS GOING TO BE ABLE to DRAG HIS ARMS DOWN from a Y position and raise his body enough to PULL HIS ARMS UNDER himself, not only after being shot — BUT after ZIMMERMAN HIMSELF PLUNKED HIS 207 LBS on Trayvon’s dead or dying body.

    You ….. are ….. some ….. kind ….. of …… a ….. ghoul.

    Pliaja, you must the kind of friend and supporter
    George Zimmerman would truly appreciate.

    A match made in Hades …

  6. I just read another post from this justfactsplz or odessagirl. What are they talking about:

    “justfactsplz says:

    August 17, 2012 at 2:59 pm

    First I have to tell you what a beautiful song and video above. I really enjoyed it. The link you provided did a great job on following the phone found at the scene using the evidence released. I personally don’t believe the phone conversation between DeeDee and Trayvon ever took place. If the state has evidence otherwise it is my theory that the log may show the calls happened but it was someone else in Miami talking to DeeDee. Phone pings will tell that story. If it is not that then the phone log is bogus. Chief Lee did nothing further with the phone because by that time he realized it wasn’t Trayvon’s phone. It is not listed in his possessions. I believe Tracey not giving the pin number until he checked with Crump was a stall tactic until they could solidify their story about the phone. It was this “conversation” with DeeDee that set the stage for a murder charge because DeeDee” heard ” George approach Trayvon and this call was part of the arresting affidavit. Am I making sense now? I don’t want to tell too much that is not in evidence yet released because anyone, even the Martin camp can read this if they choose to. There is more about the phone situation and that is all I am willing to say at this time, I hope you understand. Keep digging and sifting and you will find answers.”

  7. Digger says:

    Is it if we have not donated we can not get your posts? Do you have a mail address to which on can donate or does it have to be through Pay Pal? Thank you

  8. Patricia says:

    Thanks to Princess –

    It is the Federal “no report status” on this that leaves me wondering.

    Murder I understand. “Profiling” I do not – as it relates to state or federal law. Can you “profile” other than racially?

    I am hoping the Professor can find the time to explain the ramifications and possibilities – both state and federal – as they would apply (if they do) in the case against George Zimmerman.

    Again, Princess, thanks!

    • princss6 says:

      “Profiling” I do not – as it relates to state or federal law. Can you “profile” other than racially?

      I know, right! That is something new to me….I didn’t know you could profile as a criminal…I only thought it was in relation to racial profiling but maybe this is common legal theory. I’ve never heard of it but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. I would say that most criminals profile their victims in some way so…I don’t think it ever plays a role in the legal argument of most cases.

      IMO, GZ did violate Trayvon’s Civil Rights BUT trying someone for that basically falls under the simplistic definition of what racism is. If you burned a cross prior to the act, you would be eligible to be charged with a hate crime. It seems to be primarily reserved for those with ties to white supremacist groups, you know the “real racists.” If however, you do not belong to one of these groups, then you are absolved of being charged with a hate crime (because “no one can know what is in your heart”). I don’t agree obviously and I don’t care what the FBI says as it isn’t like they have a good history and they are as we speak racially profiling Arab Americans in this country – so their determination of a racially-biased crime is moot to me. I will forever hold that a white kid would have made it home in that neighborhood. Meredith Taaffe seems to agree with me as well.

      • Patricia says:

        Princess, the reason I am inquiring is so I can understand the STRUCTURE of the legal case against Zimmerman (and if there could be a follow-up charge against Zimmerman from “a higher-up authority” on the basis of profiling).

        If there is no legal charge against GZ for profiling, then I believe the aspect of racial profiling cannot be the FOCUS of the prosecution.

        Although I mostly deal with political actions on a local and county level (by definition these are non-partisan) where citizens are harmed, I always urge that complaints be addressed within the confines of existing ordinances.

        While everyone (except “the bad guys”) may believe certain people acted like absolute schmucks, “schmuckiness” is not addressed by statute. Schmuckiness may work against the defendant in peoples’ minds, and that’s OK by me. But emphasize the points that are addressed witin the law, and juries and other deliberating bodies can hang their hats on these FACTS.

        I have found that that is the way to win.

        I am so apreciative that The Professor has set up this Forum, gives his time (exhaustively!) and is gracious in correcting us when needed – and that most all that are participating are doing so in the manner he intends. For Trayvon Martin’s justice, this is a learning experience I need.

        It is far outside my field.

        But deep within my heart.

        I thank you all.

      • Malisha says:

        The civil rights act defines a crime of depriving someone of their constitutionally protected rights under color of state law (42 USC 1981) and defines a civil tort of the same misconduct (42 USC 1983 and following sections. In my opinion, the Sanford Police Department committed a 1981 crime if, as I suspect, some residents actually called the police to report their concerns that George was running around like an aggressive, armed vigilante and the police, knowing that, (a) did nothing to prevent the killing of Trayvon Martin and, even worse, (b) tried to cover up the killing of Trayvon Martin.

        The FEDS are the only ones who can do the 1981 thing; the family’s lawyers, Crump et al., are sure to be planning something like this; it would boggle the mind if they were not.

        Professor, do you agree?

  9. I also read information that Tracy Martin’s wife that he just finalized a divorce to plans to be on the show. I think she will be ambushed by that entire show. Some who are pro GZ say they she actually raised Trayvon. None of that has to do with this murder, but the pro GZ camp is fixed on making Trayvon’s family look bad.

    A friend of mine sent this to me that was posted on a pro GZ site. The taping for the show is supposed to be today:

    “justfactsplz says:
    August 25, 2012 at 2:15 pm
    I have new information that I have been given the okay to tell, Mark and Sondra Osterman will be on the Dr. Phil show on September 10th. Their book about George will be available then for purchase through Amazon, E book, and a link at Dr. Phil’s website. It is a paperback. The title of the book is: DEFENDING OUR FRIEND, THE MOST HATED MAN IN AMERICA, THE GEORGE ZIMMERMAN WE KNOW. There has been no book tour to date. As Dr. Phil cannot take sides and must remain neutral on the show there is another person on the show at the end besides Mark and Sondra. That person is Alicia Martin. While Alicia maintains that George murdered Trayvon she at the same time pokes many wholes in the Martin’s story of raising Trayvon. The Osterman’s did a good job in the show of coming against the media’s role in this case. They tell of George’s true character as opposed to the monster he has been painted to be. Treepers please join me in prayer that this will help and not hurt George. The Osterman’s remained in prayer during the writing of the book and prayed just before the taping of the show. The cover of the book appears to look like a newspaper article so be watching for it. And George and Shellie, I pray for you all the time. Hang in there.”

    • KA says:

      This show sounds like pointless drivel.

      Dr. Phil has really gone downhill.

    • aussie says:

      That poster is known elsewhere as OdessaGirl, and claims to be a close friend of GZ and have inside information.

      The supposed wife Alicia did an interview ages ago in which she said she “virtually” brought up Trayvon for 15 years which would be from the age of 2 which is before his parents got divorced. Strange story. There were two interviews and no follow ups from anyone except the Nuthouse lot.

      We’ll see.

  10. Mike S says:

    There’s a rumor going around now that Osterman is the one behind the Dr. Phil call out, he’s supposedly written a book defending Zimmerman that will be out next month, and the Dr. Phil appearance is to promote that book.

    Anyone know if this is true or not?

    • TruthBTold says:

      @Mike,

      I posted info about this a week or so ago. Unsure of its veracity, but we will see. Craziness of true.

    • PYorck says:

      Most information seems to originate from justfactsplz/OdessaGirl who has claimed to be an insider. Most of her claims have been platitudes about how everything will turn out alright, the defense knows what it is doing, we are in for unspecified surprises etc. Her more remarkable claims have been this book and a conspiracy theory about Trayvon’s phone. I am not convinced.

    • princss6 says:

      I’m wondering if the author of this book titled “Justifiable Homicide” and this Mark Osterman are the same person…

      http://www.amazon.com/Justifiable-Homicide-Mark-Osterman/dp/1877633178

      • heartofhearts says:

        Princss6, I had to go into Amazon to look up the book that he wrote in 1993 and below is the review a customer wrote. It is very disturbing because it speaks volumes about George’s state of mind that night.

        Book Review on Justifible Homocide:

        No doubt, Jack Saunders was driven to it. The justice system failed again. The child molester who beheaded his eight-year-old daughter walked free. In this sad aftermath, Jack began his secret war on crime. He joined the Detroit Police Department and rose through the ranks to become a detective.

        However, Jack’s after-hours activities included a different method for reducing crime statistics.

        Serial killers, molesters, thugs and animal haters soon discovered the awful truth. Suddenly, legal loopholes vanished and fancy paperwork maneuvers were useless. No appeals or plea bargains were allowed.

        Instead, justice was swift, sudden and certain. This one-man crusade served as judge, jury and executioner. Sentences were carefully crafted for each criminal; it resembled poetic justice.

        Detroit’s crime statistics plunged. When hundreds of its criminal class simply disappeared, no one asked why. The unspoken message was clear: Choose a new career; crime doesn’t pay like it once did.

        There was another unexpected bonus. The psychological role of victim and predator became reversed. Now criminals worried about retribution, fearful for their own safety.

      • Patricia says:

        Princess, there’s one single review of that Osterman book on Amazon, supposedly written by a guy from New Smyrna Beach, FL who has never written any Amazon review before or since, in the last 20 years. Think “our” Osterman ghost-wrote that review???

        FYI the book is available from $.01, so it looks like the price is right.

        I am wondering if we’ve all been a tad harsh on Zimmerman for his screen-writing skills. Maybe Osterman is HIS mentor …

  11. I have been wondering the same thing, KA.

  12. KA says:

    I have a question: If O’Mara loses the decision on removing Judge Lester from the case at the current level, is that considered final for this type of decision or can he file another appeal in a higher court?

  13. EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

    Why I don’t trust the Orlando Sentinel if you look at the site they manipulate pictures. Looking at a mug shot of Zimmerman you will see on the video where “GZ describes his injuries.” the photo was doctored to make it look like damage to GZ nose area. Under lottery text alerts watch the screen…look for “GZ describes his injuries”
    pic. Looks funny to me….

    Stuff like this just baffles me about them. Orlando Sentinel only straightens up when eyes are directly on them and this paper is a strong supporter of the bias SPD.. When eyes are on them they try to be fair….

    Clearly, GZ had little damage to not seek proper medical help… In my opinion, his nose was broken before and it wasn’t by TM. Some other person who had enough of GZ bully attitude…

    • @Everyone

      I too believe Zimmerman had a previous broken nose. And the Sentinel is full of it. They delete posts in support of Trayvon that do NOT go against their policy. And that is a fact. I trust nothing about that paper.

    • KA says:

      His voice in the resulting interviews that evening is very clear. A broken nose that night, I can only assume, would produce some congestion and “nasal sounding” speech like a cold.

  14. Sandra E. Graham says:

    Professor – I have an idea for commenters on this blog. Because some disagree with a comment made and are then accused of being a GZ supporter how about —–Rather than say Trayvon supporters or GZ supporters — taking a different approach:
    Prosecution side and Defence side.

    IMO – the description is more accurate. The whole ZBot, Omoney thing is offensive as well. Just a thought everyone.

  15. KA says:

    455 comments in two days….your site is rock’in….

    It seems the world is watching 🙂

    • roderick2012 says:

      Frederick Leatherman says:Due to the police misconduct in the OJ case, the proper verdict was “Not Guilty,” regardless of the racial makeup of the jury.

      Considering how O’Mara has conducted himself so far do you believe that he will concentrate on the sloppiness of the police investigation (although most of it was in favor of his client) instead of challenging the evidence directly?

      Also since we know that JonWit13 was on the scene too quickly ( the prosecution doesn’t seem to be pursuiting the possibility that anyone besides Zimmerman was involved) and his Zimmerman moved Trayvon’s body before the police arrived (we knnow O’Mara won’t bring that up) wouldn’t bringing the fact that the crime scene was compromised also be a good tatic for the defense especially since West is a murder specialist?

      • Sloppy police work never benefits the prosecution and here it doesn’t benefit the defense either because GZ admitted to shooting and killing TM.

        Defense may bring it up as part of a shoot-anything-that-moves approach.

        We’ll have to wait and see.

      • roderick2012 says:

        masonblue says: Sloppy police work never benefits the prosecution and here it doesn’t benefit the defense either because GZ admitted to shooting and killing TM.

        I completely agree but without pointing to anything specific
        the defense could just mention it in passing and plant doubt in the mind of jurors if all of the evidence was collected or if it were collected correctly.

        The fact that the police didn’t protect the scene from the elements seems to be a serious issue that the defense will pursuit and the fact that Zimmerman’s truck wasn’t impounded just shows how careless the police was that night.

        “Defense may bring it up as part of a shoot-anything-that-moves approach.”

        The defense is already at that point after filing all of these ridiculous motions to make Zimmerman look like a martyr again so that those donations pour in like they did after the initial arrest, but I don’t believe that will occcur again because his supporters have short attention spans.

      • KA says:

        This case is very different from OJ I thought because the “killer tie” is what was the main barrier the Prosecution had to meet.

        Had they established that, the “what motive he had” would not have allowed him (in the grisly way the murders were carried out) to even claim a justified or lesser charge like self defense or manslaughter.

        People compare this to Casey Anthony or OJ all the time but it is a much lighter burden for the Prosecution to overcome than determining the killer upfront;

    • roderick2012 says:

      YEs the world is watching KA. On the Orlando Sentinal website someone posted a slander against Crane-station.

      I guess the discussions on this board are getting to close to what actually occurred that night.

      • KA says:

        The slander posts in the blogs and Twitter are so “out there” and outrageous that I can only imagine the childish, immature individuals that wrote it.

        In one instance the person did not even have a degree, yet had the audacity to criticize Prof Leatherman’s schooling and professional teaching record. This person could not have met law school entrance requirements.

        They are just small minded people with unscrupulous morals.

      • On the Orlando Sentinel website someone posted a slander against Crane-station

        What? I get I missed it but it doesn’t surprise me at all. They are vile miscreants over there. And it’s not like the Orlando Sentinel doesn’t see the slander. They do. They delete posts in support of Trayvon Martin that in no way go against their policy but leave up the slander post. I’ve seen them slander Sybrina Fulton, Tracy Martin and Benjamin Crump and it stays. IMO… I believe the OS is complicit in this.

        @Crane

        I’ll keep my eyes peeled and if I see anything slanderous I’ll take a screen shot and then you can GET them. I despise those hateful people. I really do.

    • Patricia says:

      REQUEST TO PROFESSOR LEATHERMAN

      I would like clarity on what charges could have been or may be brought against Zimmerman for “profiling.”

      Also how or if the prosecution may either charge Zimmerman for profiling and what variant of profiling they could charge him with, or, without legally charging him with profiling can they state he did this, using that statement to discredit Zimmerman in some way?

      The FBI investigated Zimmerman. My understanding of this is to see if Trayvon Martin’s civil rights were violated, in that, as an African-American, he was killed because of his being African-American. My understanding is that the FBI reported they found no evidence to prove this charge, and are not pursuing this issue at this time.

      Could a charge of civil rights violation based on race be made SOLELY by federal authorities?

      Could Florida prosecute for profiling if it had evidence?

      Secondly, is there any Federal or Florida charge for “profiling” an individual as a CRIMINAL (entirely separate from racial application)? Or is only RACIAL profiling a crime?

      My belief is that Zimmerman profiled Trayvon Martin as a “black criminal” in his 311 N-E-N call by speaking up sharply with “He looks black” as soon as asked by the 311 dispatcher to identify Martin (instead of the logical “I can’t tell”) then verbally embroidering the event (“got his hand in his waistband,” “looks like he’s on drugs,” etc., as a SALES PITCH to get the dispatcher to take action and send an officer). Ialso believe he said “fucking Goons” to reference the three BLACK GANGS in the Sanford area, considering black criminals, not just blacks by race in general (as “fucking Coons”) would reference.

      But is profiling an individual (with or without racial reference) AS A CRIMINAL, in itself a crime (Federal or Florida) whether it results in a crime (Murder 2) or does not result in a crime?

      If it is a crime, but Zimmerman is not charged with this crime, could the prosecution refer to Zimmerman “profiling” Trayvon Martin?

      I am aware that Zimmerman referred to Martin in his police interview (and in writing) as the “suspect” which is certainly proof that he pre-judged Trayvon Martin as having criminal “intent” although there was no evidence whatsoever to base this on.

      I also recognize the past calls to Sanford PD re potential suspects, all of whom were described as “black.”

      Please tell us IF the Feds or the State could charge Zimmerman with profiling (if they had evidence as such). What statutes could his evident (to my mind) profiling violate?

      If he is not charged (and convicted) of profiling must the prosecution REFRAIN from referring to his actions as “profiling?”

      If they must refrain, could they point out any of these specific actions that they believe influenced the killing (if the prosecution sees this as fitting into their strategy)?

      Please explain. Thank you.

      • princss6 says:

        “My understanding is that the FBI reported they found no evidence to prove this charge, and are not pursuing this issue at this time.”

        That is not my understanding…I’ve not seen anything other than the Zimmerman Sentinel claim this based on the summary of interviews conducted with some/all of his neighbors, coworkers and friends. FT openly bragged on twitter that he gave the FBI nothing.

        All though this talking point has taken hold, it comes from Zimmerman supporters. I’ve not seen an FBI report that has stated that whatsover. Maybe that is their finding but nothing has been publicly released that can be attributed to the FBI.

  16. Malisha says:

    Upthread there was a discussion of what a person does if there is a gun held on them. I have very little information about this, thank god. At one time I did have a knife held against my throat and I remember being extremely quiet and still, and trying to think, but finding myself unable. Years later (more than 30 years later in fact) my son told me that on the college campus where he was studying (a sophomore at that time), a kid held a loaded gun to his head. This happened after a simple argument that did not even really involve my son — it took place between the gun-bearer and his cousin, who was a student. My son said he was extremely quiet and answered a series of challenging questions in the way he thought the gun-bearer wanted them answered. Mostly the answers were, “no I didn’t mean that” or “no I didn’t think that” or “no I do not believe that” and the kid then put away his weapon and satisfied himself with a few choice words. My son never prosecuted because he said, “I don’t want to get [the cousin] killed; he has to see [the gunbearer] again in his life and I don’t have to.” The Dean of my son’s college disagreed with my son and tried to force him to prosecute but he wouldn’t. I still don’t know if that was the right decision but it was not mine to make.

    My bottom line, though, is that I have no idea what I would do but I don’t believe that informs us very well on the “What SHOULD a person do?” question. I don’t know what, if anything, could have gone down differently on 2/26/2012 because I don’t know how heavily Zimmerman was invested in bringing in and/or killing Trayvon Martin. I DO know that his actions after shooting Trayvon Martin SEEM to show that he was heavily invested, after shooting the victim, in making sure that the shooting would lead to a rapid death. I can imagine very few facts that could change my mind about that part of the situation.

    • gbrbsb says:

      Malisha,reading your comment suddenly brought back to me how many years ago at closing time in a dark and dingy back street art/stationary shop near where I lived in Madrid I was held up at gunpoint by two thieves. They really wanted the day’s takings but they pointed the gun at me to oblige the shopkeeper to disclose where he kept them once they realised the amount in the till was only the small change.

      I remember telling myself “you” have be calm, don’t make any quick movement, and be compliant (I’m known to be somewhat feisty!). Indeed I was compliant, calm and quiet until, while waiting for the shopkeeper to disclose the whereabouts of his till, (he finally did so I think I must have been a good client!) the thief pointing his gun at me asked me to give him two gold rings I was wearing. I don’t like jewelry except for a couple of pieces very special to me and the rings were tight as well. I said something like please leave them as they have sentimental value but even as I was saying it I recalled reading how just two weeks before a lady had been shot dead during a similar hold up for refusing to give up her earrings, so chiding myself I was falling over my first sentence already in motion to add something to the effect “… but I will give them to you if you want” when the thief blurted I could keep them so I could see he could be a nice person!

      When they left they told the shopkeeper and I to wait 5 mins before exiting the shop. We complied albeit the shopkeeper called the police during that time. But I remember that once they left the incredible calmness vanished and in minutes I was shaking, incensed someone could have pointed a gun at me and and when I did leave the shop I was looking out for them, even days after, even though I knew I would never find them and didn’t know what I would do if I found them. I also recall when the police arrived they asked me if the gun was real or fake, to which I remember replying that I was hardly about to start asking them to show/prove it to me and pointing at a short distance from my chest it was real enough for me!

      Sorry for length, but even before this, I was going to reply that I agree with Ed. I don’t think just the pointing of a gun brought on those horrific screams. I have felt this for a long time and months ago I found youtube video of the police retraining a suspect with an armlock or whatever and the screams were just all to similar to those heart wrenching ones on the 911 call.

  17. Brown says:

    Just a thought that flew threw my head about hoodies. WE all have been wearing hoodies since birth. Go look at your baby pictures. Everybody has a picture of themselves in a carriage or stroller with a hoodie on with a nice bow tied under their chin.
    : ^ )

  18. Malisha says:

    It occurred to me for a long time to compare the Trayvon Martin shooting to other fatal shootings in Florida that were done by actual police, not wannabes. It seems obvious to me that a real cop who had failed to wait for back-up after spotting someone he got suspicious of, who (the “suspect”) then “ran” rather than engaging in obvious criminal conduct, would have been relieved of his weapon, his badge and his livelihood, and possibly even his freedom, in relatively short order. He would not have been able to justify the killing by saying the individual resisted arrest; he would not have been believed about “self-defense” if the victim was unarmed at the time of the shooting. It would have gone down as a “bad shoot,” not a “good shoot.” But more telling, had the officer not immediately phoned in for medical assistance to the man he had shot, this would put the proverbial nail into his official coffin.

    Am I missing something here?

    • Rachael says:

      @ Malisha – Here is how I see it. Wannabe or not, GZ was not acting in the capacity of a police officer. I don’t even know if he was acting in the capacity of Neighborhood Watch Captain that night. However, his “duty” as either was to watch and report, not to chase down, the layman equivalent of what you say would be calling for backup. In doing such, it seems to me it puts Trayvon in the position of needing to defend himself.

      • Malisha says:

        I agree 100%, of course, Rachael. The reason I brought this up was to show out far out of line it was for the police to have initially let him go; a COP doing what he did would not have been let go and would not have been allowed to call the shots as to how the case was viewed by the Department.

    • boar_d_laze says:

      I’m not disagreeing with your basic premise, but the answer to your question, “Are I missing something?” is yes. You’re missing specific examples.

      I don’t know about Florida, but in Los Angeles the hypothetical police shooting would most likely have been found “in policy.”

      In those jurisdictions with which I’m most familiar, police are given wide latitude. When they exceed it, their actions are more frequently covered up or excused than not.

    • bettykath says:

      Malisha, Think about the number of cops who are given a paid vacation called administrative leave, the investigation leads nowhere and the cop is soon back on duty. I think that’s the more likely scenario that GZ was following.

      • boar_d_laze says:

        “I think that’s the more likely scenario that GZ was following.”

        Why? What makes you think that? What factual evidence going a beyond speculation?

        Isn’t it more likely that Mr. Zimmerman impulsively put himself into the situation which ended with the murder? If he formed the idea that he would get away with murder any time before pulling the trigger the prosecution brought the wrong charge.

        Do you really think he gave a lot of thought to what might happen to him down the line before he pulled the trigger? I haven’t seen anything to make me believe he’s capable of much foresight at all. Take the self-incriminatory jail conversations about money, for instance.

      • KA says:

        It seems to me that GZ did not set out to kill Trayvon, but he also did not intend to NOT. The ease of pulling the trigger when there was only an 80 sec frame from DeeDee’s call ending to Trayvon being shot indicates, I think, that shooting had to have been in his toolbox as an available option.

        There seems as he did nothing to prevent the altercation, He also did nothing to prevent the eventual shooting. After an 80 sec altercation where he deployed no physical resistance (his testimony), he gave priority to ending Trayvon’s life over all other available options.

        I think outside of all the arguments we discuss, I suspect there will be sufficient evidence to show the shot was made from “on top” which should preclude self defense.

        Maybe if the hearing is unsuccessful, Zimmerman may look to pleading his sentence. If they have sufficient evidence of Zimmerman shooting Trayvon while on top, I cannot see where they think a jury trial would be beneficial.

        • Patricia says:

          KA – So much evidence so far!

          If premediated, when did the premeditation form?

          When did it turn from “George’s blunder”
          to “George’s INTENT”?

          Here is what the evidence to date tells me:

          First neighbor out said he would call 911. I think that set George’s priorities … as he said, he was “running out of time.”

          Running out of time to do what? Running out of time to accomplish his heroic criminal-catcher scenario and reap the glory of approval from cops, neighbors, family.

          At that point, if the police arrived on scene immediately, George was in DEEP trouble legally.

          Therefore he made the decision to first, get into POSITION to kill Trayvon, then to KILL him, before the cops arrived. This was the only solution acceptable to Zimmerman.

          He had the body strength to do this, and the adrenaline to accomplish it.

          He killed Trayvon Martin, frisked him for weapons (getting Zimmerman’s blood on Trayvon’s inner shirt), flipped him over to continue the frisk and to see if there was an exit hole in Trayvon’s back and hoodie.

          (If the bullet had gone all the way through into the ground, it would have followed the same trajectory that it did through Trayvon’s heart. GZ knew that evidence would cook his goose.)

          Through the flipping maneuver, Trayvon’s arms ended up under his face-down body. The “I moved his arms into a Y” story was just a cover in case someone reported GZ moving the body around – it was dark, he figured this would fly. (Note that no witness ever saw the “arms in a Y” position.)

          But on palming Trayvon’s back, he learned that the hollow-point bullet had perfomed as expected and exploded into shrapnel inside Trayvon’s chest. No exit wound/fabric holes.

          While mounted over Trayvon’s back, he may have attempted to strangle Trayvon (in case Trayvon was not dead) or he may have been checking Trayvon’s pulse to be sure he was dead.

          Whatever he did to Trayvon’s neck, the only alibi Zimmerman could think of was to say he killed in self-defense – but he needed a very dead Trayvon to back up his claim.

          He knew he was seen straddling Trayvon by the two women, and arising from Trayvon by others. He concocted the bizarre tale of being UNDER Trayvon and extricating his gun from under his butt as the only thing he could think of in the few seconds before neighbors and police arrived.

          He was no longer seeking glory.
          He was just trying to save his sorry ass.

          So as I see it, yes, this was premediated. The moment of premediation was when the neighbor told him “I’m calling 911.”

          If not forming the intent to kill, and if he felt at all menaced by Trayvon, he could have pointed the gun and said “back off.”

          But when the cops arrived, he’d have a lot of ‘splaining to do, and the results of that would have been disastrous to Zimmerman. Even if Trayvon ran off, he figured the cops would locate him.

          But he didn’t WANT Trayvon to run off.

          He BLAMED Trayvon for everything!

          He killed him.

          In rage — and to protect Zimmerman’s alibi.

          That’s what the evidence,
          particularly the trajectory of the bullet,
          and Zimmerman’s repeated statements
          that defy science and cannot believed,
          tell me.

          But … I am always open to new evidence.

      • Rachael says:

        Wow KA – I didn’t know the timeline before. All that what GZ said happened in an 80-second time frame? I so totally agree!

  19. Sandra E. Graham says:

    Exactly! These are crazy times we live in. Imagine the good Senator saying something like that. How to win friends and influence people, Senator.

    • whonoze says:

      Don’t promote Akin! He’s a sitting Congressman running against Claire McCaskill for her Senate seat. A poll taken a day before his comment had him up by 2%. A different poll taken the day after the “legitimate rape” remark showed him losing by 10%.

      • Vicky says:

        In the 90’s, I learned a great deal about Drug Court (she implemented the first one in Missouri) from Clair McCaskill when she was the Jackson County Prosecutor. Unfortunately, we were unable to convince our County Attorney to implement the program where I live on the Kansas side of the river. She is a very intelligent, thoughtful and interesting person. The State of Missouri is far better served with her in the Senate than the likes of someone like Akin, no matter which party affiliation one claims.

    • bettykath says:

      The real problem with Akin’s remarks from a Republican pov is that he blew their cover. They, Akins and Ryan, have cosponsored bills that prevent abortion except in the case of “forcible” rape. Akins just called it “legitimate” rape. The idea that women cannot conceive during “legitimate/forcible” rape is not just Akins pov. It is shared by Ryan and other Repubs. Ignorance running wild.

      • KA says:

        I agree. He said nothing new as to the current thought in the party except maybe the clearly inaccurate “biological” part of it.

  20. whonoze says:

    “Next, he will say women should not wear short skirts because, if they get raped, they will have asked for it.”

    I guess you haven’t been watching the news. Not Geraldo. The Republican candidate for Vice President. (OK, not the short skirt thing exactly, but close enough…)

  21. Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) was asked to leave the House floor after removing his suit jacket to reveal a “hoodie,” then putting the hood of his sweatshirt on his head to protest the Trayvon Martin killing in Florida.

    “Racial profiling has to stop,” Mr Speaker. “Just because someone wears a hoodie does not make them a hoodlum.”

    ***tears***

    • Sandra E. Graham says:

      I live in the great white north where hoodies are standard winter wear – a nation of hoodlums – methinks not. Geraldo is an idiot. Anything to inject himself into a major story. Next, he will say women should not wear short skirts because, if they get raped, they will have asked for it. We really have not advanced as far as we think we have. Sad. To have had Rep. Bobby Rush removed, when it was quite clear he was making a peaceful and more than reasonable demonstration at the time was sheer nonsense and disrespectful toward those seeking justice.

    • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

      Awesome. The chair did not know what to do.. I would have kept my mouth shut…chair……

      Guess he was scared of the hoodie…just like GZ.

  22. hinkster4ever says:

    Ed, I do not think anyone ever really thought you were “in the other camp”…..your wording of things is hard to follow. Mostly what I see are people who have a great fear of a gun being pointed at them, and everyone would react differently. In your post you seemed to convey that this would not cause the fear factor to kick in…..you were misunderstood.

    Prof. L is working hard to have a really nice place for us to come to talk and pass back and forth thoughts and feelings. Name calling is being disrespectful in his house (this blog). I have seen a few do it and out of respect for Prof L and Crane….I think we should all not resort to name calling or getting into the gutter trashing.

    After rereading your post I see you have probably seen a lot and been through a lot. And have a lot to offer to help us understand not only the legalities but the fact that people can gather in the home of two kind people and carry on a very good conversation.

    What is it Prof F says? Hope I spelled it right it has the red sqiggly line under it saying misspelled.

    Namaste

    • ed nelson says:

      Hey thanks Hinkster for the rather cryptic but great comment/reply, hey I know what you mean bud… And like I say, I am sending them a little $ soon…

      Now what I am concerned about, is , that nobody seemed to even get my points today, they didnt understand my points!

      Some thought I was on the wrong side of issues… Jesus!

      I am learning about how this thing works, I hope I will learn soon, cause, I ain’t got all that long in the world of the (living), cause I am old!

      Looky here: I am pretty good at seei’n what is goin’ on, I think, but that is bs, cause I don’t know shit, cause, duh, I know I don’t know much!!

      I have a certain list of iconoclastic bloggs… and so on, but we can’t know that much against, what the real world is… !!

      • Vicky says:

        Ed Nelson, were you a fan of Gore Vidal? I was sorry to hear of his passing. It is fine to speak one’s mind and to challenge, but the majority of people who comment on the professor’s blog are not accustomed to such a caustic approach to expressing one’s alternate viewpoint. I must tell you, however, I do not buy into your assertion that real men don’t (fill in the blank). As an individual who has spent time on iconoclastic blogs, I would think you would avoid challenging the “fall in line” agreement of several people as to how they would respond to having a gun pointed at their chest, with such a blanket assumption about “real men”.

      • ajamazin says:

        ed nelson,

        I am not you and you are not me and sometimes I am not me, either, so I won’t channel Trayvon.

        I was looking down the barrel of the biggest gun in the history of the world ’cause it was aimed at me and suddenly, unexpectantly, I was some dude, John Wayne, maybe, and this John Wayne dude refused to give up our handbag and was dragged about a 1/2 a block kicking, kicking, and kicking Mr. If You Don’t Shut Up I’m Going to Blow Your Fuking Brains Out in his shins, while lecturing him on the evils of crime.

        But maybe you understand because I don’t remember
        and Josh told the cop he thought I would get both of us killed.

    • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

      Excellently written, I think since the O’Money Facebook website has been taken down the Zbots are here now. You can tell the manarism… ZBots need to respect all who post here and we expect the same……

  23. ed nelson says:

    Appearently, some of the above, don’t understand my point, and really don’t understand that… I Am completely on the side of the poor boy that got kilt!

    Jesus people, get real, I hate the murderer. I don’t quite get how you dumb shits put me in the other camp, but you do and that is a thing to look into, Jesus, what is wrong with some of these idiots??

    • TruthBTold says:

      @Ed,

      Whoa whoa whoa bruh, you need to simmer down, develop some reading comprehension skills, and mind your manners. Your language is uncalled for. Because of the way you write, there was some confusion as to exactly what you were saying. If you cannot engage in dialogue in a mature manner and clarify comments when need be, this might not be the place for you.

      • ed nelson says:

        What in the hell…? what are you even talking about? whoa whoa to you too, I mean: whoa hoss… WTF are you even talking about, hell, my comment was fine and dandy, your just full of it, the way it looks to me…

    • Xena says:

      Ahhh Ed. So you are completely on the side of Trayvon but think that the people who agree with you are “dumb shits” and “idiots”??? What a way to win people over!!! Or is that a new way of reverse psychology — like get people to agree with you, and it confirms that they are excrement and idiots?

      • ed nelson says:

        No of course not, duh… I don’t exactly know what you mean, but no… I don’t mean to make enemies just for fun…

        You do make a point there, which is, as I take it: it isn’t a wonderfull idea to… make enemies, where there was no need to do so!!

        So I guess you made a good point, I sure do agree, then so what is the next thing for an iconoclastic type thinking person to do, what?

    • fauxmccoy says:

      thank you for clearing that up. i think it is your writing style that left any open question. i would encourage you to keep your sentences short and to the point as you just did, but without the name calling. sometimes in the blogging world it can be very difficult to understand what another poster is trying to say. chalk it up to that.

    • W.G. says:

      Just tell everybody that a taser gun was used maybe an international C2 that is used for personal protection. That would make your point and explain the two popping sounds one being louder than the other and the screams for mercy that follows the first pop. Check for yourself at You Tube the sound of both a taser and the Kel Tec 9mm simi auto. Check for reaction of a person being subject to a taser and how long the pain last.

  24. hinkster4ever says:

    I reread what you originally wrote, Ed, and see that you are probably saying you do not think a gun being pointed at Trayvon caused him to scream the horrific screams of fear we hear. You see it as him being subdued and in horrific pain from whatever body part maybe Gz was twisting or whatever jitsu or judo moves one does to cause the pain?

    Your typing or way of expressing things are hard to understand. But, if this is what you are saying and you are saying you know this from firsthand experience…..then you are making sense in pointing this out. It makes us think…..

    • Rachael says:

      Thanks hinkster4ever – I’m not really sure I am clear on what he is saying either.

      • TruthBTold says:

        @ Rachael,

        His posts tend to be difficult to follow. I think a great deal of people would react the same way. You made some valid points.

      • hinkster4ever says:

        Great post Rachel, and I had to go back to read to really think I understand….One of the thoughts I have had is….if Gz had his gun out and Trayvon was screaming…..almost a minute we heard on the 911 tape….he was not fighting back, or trying to get away…..he seemed to be in a position of inability to move to me…just to scream….there was plenty of time for Gz to shoot…there is just no way Gz’s story could make sense to a fool. IMO

    • ed nelson says:

      You don’t scream because a gun is held on you!!, you don’t scream!, you just compose yourself and get ready for what is about to happen!

      Is that too much information for somebody like you to process, answer: yeah, way too much for a dweeb like you to even start to process, you are a person with no comprehension of life or anything, your a complete dolt!

      • Digger says:

        You are using the term YOU don’t. You should speak for yourself not for Trayvon. Why do you take the liberty to say to us what Trayvon did or would have done. We do have the liberty to see this as we see it just as YOU have the same liberty to see it the way you see it. Neither of us know how Trayvon saw it. Don’t call us names just because we feel differently than you about this unfortunate killing. You speak that Trayvon wouldn’t shrink down to our level. How do YOU know what he would do?

      • Rachael says:

        Speak for yourself. Maybe you don’t. Maybe you are a big brave man who stares down the barrel of a gun every day. Maybe everyone is like you and I’m a dweeb and know nothing. I have lived life, but having a gun on me has not been a part of my life all my 56 years. If that means my life is somehow lacking and I’m a dweeb, so be it,and if Trayvon’s life was not centered around violence and did not handle it in a manley enough manner for you well thats too bad because if he had really been a “thug” or a “big brave man” like you, maybe he would have. But for all the names you are calling me/us, I think you are nothing more than someone playing on the internet. Good night Mr. Ed.

      • fauxmccoy says:

        ed – you must know that every situation is different, depending on the victim, the gunman and the surroundings. i cannot see how name calling helps at all in the attempt to try to understand what you are writing.

        i can tell you that unlike most folks here, i did have a gun held at me at 17 by a family member experiencing a clinical psychotic episode, for which he was picked up and held on a 72 hour watch and then let go.

        in that situation, i remained silent, in fact pretended to sleep while making plans for an escape. in this situation though, silence was what my 17 year old mind determined to be my best hope for escape. the only people in the house were my younger siblings who could not have possibly helped and i wanted to protect them as well. our closest neighbor was 5 miles away. no one would have heard any screaming.

        had i been in trayvon’s position, i might have chosen very differently as there were people within earshot completely capable of helping, but they chose otherwise.

      • gbrbsb says:

        I do have the experience of being held up at gunpoint in europe where we are much more sheltered from guns than in the US. I was calm, collected and polite to boot… a bullet travels faster than a scream however many people are nearby, and a trigger only takes a second to pull. In my case at least it put me in survival mode which did not include making a fuss for fear of annoying the gunman.

      • heartofhearts says:

        Ed, you couldn’t be more wrong. I’ve been in that situation and NO, as one human being to another here, I screamed in absolute terror. You don’t stay calm and say, like in the freakin movies, oh dude, ah I see you’ve got a gun now let me try to rationalize with your sick ass mind. What stupid crap is that?

    • ed nelson says:

      So what the hell is wrong in my typing there? I said it about the way I meant it! I meant that I don’t think Trayton needed to cry or scream, just because he had a gun on him!!

      Trayton probably would have been more “stoic”, and more, “heroic” than to shrink down to your level… !

      I mean somebody like you lilke so many… scum!! that cries, and screams, and cries/and screams!! Bull shit!! You don’t understand the man! You don’t have any conseption of what a real man would do!!… He would hunker down and get ready to go to war!! and not to … Squeek and squirm, you are a coward!

      • TruthBTold says:

        @Ed,

        Oh okay, I see. You are a bit on the ig’nant side.

      • Rachael says:

        Yeah, I’ll admit I would be a cowatd with a gun pointed at me and the person pointing it telling me I was a POS, he’d had enough of my kind getting away and he was gonna make sure I wouldn’t. You say something about a man wouldn’t act that way, that that would be the reaction of cowards, so I guess I know a lot of cowards and wonder what you would do. But as far as acting like a man, Trayvon was just a boy, not yet 17. Please don’t get mad at me, but your comments are very cryptic and agressive. Have you been drinking? Are you PUD (posting under the influence LOL)

      • Rachael says:

        PUI sorry. Texting on my phone

      • Cielo says:

        I feel you’ve crossed over the line there friend. I find your posts offensive and unnecessary. If you enjoy the name calling there’s always The Smoking Gun or the Orlando Sentinal. There’s no place here for that.

  25. Vicky says:

    Ed Nelson, were you or those individuals barely 17 year old high school juniors, with a somewhat limited “street life”? Do you or anyone commenting on this or any other blog have first hand knowledge of Trayvon’s life experience, personality or temperament? I kind of doubt it.
    Many people would scream for help under those circumstances. Of course the majority of those here have never seen or been faced with a life threatening situation like the one experienced by Trayvon Martin. So, most are left with only imagining.
    Did all of those in the life and death experiences you alluded to react the same way? I kind of doubt that as well. To express empathy for Trayvon Martin is not something that should be dismissed as “naive” and “foolish”. We all have the right to our own thoughts and feelings.

    If we all viewed this tragic situation without any level of emotion, Trayvon’s death would have been just another statistic. His story has generated a lot of interest and dialogue that will hopefully result in some level of social and political change. Even if GZ never spends another day in jail.

    • hinkster4ever says:

      Vicky’s words: “If we all viewed this tragic situation without any level of emotion…..” and I immediately realized that George Zimmerman show’s no emotion…none. I doubt Ed will watch the whole interview with Hannity….but, he should.

      As an ER nurse, and with my experience from a trauma nurses perspective….I hear a lot of screaming….but, have to say, the screams I hear in that 911 call are none like what I have heard. The utter fear in those screams sends chills…and I can say I have seen and heard a lot.

      • Hannity: A lot of time has passed since this incident with Trayvon. How do you feel about it now that you have had some time to reflect on what has happened?

        Zimmerman: I haven’t really had the time to reflect on it.

        So cold bloodied!

      • gbrbsb says:

        Yep, GZ first says “I haven’t had the time to reflect” but immediately in the following sentence I recall says that while spending the month in prison “I had a lot of time to reflect”… that’s George for you, just can’t make up his mind what will play best to the gallery!

      • Rachael says:

        @ gbrbsb
        I swear, that was the strangest thing I ever heard.

        “Yep, GZ first says “I haven’t had the time to reflect” but immediately in the following sentence I recall says that while spending the month in prison “I had a lot of time to reflect”…

        Someone this forgetful, I’m surprised he remembers he shot Trayvon at all. I suppose that will be next. I don’t know.

      • KA says:

        SG2 – I agree.

        It is just another way of saying “I just haven’t gotten around to it yet”….or “It has just not held any priority to the many other things I have going on”

  26. Digger says:

    No ed nelson, I don’t say your point is foolish AT ALL! Just saying a victim has little else they can do when someone else’s finger is on a trigger. There is the possibility I would just FREEZE! Not able go utter a sound at the shock of my facing something like Trayvon did in a second of his death. You agree that Trayvon Martin dead and George Zimmerman, the “one with the gun”, is still very much alive, won’t you? One vital point is that GZ said Trayvon had something in his waistband, “I don’t know what it is”, yet GZ got out of his truck and proceeded to follow. To be generous, let’s just say Trayvon did have a weapon, GZ just went ahead, big man that he is, putting himself in danger. How did GZ know but what this young man was not waiting for him to leave his truck and be out in the open so he could kill him. Now that is a bit foolish of GZ don’t you think, to place himself in such grave danger and not even, UH, have his gun drawn yet (BS) to protect himself. WHY DID HE FOLLOW TRAYVON AND NOT WAIT FOR THE POLICE MAN? who told him they were on the way? Tell me that, PLEASE! if he thought Trayvon had a weapon??????????

  27. ed nelson says:

    just too many jack ass stupid mrfrs, like in the above, folks who probably whatch just a little too much TV, and, maybe… don’t read much… hell they don’t read anything!!

    These are good items that show what it is in the world of the stupid, and the bastards that go along to be grist for the mill, just to be the human grist… and how they show, how the stupid are rounded up, and delivered up, and… ” that is the way it was.”

    • Vicky says:

      Ed Nelson, Your point is?
      Do you think they should have left the package unopened?

    • Xena says:

      Evidently, Trayvon was not accustomed to walking in a “bad neighborhood” by himself in the evening. He was apparently trusting. He saw a creepy guy following him in a truck, and he ran. He ran down a path with no street for a vehicle. But then the creepy looking guy shows up and was relentless.

      Children cry out for help when they know or have reason to know that adults are around. OTOH, adults generally cry out “Somebody call 911!” Adults don’t expect for civilians to do the job of cops, but children expect for adults to protect them.

    • Rachael says:

      Xena, I don’t even think that an adult would have the forthwith to yell call 911 with a gun in their chest and someone saying they are going to kill you. The most immediate thing would be to cry out please don’t, I beg you.

      I’m not sure I understand Ed Nelson. He says “That you are convinced that the gunman is not just brandishing, nor backing up a command, but is about to ” pull the trigger”, which you can’t necessarily know… necessarily! ”

      The thing is, I wouldn’t be sure he is going to pull the trigger, but I can’t believe that someone would just stick a gun in my chest and taunt me for fun. I don’t know that they would do it, but I’m certainly not going to assume that having gone that far they wouldn’t. I also know that they are probably going to get a kick out of making me squirm, watching me cry and knowing I have no other way out. It is a power trip, like rape, but I don’t know what resources or instincts he (Mr. Ed) thinks I am capable of pulling in other than to do just what he wants and beg for my life.

      Ed Nelson, what is it you think you would do and why? Have you ever been held at gunpoint? If not, how do you know then how you would react?

      Of course I am only imaging here that this is what I would do, but I’m not stupid and with a gun pointed at me, it is really hard for me to see any other way out. Maybe if Trayvon was the “thug” some of the people say he was, he would have figured some other way out. Oh sure, I would love to think a karate kick to the balls, grab the gun and put it on him, but I also know that is not realistic.

      Maybe I just don’t understand what you are saying. But I don’t think I am that different from most people and I think most people would act like I think I would.

      If there is some other way someone shold behave when someone is held at gunpoint and they don’t know if the person is crazy enough to actually do it, I would sure love to hear it.

      • Xena says:

        SouthernGirl2. Thank you.
        @Rachael. It is my impression that what happened before GZ and Trayvon came into physical contact painted Trayvon’s reaction to cry out for help. He had already ran. Why would that creepy looking guy get out of his car and follow on foot? THAT is most inquisitive. It demonstrates relentless purpose. I believe that is why Trayvon asked why he was following him. Maybe GZ wanted to rob him, or mistook him for someone else. I mean, a barely 17 yr old would not imagine that a grown man who he ran from would continue following him for no reason.

        When the creepy guy failed to give an explanation that would remove Trayvon’s fear, his only other option was to run and cry out for help. With or without the gun in view, Trayvon realized that the creepy guy intended him harm.

        Yes, I believe that GZ had his gun out when he approached Trayvon and that is why one witness heard “I’m begging you.” Also, the last two screams that I hear before the gunshot are “No. Nooooo.”

        That is why my opinion of GZ is that he is a heartless, mentally deranged person.

    • heartofhearts says:

      I’m not sure I understand what it is exactly you are trying to say here.

      If someone has a gun pointed at me I’m not going to behave in a rational manner mostly because of the element of surprise, shock, terror, call it what you will.

      I suppose that if Trayvon were the criminal thug that some envisioned him to be, he would of been joe cool with GZ and all would of been fine. And if that is the thought process then it should be obvious this kid was not a thug, or acting like a thug since he was pleading for someone to help him.

  28. ed nelson says:

    So I have gathered that the cries for help/screams, terminated with a gunshot. Now in my not too full experience, how does one come to the point where it is completely known enough that one must scream, under the gun? That you are convinced that the gunman is not just brandishing, nor backing up a command, but is about to ” pull the trigger”, which you can’t necessarily know… necessarily! You would try to go along, and get along, unless there was some knowledge that the gunman, really intended to kill you, but how would you know that he was going to go though all the trouble to kill you, when you didn’t have any knowledge or prior entanglements, other than… racial animosity! (of course it exists in all venues, I know it does, but most of us can make bridges and get along.)

    So the idea expressed above that Trave was maybe under some physical holds, Juiistisu type things, (trust me I have experienced just enough to know, the pain is horrible, and you are easily brought to a place where you will only cry and scream for release, it is torture! These guys… /and gals?… can put the hurt to you like no tomorree!

    So that is my quandary this moment: what made Travon scream? just to be under the gun?, doubt that in itself is a scream worthy deal, but the jujitsu grappling is something that would make all of us scream!! and then with the utter submission of his prey … in hand, the monstrey, completes his work, with an Ernest H …. Big game trophy scene, and puts that 240lb on top his buck!!

    • Digger says:

      Well I can tell you that if a defected piece of the human race was to have a hold on me by my clothes and put a loaded gun just a few inches from my heart and tell me “YOU ARE GOING TO DIE”, then SCREAMING “HELP ME”, “HELP ME” is just about the only thing I have left.

      • KA says:

        He was also barely 17…he is not going to have a mature, well thought out and studies response. He is going to try not to die by getting someone to take care of him. What they do not realize is that he was a boy that lived at home and did not take care of himself. He did not even have a license. Calling [screaming] for someone to help with be the first thing he would do.

    • Rachael says:

      If someone was holding me at gunpoint, telling me I was gonna die and saying godknows what, I’d be screaming and begging too. There would just be something about a gun pointed at me with someone letting loose all their hatred an threats that (I imagine) has that effect on me.

      • ed nelson says:

        of course that is what you think you would do, but… in the moment… you might… pull in some of your instincts, (things that you and your… above commenter, have dismissed out of hand as, oh, I guess you are saying, my point is fool ish, let me say: you are naive, I have known both those who did murder, and … sorry to say, some who have been murdered!!

      • Rachael says:

        Just what instincts do you think I am going to pull in when someone has a gun at my chest and is telling me I’m going to die other than to cry and beg him not to shoot?

    • Dave says:

      Screaming in this situation makes perfect sense. While it might not bring direct help, it should attract witnesses whose presence could persuade the thug to back off. Sadly for Trayvon he didn’t.

    • heartofhearts says:

      What comes to mind is what GZ claims TM said to him and it was most likely the other way around. Something to the affect of “You’re gonna die tonight MF.” I believe that TM was scared to death of this crazy person who had been following and threatening him. This kid was in fear for his life, screaming for someone to help. He didn’t know the address of where he was staying and that is tthe same voice that was screaming “I don’t know, I don’t know.” Of course that only enraged GZ more and thought he got himself a goon or whatever he was calling the bad kids. I don’t think Trayvon had a chance. From beginning to end in GZ’s mind these assholes always get away. He was not going to let it happen again.

      I was involved in a robbery years ago where a guy had me on the floor so fast with a saw-off shotgun held to my head and I screamed my fool head off. Terror takes over. Now think of this happening to a boy of 17 years.

      I wish someone could of gone out there and helped Trayvon, yelled out the window, do something! That could of been any of our kids and it is just heartbreaking and then to take pictures of Trayvon laying there dead. What world is this we live in?

      I cannot get those screams of him out of my head.

  29. EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

    All I have to say to GZ is, “Its all in God’s Plan for him to be locked up for the rest of his life.”

  30. Patricia says:

    To Raechel –

    If GZ uses his RetCob in court to defend himself
    (“I didn’t shoot the kid. My retriever cobra did.”)
    then he’ll be changing Trayvon’s last words from
    “You got it” to “Nice snake ya’ got there, Homie!”

    This is GZ seeing himself as Agent 007.

    • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

      There is not reply box above., but Right On to the investigation response. They need to be seriously investigated. Now one is retired living off of tax payers money after not serving the public properly…He got his pension and retire quick….

    • Xena says:

      HA!!! That sounds like GZ. Better yet, now that evidence has been released and compared to his story, I can hear GZ saying,
      “I was holding on to his clothes to pull him out of the way of my aiming. I didn’t really want to shoot him but he was struggling and stumbled into the path of the bullet.” And;

      “I wasn’t actually straddling him and pressing down on his back. I was putting his clothes in order because a resident wanted to take a picture of him.”

  31. Xena says:

    “What, so GZ should have flipped TM over so he could restrain him in accordance with the latest research on optimal restraint procedure? ”

    They don’t teach, neither recommend that for Neighborhood Watch. Also, GZ is an undeputized nobody, so what gave him the right to use “optimal restraint procedure” on another civilian?

    • KA says:

      Neighborhood watch is not allowed to restrain anyone. They are allowed AND trained to watch, call, and report…end of story.

      ..and GZ JUST had that training months beforehand. He knew this like the back of his hand. He approved the training.

  32. KA says:

    Pliaja

    You understand that the timeline of the shot to GZ getting up and walking is a total of 46 seconds.

    If he was restraining him for 30sec or more (of course assuming it only took a total of 16 seconds to shoot, let Trayvon sit up and talk, fall back, GZ to get out from under him and then roll him over) …why did he finally feel safe to get up after only restraining for 30 sec or less?

    Was Trayvon then dead? How does GZ claim he did not know if he hit him or not and also claim he did not know he was dead until later at the police station?

    Why would he give up restraining after a mere 30 sec? I think he said it because he knew two witnesses saw him on the body afterwards and needed a “filler”.

    I also believe that it will be adequately proven he was on top when the shot happened.

    That in and of itself would refute self defense.

    • Dennis says:

      O’Mara just recently said that this case is not a Stand Your Ground case, but a standard self-defense case. I think he knows Stand Your Ground will not fly so he is now resorting to the State’s self-defense laws to try to get Zimmerman acquitted. Neither Stand Your Ground or standard self-defense laws protect you if you are determined to be the aggressor. If the forensic evidence coincides with the witness statements that Zimmerman was on top, he is literally screwed. He can throw his self-defense claim out the window.

  33. Rachel, I have always found his choice of words to speak to his frame of mind and intent. He did not value Trayvon as a person, only as a “suspect.”

    • Vicky says:

      I too have been bothered by his view of Trayvon as a “suspect” Exactly what was he suspected of? Unauthorized walking in the rain without an umbrella?
      I do have one observation regarding GZ’s claim of Trayvon’s behavior that night. I would guess that he was completely unaware that Trayvon was using earphones while talking to his friend. If Trayvon was anything like me, his hands were talking at the same time he was. LOL To a paranoid idiot who was profiling a teenager, Trayvon might very well have looked like he was “on something”. That does not excuse GZ’s behavior. As a matter of fact, his belief that Trayvon makes the fact that he exited the safety of his vehicle all the more irresponsible. A normal person will walk a block out of the way to avoid someone they perceive as a threat. Super Z with his fully loaded firearm was fully prepared to confront his drug crazed suspect.

      One more thing, I read a comment wondering about why anyone would think a parent would not demand justice for their child. The anyone who would think such a thing is a person who bought into a stereotype that the “gangster” Trayvon was the child of parents who were never married, with a mom with several baby daddies, whose father had numerous baby mamas, came from multi generational poverty, whose mom thanked God every day her son was not killed by a drive by and because of that parents who would never question the untimely death of their child. In other words total and complete ignorance, prejudice, false assumptions and self righteousness would lead someone to think any parent would not demand answers.

      • KA says:

        I once read a comment from a GZ supporter when someone asked him why Trayvon was suspicious.

        He said “He was walking in the rain without the correct attire”

        Just cracked me up. Did anyone notice that GZ must have forgot his rubber ducky galoshes at home as well?

      • Dennis says:

        @KA

        Zimmerman made several excuses for why he started to follow Martin. It went from his “attire” to him being on drugs and then all the way to “he was looking at houses” and finally “he looked like he did not belong”. I guess Zimmerman believes that you have to dress a certain way or be a certain race to not be harassed for walking down the street. He has made so many comments that prove his racial and discriminative mindset.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        To me, after all the evidence has been shown and analyzed, how did George Zimmerman, after the shooting ALMOST get away with murder. From not being charged at all to Murder 2, what gives!! Most of the evidence was right there before their very eyes. I see Singleton and Serino doing an excellent job of interrogation. But, I also see LE and EMTs at the scene being lackadaisical about the shooting and the subsequent reports written by those first responders. How often did that happen in Seminole County. How often does it happen elsewhere. Yet, some are not outraged – because it didn’t happen to them or a loved one. Apathy is the answer. Whatever happened to – There but the Grace of God go I.

        • ajamazin says:

          Do not make the mistake that this is confined to Seminole County, Florida.

          It is both historical and universal.

          “Hmm, a little boy shot in the head 

          Just another kid sent out to get some bread  Not the first murder nor the last  Again and again a repetition of the past. Since the very first day same story  Young ones, old ones, some glory  How can it be, has the whole world turned blind?  Or is it just ’cause it’s only affecting my kind?! ” 

          Sami Yusuf 

          ________________________________

  34. Rachael says:

    Professor – or anyone, I know this is a very small thing, but it has been bothering me. George Zimmerman’s use of the word suspect.

    Does the fact that he used the word “suspect” (and it was in his handwritten statement to police) incorrectly show any kind of intent or cop-play ideology?

    I mean if the prosecution were to ask him, “Why did you refer to Trayvon as the ‘suspect,” would that perhaps show them that he was playing cop?

    According to my law dictionary, as well as when I looked it up on the internet, the definition I found is: As a noun, a person reputed to be involved in crime. A broad term for anyone being investigated by law enforcement authorities who is not formally charged. If the individual is formally charged with an offense, the reference is generally to a defendant rather than a suspect.

    I know it is just 1 little word, but I’m kind of a stickler about words and it really bothers me that he used it in the context he used did, and if I were on the jury and the prosecution asked that, while perhaps not of huge significance, It would sure catch my ear and make me wonder about the defendant.

    • You’re right. It’s cop talk and he was attempting to sound like he was a member of their team.

      • Rachael says:

        Thanks Professor and everyone, but I’m wondering if it were brought up to a jury, not in a big way, just matter of factly, would it have an effect on them do you think?

        • I don’t think there is any question that GZ was playing cop that night and his use of the word “suspect” demonstrates that point.

          Therefore, yes they will bring it out because he wasn’t a cop and had no business attempting to play cop and prove that he was worthy of their respect.

          This is yet one more knot in the tapestry of guilt.

      • SearchingMind says:

        @ Professor,

        Prof., I think the use of the word “suspect” by GZ goes to the ‘PROFILING-element’. Whether or not GZ was using that word to look like a cop, is irrelevant in IMO to prove murder2. The prosecution should and must use the usage of that word “suspect” by GZ to beyond reasonable doubt demonstrate that GZ PROFILED Trayvon as a criminal. When they do that, they should have beyond reasonable doubt proven an essential element for successful conviction for murder2.

      • Rachael says:

        @SearchingMind – I agree. It isn’t about playing cop – it is all about he considered him to be a criminal – not just look like one, but to be one.

    • Patricia says:

      Raechal, I always figured Doris Singleton’s deep suspicion of Zimmerman’s “story,” and Chris Serino’s growing suspicion, was caused by Zimmerman’s use of cop-talk to try to insinuate himself into the law enforcement fraternity.

      I expect they were deeply offended by Zimmernan’s use of the word “suspect.”

      For that reason, they probed and probed, kept Zimmerman talking, and … the prosecution has it all on tape.

      He deserved the “Good Cop/Bad Cop” teamwork.

      • jd says:

        He got the good cop/ good cop treatment and they kept him talking. They essentially gave him enough rope, and he hung himself.

        My favorite part is the “voice stress test” which of course is a useless and worthless test, but a great ruse in that it got GZ to tell his mixed up story one more time, and to believe that he was getting away with his lies, so he kept telling more.

        I think they handled him fine, but it was the chief and Norm wolfinger who need to be investigated.

      • Xena says:

        @Patricia. “I had not picked up GZ’s use of the word “surrender”—

        Could you direct me to the source document?”

        GZ used it in his re-enactment. He said (my paraphrase) that after he shot Trayvon, Trayvon sat up and threw both hands in the air and said “You got it” or “You got me.” He claimed not knowing whether he had shot Trayvon and thought that Trayvon was surrendering to him.

        Keep that in mind for a second. Now, connect the dot with the Hannity interview where GZ said it was not his gun, or Trayvon’s gun, but THE gun. It’s a process of association. Trayvon would not surrender to him, but he would surrender to the gun.

        Now, since GZ mixes fact with fiction and chronological order, there’s a good chance that Trayvon was on his knees with both arms up while crying for help and although seeing that as a position of surrender, GZ shot and killed Trayvon to shut up his cries.

      • Rachael says:

        @Xena – I missed this post earlier and the thought of this upsets me so greatly. I see it as a distinct possibility.

    • Xena says:

      @Rachael. Not a lawyer here, but I assisted one on a civil case for personal injury. It involved a hospital security guard who assaulted a patient. After receiving discovery material, I noticed in the security guard’s report that he referred to the patient as “defendant” and brought that to the attorney’s attention. The attorney amended the complaint to include a count of defamation, filed for leave to file the amended complaint, and the hospital changed its attitude and offered a substantial settlement.

      IMHO, in the legal community, words have meaning, and some words are only allowed or credible once those with authority or jurisdiction apply them to individuals.

      While it may be difficult to explain the use of “suspect” by GZ to a jury in terms of GZ’s wannabee cop desires, it is my hope and speculation that prosecutors can apply his use of that word, as well as his use of “surrender” to the allegation of profiling.

      • Rachael says:

        I don’t know that it would take much to explain it to a jury. I don’t even thing it would have to be explained to the jury. If they simply ask why GZ referred to Trayvon as the suspect, that should do it right there. There is no reasonable answer for it that GZ could just explain away regardless of the jury understands that it was not used correctly. He could say he was not aware of what it really meant, but he is not your “typical lay person. Someone with his “extensive training” (gag me) can’t really say that they didn’t know that the word suspect should not be used that way when someone is in fact not a suspect and would have to give some explanation tht would make sense. But he can’t.

      • Patricia says:

        Xena, re “While it may be difficult to explain the use of “suspect” by GZ to a jury in terms of GZ’s wannabee cop desires, it is my hope and speculation that prosecutors can apply his use of that word, as well as his use of “surrender” to the allegation of profiling” … I had not picked up GZ’s use of the word “surrender” —

        Could you direct me to the source document?

        Thanks much,

        P.

    • CommonSenseForChange says:

      @Rachael –

      I agree that the use of the word “suspect” was a continuance of painting “this kid” as a criminal. On the NEN call, he referred to him as “this kid”.

      “I don’t know where this kid is”.

      Zimmerman did this in the same way that he went from this kid was “looking *at* houses” to this kid was “looking *into* houses” by the time he wrote his written statement. Zimmerman also seemed to have thought that his “written” words would carry more weight than his recorded/videotaped words.

      Very weird that he would differentiate this way, imo. I don’t think he ever expected recordings and videotapes would show his written story was inconsistent with everything else he said. I’m not saying he didn’t know the evidence would be there on tapes or video, I’m adopting somebody else’s previously posted suspicion that Zimmerman didn’t think anybody would pay enough attention to analysis of written statements vs. audio/video.

      He talked smack on those jailhouse calls for a reason.

    • Dennis says:

      The use of the word “suspect” and the statement “these **** always get away” will come back to bite him. Those statements provide a good insight in Zimmerman’s mindset before the altercation. I was shocked that the FBI concluded that it was not racial profiling but rather Martin’s attire that led to him being profiled. The FBI is so full of crap I can’t even believe their nonsense. It is public record that witnesses stated that all of the criminals breaking into the complex were black. Not once did I ever hear them saying that they wore hooded sweatshirts. The hoody combined with the fact Martin was black was what led to Zimmerman profiling him. If Martin was white, I doubt this incident would have happened. The whole incident sparked from racial stereotypes. Zimmerman’s delusional racist mind believes all black people walking down the street wearing a hoody and talking to their girlfriend are suspicious. I’m not convinced this incident would have happened had Martin been white.

      • princss6 says:

        The FBI has not concluded anything on the racial aspect that we know of publicly. We did see summaries of interviews conducted by the FBI of Zimmerman’s biggest fans. Did we see all of the FBI interviews? We certainly don’t know. And there is NO “FBI Report” that says he didn’t racially profile.

        Having said that, I don’t need the FBI to tell me he racially profiled Trayvon. If you, like me, believe that a white kid in the same attire, doing the same thing would have been left alone, then you will agree with me that Trayvon was racially profiled.

    • Dennis says:

      I believe that his use of the word “suspect” is proof alone that he predetermined this person to be a criminal regardless of whether the person committed a crime or not. Because of the previous break-ins in the complex, he knew that the police would not catch the person in time so he took it upon himself to play Cops & Robbers. A real police officer would have identified themselves, but Zimmerman did not. He claims Martin appeared dangerous and was reaching in his hoody pouch, yet he gets out of his car to supposedly get an address but he clearly passed townhouses with the address in plain view and he refused to tell the dispatcher where to send police. Everything this man did was completely illogical and stupid, same goes for everything he said as well.

  35. [Sorry if I double-posted. I was logged-in on WP & the first posting went into moderation because my WP username is slightly different than the one I’ve been using here]

    If you believe George’s story, he was completely overwhelmed by Martin. He couldn’t land a single blow against him. He couldn’t restrain Martin or escape him. He was so utterly dominated by Martin that his only effective defensive maneuver prior to drawing his firearm was squirming off the sidewalk.

    Hearing George tell his tale, you’re left with the impression that he was so completely intimidated, he didn’t even attempt to counterattack, not even in the desperate, clawing, animal way that people in such situations instinctively attack. Not one time does George mention striking out at Martin.

    And Martin was like some freakishly strong, enraged lunatic, intent on mashing George’s brains into the pavement, or killing him any way he could, no matter how much noise it made, right there in the shared backyard of 10 occupied townhouses at prime-time.

    George would have felt an enormous sense of relief to have finally gotten free of this lunatic. He would have had precious distance and a full clip of hollow points, with safe houses all around, and the cops on the way.

    So what does George do? He puts himself and THE GUN right back within easy reach of a killer that he is completely powerless against in close quarters combat. This despite the fact that it was supposedly his sudden realization that Martin might get THE GUN that finally prompted him draw THE GUN and shoot, saving his life.

    There’s no way Zimmerman believed he missed, or that Martin needed restrained. Martin lost consciousness the moment GEORGE’S HOLLOW POINT entered his chest.

    • Patricia says:

      SECRET WEAPONS:

      X-RAY EYES and the RETRIEVER COBRA

      MOnBa,

      Zimmerman’s decision to “go for the gun,” even though it would absolutely bring it into immediate grabbing range of this super-human titan, Trayvon Martin, was based on COMMON KNOWLEDGE:

      “Black folks got X-Ray eyes.”

      Despite Zimmerman’s claim that Trayvon was in the “superior mounted position” sitting ASTRIDE Zimm when the shot was fired, GZ knew for a certainty that Trayvon’s X-Ray vision could pierce through TM’s own thigh AND GZ’s 207 lb. bulk to view the Kal-Tek sandwiched between Zimmerman’s fat ass and the St. Augustine grass crushed into the earth beneath them.

      So Zimmerman, for self-defense, had to grab the gun before Trayvon could get it, because Zimm knew TM saw it.

      Saw it “where?????”

      I quote Zimmerman from his on-camera re-enactment the day after the shooting: “I had my firearm on my right back hip.”

      Slapped his bum in re-enactment, in case the interviewing cops did not understand one-syllable words like “right” “back,” and “hip.”

      Now, while GZ has not yet reported what I am about to reveal, I am sure that, if he testifies in court, he will tell us that, as compensation for Trayvon Martin’s X-Ray vision, GZ was confident that his right arm and hand could miraculously turn into a wily, trained “retriever cobra,” (the new super-classified high tech weapon known as “RetCob”).

      A retreiver cobra that can inflate/reinflate itself at will.

      Here’s how the RetCob worked:

      GZ’s secret RetCob snaked (no pun intended) itself under Trayvon’s leg, deflated itself, turned under GZ’s body without flattening into a lasagna noodle, reached around GZ’s “right back hip,” grabbed his “firearm,” (Cop talk here of course, no talk of it being “THE gun”) with its sharp, curved RetCob teeth, made a hairpin turn under GZ’s body, slithered back out and under Trayvon’s thigh, re-inflated itself from teeth-embedded lasagna noodle to a retrieiver cobra and then further reinflated itself back into being Zimmerman’s right arm and hand, now grasping the Kel-Tek for the fatal shot.

      Pliaja is convinced (and wants to convince the rest of us) that
      “TM was on top of GZ so he ended up in a face-down position. That’s what happened. Not as though GZ planned it that way.”

      Not at the time of the shooting, babe.

      Not when Trayvon was killed.

    • Rachael says:

      Is that RetCob classified? If so, that’s what happened. Got it mixed up with his movie fantasies.

      ***Saw it “where?????”

      Where did you see this?

      Maverick: Uh, that’s classified.
      Charlie: It’s what?
      Maverick: It’s classified. I could tell you, but then I’d have to kill you.

    • Rachael says:

      Ack – I forgot to change the names to Trayvon and George – but you get my drift.

      Yeah, those secret and classified weapons. Ain’t they something.

    • Pliaja is convinced (and wants to convince the rest of us) that
      “TM was on top of GZ so he ended up in a face-down position. That’s what happened. Not as though GZ planned it that way.”

      Not at the time of the shooting, babe.

      Not when Trayvon was killed.

      Tell it!

    • Xena says:

      Patricia, you are so funny. It reminds me of a part of the movie “Braveheart” when the men were gathered for battle, and William Wallace arrives, and they argued it couldn’t be him because Wallace was taller. And the character responded along the lines of saying that rumor had it he could blow smoke out of his butt too. 🙂

    • Patricia says:
      August 24, 2012 at 5:47 pm
      SECRET WEAPONS: X-RAY EYES and the RETRIEVER COBRA

      ——————–

      King Cobra, again. Did you ever notice George’s cobra mark? I mentioned it to Sleonardelli at JQ once, and she made this:

      http://www.justicequest.net/forums/picture.php?albumid=585&pictureid=8974

      LOL. I’d embed the pic, but I don’t suppose you can do that here.

  36. monanbatterload says:

    If you believe George’s story, he was completely overwhelmed by Martin. He couldn’t land a single blow against him. He couldn’t restrain Martin or escape him. He was so utterly dominated by Martin that his only effective defensive maneuver prior to drawing his firearm was squirming off the sidewalk.

    Hearing George tell his tale, you’re left with the impression that he was so completely intimidated, he didn’t even attempt to counterattack, not even in the desperate, clawing, animal way that people in such situations instinctively attack. Not one time does George mention striking out at Martin.

    And Martin was like some freakishly strong, enraged lunatic, intent on mashing George’s brains into the pavement, or killing him any way he could, no matter how much noise it made, right there in the shared backyard of 10 occupied townhouses at prime-time.

    George would have felt an enormous sense of relief to have finally gotten free of this lunatic. He would have had precious distance and a full clip of hollow points, with safe houses all around, and the cops on the way.

    So what does George do? He puts himself and THE GUN right back within easy reach of a killer that he is completely powerless against in close quarters combat. This despite the fact that it was supposedly his sudden realization that Martin might get THE GUN that finally prompted him draw THE GUN and shoot, saving his life.

    There’s no way Zimmerman believed he missed, or that Martin needed restrained. Martin lost consciousness the moment GEORGE’S HOLLOW POINT entered his chest.

  37. Rachael says:

    “Neither is where Martin’s hands were or weren’t. What difference does it really make? If Zimmerman moved his hands out but the first person on the scene is certain his hands were found under his chest then Trayvon probably moved them. Nothing there.”

    What??!!!

    • Rachael says:

      My computer won’t open it 😦

      • Elle Jay says:

        –they basically go over everything that’s transpired thus far…..ending with:

        [IMG]http://i1097.photobucket.com/albums/g350/misszandra/trayvon/stateresponse.jpg[/IMG]

        (—ie: they’re just mad that they had to give up donor$$$$’s—cry-baby writ should be denied.)

        submitted by: Pam Bondi Attorney General and Pamela Koller Assisstant Attorney General.

    • KA says:

      I was wondering why the Assit Attorney General wrote it and not Angela Corey’s office?

      Just curious. Will it hold more weight then?

      • Xena says:

        The State Attorney General is legal counsel for the State. The State is the party to the case and not individual prosecutors. SA Corey works for the state and so, will be represented by counsel.

      • The Appellate division of the State Attorney’s Office handles all appeals, including writs.

        Just standard operating procedure.

      • KA says:

        Thanks. I am not familiar with that court structure at all.

      • Xena says:

        oops. Sorry Professor. Didn’t mean to step into your territory. 🙂

      • KA says:

        I just read it. I think it effectively makes mincemeat of O’Mara’s argument. They even went overboard on quoting cases that have had judges make far worse “gratuitous statements” and no Petitioner was awarded a recusal.

        Most of the references the State used were far worse than what Judge Lester had used. I thought the one statement when a judge said “he did not believe the defendant now nor would he at any time in the future” [paraphrased] was quite appropriate.

        I think the fact that this is the second judge that was requested will also hurt O’Mara. I would think a five month murder case life with two requests for removal, a bond deception by the defendent, the wife charged with perjury, a revoked bond, and a 2nd bond granted would give anyone pause to wonder what is going on with the this case.

        I also liked that they brought out the fact that Judge Lester asked O’Mara to get him information about the account as far as access, amounts, activity, ownership, etc on April 27th. This did not blindside O’Mara as the media reported. He dropped the ball and did not respond to the judge’s direct requests for information.

        Did O’Mara just forget or did he realize his client was screwed when they saw that they had money in the account prior to the hearing and it was accessed and transferred into personal accounts with full knowledge of Shellie and George?

        Additionally, O’Mara lied to the judge on April 27th when he told him that George asked him innocently what to do with the 204K in the Paypal account when O’Mara went to close down the GZ page and they had just been “too busy to discuss it”. That could not have been true as there was not 204K in the Paypal account on April 27th, there was around 20 – 50K because GZ had already taken out the rest of the money, spent much of it, so it was no longer in Paypal. I was surprised that the judge did not call him on that.

        The whole June 1st hearing was the result of O’Mara completely dropping the ball on following up with the judge as to his inquiry into the nature and transactions in the account. The State did not bring it up for 5 weeks afterwards. O’Mara had from April 27th to June 1st. I would think that more than sufficient time to address it.

        The defense crybaby act is annoying.

    • CommonSenseForChange says:

      Thank you for a link to the court document. So I can’t help but notice that BDLR is asking the same question we’ve been asking — where’d the money go? He seems to point out that nearly $50K is unaccounted for!!! (see footnote p.3). I’m still reading…

      • KA says:

        I love how the State just happened to throw in there a footnote that showed that GZ held out almost 50K from his check to O’Mara….the list of expense that the accountant stated was not 50K, but more like 10K in bills and some minor other expenses that could not have been over 5K…where is the other money? That would make 35L unaccounted for.

        [Footnote 1: page3]
        “At the hearing held on June 29, 2012, the accountant
        explained that a check for $122,393.00, dated April 25, 2012, was deposited into counsel’s trust account on April 27, 2012. (Pet. Appx. Page 143). The difference between the total amount
        transferred from the PayPal account into the Zimmerman’s accounts and the money deposited into counsel’s trust account is $49,486.96.(Pet. Appx. Page 144). “

        • Cielo says:

          Hmmm… $50,000 in cash, permission to leave Seminole county… I can STILL see “flight risk” as a very real possibility.

      • Angelia says:

        He would have had to pull the money for the first bond before he handed the check over to O’Mara, right? I can’t remember if GZ put up the whole $15K, or he put up $5K and his parents helped him. It certainly wasn’t $35K though.

      • princss6 says:

        I don’t know if any of you had the opportunity to listen to the jailhouse calls, but prior to the bond hearing, GZ was supposed to give MOM money but he couldn’t do it because of some type of paypal technicality. GZ was trying to transfer 32K to give to MOM. It is unclear if MOM knew that the transfer was 32K but he knew there was money and he knew that a transfer was attempted and unsuccessful thus MOM not receiving the funds on that day.

        Looking back, it was all too convenient.

      • KA says:

        No, according to the June 1 hearing, they (GZ) had only paid the bondsman 5K and O’Mara mentioned that they needed to get him the rest of the money, so I do think that may account for 5K of it.

        Also, the bondsman credited them 15K for the new bond so they only had to pay 85K for the new bond. O’Mara must have paid that other 10K between June 1 and July 5th when the order came out. I remember O’Mara stating that fact after the order.

      • KA says:

        Just FYI, my previous comment was in regards to Angelia’s comment.

      • Angelia says:

        Thanks KA-
        I knew $15K would be necessary, and I vaguely remembered something about the $5K, but I wasn’t at all clear on the details. That still appears to leave tens of thousands unaccounted for.

        I also agree that O’Mara’s whining is annoying. “Petulant” was the word I used on another blog. As for your other comments regarding him, I would have thought that the intense scrutiny on this case would have made him extra careful, but it seems to have had the opposite effect. Maybe they’re acceptable in the legal community, for reasons I’m not privy to, but to me they just defy commonsense.

      • crazy1946 says:

        Ok, I have a little math problem with this PayPal money. If Zimmerman collected approx $204,000 and he gave MOM $122,393 my finger and toe calculator shows there to be a balance of $81,607 not accounted for? Everyone keeps talking about $50,000 what happened to the other $31,607? Most people could live quite well on that sum of money for far longer than the Zimmerman and wife did for a month or so? I don’t know, but if I had given this man money, I would want to know what in the world he did with that money? I remember that Zimmerman had Shelly convert some to cash, why do I suspect that he has some cash stuck back for an escape reserve? Laugh if you want, but even you must admit that it is not beyond imagination to think that if the going gets tough that little coward will run like a rabbit, if he is given an opportunity!!!

      • KA says:

        I believe 31K ish was accounted for my the accountant for the bills they paid and other things for living expenses (probably also the 5K for bond). The part that was “left off” from explanation was the almost 50K that everyone is referring to.

      • bettykath says:

        Excerpt:

        George Zimmerman and his wife Shellie were balling out! It was revealed in court documents that the couple spent almost $36,000 of donation money in only 18 days while he was in jail.

        With the funds donated, Zimmerman and his wife spent $6,500 on Internet and phone bills, new cell phones for $300 each, paid off a year-long Verizon contract in full, installed a telephone landline for $2,500, spent $1,300 on a two-year AT&T Wi-Fi contract and paid off at least $7,000 in credit card bills.

        ….

        They used $4,378 on automotive expenses, making payments on two car loans while renting another for more than $1,500. Gas: $800.

        Zimmerman paid off a $3,000 loan to his parents, paid $5,000 for bond, spent $800 at the jail commissary and $600 on jailhouse calling cards. The couple spent about $1,300 on food and $400 on utilities and $1,900 on rent.

        Read more: http://globalgrind.com/news/george-zimmerman-wife-shellie-spent-36k-18-days-trayvon-martin-details#ixzz212ocKWQc

        • Cielo says:

          NO WONDER they want the scam to continue! If you have wifi and cell phones, what the hell do you need a landline for? And that is some food bill! Was it all for carry out or caviar?

  38. bettykath says:

    Interesting.

    Actually, I believe GZ “doesn’t remember” how he got from under TM and then on top of him.

    Do you agree that GZ put his hands on TM? If so, why?

    • roderick2012 says:

      And what else doesn’t Georgie remember?

      You Zimmerman supporters are sad people. You believe whatever crap he states.

      If Zimmerman has a bad memory why isn’t everything he states suspect?

  39. TruthBTold says:

    Dag, there was someone’s comment that I wanted to respond to but can’t locate it now lol. Anyway, this poster stated that the pictures taking of Zimmerman, after the shooting, was done before police arrived. This was my understanding as well. I know some have commented that individuals were able to basically contaminate the crime scene by walking around taking pictures, etc., but I was under the impression it was before they arrived. Maybe? Maybe not? The timeline is the confusion I believe, in determining what the heck was happening at that time.

    • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

      The picture is posted online; it is showing TM with his arms underneath him. I want to know how GZ can claim the multiple stories he is giving it just doesn’t match. LLMPapa have excellent videos. The person used a flash light “they say” to shine a light so the picture would show better. It is just heartbreaking GZ must had help….with his fabricated stories.

    • Marilyn says:

      For timeline info consult:

  40. TruthBTold says:

    Blushed Brown wrote,

    “Thank you, Truth,
    : ^ )
    Have so much to review this weekend.”

    You are welcome. Yeah girlie, you have lots of catching up to do:). Miss ya.

  41. de la Rionda handed over to O’Mara the most recent batch of state evidence, according to court paperwork.

    It includes Trayvon’s cell phone records, 217 photos from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, eight photos taken by a private investigator hired by Trayvon’s family, Zimmerman’s school records from Manassas, Va., and eight Seminole County Sheriff’s Office incident reports from the night Trayvon was shot.

    Most of those – not including the cell phone records – should become public in the next week or so.

    http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-08-24/news/os-george-zimmerman-medical-records-20120824_1_trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-mark-o-mara

  42. bmh says:

    Mr Leatherman, I have a question, Since this case will most likely have cameras in the courtroom when this case goes to trial because of the Sunshine Laws in Florida, what is to stop perspective witnesses from watching the proceedings on TV or online while its going on? Can the judge order them not to? The judge allowed George and Cindy Anthony to be present in the courtroom during others testimony. I know the situation was different in that case, but i still disagreed with his ruling.

    • Televised trials certainly have the potential to defeat the no witnesses in the courtroom rule.

      Witnesses will be warned not to watch until after they testify, but the rule is unenforceable.

      • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

        Professor, I have a question about when the charges where finally brought against GZ. Is it true the prosecution had six months to bring charges against a murder suspect (GZ) or the charges would be dropped and never prosecuted.

        I heard something towards the beginning of the uprising; people were highly concerned because of some form of Florida statue. Can you clarify? Thank you..

        • You are referring to what is called a statute of limitations that provide a maximum period within which a charge must be filed.

          The limitations period for felonies in most states is three years.

          There is no statute of limitations period for murder, however.

          The dust-up was over the stand your ground law.

  43. TruthBTold says:

    Dennis wrote,

    “I am in no way comparing Frederick to people like Johnnie Cochran or the guy in Devil’s Advocate. Frederick saves lives, which is not something most people can say for themselves.”

    *quizzical look* Not referring to the fictitious character in the movie, but the Johnnie L. Cochran, Jr. put down. Say what now? It’s probably best for me to leave this one alone.

    • Dennis says:

      @Tzar

      Are you an O.J. fan? LOL

    • Dennis says:

      I admired Johhnie Cochran for fighting for the civil rights of African-Americans, but when he got O.J. acquitted, that drew the line for me. Everyone knows the police tainted the evidence to secure a murder conviction because they knew there would be African-Americans on the jury. All it takes is one not-guilty verdict to cause a mistrial. Not one black person I have ever talked to has ever stated that O.J. was innocent. The jurors even admitted that they believed he was guilty. If there is a hell, Cochran is definitely there…

      • Dennis,

        Due to the police misconduct in the OJ case, the proper verdict was “Not Guilty,” regardless of the racial makeup of the jury.

        Due to the prosecutorial and police misconduct in the Darrold Stenson case, the Washington State Supreme Court set aside his conviction and death sentence and ordered a new trial.

        This is the way our legal system is supposed to work because, if cheating and dishonesty were permitted to occur without consequences, the criminal justice system would routinely destroy innocent lives as well as the lives of everyone dependent for their livelihood and emotional support on that innocent victim.

        They become victims too and that includes a lot of children.

        And don’t forget, the actual perpetrator of the crime for which the innocent person was convicted would remain free to hurt others.

        Remember please that no one can have any confidence in a verdict obtained by intentional governmental misconduct that basically defrauded a jury and that must be so whether one believes the wrongfully convicted defendant was really guilty or not.

      • roderick2012 says:

        Frederick Leatherman says:Due to the police misconduct in the OJ case, the proper verdict was “Not Guilty,” regardless of the racial makeup of the jury.

        Considering how O’Mara has conducted himself so far do you believe that he will concentrate on the sloppiness of the police investigation (although most of it was in favor of his client) instead of challenging the evidence directly?

        Also since we know that JonWit13 was on the scene too quickly ( the prosecution doesn’t seem to be pursuiting the possibility that anyone besides Zimmerman was involved) and his Zimmerman moved Trayvon’s body before the police arrived (we knnow O’Mara won’t bring that up) wouldn’t bringing the fact that the crime scene was compromised also be a good tatic for the defense especially since West is a murder specialist?

  44. gbrbsb says:

    Sorry repeat. I keep messing up with the reply button:

    According to the Washington Post:

    “O’Mara said that he doesn’t believe anything in the records would harm his client’s case and that he is fighting the release to protect Zimmerman’s privacy”.

    What privacy if he already disclosed it himself! I mean I can understand his right to privacy about whether he had, say, bilateral anorchia (sorry folks but couldn’t resist!) which has nothing to do with him shooting Trayvon… or then indeed could it have? (sorry couldn’t resist that either!) but in respect of his nose and head one would think “privacy” flew out of the window no sooner GZ & Co informed the world Trayvon broke his nose and repeatedly bashed his head in.

    On the other hand, I don’t know about anyone else but the fact GZ & co want the medical records kept secret IMO indicates a full fledged admission there are no x-rays showing fractures and contrary to what MOM states, the absence could harm GZ’s case because it raises, yet again, doubts as to his credibility as if there were x-rays or whatever proving a broken nose and or head fractures why would they not want these released as they would surely go all the way to proving GZ’s reasonable fear of death/serious bodily harm, but if there are none then better to use the excuse of “privacy” to disseminate doubt.

    • PYorck says:

      I have read interesting speculation that the injuries from 2/26 aren’t really the problem, but that GZ could have been in (more or less) unrelated fights before.

      • Rachael says:

        That is really what it sounds like they are going after. As well as his supposed back injury.

        The reason the prosecution asked for all the records is because if they only ask for something specific and get that, there may be something else they won’t get because they did not ask specifically for it.

        However, because medical records are protected, the defense is using that reason not to hand them over because they are right, any information that is there that does not pertain to the case is no one’s business. Therefore the judge will look at the records and make a decision as to what is relevant and what is not.

        We will not be seeing information about GZ’s jock itch or his embarrassing rash (thank God).

        They are just following procedure.

      • GrannyStandingforTruth says:

        The Attention Deficiency Disorder and bad back

    • KA says:

      Most of O’Mara’s argument was the irrelevance of the records and the broadness of the request. The privacy was just one of the supporting arguments.

      He is only saying now that the privacy was the main issue, but that is not how his filing stated.

  45. Fla asst atty gen: Lester gave Zimmerman “a well-deserved tongue lashing”. He should stay on case.

    An appeals court is still considering whether to boot Lester off the case. The state late yesterday filed a 26-page pleading, urging the Fifth District Court of Appeal to leave him in place.

    Assistant Attorney General Pamela Koller wrote that Lester gave Zimmerman “a well-deserved tongue lashing” in a July 5 bond order in which the judge accused the defendant of manipulating the court system by failing to disclose that he and his wife had $130,000 and a spare passport.

    But in the same order, Koller pointed out, Lester ruled in Zimmerman’s favor, granting his request to be released on bail.

    A judge who does that, Koller wrote, has not provided clear evidence that he is biased or will be unfair to the defendant in the future.

    http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-medical-records-20120824,0,6617733.story.

    • gbrbsb says:

      According to the Washington Post:

      “O’Mara said that he doesn’t believe anything in the records would harm his client’s case and that he is fighting the release to protect Zimmerman’s privacy”.

      What privacy if he already disclosed it himself! I mean I can understand his right to privacy about whether he had, say, bilateral anorchia (sorry folks but couldn’t resist!) which has nothing to do with him shooting Trayvon… or then indeed could it have? (sorry couldn’t resist that either!) but in respect of his nose and head one would think “privacy” flew out of the window no sooner GZ & Co informed the world Trayvon broke his nose and repeatedly bashed his head in.

      On the other hand, I don’t know about anyone else but the fact GZ & co want the medical records kept secret IMO indicates a full fledged admission there are no x-rays showing fractures and contrary to what MOM states, the absence could harm GZ’s case because it raises, yet again, doubts as to his credibility as if there were x-rays or whatever proving a broken nose and or head fractures why would they not want these released as they would surely go all the way to proving GZ’s reasonable fear of death/serious bodily harm, but if there are none then better to use the excuse of “privacy” to disseminate doubt.

      • bettykath says:

        Medical records are personal and protected. O’Mara was correct imo to insist on privacy or them. The judge agrees. It’s none of our business what’s in those records. Whatever is relevant to this case will be made available to the prosecution.

        I’m not sure how the records will be used, however. I expect that the PA will be called to testify as to the injuries and any surprised in the medical records might be used in the cross examination.

        Will the pertinent records be allowed as evidence? That would make them public, but as part of the hearing or trial, not as a public dump.

      • crazy1946 says:

        I would suspect that what Zimmerman and MOM want to keep from the public knowledge is prior injuries to his nose due to fights in the past. This would add to the claim that he was possibly predisposed to violent actions in his personal life. Plus it could indicate a pattern of other injuries that could cause one to suspect he was not being truthful about his injuries on the night in question.

      • KA says:

        bettykath,

        Actually O’Mara was requesting the Lester reject the order for medical records altogether. He said they could get it from them. Judge Lester ruled that the request for records could continue as a matter of the investigation, but felt the motion for privacy to be appropriate. So he allowed the request for records to continue. He did not rule in favor of the defense to reject the medical records request, he just made consideration for the privacy concern in his decision.

        O”Mara privacy has only one argument. His main issue was that they were irrelevant to the case.

      • Rachael says:

        Yes crazy. I’m thinking if he had actual documentation of a broken nose in the past, an old injury of such might affect a new diagnosis, to what extent is why he would be referred for followup, which he did not comply.

      • KA says:

        I think it will show paranoia or something related.

        The State might be going after the “reasonable fear” claim for the hearing.

      • bettykath says:

        O’Mara did ask that the subpoena be quashed but he also offered, as a second option, that the judge review them in his chambers. The judge opted for option 2. The privacy aspect has been upheld.

      • Mirre says:

        Second option they offered, was that the defense would supply the medical records to be reviewed instead of the medical office.
        Defense lost the motion to quash the subpoena.

  46. George Zimmerman case in court over medical records

    http://www.wesh.com/news/central-florida/trayvon-martin-extended-coverage/George-Zimmerman-case-in-court-over-medical-records/-/14266478/16251936/-/12rj6dw/-/index.html

    On Thursday night, O’Mara filed a motion asking Judge Kenneth Lester to allow Zimmerman to leave Seminole County.

    In the motion, O’Mara stated that the terms of his client’s bond interfere with his ability to pay for his defense.

    • Elle Jay says:

      –nowhere in the motion is the “ability to pay” mentioned.

      http://184.172.211.159/~gzdocs/documents/motions/motion_to_modify_conditions_of_release.pdf
      –motion to modify conditions of release

      • Hi, Elle Jay!

        Yup!

        Looks like someone made that up? They should retract it!

      • Xena says:

        You are correct Elle Jay, but it’s an interpretation. O’Mara has previously stated that living in Seminole County has cost GZ additional expenses for security that he would not need to pay if residing elsewhere. He has also stated that he might file a petition for the court to find GZ indigent. Read into that, that with the money being spent for security and GZ’s cost of living expenses, there is nothing remaining to pay O’Mara’s fees.

      • KA says:

        So O’Mara is asking for GZ to go to another state to live.

        Strange that he would ask when he just made a big deal about GZ not being able to go to his office by living one county away. Judge Lester granted that consideration.

        So now he wants him to live out of state. How will he get to his attorneys office each week then? Is O’Mara moving with him out of state so he can still see his attorney? Will he do conference calls out of state? Why can’t he do that now? Will O’Mara fly to see GZ every week bu could not drive 50 miles to see GZ now?

        I do not understand them.

        • Patricia says:

          To KA – Of course Zimmerman would prefer to live out of state: Ecuador.

          They are cheerful about granting asylum, their currency is the US dollar, and George speaks the language.

          Second choice would be to visit old best buds in Virginia – with a quick slip into DC.

          If the Ecuadorian Embassy can host Julian Assange in London, why not Zimbo in Washington? (Hint: George would LOVE to be internationally famous … or notorious.)

          • I lived in Ecuador many years ago when I was a young teenager — my dad was a foreign Service Officer working for the U.S. State Department.

            I love Ecuador! It’s not only beautiful, it has a new constitution in which the environment has rights and standing to sue to protect those rights.I don’t believe they would want anyone like George Zimmerman living in their country.

        • fauxmccoy says:

          KA states: “So now he wants him to live out of state. How will he get to his attorneys office each week then? Is O’Mara moving with him out of state so he can still see his attorney?”

          – – – –
          very astute analysis there KA.

  47. George Zimmerman gets permission to travel to Orange County

    http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-medical-records-20120824,0,6617733.story

    In a brief, eight-minute hearing this morning, Lester said Zimmerman could travel to Orange County to meet with his lawyers but could go nowhere else and could not leave Seminole County for any other reason.

    • Judge orders medical records be sent in a sealed pack to him from Altamonte and he will review them and then lawyers can review them in chambers and make objections in private.

  48. Sandra E. Graham says:

    When hearings are held, do the television stations have live feed in this case. I could find nothing live today. Anyone know where we should look for future reference.

  49. fauxmccoy says:

    anyone know where to find a live stream of the hearing now in progress? i’m usually pretty lucky, but today has been a bust so far.

    • Rachael says:

      I think it is already over. I just found this:

      http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/trayvon-martin/os-george-zimmerman-medical-records-20120824,0,6617733.story

      Judge says Zimmerman can go to Orange County on a limited basis but ONLY to see his lawyer and has not ruled out entirely that he can move, but it would require much planning if it were to happen.

      Also did not quash the request for medical records, said he would review them and argue them with the lawyers but the records would not be made public.

    • KA says:

      To me, Judge Lester seems fair Those two solutions were impartial to both parties.

      I assume it will be shouted from the highest point from GZ supporters that these somehow show him with bias…

      • The Zimmerman supporters make less and less sense as time goes by.

        Mostly, they have been reduced to hurling hatred, insults and lies at anyone who dares to illuminate their faux hero’s inconsistencies and lies.

        That only makes them look dishonest, stupid and nasty.

        Since no one with any intelligence and integrity can take them seriously anymore, after all of their self-inflicted damage, they have pretty much ceased to be a factor worth considering, as far as I am concerned.

        My advice to everyone is ignore them and let them fizzle out in obscurity.

      • KA says:

        Yes, but they shout pretty loudly. I need to get better at ignoring the noise.

        I do not think they will fizzle out but they do seem to be reducing, however the ones left seem to have to shout louder now to be heard.

        It is actually amusing sometimes to see how “wise in their own eyes” they feel.

        The last scuttle I had was someone critiquing your education when they did not even have a BA (nor AA). I realized after her ignoring that and picking up the fight with something else irrelevant (since she could not refute the education anymore), I needed to probably just step back and ignore.

      • @KA

        The last scuttle I had was someone critiquing your education when they did not even have a BA (nor AA). I realized after her ignoring that and picking up the fight with something else irrelevant (since she could not refute the education anymore), I needed to probably just step back and ignore.

        I’ve seen them poking fun at a person’s education. I mean it’s unbelievable!

      • Xena says:

        “I’ve seen them poking fun at a person’s education. I mean it’s unbelievable!”

        They argue that Attorney Crump is a “bottom-feeder.” I would like to see them pass a Bar exam.

      • KA says:

        Benjamin Crump and his colleagues were recipients of a very prestigious award last year in the State of FL. He and the firm were sent well wishes and congratulations by judges all over the state.

        It is their assumption that any lawyer that does not consider this self defense must be incompetent. Most of them (GZ included) could not even come close to the admission criteria even needed for law school…

      • Xena says:

        “Most of them (GZ included) could not even come close to the admission criteria even needed for law school…”

        Right you are! I love reading those one-line, drive-by comments such as “Mistrial. Set him free.” when there hasn’t been a trial yet. LOL!

      • rayvenwolf says:

        @Xena: the worst ones are the ones who pretend to be lawyers. And then they turn around and write something that shows they don’t have clue one. the last time someone tried to hurl intelligence insults at me however I simply responded, “My SAT scores earned me an unsolicited info package from Yale. How about you?”

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        Wise in their own eyes as you say – Law degrees, any degrees do not make you wise. Your SAT scores do not make you wise. I am not a GZ is innocent supporter. Because I am not, does not make me wise. Some of those commenting in this post may have passed your bar exam. But that does not qualify you to perform brain surgery. Please, get off the high horse. Ignore the noise. In the meantime – quit with the – I’m better than they are.comments. Get real.

        • ajamazin says:

          Sandra E. Graham,

          Neither education or intelligence are the true measure of a man.

          The measure of a man can be found in the content of his character.

          Character is expressed in life by our actions or inactions.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        aj…
        Thank you
        Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. – I had a Dream

      • KA says:

        I apologize Sandra, I was not trying to indicate higher intelligence or education, just the hypocrisy of them criticizing someone’s personal education and profession when they themselves could not even do achieve that.

        I do not think education makes anyone a better person (James Holmes case in point). It was just the item they were using to discredit one (Crump, Leatherman, etc) for their education and intelligence, yet they themselves do not and most likely, can not possess the same base “criteria for entry”.

        I apologized if it seemed I thought education made one a better person. That was not my intent nor even belief.

      • KA says:

        I wholeheartedly agree with that AJ. I do not think anyone should mock another’s accomplishments or education regardless…

        However it also believe that it should preclude those from maligning another’s school and/or education that they themselves ,do not or can not, possess.

        I do not assume another stupid, however they should not assume me either.

        It is more of a “hypocrisy” statement about many GZ supporters maligning behavior than a statement about education or experience specifically.

  50. ajamazin says:

    “George Zimmerman’s mother-in-law charged with DUI”

    According to the police report, Dean told deputies she took two hydrocodone pills before she got behind the wheel, but is also prescribed Xanax and another sedative.

    http://www.news4jax.com/news/George-Zimmerman-s-mother-in-law-charged-with-DUI/-/475880/16251784/-/4nkmin/-/index.html

    • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

      Wow what a group dangerous individuals; the prescriptions’ were reported to cover the fact she’s just like Frank driving under the influence of alcohol.

      She is and adult and knows not to take prescription drugs with alcohol; media seems to minimize her drunkenness…

      If my daughter was in deep-s–t and her loser husband has created such problems; I would drink but not drive and endanger people lives. A woman in a baby had to block her in to prevent her from moving endangering others lives.

      Guess she is going to set up a donation website for her defense. Get ready to donate..LOL. Amazing this happened the night before court.. Wonder?????

      Follow the leader GZ fans “its prescriptions'”…… Hell no it isn’t it DUI…

      • bettykath says:

        DUI is driving under the influence. The influence can be alcohol or drugs of any sort. Same with driving while impaired.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        Zero Tolerence DUI where I come from — does the Seminole County jail have group rates.

      • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

        Sandra E. Graham says: Zero Tolerence DUI where I come from — does the Seminole County jail have group rates.

        I LOVE IT! Making it plan and simple.

      • Elle Jay says:

        –shellie’s mom was arrested on august 8th—it just wasn’t reported until yesterday.

      • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

        I suspected it happened a lot earlier but couldn’t confirm it. Drama seems to occur every time O’Money is scheduled for a court appearance.

        My original statement, ” Amazing this happened the night before court. Wonder????”

        In my opinion, strings are being pulled when to report things and felt something when this suddenly appeared. It still doesn’t look good for GZ close family and associates to be collecting arrest records for driving under the influence; then claim prescriptions drugs.

        I always felt GZ was high on something the night he stalked and gunned down the unarmed teenager. Maybe a blood analyst was performed on Zimmerman and that is why the fight is on to keep it sealed. In my opinion it wasn’t explored enough.

        You test the decease child but not the shooter with a history of attacking law enforcement agents; employees at Car Max and violence against women. Bias behavior by the SPD this is my opinion… Unless there is something we do not know?????

    • edgySF says:

      Hmm…so Shellie’s mom got arrested for DUI.

      And I saw something about her dad being in trouble with police, too.

      This leads me to believe that she won’t cooperate with the prosecutors in exchange for them dropping her perjury charge.

      With parents like that, how can she not be confused about right & wrong?

      She’s with a guy who had been previously arrested for hitting his girlfriend…and whose own cousin accused him of molesting her.

      Only someone with a very low self esteem would do that.

      And if both of her parents are unable to help her out…she stays.

  51. EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

    To: SouthernGirl2 — you don’t have a reply button..

    You right GZ is so evil…. She-Lie really got her a catch “Catch Of Mess”

    You reply button does word inder your last reply..

    • Brown says:

      @EIETTO
      I enjoy reading your posts. Sorry if I confused you about the *follow* its just easy for me to follow the thread. Please don’t go I am not a lawyer or student but find value in this blog.
      Thanks
      Blushed Brown

  52. ed nelson says:

    There are monsters.

    Thanks Frederick for being there to put up some kind of sort of type of defense for humanity, against [u]monsters,[/u] in their variety, and increasing numbers, as they are now comming in, and they are coming in by increasing no’s, as Satan see’s his chance now, he is focusing his minions to this place, and don’t think for a minute that them bastards can’t move faster than the “speed of light” either… although I don’t actually know it!. No, just a speculation.

    • Dennis says:

      There is no such thing as Satan. Humans are born with the capacity for good and evil. Nothing can oppose God Almighty, which is why the idea of Satan is ridiculous.

  53. Sandra E. Graham says:

    I am beginning to sense that some aspects to this case will be omitted and we will never see the whole picture. I still believe GZ did not act alone that night. But, the case will move forward as it should, although I believe others should be held accountable for their actions that night. This is just the way it is sometimes. I have to accept the things I can not change.

    • Maybe once reality hits Zimmerman and he realize he’s going to spend life in prison, maybe he will give up the goods if others are involved?

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        You may be right – But it would take an army of hundreds to figure out what he is actually talking about! C,est la vie. He wears me out.

      • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

        EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

        August 24, 2012 at 1:50 am

        To: SouthernGirl2 — you don’t have a reply button.on your last post. But here it is..

        You right GZ is so evil…. She-Lie really got her a catch “Catch Of Mess”

        You reply button does word inder your last reply..

      • @rnsone says:

        I doubt it.GZ is the one looking at serious time.I believe it’s more likely that Taffe,Osterman,and his wife would spill the beans.Taffe has a DWI to deal with,maybe he can cooperate to get that charge dropped? Shellie has a perjury charge and a likely felony hanging over head.Hey,the money is running out,as is his supporters.What if Shellie decides to cut her losses now? She can cut a deal,testify,and most likely sell her story.Im not too sure about the depth of Osterman’s involvement but judging from GZ’s self defense claim,I’m almost positive that came from Osterman.I currently work in law enforcement and that story is textbook self defense that is taught in all police academies nation wide.The best bet is Shellie.She holds the pieces to the missing puzzle.

      • @rnsone

        You’re probably right. What will they do?

        BTW…do you post on the OS? Your screen name looks familar.

      • RNS1 says:

        Yes, I do post there at OS.The pro GZ comments there are disturbing to say the least.

    • Xena says:

      @Sandra. I feel the same way. One of the things I’ve considered is that if the State has evidence, (for instance, the M&I Bank vid showing Osterman) that it might put GZ in a position to question whether he can trust those who might have been involved. There are others that GZ is no doubt wondering why the prosecution has named them on the witness list, such as Joe Oliver and Frank Taaffe. These are suppose to be GZ’s friends and yet the State is naming them as State witnesses. That has to mess with his mind.

      • fauxmccoy says:

        as i understand it, osterman, taaffe and oliver would be on the prosecution’s witness list (along with zim sr.) due to communications they had with gz following the event. his accounting to them would not be subject to any privilege such as spousal or attorney/client. have no clue if they’ll be called or not.

        • People whose names are on the witness list will be excluded from the courtroom during the trial, until they are finished testifying and excused as witnesses by the Court.

          The purpose of this rule is to prevent them from hearing the testimony of other witnesses so that it does not influence their thinking and cause them to testify differently than they might otherwise have testified.

          Sometimes lawyers place names on their respective lists with no intent to call them just to keep them out of the courtroom during the trial.

          This is rare and improper but it does happen.

          Witness lists generally include everyone whom a lawyer might call to the stand. Rarely, do all of them testify.

      • boar_d_laze says:

        The prosecution could use some of these witnesses to impeach Mr. Zimmerman’s stories by juxtaposing them and showing they’re inconsistent with one another and with the statements Mr. Zimmerman made to the police and through his legal representatives.

        However, there’s a limit to how much impeachment evidence you can bring before a judge disallows it for being cumulative.

        Even if you’re not really going to call them having witnesses you don’t like on a string is more work for the other side; and it’s also fun.

      • People whose names are on the witness list will be excluded from the courtroom during the trial, until they are finished testifying and excused as witnesses by the Court.

        The purpose of this rule is to prevent them from hearing the testimony of other witnesses so that it does not influence their thinking and cause them to testify differently than they might otherwise have testified.

        Ah!

        Thanks!

      • SearchingMind says:

        @ Professor

        “People whose names are on the witness list will be excluded from the courtroom during the trial, until they are finished testifying and excused as witnesses by the Court”.

        But, I guess “the purpose of this rule” which “is to prevent them from hearing the testimony of other witnesses so that it does not influence their thinking and cause them to testify differently than they might otherwise have testified” will be defeated in this present case since the proceedings will be televised live.

    • Xena says:

      “fauxmccoy says:
      as i understand it, osterman, taaffe and oliver would be on the prosecution’s witness list (along with zim sr.) due to communications they had with gz following the event. his accounting to them would not be subject to any privilege such as spousal or attorney/client. have no clue if they’ll be called or not.”

      Correct, which has to be playing with GZ’s mind.

    • whonoze says:

      “I believe others should be held accountable”

      Rick Scott, Wayne LaPierre, the NRA, the Tea Party, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, Norm Wolfinger all played far more significant roles in Trayvon’s death than anyone other than GZ who was at The Retreat that night. But you’re right. GZ did not act alone. he had a whole culture of hatred, fear and privilege behind him. GZ was right about one thing. The REAL assholes always get away.

      Any time you have a nice thought for Angela Corey, just remember she’s a political crony of the people who seek to deny Trayvon the right to vote were he still alive.

      • ajamazin says:

        whonoze,

        Exactly.

        ________________________________

      • Rachael says:

        That is what I said here earlier and what I keep saying. GZ may have been the one to pull the trigger phisically, but they all pulled the trigger morally and are every bit as guilty as GZ of murder.

      • SearchingMind says:

        @ Rachael and Whonoze,

        Rach and whonoze, I totally disagree with you on this. “By all definition” Zimmerman is an adult. Just like me and you, he is capable of making choices based on the principle of cost-benefit-analysis. Guns/knives don’t kill. Evil/deranged, malicious, etc. people do. Zimmerman made a choice to murder Trayvon. Neither Corey nor the NRA was involved in that decision-making process. Angela Corey (like other prosecutors trying murder cases, Nancy Grace, etc.) is a dedicated jurist who fights for they who cannot fight no more, i.e. THE DEAD! Her task is solemn and very difficult (as evidenced in the present case). Pls. you guys need to leave her (Corey) alone. This case has nothing to do with liberal- versus conservative values or vice versa. It’s about the actions that proceeded forth from a deranged mind, i.e. stalk a kid in a car, then on foot, scare the hell out of him and make him “ran”, chase him down, pump a bullet in his chest while he begs for his life, flip him over on his face, mount him on his back, straddle him and squeeze his last breath out of him, and bringing the said deranged mind to the book. I beckon you to concentrate on the facts and the law and leave politics out of this case.

      • crazy1946 says:

        Searching Mind: While you are some what correct, it might be good to remind you that if our culture was not so gun dependent that this crime very possibly would never have happened. If Zimmerman had not been emboldened by having that killing weapon strapped to his waist he probably would never have left the safety of his vehicle, and if he had, it is not realistic to assume that he would have confronted Martin as he did. What our culture does is take a theoretical five foot coward and turn him into a ten foot tall super hero as soon as he has the ever popular means of control in his hand! Many people think it is time our culture re-thinks what is necessary and proper for all members of our society, not just those that are in love with a means of control of other people by threat of death.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        crazy1946 – culture of gun dependence — is it too late to take back control. It takes more to qualify for a drivers license than it does to own a gun. Rather than gun ownership being an Americans right, gun ownership should be moved into the privilege category. MOO

      • bettykath says:

        “Any time you have a nice thought for Angela Corey, just remember she’s a political crony of the people who seek to deny Trayvon the right to vote were he still alive.”

        really? what do you base this on?

        • ajamazin says:

          Based on her past history. 

          ________________________________

        • ajamazin says:

          Here is one example of Corey’s conception of justice:

          In the eyes of Angela Corey, a twelve year old child is more culpable than an adult with multiple DUI offenses or an adult who knowingly neglects and/or abuses his or her child to the point of death.

          In 2010, Jessica Martin was arrested in response to driving under the influence. She was driving a pickup truck at the time and crashed into a van carrying 11 people. The crash resulted in the death of 49 year old Moses Hughes Jr. and severely injured four children. This wasn’t Martin’s first DUI charge, either. It was her second.

          She was sentenced to 18 years in prison, with an additional 10 years of probation. She knew it was a crime to drink and drive as she had been arrested for it previously. Yet somehow the death of one man and the serious injury of four children was not deemed as significant as the one Corey would like to believe 12 year old Cristian Fernandez perpetrated.

          In 2011 Corey’s office oversaw a case in which 12-year-old Cristian Fernandez was accused of killing his two-year-old brother. Corey sought and received a grand jury indictment of Fernandez on charges of homicide and aggravated child abuse, and decided to try him as an adult.

          http://justice4juveniles.blogspot.com/2012/01/jacksonville-state-attorney-angela.html

        • ajamazin says:

          The quick and dirty answer is that Corey was appointed by Scott who has actively worked to disenfranchise black voters.

        • ajamazin says:

          Zimmerman called Sean Hannity, Pastor Terry Jones, and Angela Corey.

          Zimmerman seemed to think they shared a commonality.

      • princss6 says:

        Re Angela Corey: Welcome to the world of being African American. We’ve always had to make unholy alliances in this country… accommodate white supremacy and the institutional power behind it. At least this time, the institutional power is fighting to hold accountable the person who murdered a black kid unlike in the past. As we did see prior to Angela Corey taking this case, the STATE via the SPD and Wolfinger was going to let Zimmerman off scott-free. The State was willing to blame that unarmed teenager for his murder in an attempt to let GZ go. Whatever her politics are or who her cronies are, she did not have to charge GZ. I will be forever grateful to Corey for bringing this case to trial vigorously and without bias or bs and recognizing Trayvon as a victim AND actually listening to and believing DeeDee. That is generally not done by far too many, regardless of their political leanings. Too black children deemed as victim and credible (a long history of this not being the case), is a step forward regardless of the politics in the state of Florida. She is elected to represent every victim regardless of her politics and IMO she is doing just that in this case. GZ is a registered Dem, so he gets a pass because of the politics of “his cronies”????

  54. Xena says:

    This is painful for me. I so appreciate your blog, Professor. There are times that it is through pain that we are compelled to dig deeper. IMHO, GZ had no authority to restrain Trayvon. Doing so after (according to him) Trayvon “surrendered” demonstrates that he was not in fear for his life. It also conveys that GZ believes Trayvon surrendered to the gun, which questions whether GZ pulled it in self-defense, or to retain and restrain Trayvon. For GZ, he did what he intended to do all along — restrain and retain cop style, although he is an undeputized nobody.

  55. EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

    Dear Professor, thank you for a very interesting blog and continue the good work!!! This is written because of a concern..

    In response to TruthBTold… Today was a very strange day; some bloggers have been extremely nit picky and it seems some may not approve of me being here any longer; so I will unenroll shortly. I’ve never seen “follow” before.. but thank you TruthBTold for the clarification.

    Earlier a statement of, “RIGHT ON!” was made and someone decided to judge my comment as “emotional.” And nothing is wrong with being emotional or passionate as long as it is geared not to hurt anyone…

    My RIGHT ON! or Right On! statement could mean anything and here it offended someone to prompt a negative response from the professor (in my opinion concerning emotion and passion.) For Case#1 to imply this was a cheering comment as if we were on a ball field was “very offensive.” I took it that way. Case#1 have a right to the way he approaches things and so does everyone else.

    I am not a law professor nor attorney and never have tried to take Professor Frederick Leatherman place; that is his expertise. It is my right to be who I am. Agreeing with someone statement especially when they are spot on IN MY OPINION is ok. As stated, “I’ve been through a case similar and know what the Martin family is going through….”

    Maybe the all caps was the issue as many have done here and possibly other places either deliberate or by accident especially on and IPAD.

    Also, people need to clarify some comments because misunderstandings do happen frequently on blogs. But I still have my point of view and this is America…. Do have a wonderful evening……

    • TruthBTold says:

      @Everyone,

      You are welcome. Don’t go. You have something to contribute just like anyone else. I’m actually in agreement with you. I took your comment in the spirit in which it was intended. I try to pick and choose my battles considering the type of forum this is. I don’t believe the Professor’s comment were a slight against you or anything. Generally speaking though, I can see how a person can be put off by another person’s comment or approach. Hopefully, we all want one another to do well here as it relates to critical thinking, etc., but not become annoying or overly rigid by following up on particular comments. Reconsider though and stay engaged:).

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        EveryOneIsEntitledToTheirOwnOpinion just as your title suggests, your opinions (comments) have been valuable to many – myself included. I am not in the legal profession either. But, I find this blog, with participants working in different environments, offers a unique analytical approach in problem-solving. PLEASE Don’t Go. You are a valuable link in this chain!!!

    • @Everyone

      Please don’t go. I enjoy what you bring to the discussion. I’m asking you to please stay. You can say RIGHT ON. If folks say you’re emotional so what? Be emotional. I’ve been emotional since the beginning of the case because it breaks my heart into a million pieces. It’s who I am and no one can change me. Trayvon Martin could have been my child. I’ve got some news too. Come on in and lets discuss.

      George Zimmerman’s mother-in-law charged with DUI

      http://www.clickorlando.com/news/George-Zimmerman-s-mother-in-law-charged-with-DUI/-/1637132/16249684/-/10bhp5az/-/index.html

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        Frank Taaffe DUI and now GZs mother-in-law DUI. Way over the top. Truth is, indeed, stranger than fiction. Wow.

      • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

        TruthBTold (Thank you for your response)
        SoutherGirl2 (Thank you for your response)
        Sandra E. Graham (Thank you for your response)

        I had to really think about it because it appear Case#1 was kissing up trying to belittle others. I just don’t tolerate that activity; I never claim to be in the legal profession. Just a caring American…like you wonderful three bloggers…we can respectfully agree or disagree.

        Not too shocked by Zimmerman’s mother-in-law activities. This coward GZ has many people lying for him; throwing his wife under the bus is another flaw in this sociopath character. Such a loser…

        If I was Shel “Lie” I would save myself at this point. GZ is some catch (in my opinion.) A catch of “MESS.”

        Judge Robert Zimmerman should be very proud of his son and better pray voice analyst testimony isn’t allowed as some form of evidence; that can prove he walked into a court room and lied just like his son. (In my opinion)

        As I have stated from the beginning GZ bad behavior started somewhere and not being corrected at an early age assisted in his sociopath behavior. Or his parents trying to cover his mental issues. As I look into his eyes you can see a evil vibe.

        The bible states, “spare the rod spoil the child.”

        Prov 29:15: “The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame.”

        Prov 22:15: “Foolishness is bound in the heart of a child; but the rod of correction shall drive it far from him.”

        Prov 19:18: “Chasten thy son while there is hope, and let not thy soul spare for his crying.”

      • Not too shocked by Zimmerman’s mother-in-law activities. This coward GZ has many people lying for him; throwing his wife under the bus is another flaw in this sociopath character. Such a loser…

        Just look at the lives George Zimmerman has ruined. I’m feeling so many emotions until I can’t see straight. And then the gall of him to say he has no regrets. He’s so evil!

      • bettykath says:

        everyone, glad you’re staying.

        From what I understand, GZ’s mother didn’t spare the rod. She regularly hit him. There have also been suggestions of child abuse that could refer to her hitting him or to other abuse. I haven’t read the original materials, so I don’t know the extent of the abuse.

        Sometimes those who don’t spare the rod go overboard and cause more damage. Besides, hitting a child teaches them that violence is what is needed to settle disputes leading to the John Wayne solution – guns and fists.

      • bettykath says:

        ajamazin says:
        August 24, 2012 at 11:16 am

        “bettykath,

        There is not one shred of proof that George was abused.

        You are spreading gossip and lies and you know it.

        I am truly disgusted.”
        ———-
        You don’t know what I know and you would be wiser if you didn’t try to speculate.

        Sorry about your disgust but you’re misinformed.

        You’re right about “proof”. We’re not discussing much that can reasonably be called proof. But there is documentation of my assertion. If it has been countered, please provide a link.

        http://www.businessinsider.com/george-zimmerman-childhood-abuse-2012-7

        • TruthBTold says:

          Aja wrote,

          “bettykath,

          There is not one shred of proof that George was abused.

          You are spreading gossip and lies and you know it.

          I am truly disgusted.”

          Some of the “outrage,” disgust, theatrical reponses to other poster’s comments, is becoming quite laughable. Also, this is in part, how schisms between posters start; the approach. Obviously, bettykath is talking about the claims made by W9. She is not stating from a position of fact. I’ve seen you Aja, in particular, post things that have absolutely no relevance to the discussion at hand (e.g. Frank Taaffe’s foreclosure, The Zimmerman family lineage, etc.). You have accused others (Aussie) of not being civil. Come on now.

          • ajamazin says:

            TruthBTold,

            1.] bettykath admitted she had no proof of the allegation.  When one spreads such unsubstantiated information, one loses the moral  authority to criticize others for similar offenses;

            2.] Why do you assume that Frank Taaffe’s foreclosure and The Zimmerman family lineage had no relevance?

            ________________________________

        • ajamazin says:

          bettykath writes, 

          “You don’t know what I know and you would be wiser if you didn’t try to speculate.”

          Oh wow!!  Are you going to get your big brother to beat me up?

          As to the source you cite: “The unidentified witness went on to describe Zimmerman “as a person of strong character but not very street wise”  and as one who “stays in casual contact with a lot of people” but has few close friends”

          We now know that unidentified “witness” is Mark Osterman.

          Odd that you would consider him a credible source.

          I tend to dismiss articles that state:

          “Here’s the juiciest part of the interview …..”

          “.

          ________________________________

        • I have a feeling that George Zimmerman is the source of the statement that his mother beat him regularly.

          I think the source of information for the story is Mark Osterman and his source is George Zimmerman.

          I also believe the reason he was estranged from his family is his cousin’s revelation that he had molested her for 10 years starting when she was 6.

          Therefore, I will apply the Zimmerman principle and assume his mother did not beat him, unless independent credible evidence verifies it.

          Mark Osterman is not an independent credible source because he did not know him when the beatings were allegedly happening.

      • Dave says:

        The documentation referred to by bettykath is the FBI interview with Zimmerman’s buddy, presumably Mark Osterman. Osterman’s source for this information would be GZ himself. Given the ultimate source of these allegations of abuse, I give them no credence at all. Accusing bettykath of deliberately spreading lies is, I believe, uncalled for.

      • bettykath says:

        ajamazin says:
        August 24, 2012 at 6:45 pm

        bettykath writes,

        “You don’t know what I know and you would be wiser if you didn’t try to speculate.”

        Oh wow!! Are you going to get your big brother to beat me up?
        ——————-
        That wasn’t a threat or a warning. Only those who don’t know what they’re talking about show unwise they are. It has to do with you and what you tell about yourself when you make such baseless attacks and then respond with a hostile rejoinder.

        ==========

        Actually, while some have suggested that the unnamed witness is GZ’s cousin and others that it’s Osterman, no one has provided anything that substantiates either of these. I read the article some time ago and haven’t seen any follow up. If the original source is George, I tend to agree that it’s tainted. But I don’t know that the source is GZ.

      • KA says:

        Actually, as much as I have some ill feelings for ZImmerman and his clan, I have to say I hate the idea of any of us judging everything the family has done.

        She might have and addiction or she took the pills and thought she was “ok”. I believe in either scenario, she is probably not out trying to kill people (like her SIL)..

        Addiction is a serious illness and one that is not always freely chosen, and I just feel a little uncomfortable with us doing the “expose'” thing on family members.

        I am so sick of the GZ supports and their expose’ blogs, I do not think we should treat Shellie’s mom the same.

      • bettykath says:

        KA, I agree re: George’s and Shellie’s families.

    • fauxmccoy says:

      oh please, do not let any misunderstanding with another poster deter you from posting. if i were to have done that, i’d have been long gone.

      i think that although most of us are reading the same book, we are not all on the same page, so to speak. i have found that sometimes when i start to disagree seriously with a poster that we are actually just not understanding each other or arguing over finer points/minor details and i’ve come to realize that letting it go is preferable to driving home my point.

      i hope you’ll reconsider.

    • Case#1 says:

      On other blogs this is referred to as the “Goodbye Cruel World Speech” (“GBCW”) where someone who can not tolerate disagreements announces to everyone they are going to leave.

      You can stay or go. It has nothing to do with me.

      I disagreed with you. That’s all.

      So leave my name out of your choices.

      • CherokeeNative says:

        @Everyone. I hope you will reconsider your choice. We all have a right to be emotional and express that fact. Even though we are not attorneys or professors, we have much to offer because we are demonstrating (unintentionally) what a “reasonable person” such as a juror will most likely experience when presented with the same set of facts and evidence. Your opinions matter to us all. You just have to wade through the bullshit and not let it bother you.

    • heartofhearts says:

      I also ask you to stay. I am always cautious about what I write due to my own insecurities and/or fear of reprisal but we are all entitled to our opinions and emotions unless of course we become over the top offensive!
      Giving my screen the finger helps a lot! LOL
      Some people online love to correct other’s spelling too and I have always found that funny and sometimes will respond by saying, there, their, they’re! 🙂
      I guess what I am saying is please don’t take what another says personally it is only their opinion and you are certainly entitled to yours.
      I didn’t find anything wrong with saying right on in caps. My goodness if the prosecution is basing their entire case on what we as commoners say online, we need to be concerned!
      Have a fantastic day!

      • CherokeeNative says:

        RIGHT ON!!!!

      • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

        Heartofhearts & CherokeeNative Thank you. I will engage….. RIGHT ON!

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        KA — Regarding GZs mother-in-law – A motor vehicle can be considered a killing machine. DUI is DUI. Don’t much care about anyone’s addictions or what ever else might have been the cause of her driving while impaired. No one carries a gun because they will never use it. They carry in case they are going to need it. Should someone who is IN a lethal weapon drive because they won’t kill anyone. Or, do they drive believing that it could kill someone. Responsible drivers drive responsibly. Those who do not drive responsibly should be charged with attempted murder, in my eyes – they were in a lethal weapon and missed killing someone. Where I come from, the laws are very strict when it comes to DUI — No tolerance. People (like GZ and others) should be held accountable for their actions if they are irresponsible and putting the public in danger.

        • ajamazin says:

          Sandra,

          I have zero tolerance for driving under the influence.

          I believe a 1st offense should result in a one year suspensionof the driver’s license of anyone convicted and mandatory attendance in a substance abuse course.

          There is absolutely no excuse for anyone to drive while impaired.

          ________________________________

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        Some saying that Trayvon would be alive today had GZ not gotten out of his truck (or car – depending on the interview), I say many could be dead because GZs mother-in-law was in her car and driving!!! Both need to be held accountable for their actions.

      • KA says:

        Oh I agree Sandra on being accountable legally, just more to us making assumptions to her core character and morals because of her arrest.

        GZ, fair game, he has given more than enough indication that he is willing to lie and cover up the murder of a young teen through complete reckless and depraved behavior.

        However on Shellie’s mom, I do not think we have much, if anything, to make base “character” assumptions with, That is all.

    • There are going to be disagreements and ruffled feelings from time to time and there is no reason to take them personally.

      You are doing fine and I don’t want you to unenroll. Just keep on doing what you are doing.

      I was not offended or irritated by what you said.

      Part of what I hope people will learn here is the ability to develop a little tougher skin and understand that criticism should not be taken personally.

      Most criticism says more about the person criticizing and what they consider important rather than the person they criticize.

      Use criticism by others to figure out who they are and what they value.

      People should ask themselves whom and what they criticize to better understand themselves.

      Self-reflection is the path to enlightenment. All the Masters have known and teach this fundamental principle.

      Learn and grow with us.

      Think of us as an extended family and roll with the punches.

      We are here in service to a principle much larger than our occasional disagreements.

      The whole is greater than the sum of its individual parts and you have a role to play here.

      Namaste

  56. mataharley says:

    FL, you said in the OP:

    Keep in mind that he could not have known whether Trayvon Martin would die when he shot him and, despite the shot that destroyed his right ventricle and collapsed both lungs, Trayvon might have remained conscious for several minutes, according to two forensic pathologists interviewed by Rene Stutzman of the Orlando Sentinel.

    While I understand people have been collecting plausible speculation as to the time Martin may have lived, none of this gels with the police call log of events. Those are found on pg 40 of the original May 15th doc dump.

    Per their logs:

    1916:43 – 911 cal! placed by (redacted) here Zimmerman is heard screaming for help

    1917:20 – Shot fired; screams from Zimmerman cease

    Event 20120571671

    1917:40 Officer T. Smith arrives on scene

    Please note 20 seconds of time elapsed between the time the shot was fired, until the time the first LEO arrived on the scene. TM was deceased, per the reports. In fact Zim’s entire “fight for his life” was a minute or less long in duration.

    If the call times are accurate, the two minutes that one pathologist speculates isn’t possible, or TM would have been alive when Smith came on the scene. I find it odd that Ms. Stutzman wouldn’t have noted this when she interviewed the experts, since this timeline has been available for quite some time.

    This also means that – using GZ’s story and subtracting what seconds it took for GZ to “push off” Martin’s body (… some 30-40 feet.. LOL) – he could only have been straddling Martin for 13-17 seconds max. So I doubt that Zim’s actions in those last few seconds realistically did anything to hasten a death that obviously happened close to immediately.

    What may bear more viable scrutiny is just when was all that talking, straddling, and subduing of Martin (per Zim’s story), along with the chit chatting with neighbors, supposed to have happened in that brief time frame?

    And, with virtually a close to immediate death, how did Martin’s hands end up under his body? Did he fold them under when Zim got up as the LEO approached? And wouldn’t the LEO have noticed if the boy had moved?

    To me, the post gunshot events told by Zimmerman compared to the real time elapsed simply do not add up.

    • mataharley says:

      Pardon me for accidentally dropping the icing on the cake for the timeline… the following entry in the call logs after Officer T Smith arriving is:

      1919:43 – Officer T. Smith locates and places Zimmerman in custody

      So I correct myself that from the gunshot to TM being dead when the LEO arrived is 23, not 20 seconds.

      • Mire says:

        According to police logs, Smith was redirected to 2821 RVC. W18 again announces his arrival at 7:19:28. By the time Smith arrived, GZ had been up and walking around and talking with w13 who got there at 7:18:16 and had plenty time to take some photos before Smith got there.

      • Bill Taylor says:

        WOW in your correction you left out 2 whole minutes……the gap from 1917:40 to 1919:43 is 2 MINUTES and 23 seconds….not 23 seconds

    • Dennis says:

      I think Martin would have died within a minute or two. His lung was collapsing and filling with blood and at the same time his heart was nicked so blood would not be able to circulate in his body properly. He could have gone unconscious or into shock when he was hit as well.

    • Mire says:

      We know how long GZ straddled and pushed down on Trayvon. Shot was fired at 7:16:56. Selma and Mary were walking towards the sliding glass door, before the shot was fired. They were outside seconds after the shot was fired. Selma was outside the entire time that GZ pushed down on Trayvon and mentions him getting up and walking around, putting his hand on his head and looking down as if looking for something. W18 was on the phone with 911, and says at 7:17:42 I can see the man walking around he is putting his hand on his head. GZ was restraining Trayvon for at least 40 sec.

    • SearchingMind says:

      @ mataharley

      “1916:43 – 911 cal! placed by (redacted) here Zimmerman is heard screaming for help
      1917:20 – Shot fired; screams from Zimmerman cease”.

      On what evidence do you base the above claims? Why would Zimmerman “cease screaming” not knowing he shot Trayvon (Zimmerman claimed he did not know he hit Travon when he fired the shot)? Why would Zimmerman (in his own words) toss his gun away to subdue Trayvon by mounting Trayvon on his back, straddling him and (according to witnesses) holding him by the neck pushing his face into the grass/dirt?

      • Mataharley is quoting information in a report and not expressing an opinion.

      • mataharley says:

        SearcingMind, I am not “claiming” Zimmerman is screaming. Where did you get that? Not even the subject matter of my observation.

        What I did was a copy/paste of the dispatch activity as documented in Serino’s report in the May 15th doc dump on pg 40… as I plainly stated in my comment above. The times that are pasted, verbatim from the report, were, per Serino, constructed from the Aided Dispatch (CAD).

        Ergo, the subject matter was clearing up how long Trayvon was alive after the gunshot. Obviously it was not minutes, or Martin may have been able to speak to Officer Smith before he died.

        At the time of that report, Serino assumed Zim was telling the truth and put down that Zim was the screamer in his report. I am among those that do not believe it was Zim, as I’ve stated on this forum before.

        While I understand that discussion and speculation is the objective here, it seems that many are wandering needlessly far off the reservation of evidence in some arenas. As Case#1 put it, the theory is closest to what can be proven. What can be proven is that Martin lived only a matter of less than 25 seconds, considering the documented time of the gunshot and the arrival of the first LEO (where Martin was already dead), So there’s not much substance in the debate that Zim’s mounting of Martin was a major contribution to his ultimate death.

        However others here are putting in times that conflict with the CAD timeline. I don’t know their sources. I am just using what was provided in the evidence.

      • princss6 says:

        Officer Tim Smith arrived at 1111 RVC at 17:40 not the crime scene. Upon arriving he was told about the reports of shots fired. He was then told to go to an address on RVC – it took him about a minute to get there. He didn’t get to the crime scene until about a minute or two later. Not 20 or 23 seconds.

      • SearchingMind says:

        @ metaharley,

        Metaharley, I misunderstood you. My apologies. Next time use quotation marks (i.e. “…”), pls.

    • Vicky says:

      Mataharley, your point is well taken. Especially if your analysis can be backed up by specifically what was occurring at 19:17:40. Will you please provide a link to the documents you have referred to? I find it incredible that Officer Smith was able to arrive at the scene, observe the scene, assess the threat level, obtain information from GZ regarding his involvement, and take him into custody in 20 seconds time. Within the timeline you have referred to, is there a time stamp for when officer Smith exited his patrol car? Rather than having arrived at the scene of the actual shooting at 1917:40, is it possible that he arrived at the residence he was dispatched to at that time? Specifically, what did he state to the dispatcher at 1917:40? That he had arrived at the location to which he was dispatched or that he had made contact with GZ?

      • Vicky says:

        I have located a news article that indicates that SPD arrived at the scene at 1917:40 but did not locate GZ until 1919:43.
        I realize this is a news report, but the timeline is purportedly based on information released by SPD. Those two minutes actually do make a difference in what transpired immediately following the shooting.

        http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2012-05-21/story/timeline-night-george-zimmerman-shot-trayvon-martin-subsequent-events

      • mataharley says:

        Vicky, here’s a link to the first discovery release of 183 pages back in May. Pg 40 is the CAD timeline I posted above.

        http://media.miamiherald.com/smedia/2012/05/17/21/26/aOYtz.So.56.pdf

        As I pointed out in my oops/forgot to paste this line error follow up, he had GZ detained w/in three seconds, so that arrival on the scene wasn’t likely driving into the ‘hood.

        Also, sort of in reference to bettykath’s comment below, the officer scene reports are found on pg 14 for both Offc. Smith and Ayala (the first two on the scene, and within 20 seconds or so of each other). Yes, Smith went first to detain the guy with the gun, and observed Martin face down on the grass – the position of his death. He notes that Ayala (2nd LEO on scene) was there “shortly” after he had Zim in custody, and told Ayala hadn’t checked out Martin yet. However he makes no reference to Martin moving or making sounds during this time.

        Ayala says he also arrived at the 19:17 hour, so that would be within 20 seconds of Smith, there a 19:17:40. Ayala went to Martin and could not revive him.

        If Martin was alive while Smith was handling Zim, he made no sounds and did not move.

        They were dispatched prior to hearing the gunshot. Don’t forget one was being sent from GZ’s call. Others called in when the argument was happening. It’s not surprising that Smith and Ayala arrived on the scene quickly.

      • mataharley says:

        Mea culpa, Vicky. The arrival by Smith was at the clubhouse address, per the Offc report at 19:17. He was directed to 2821 RVC at that time, so it was more than 20 seconds…

        Never mind.. retract. Think I’ll stop multitasking now. t’ain’t doing it so good. LOL

    • bettykath says:

      Smith didn’t go near Martin. He just took Zimmerman into custody. We have to wait for the next officer to arrive for anyone to pay attention to Martin. It wasn’t obvious that Martin was dead b/c he did CPR.

      • hinkster4ever says:

        Betty, In response to your statement:

        bettykath says:
        August 24, 2012 at 10:39 am
        Smith didn’t go near Martin. He just took Zimmerman into custody. We have to wait for the next officer to arrive for anyone to pay attention to Martin. It wasn’t obvious that Martin was dead b/c he did CPR

        You do not do CPR on a live person. You listen for breathing, feel for a pulse. If breaths are heard you do not try to breath for them….if a pulse is felt….you do not do chest compression.

        Most people misunderstand CPR. Now we do not have a statement from…. wasn’t it Officer A— if she had a pulse or breathing at first assessment….but, if she initially had breathing and a pulse she would keep assessing and began CPR accordingly.

        I have to give Kudo’s to the attending officer who asked someone to get plastic and VASELINE…..as a vaseline gauze is used to cover an external entry to a lung. That person would have realized air was escaping via the wound entry point and in order to provide an effective blockage of this escaping air…a vaseline soaked sponge could possibly stop this.

        Multi tasking between screens…hope this makes sense.

      • bettykath says:

        hinkster, I understand that if he’s breathing on his own cpr isn’t needed, but if it is clear that Martin is dead, what’s the point of cpr?

      • hinkster4ever says:

        In reply to Betty:

        bettykath says:
        August 24, 2012 at 2:19 pm
        hinkster, I understand that if he’s breathing on his own cpr isn’t needed, but if it is clear that Martin is dead, what’s the point of cpr?
        ********

        Betty, Cardio=heart
        Pulmonary=lungs
        Resuscitation =restore heart, lung functioning/give life to

        A person found dead is given CPR to keep the brain alive until you can get them medical care. You do not need to perform CPR on a person who is alive (both breathing and heart beating). If you find no breathing you give breaths….If you find no heart beats you do chest compression’s to get the heart to beating and blood flowing to the brain. You hope to keep the brain alive and save the person’s life.

        I strongly advise EVERYONE to learn CPR. Call your local fire department and find where a free class is. So many lives are saved by CPR. All mothers should know it IMO.

      • Vicky says:

        Mataharley, Thanks you for the link and response. I completely understand those Multi-tasking moments. LOL

      • bettykath says:

        Thanks for the responses. I learned something about cpr that I didn’t know.

        So the person is assumed to be alive but his/her heart and/or lungs are not working and need help.

    • M Onan Batterload says:

      correctly calculated the time of gunshot from the call connection time (which would have to be 1916:35) and incorrectly (again) used the log creation time as the call start time. But I’d put my money on the first scenario: she got the time of the gunshot from the log.

    • M Onan Batterload says:

      [Arrrgh. WordPress login screws me up every time. Please delete the above reply]

      Singleton’s timeline is wrong. She misinterpreted the call logs, mistaking log-creation times for call-start times. We know she did that with Zimmerman’s call, because we have the log. The log of W_11’s call hasn’t been released, but there’s reason to believe Singleton misinterpreted it as well.

      Her timeline places the shot 37 seconds into the call. We know from the recording that the shot was fired approximately 45 seconds into the call. So how did Singleton arrive at the 37 second figure, if she didn’t calculate the time of the shot from the recording?

      My guess is, she took the time of the shot from the call log, which means it isn’t the time of the shot. It’s the moment that the 911 operator made note of the shot. Singleton’s call start time (again) is probably the log creation time rather than the call connection time.

      Of course, she may have simply miscalculated the time of the gunshot. Or maybe she correctly calculated the time of the gunshot from the actual call connection time (which would make the call connection time 1916:35) and then accidentally (again) entered the log creation time as the call start time. But I’d put my money on the first scenario: she got the time of the gunshot from the log, and mistook log-creation time for call-start time.

  57. Sandra E. Graham says:

    Professor – I have really enjoyed the process taken in this blog. The brain-storming activities had everyone`s thinking caps on. Your summaries at the end of the funnelling down keeps the bare bones approach as the focus. The prosecution and or defence has the ability to fashion their take for presentation purposes. In other words – put their meat and potatoes on those bare bones. RIGHT ON!!!

  58. MichelleO says:

    Professor Leatherman, I just wanted to ask this question. How do you handle the realization that your client is probably guilty? Do you still represent him to the best of your knowledge/ability? Have you ever represented someone you believed to be guilty? If so, where do you think you would draw the line? I find it pretty horrendous that O’Mara probably realizes that his client is both mentally unstable and guilty. I would have to cut the line at child murder if I were a lawyer. I couldn’t sleep at night.

    • Rachael says:

      I know your comment was for the Professor, but I had a friend who was a defense attorney, defending 3 strike clients. He said he never asks if they are guilty or innocent, doesn’t want to know. He said it was his job to represent them and that is what he did and went all out to the best of his ability. Creeped me out.

      • SearchingMind says:

        @ Rachael

        Rach, a lawyer does not have to ask a client whether or not he/she (the client) is guilty/innocent to know the answer . The same determination the prosecution can/will make regarding guilt/innocence of the client, the lawyer can also make independent of whatever the client says. A bad lawyer is one who believes his client. A good lawyer is one who believes only himself, knows what he wants and has a reasonable strategy to get it.

        @ MichelleO

        A good/moral lawyer has to defend his client with the fullest of his LEGAL ability and within the ambits of the law. You do that as a lawyer without sentiments no matter whose ox is gored! A good/moral lawyer has ZERO emotions for anyone. It is not the job of a lawyer to do the work of the prosecution and/or the judge and/or the jury for them. Within the criminal justice system there is a division of labor. If all the parties (i.e. the prosecution, the judge, the jury, the defense) play their respective parts well, the (legal) truth will emerge.

      • gbrbsb says:

        Same in UK and even with civil cases. Solicitors/barristers don’t want to know because as officers of the court they are not permitted to lie or mislead the court in any way nor allow you to either. Therefore, if you tell them something which contradicts what you are claiming in court it creates a type of conflict of interests which in its turn gives rise to one of the most debated legal ethics conundrums as they are not allowed to snitch on you either (unless they fully believe it is to avoid serious harm to another perhaps) so they would either have to convince you to change plea and defend you best they can with that or recuse themselves from your case. (I think it goes something like that but I’m only a lay advocate)

      • KA says:

        In reading the VLPATE2’s malicious blog posting about Leatherman, she truly has no idea of how defense works. I barely know how defense works and seem to be heads and shoulders above her.

        She said he had no “success” because 3 of his defendants were sentenced to death. Their “best defense” is not “getting off”, it is the best possible scenario for their situation. If Prof Leatherman specialized in capital crimes and death penalty cases, it is not what a “god divorce lawyer” would look like…

        People should not malign publicly when they do not have a clue about what they are talking about.

      • Rachael says:

        @ SearchingMind LOL – I thought that was what I said, or at least implied, but I guess it wasn’t clear.

        Thanks.

      • gbrbsb says:

        Forgot to say in my previous reply that if a lawyer knows a client is guilty, and I mean with certainty, proof, confession, etc., not just a feeling or conclusion, so long as he says nothing that is a lie or misleads the court nor allows his client to do so either they can sit quiet and force the prosecution to prove each accusation beyond reasonable doubt. That is how justice for all is ensured with the idea that far better ten guilty get away than one innocent be convicted. Again I am only a lay advocate.

    • Dennis says:

      I believe Frederick represented clients to free them of the death penalty, rather than try to get them acquitted. Only a monster would actually try to get a client acquitted that they know is guilty. Frederick is a great person and I do not believe he would have ever done something like trying to get a murderer acquitted.

      • SearchingMind says:

        @ Dennis

        “Only a monster would actually try to get a client acquitted that they know is guilty”.

        Waaoo, Dennis! So how do you know “a client is guilty” before the jury/judge finds him/her “guilty”? And if a client is innocent until found guilty by a jury/judge, what makes any lawyer “a monster” who is representing this defendant/client? Dennis, I hope you ruminate on- and retract what you said, because IMO it is a form of vigilantism and contains a form of anti-lawyer sentiments.

      • boar_d_laze says:

        No Dennis.

        Every defendant is entitled to a vigorous defense to make sure the State cleared every legal and evidentiary hurdle before conviction.

        Defense attorneys defend the Constitution as much as they defend their clients.

      • Well, I guess that makes me a monster in your eyes because that is exactly what I did.

        All good death penalty lawyers do this.

        I always tried to figure out a way to win the case first and, if there were no way to win it, then I focused on developing a trial and mitigation strategy that would save the client’s life.

        The problem that came up in the Stenson case was that I concluded there was no defense to the double homicide because the prosecution concealed important exculpatory evidence that I did not know about.

        Therefore, I developed a trial and sentencing strategy limited to arguing reasonable doubt, but focused on presenting mitigation evidence that would save his life.

        We argued about that and our relationship broke down. I moved to withdraw, but the judge would not let me out of the case because we were too close to trial.

        All of this information is now a matter of public record, so I am not revealing any client confidences.

        When his lawyers discovered the exculpatory evidence, they filed a motion to set aside his conviction and death sentence and set a new trial.

        The Washington State Supreme Court granted the relief requested.

        The legion of haters who despise and fear me because of what I am doing with everyone’s assistance here to systematically dismantle and destroy George Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense are still seeking to vilify and discredit me regarding the manner in which I handled the Stenson case.

        When they do so, they conveniently omit any reference to the exculpatory information that the prosecution intentionally withheld from me.

        That is one of many reasons why it is not possible to take them seriously.

      • longtimegeek says:

        Huh? Wa? Professor’s a monster, now? It just goes to show ya how carefully we have to speak even amongst friends. We’re all on the same team! Team TM!

      • Dennis says:

        @SearchingMind

        There is a big difference between trying to get a killer acquitted and making sure the prosecution does its job fairly. Frederick did the latter, which is what I would expect from a good defense attorney. Like he said, it isn’t about whether he believes the client is innocent or not. It is about making sure the prosecution plays a fair game in the eyes of the law. I am in no way comparing Frederick to people like Johnnie Cochran or the guy in Devil’s Advocate. Frederick saves lives, which is not something most people can say for themselves.

    • Never mattered to me whether my clients were innocent or guilty.

      The criminal defense attorney is liberty’s last champion in the sense that our major responsibility is to make certain that our client’s constitutional rights are respected and they receive the maximum benefit of due process of law.

      When we do our jobs well, we force police, prosecutors and the courts to do their jobs professionally and honestly.

      Institutional corruption cannot gain a foothold and flourish when there is a tough and aggressive criminal defense bar.

      People tend to forget that police and prosecutors convict the guilty when they do their jobs thoroughly, competently and professionally. We win when they don’t.

      We speak up for the guilty as well as the innocent. Mostly we speak up for society’s untouchables: the poor, the homeless, the marginalized and the mentally ill.

      I have always been proud of my profession and what I did.

      This blog is a continuation of what I did, only now I am fighting for justice in the larger sense of that word.

      Justice for Trayvon Martin and his family.

      • KA says:

        “We speak up for the guilty as well as the innocent. Mostly we speak up for society’s untouchables: the poor, the homeless, the marginalized and the mentally ill.”

        I stated something in this ballpark of this to an incompetent GZ supporter that claimed “you would not take GZ theoretically as a case because you thought him guilty”

        I told her that it was my opinion you would not take the case because he could not keep his mouth shut when advised and he lied to his attorney/court, not because he was guilty.

        I assume a defense attorney can spend every moment of their time defending the case as it was charged initially, or they can run in circles trying to fix the continuing damage your client does afterwards, including lying to you.

        I think Zimmerman must be a disaster of a client. How they have time to run around and fix his mistakes are a wonder to me.

        • You said,

          “I told her that it was my opinion you would not take the case because he could not keep his mouth shut when advised and he lied to his attorney/court, not because he was guilty.

          I assume a defense attorney can spend every moment of their time defending the case as it was charged initially, or they can run in circles trying to fix the continuing damage your client does afterwards, including lying to you.

          I think Zimmerman must be a disaster of a client. How they have time to run around and fix his mistakes are a wonder to me.”

          Yes, this is why I would have fired him as a client..

      • Unabogie says:

        Thank you, you said it well. Defense attorneys don’t “get guilty people off”. They protect the system from corruption so that innocent people can rely on it and to preserve justice.

        It’s a thankless, yet highly honorable job.

        Yes, even O’Mara.

      • TruthBTold says:

        Great post Professor.

      • Dennis says:

        I meant no disrespect to you all regarding my previous comments. I just want to set the the record straight since some people like to twist the words of others. I was just merely stating my opinion regarding defense attorneys that try to get murderers acquitted. I surely would not say you are a monster just because you represented a client that most likely committed the crime. Everyone is entitled to a legal defense. Judging by the fabulous work and efforts to bring justice to Trayvon Martin I would assume that you would not try to get a person like him acquitted. I think you are the only former criminal defense attorney that I know of that is covering this case and actively involved.

        • ajamazin says:

          “Judging by the fabulous work and efforts to bring justice to Trayvon Martin I would assume that you would not try to get a person like him acquitted.”

          I believe that the professor would give his best effort.

          To do otherwise would be a violation of his legal and professional duty and responsibility.

          ________________________________

      • Dennis says:

        Frederick, I greatly appreciate all of the fantastic articles you have written regarding this case. One of my favorite recent articles you did was on jury selection. I was called down to do Federal Jury Duty in Detroit at the District Court a few years ago. Obviously, one of the questions the judge asked us was if we had heard anything at all about the case. Long story short, I was eliminated by one of the sides. The one question I have is regarding a tainted jury pool. I was just wondering if you think it is right for the news to report evidence before a trial occurs because of the potential to taint the jury pool. Even though I believe in the legal system, I believe the people have a right to know the evidence. If it wasn’t for the news and very dedicated people like yourself, Amanda Knox might never have been acquitted in Italy. It took a massive PR campaign to educate the masses regarding the junk forensic science and coerced confession. I also believe that if it wasn’t for the media exposing Zimmerman’s lies that the State Attorney’s Office might have never stepped in and he would be scott free.

        • Your comment spotlights one of the most significant issues of the day related to our criminal justice system.

          In these times of near instant communication about legal matters of public interest, is it possible or even desirable to have jurors who know nothing about the case?

          Would any of us, for example, be able to truly presume George Zimmerman innocent and base our vote only on the evidence we heard in court?

          Assuming for the sake or argument, that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, could we vote Not Guilty?

      • longtimegeek says:

        Professor – My knee jerk reaction to your last two questions is, “Of course.” Thinking about it more, it would pain me if prosecution or anyone else botched the case, but I would have to say, “It is what it is.” If some magical fact(s) were to arise to cast reasonable doubt on GZ’s guilt, then, “It is what it is.” However, I would still want the law changed. When push comes to shove, we have to respect our justice system, good, bad or ugly. If something needs to be changed or improved, then there are other avenues for doing this. IMHO.

      • bettykath says:

        “Would any of us, for example, be able to truly presume George Zimmerman innocent and base our vote only on the evidence we heard in court?

        “Assuming for the sake or argument, that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, could we vote Not Guilty?”

        If I were in the jury pool, that is, lived in FL, I wouldn’t be on this blog, nor would I read the papers beyond the headlines and would avoid the TV news.

        At one time I thought I could render a fair verdict just on the evidence presented, even if I knew more. I changed my mind when I was called for jury duty for an arson case. It was part way through jury selection, just before lunch, that I realized that the arson was of the building my elderly aunt lived in. If the fire dept. was two blocks away instead of one, my aunt would have gone out the front door of her 3rd floor apartment instead of the fire escape and probably would not have survived.. Fortunately, the firefighters were there in time to take her out the back fire escape. Her son and my brother helped clear out her apartment when they were allowed in. They described the burn pattern that even to them looked like arson. The defense lawyer’s primary argument to the jury candidates was that it was an electrical fire.

        When I left for lunch I thought I could still be fair and judge only on the evidence presented. By the time I went back to the courthouse, I knew that my prior knowledge was such that I couldn’t be fair. The b….. (apologies to female dogs) nearly killed my aunt! An emotional connection like that doesn’t make for a fair hearing.

        • There is no shame or reason why anyone with a personal connection to a case, such as you had, shouldn’t mention it and ask to be excused.

          If for any reason any of you would prefer not to state your reason publicly, you can always ask to raise it privately and the judge will permit that.

      • PYorck says:

        In these times of near instant communication about legal matters of public interest, is it possible or even desirable to have jurors who know nothing about the case?

        I live in a country without juries and I have often wondered about that. Of course it isn’t a big issue for most trials, but I can’t imagine how it is supposed to work in high-profile cases. Honestly, in a case like this that has been all over the news even here the idea of a jury that really doesn’t know anything about the case is pretty scary.

      • bettykath says:

        Each juror, before being questioned had a quiet conversation with the judge with both attorneys present. Don’t know what they were asked but each was then seated for additional questions that we all heard. At that quiet discussion I would have told them of my connection to a victim who lost her place of residence and nearly her life and that I wouldn’t be able to judge fairly. The accused was found guilty.

    • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

      follow, stalk, hunt = GZ was not a law enforcement officer.

      Only the prosecution knows the legal strategy they will to approach this case for a conviction of second degree murder. The part of the trial that will interest me mostly is the “medical examiners findings” on both parts.

  59. Two sides to a story says:

    I’m guessing GZ probably thought to restrain TM and to check either for a weapon or an exit wound, or both. The witnesses reports don’t seem to indicate that he pressed on TMs back for an extended period of time. Which is chilling enough considering that he should have cared enough to either render aid or to pick up his own phone and make certain that medical help was on its way.

    • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

      GZ had know right to restrain TM to check for a weapon he was not an official law enforcer of any kind. Mary Cutcher was interviewed and stated TM was face down in the grass..

      If GZ pressed anywhere near TM wound this may have excelerated his death. In my opinion.

  60. EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

    Case#1 your comment does not have a reply button so posting it here.

    Case#1 as mentioned before (I respect everyone’s view without attacking it the way the cruel Zimmerman fans have chosen to do on this blog and hope they learn how to respect everyone’s view here. Thank God for EMOTIONAL people like me… and brilliant legal minds like the Professor and his family…”

    Right On was support for the following comment.

    Tzar says: “one theory, Zimmerman killed an unarmed innocent child who he outweighed by 40lbs not really hard to prove….”

    I respect other bloggers responses and expect them to respect mine. This is America and we have a right to approach situations differently. I’ve been through a case similar to what happen to TM.. will leave it there. You will never know my experiences that lead me to “support” the RIGHT ON comment.

    To assist you does “Exactly My Thoughts” sound better to you or politcally correct in your ears? Case Closed.

    • Dennis says:

      I’m afraid to say this, but many of the Zimmerman supporters are either racist or they believe Zimmerman’s story due to their own incompetence to look at the actual evidence. This happens with every case I research.

      • longtimegeek says:

        I, too, wonder how much incompetence has to do with it. Even in seemingly objective environments, I have been in situations where people look at the same facts I look at and arrive at the opposite conclusion. A simple example is a person making a snap judgment before having all of the facts and then having too much pride to stop pushing a bad position. This case was inflamed by so many problems, involving law enforcement, connections, media, etc.–with racism being the pervasive theme. MOO!

      • Rachael says:

        Well I just saw this on another site:

        He is a good man (GZ) !! there should be no case, that dark devil treythug attacked poor zim and tried to kill a good man, he got what he deserved he is burning in hell thank u god

        Pretty obvious which it is here. And someone else on another site said if they had seen Trayvon in the 7-11 that night through the window, they would have backed their their car out and would not have even gone into the store.

        What “evidence” are either of these based on? I see disgusting comments like this all over the internet. I am in shock and pain when I see these. Maybe I have led a very sheltered life based on how I was raised and where I have lived, but it terrifies me to think that the person writing these things can be right next door to me sitting at their computer, never saying these disgusting things to my face.

        I am not kidding when I say Trayvon could have been my son. When my son was 17 years old 3 years ago, this was exactly the kind of thing I worried about when he did not come home on time.

        It makes me wonder sometimes if I made a mistake bringing my son into this world, a world he has experienced through his biracial life that my whitness never knew orin my own whiteness believed existed.

        I just can’t visit those kinds of sites anymore. There is no way to have dialogue with people like that.

        As far as I’m concerned, all of those people who say those things are just as bit as guilty as GZ, of pulling that trigger and murdering Trayvon. Maybe not legally, but certainly morally.

      • Rachael says:

        Ugggh – got so upset:

        I mean:

        a world he has experienced through his biracial life that my whitness never knew or in my own whiteness refused to believe existed.

        I experience it now, through my own son and through Trayvon – and also by way of being a mother of a son of any color.

      • princss6 says:

        @Rachel…

        knowing is half the battle…those examples you point out…I can guarantee that the people who wrote it, do not believe they are racist and still do not believe racism exists, unless of course, they are talking about anti-white racism….yeah…it is willful ignorance and blindness.

    • @Rachael

      When Jonathan Capehart wrote the article ” Under ‘suspicion’: The killing of Trayvon Martin”, he was dead on it. Many African American families sit down with their boys after they’ve reached a certain age and have “that” talk. I did the same thing when my boys got their driver’s license. I can’t tell you how much I would stress to them on how to behave if ever stopped by the police. They’d get a little annoyed and say “OK MAMA” but this was something that had to be done because it could be the difference between life & death. I’m so tired of the fear & it’s a shame that African Americans have to do this but we know having “the talk” could very well save our kids lives. My talk with my boys included how they can become the target of someone else’ suspicion also included this if ever stopped by the police.

      1. Do what the officer tells you.
      2. Keep your hands on the wheel.
      3. Make NO sudden moves.
      4. Please use Yes sir & No sir.

      • longtimegeek says:

        Hopefully, TM’s death won’t be in vain. It’s a golden opportunity for the nation to learn and grow. In fact, this should be true even if that GZ *sshole gets away again. Learn and grow. Don’t go backwards. Go forwards, at least to the point where innocent children don’t have to fear for their lives like this.

      • longtimegeek says:

        Oh, sorry. I succumbed to a moment of optimistic thought. If only it were so simple. I wish it were.

      • longtimegeek says:

        This isn’t a well formulated thought. But, I think a litmus test for minorities might be how white women are treated by white men in the workplace. As a generality, white men have a hard enough time truly accepting white women and still discriminate against them quite a bit. This is true even in corporate America amongst well educated professionals. I imagine that many of these same people are pro-GZ and would swear that they aren’t racist. At least white girls don’t have to get anything remotely resembling the “talk.”

      • TruthBTold says:

        @Southerngirl2,

        Yup, these “talks” are quite common in the Black community. Sad state of affairs.

      • Rachael says:

        Yes, SouthernGirl. I had that talk with my son too, many many times and it was alsways so very very hard for me. He already had “issues” being different from me so it was so hard for me to stress the very things you did, even so far as not running in the neighborhood, especially when dark. Some of our neighbors my son hung out with were Middle Eastern and it was just awful how my son and his friends would be treated if they walked into a store after school. Yes, I had that talk with my son but it makes me so angry that I had to, especially with police, and I even had police tell me on occasions that they did stop him and talk to him and he was always polite. But the idea he got stopped at all just angers me like you would not believe and then when I hear this garbage at other sites. . .I mean I knew this stuff existed, but not like what I see on the internet.

        Thanks SouthernGirl.

      • Rachael says:

        longtimegeek, I appreciate what you are trying to say about white women and white men in the workplace, but having been a white woman in the work place, as well as now an over 50 woman in the work place, I can tell you, it is not even remotely similar. That doesn’t make it any better, but I’m telling you, it is not even near the same as what I saw through the eyes of my son.

      • princss6 says:

        Yup, my son was stopped last school year…I can’t remember if he was 12 or 13 since his birthday is in March. He goes to a school with an open campus (not a common occurrence in Philly – go Democratic Free Schools!) so they were out walking to the store for lunch. “Stopped” is probably not a good word as the officer just rolled up in his patrol car and asked them why they weren’t in school. I have to be candid and admit that I was happy that one of his friends he was with was a white kid. I figured that would defuse the situation which was not tense at all. Still hearing it scared me until he explained the entire context. On the plus side, he handled it well, was not bothered by it and most importantly TOLD ME ABOUT IT that very day because he knew “that would be something I would want to know.”

      • I was in tears when I had the talk with my son. He just turned 17 a month ago. He is 6’4. I fear for him daily. I fear for him daily. Sniff.

      • I was in tears when I had the talk with my son. He just turned 17 a month ago. He is 6’4. I fear for him daily. I fear for him daily. Sniff.

        I understand. I hate living in fear. I hate it! And I’m tired of it!

      • longtimegeek says:

        Racheal – I’m glad you responded, because I’ve been thinking about this a lot and I’ve been struggling to articulate it. I was hoping someone would help me think through it and articulate better. Pat Brown went through what you’re going through and gave her mixed race sons the “talk,” including being careful with how they dress in public.

        I wasn’t trying to compare white women in corporate America with parents having to give their black or mixed race children the “talk,” so they can protect their lives. There is no comparison, not even close. I’d much rather society work on protecting all of our children than work on equality for white women in the workplace. What I was trying to say, and not very well at all, is that this case has shined a spot light on racism. We’d like to believe that we’ve progressed a lot as a society, but we haven’t really. What I was trying to say is that if white men, who supposedly aren’t extreme radicals or extreme ignoramuses, can’t even stop discriminating against white women, then when are we as a society going to stop the worst of the discrimination, the kind that even scares our children?

        By the way, I try not to reveal too much about myself, because I’m afraid of the internet freaks. This is the first and probably only crime related web site that I will post on. I am a minority, so I have known first hand my whole life what discrimination looks like. Short of hate crimes, minorities don’t seem to have much recourse. So, we have to slowly chip away at misconceptions. We have to count on winning the vigilante case to help give people pause, even though racism is the bigger problem. IMHO.

      • longtimegeek says:

        Rachael – I’m sorry I mispelled your name! I’ve been writing through tears ever since Professor posted this article.

      • Rachael says:

        @diaryofasuccessfulloser My heart goes out to you. I had that talk with my son when he was like 12. He was shaving by the time he was 12 or 13 and always looked older than he was and his voice changed early too. When he was 15 the manager of our apartments got on him that summer because he was walking about with his friends and she stopped him and asked him why he did not have a job. I went and had a talk with her. She thought that of the group of kids he hung with, he was the oldest. She thought he was like in his early 20s and was like the leader of the group of kids on summer break and was up to no good with them when in fact he was the youngest. She apologized and did back off when she found that out, but I was always terrified because he did look so much older. He is not at all a big guy, was maybe 5’2″ and 135 pounds then, but I guess being black is all it takes sometimes.

      • Rachael says:

        @ longtimegeek Thanks. I get what you are saying now. You are right. We would like to think we have progressed a lot as a society, but a lot of what looks like progression is really, IMO, sweeping things under the rug. It became policitally incorrect to be racist so we can’t may not see it like we once used to, but we still can feel it. And like I said, the very people saying the horrible things on the computer, because we can’t see them, could be your neighbor who is sweet as pie when you pass in the isles at the grocery story. It has progressed, but a lot of it is just better hidden.

        I hope there comes a day when mothers don’t have to go to bed crying because they had the “talk” with their sons.

      • longtimegeek says:

        Rachael – Yes, the racism spotlight has been shined on your point about the racists being closer to us than we previously thought.

      • longtimegeek says:

        Oops. Sorry. Pat Brown should be someone else, but I can’t remember who anymore.

  61. Jeff Weiner ‏@JeffWeinerOS

    For those asking, state filed its reply to GeorgeZimmerman’s appeal today. Not made public yet b/c filed just before 5 p.m.

  62. Malisha says:

    I think “hastening [someone’s] death” is called murder unless there are mitigating circumstances. Surely if there is a patient in the hospital whose heart has been punctured by a foreign object, and a nurse or orderly turns them on their face, pushes their back and/or neck into the ground, and applies pressure to them except in a deliberately first-aid maneuver, that action is not legally called “hastening” but “killing.” In other words, I think the killing of Trayvon Martin did not necessarily happen with the bullet that might or might not (about 1% chance might and about 99% chance might not) have been self-defense, the killing of a wounded teen-ager by pushing his body into the dirt while his blood pours out from a bullet hole through his thoracic cavity is NOT self-defense, because that mortally wounded person is not threatening anybody’s life.

    I believe the discovery that Trayvon Martin lived beyond the time of being shot completely nullifies any claim of self-defense.

    • boar_d_laze says:

      Malisha,

      You’re kinda right and sorta wrong.

      You’re bringing up the concept of intervening/superseding acts; and you seem to have good intuition. However, this is a criminal case and not a civil case which sounds in negligence so the analysis is a little simpler.

      Here, what George Zimmerman did to Trayvon Martin after shooting him is part of the same “act” which began with the chase, because it was a continuing course of conduct.

    • Dennis says:

      I don’t see what Zimmerman did as any different than the man that shot the already wounded criminal that tried to rob his store. He came back in the store after chasing the other robber away, got his gun from behind the counter, and shot the wounded kid a few more times. He was convicted. You can’t execute or further the death of a wounded person, regardless of whether they are a criminal.

      • boar_d_laze says:

        Those are very different things.

        Think about this as a law school student should. There’s a “right,” and wrong” analysis; but you don’t get an opinion.

        Whether or not Mr. Martin was technically dead when Mr. Zimmerman started screwing around with his body, Mr. Martin would have inevitably died from the gunshot within at most a minute or two after the gun was fired and the cause of death was the gunshot.

        You may interpret Mr. Zimmerman’s actions after the shooting to show his state of mind; but they were not superseding acts to the murder. They were part of the same act as the shooting.

      • Mirre says:

        @BDL

        GZ did not know that.
        And by the way, we don’t know that for a fact either. The report has probably been reviewed without knowing GZ was restraining Trayvon in a prone position while putting weight on his back and neck.

  63. EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

    Anytime a child is killed, we all as parents should get emotional. I respect everyone’s view without attacking it the way the cruel Zimmerman fans have chosen to do on this blog and hope they learn how to respect everyone’s view here. Right On is my support for the comment. Just to clarify case#1; it seems you lack understanding.

    If we as human beings didn’t get emotional the Trayvon Martin case would have been another murder swept under the rug for the SPD to cover up. Thank God for EMOTIONAL people like me… and brilliant legal minds like the Professor and his family… Also, the prosecution for standing up against GZ a child molester and murderer who has lied to everyone; clearly unable to keep on story-line.

    • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

      My comment addresses case#1 comment.

      • case#1 says:

        Do you somehow thing I am less emotionally connected to what happened to TM because I am focused on thinking through out his killer can be put in jail for it rather than cheering for comments that may make me feel good, but aren’t what will help us understand the choices being made here by the prosecution in the case? I always think emotional is a cop out. I am emotional. That’s why I approach it from the view of “how can the outcome I want to see happen, actually happen.”

  64. @rnsone says:

    Can MOM simply say GZ knew the police were on the way because someone said they were calling the police.Also he told Mary to call the police.Is that how he counters the depraved mind accusations? Anyone? Thanks.

  65. case#1 says:

    I think whatever theory of the case is closest to what can be proven is what the prosecution should go with. The problem with what you are doing is arguing in the alternative. That to me helps the defense because the more you can muddy the arguments the better for the prosecution. I am not saying any of your theories based on the evidence is wrong. I am saying the more layers added the less clear it becomes, and that’s not good for the prosecution from a strategic stand point, is it?

    • Tzar says:

      There’s one theory Zimmerman committed M2

    • Tzar says:

      one theory, Zimmerman killed an unarmed innocent child who he outweighed by 40lbs

      not really hard to prove

      • case#1 says:

        Actually, there are multiple theories being presented about what went down. The more you let in the ideas that multiple different theories are possible, even those favorable to the conclusion that he murdered TM, the more you let in the window of doubt about what actually happened. You may not see it that way, but a jury is not coming at this like posters here. I am making a point about the strategy that the prosecution should take rather than in what people can discuss freely here.

      • case#1 says:

        Just to be clear, I don’t think some of these new facts being added ultimately change what happened. I think GZ did murder or commit manslaughter in this case depending on mental state. What I think is a problem is where facts that really aren’t going to matter start to be used to product competing theories, and what stops the defense from doing the same thing? I mean- they will try, and the defense will confuse the jury whereas I think a nice clean theory that accomodates multiple theories is the best strategy of the prosecution.

      • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

        RIGHT ON!

      • case#1 says:

        I guess the question at this point for me is whether some are seeking to find out how the case can be won or seeking emotional gratification because “RIGHT ON!”, all caps, seems emotional.

      • KA says:

        Case #1 -always respect your comments. I had thought the same thing as it seems that is what happened in the Casey Anthony trial as well.

        One thought, however, is that the defense can introduce theories, but I fully expect that GZ will, at a minimum, be effectively neutered in his testimony. If a theory is presented by the State aligns with multiple aspects of physical, circumstantial, and testimonial evidence it might be given greater credence as much of what the defense has is dependent on GZ’s personal account.

        I could be wrong. I suspect you know much more about this than I.

      • Rachael says:

        There may be multiple theories presented here, but we aren’t trying the case. I’m sure by the time finish their case, after having looked at their own multiple theories from every possible angle, they will settle on what you say is cosest to what can be proven. We are not presenting the case, merely discussing it.

    • You’ve made a good point. Keep it Simple is a good strategy and I’m not saying the prosecution should do anything else.

      I present this theory for them to consider, if they haven’t already done so. In the end, however it’s their case and they get to decide how to play the hand they have.

      I’m just trying to make sure they know what cards they have.

      They might decide to hold this in reserve as a possible rebuttal case, for example, or present it at the sentencing hearing in support of a request for a life sentence.

      It’s possible that in the end they might not touch it because proving it, like proving premeditation, is not a slam dunk.

      Part of what I’m attempting to teach here is the art of strategic thinking and lesson one is that it’s not possible to do that unless one really knows the case.

      Right now we still lack all the discovery.

      Thanks for the comment because you’re right. The end product of this process has to be simple and straight forward to prove.

      • case#1 says:

        I totally appreciate what you are doing here. I think strategy and understanding each one is very important. I was hoping to just add to rather than contradict what you are doing because even if a theory is chosen, one would still have to do what you are doing now, which is work through the different theories with available facts to figure out which one will have the strongest chance of winning the case.

        • Yes, we understand each other and I think another point we are demonstrating is the value of the group approach and not getting too emotionally invested in any particular idea.

          Nothing good happens when the emotional blinders are on.

          Yet, passion is important too.

          Remaining on an even keel is the only way to finish first in a long distance race.

      • Patricia says:

        A TALE OF TWO CHOICES

        Professor, George Zimmerman would anticipate SPD would have an officer on-site (somewhere in the development) at “some time,” from his NEN call.

        BUT … the moment the neighbor came out and found GZ and TM wrestling on the ground, told them to quit it, and that THE NEIGHBOR was going to call 911 … this was George Zimmerman’s “moment of decision.”

        THE POINT OF PREMEDITATION.

        He had two choices. No more, no less. Cut & dried.

        CHOICE ONE: keep wrestling with the kid, who then complains to the soon-arriving cops that this guy had grabbed him for no reason, and was preventing him from getting safely home … GZ is busted for illegally detaining TM, and when GZ is booked by the cops, GZ’s loaded, concealed gun is discovered.

        Tell me, how would that episode impact GZ’s dream of a future in law enforcement or the judiciary?

        Good choice, from Zimerman’s viewpoint?

        Or, CHOICE TWO: GJ could use his superior upper body strength to get the upper hand (and body) over Trayvon. They would still be face-to-face, and an easy draw from the holster to taunt and menace the terrified teenager, with the muzzle of the Kel-Tek right in Trayvon’s face, snarling “Tonight you’re gonna die, mother fucker,” — then carefully place it in the “sweet spot” to drill right through Trayvon’s heart. And fire.

        So what would be the downside of that choice? As long as Zimmerman was certain that the bullet had not exited (shot right through Trayvon, lodging in the earth beneath his body – which would PROVE GZ had Trayvon immobilized and shot him in cold blood) which GZ established by flipping TM over, running his hands over his back (witnessed), then, “saved by the hollow-point” staying in TM’s body, Zimmerman had only to QUICKLY squash the gurgling, twitching teen in his death throes before the cops arrived, then claim, as he did, “It was self-defense.”

        And so, it strikes me as logical (in his raging mind) that George Zimmerman would make what HE would consider to be his ONLY (self-serving) choice:

        SHOOT, SQUASH, and LIE. Dead teens tell no tales.

        Worked for a few weeks, didn’t it?

      • They would still be face-to-face, and an easy draw from the holster to taunt and menace the terrified teenager, with the muzzle of the Kel-Tek right in Trayvon’s face, snarling “Tonight you’re gonna die, mother fucker,” — then carefully place it in the “sweet spot” to drill right through Trayvon’s heart. And fire.

        It’s chilling to read about it. We heard the kid’s blood curdling screams of fear and yet I can’t come close to imagining his fear. At one point I couldn’t sleep because I kept hearing those screams. I had to ask God to heal my mind because it was just too much.

      • Tzar says:

        @case#1
        “I totally appreciate what you are doing here. I think strategy and understanding each one is very important. I was hoping to just add to rather than contradict what you are doing because even if a theory is chosen, one would still have to do what you are doing now, which is work through the different theories with available facts to figure out which one will have the strongest chance of winning the case.”

        well said!

      • julia says:

        Perhaps Zimmerman’s declaration of “tonight you’re gonna die” came before the neighbors shout out. George couldn’t let Trayvon tell the police that he’d been threatening to murder him with his gun. In his mind he had to kill Trayvon…and why not? He was just another punk gangster in Zimmerman’s twisted mind.

      • thejbmission says:

        And an excellent theory it is Professor!
        Like you, at the onset on this case, I thought a bullet to either ventricle would cause instantaneous death as that the chest cavity would immediately fill with blood but as you’ve pointed out, Zimmerman’s actions after he shot Trayvon may have been the coup de gras If so, definite depravity on his part. Thank you for bringing this to discussion. Another great article!

    • Dennis says:

      In the Anthony case, the prosecution stuck to one version of what happened, that Casey killed the child using chloroform. The evidence was there, but the jury was in the clouds. It is probably best to stick to one version of what happened.

      Zimmerman attempts to detain Martin.
      Martin doesn’t allow himself to be detained.
      Zimmerman shoots Martin.
      Zimmerman gets on Martin and quickens his death.

      I don’t see that being too hard for the prosecution to prove.

    • Tzar says:

      @case#1
      The core case against Zimmerman is not violated by any of our musings. Consider if Zimmerman never jumped on top of Trayvon; he still faces M2, the moment he put himself 47 feet off of his quasi-reasonable and claimed path and put in play: his unidentifiable self, a scared teenager, a loaded gun, and the confrontational words “what are you doing here?”, that he winds up killing. And we are not even considering how many times prior to this moment, he had the opportunity to identify himself to Trayvon in a non-threatening manner; nor are we considering the galactic size holes in Zimmerman’s claims of how and what happened.

      for f*cks sake, he was armed and in his car; he could have rolled down his passenger side window and asked the kid if he was ok or if he needed a ride home, anything to break the ice and Id himself. He had so many opportunities make sure that that community was safer for Trayvon and everyone else in it, that evening, that was his role and purpose as NW.

      • Tzar says:

        edit:
        “his unidentifiable self, a loaded gun, the confrontational words “what are you doing here?”, and a scared teenager, that he winds up killing.

      • TruthBTold says:

        Tzar wrote,

        “@case#1 The core case against Zimmerman is not violated by any of our musings”

        What Tzar said.

  66. Marilyn says:

    Professor, you have nailed down George’s living coffin. This whole new line of fearless reasoning has tracked down an uneasy feeling I’ve had ever since I saw this witness on utube (or tv news?) gesturing expansively and describing how George was “feeling” the body. She was angry and disdainful – claiming that he wasn’t up to anything good. She made it clear that his actions just weren’t right.

    George will greviously suffer locked up in jail for life. He hates jail.
    It’s a living tomb for him. I think you’ve uncovered a smoking gun and I thank you deeply for persuing this.

    • Thank you.

      I just want to see the Rule of Law restored and the criminal justice system work again. Don’t get me wrong. It has always had problems, but this is ridiculous.

      Plus, I’m disgusted by the racism and all the haters.

      Enough is enough.

      • Justkiddin* says:

        Mr. Leatherman racism does not belong any where near a minor child. Bottom line a grown man shot and killed a unarmed child, it could have been any of our children. Well for it to be mine it would have to be one of the great grandchildren.
        I just think children will learn what they live and if they are not taught racism they will be more accepting of each other. This is why some might think I am senile. I live in lala land. If only.

      • edgySF says:

        ‘Plus, I’m disgusted by the racism”

        That is why I like you. Brilliance alone doesn’t impress me. Love for humanity always does.

      • boar_d_laze says:

        Well put.

        Not just the racism, but the gun worship too. Not that they’re unrelated. It’s amazing how the fantasies of so many white gun owners involve defending themselves against a “zombie apocalypse” in which all of the zombies are, quite coincidentally, minorities.

        And then there’s the “classism.” It takes a lot more jury persuasion to win a $250,000 contract dispute against a corporation with slam-dunk facts than it does to put away a gang banger for life with bupkis. That’s not unrelated to race either. In America, race is a metaphor for class.

    • I am heartsick! Just to hear his lying voice makes me ill. GZ when convicted, needs to be placed in the GP! THen he will feel what it is like to have one’s body “FEELED UP ON!” That beast wouldn’t last in the GP before someone tries to take him out!

  67. I yelled “everything ok” and he did not reply. I said it again, “is everything ok?” He said to call the police. My roommate called 911.

    Call police? What about an ambulance? Zimmerman is a beast. A threat to society. He cannot be allowed to roam the streets to prey on innocent victims again.

    • Dennis says:

      Was that Zimmerman finally telling him to call the police? If so, that would be very damaging to his case since he already knew police were on the way.

  68. Zhickel says:

    Just say that GZ was telling the truth about stretching Trayvon’s arms out in a Y-shape.

    Consider the recent statements by the two pathologists who opined that Trayvon could have live for seconds or minutes.

    Might Trayvon’s final, dying movements have been to pull his hands in under his body again, to clutch the chest wound?

  69. princss6 says:

    Would this account for the swelling in Trayvon’s brain, Professor?

    Also, I asked on the other thread – Can the Prosecution compel GZ to get medical tests performed, i.e. tests to see if there is an old fracture of his nose via MRI or CT scan?

    • fauxmccoy says:

      the swelling can be attributed to a few possible sources according to my RN mother – head injury during the incident, a lack of oxygen due to either gz’s ‘choking’ actions, or the death process itself.

  70. Justme says:

    It’s very possible that his good buddy, Mark Osterman, discussed the scenarios with him as well

  71. longtimegeek says:

    I don’t know if I can take this case anymore. Right now, I want to wipe everything GZ out of my mind—his face, his voice, his actions, his statements, his everything.

    • TruthBTold says:

      I know exactly how you feel Longtimegeek:(

      • fauxmccoy says:

        yup – i must take breaks from it myself and this is the only place i am willing to discuss the case because of the excellent moderation of our dear host/hostess. i have written off all other outlets with the exception of reading news articles or officially released documents and i no longer read any comments to news articles, especially in the florida papers.

        • TruthBTold says:

          I am right with you faux. This is my first and only home and it is more than suffice. I don’t suffer fools gladly.

      • longtimegeek says:

        I may be overly emotional right now, but I want to say this. If law enforcement (and the jury if the case goes to trial) fails us, then I think they will have failed not only TM, but a nation–relative to both vigilantism and racism.

    • GrannyStandingforTruth says:

      @longtimegeek, I can truly related because I’m feeling the same way, but I’m not going to rest, until they locked him up. Therefore, I plan to hang in there.

      • Dennis says:

        Agreed. I was a huge supporter of Amanda Knox and helped spread the real facts regarding the junk forensic work that bumbling CSI team did. It is important to spread the true facts instead of letting people believe the lies fed by the media.

    • Tzar says:

      I have my moments to
      but this case needs sunshine and eyeballs all over it, the police and DA office were malfeasants and simply can’t b trusted to do their job without our supervision. I sincerely hope the SA and DOJ clean house

  72. “Trayvon might have remained conscious for several minutes, according to two forensic pathologists interviewed by Rene Stutzman ”

    Urgh! This is why I hated her using the plural. Only one of them said he was conscious for several minutes which led her to say TM would be yapping up a storm, which, if “several minutes” was true would mean that TM was talking when W13 got there AND the cops got there. We know that’s not true.

    The other one said he’d only be conscious for 20-30 seconds. I’ve seen other doctors say less than that but of course she didn’t interview them.

    • Tzar says:

      it’s ok, now they can’t leave, the doors are locked, it was their choice.

    • Dennis says:

      Although it is possible to talk with a collapsing lung, I don’t think you would have enough lung power to scream very loud. I was actually reading about what happens when your lung and heart are nicked by a bullet. If both the heart and lung are hit, the chest cavity will start to draw in air instead of the lungs. The lung will also start to fill with blood. The victim will start having a hard time breathing and will likely start to panic. It is also possible for the victim to go into shock from the pain or the sight of the wound & blood. From this information, Martin was clearly not a threat after the fatal shot was fired and I believe Zimmerman is clearly lying when he claims that he did not know if Martin was hit by the bullet or not.

  73. fauxmccoy says:

    professor? may i offer a point of correction?

    as i and my dear sweet 75 year old mom with 50+ years of RN experience understand the autopsy, the gunshot did not directly cause the collapse of both lungs, rather only one lung. the hollow point bullet fragmented into 3 parts, only one of which penetrated one lung causing it to immediately begin to deflate/collapse. the other lung (it can be inferred) began to collapse due to massive internal bleeding within the chest cavity (someone more experienced than i could likely calculate the time involved). i would think that crane-station could confirm this as a likely scenario.

    i only offer this correction in that it gives detractors one less thing to find fault and harp.

    that said, both lungs did collapse in relatively short order and gz’s actions helped that process in the manner in which you discussed here and previously. if it can be demonstrated through his coursework that he knew and understood this, then yes, by all means he should be held accountable for this too.

    • Dennis says:

      In my experience researching some cases, there can be conflicting views from multiple coroners that examine the body. For instance, in the Amanda Knox trial the prosecution claimed a ridiculous time of death for the victim because the real time of death would give weight to her alibi. The victim’s duodenum was empty, which means the food from her 6:00 pm meal had not left her stomach. The prosecution tried to claim that she was killed around 10:30-11:30. I found it so ridiculous that people could believe that none of the victim’s food did not leave the stomach after 3-4 hours of consumption. Most people that read autopsy reports should have a fairly good understanding of human anatomy and ballistics.

  74. EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

    I do not like to elaborate too much about my boyfriend who serves as a officer with friends in other law enforcement arenas. A discussion began at a event concerning the Trayvonn Martin case; we do have opposing views concerning what actually transpired, but when it came down to why did GZ touch, frisk and claim TM was on top; my boyfriend clearly GZ wanted him dead.

    What shocked me about the discussion he strongly believes GZ killed him deliberately by sucking the last breath out of his body. Being and officer he gave GZ the benefit of the doubt but after the SH interview it opened his eyes more. This just enrages me to think GZ “the lunatic” tried to steal this child’s cry for help. Yes, GZ has a right to a fair trial but when he lied to Judge Lester; the judge shouldn’t have granted this man another bail.

    Now as my boyfriend brought up a case in Florida concerning a man who set his partner on fire at the gas station. His first bail hearing the Judge gave him a one million dollar bail and his victim didn’t die (thank God.) But clearly she was sucking his check dry and was very greedy. This man had a good job; her constant request for more money agitated and already volatile situation. I believe he told the judge, “she suck my check dry.”

    Well why was Zimmerman given a $150,000 dollar bail and he murdered a child? The point, my boyfriend (officer) contributed it to “race” and he is of Caucasian descent. George Zimmerman made sure his victim could not speak and when officers/Feds I hear agreeing makes you wonder GZ upbringing… Such a cold lunatic bastard….

    Sorry Professor didn’t mean to go on and on….just heart breaking to hear the screams…..GZ deliberately finished him off nothing will every change my belief…

    • Tzar says:

      thank you for sharing that

    • GrannyStandingforTruth says:

      Yes, Zimmerman did get a special privilege regarding bail. I just read an article regarding the guy that broke into LL Cool J’ house and the prosecutors are asking for 1.1. million bail. He only committed burglary, there was no murder involved. And Zimmerman wants to get rid of Judge Lester for treated him unfairly…puleezze!

    • Dennis says:

      I am shocked as well that his bond was so low. Here in Michigan, most people charged with murder either get $1,000,000 bond or no bond at all. I’m not positive, but I think that the strength of the evidence also matters to the judge when deciding bond. If you are clearly 100% guilty from the evidence I would think that the judge would not deny you bond at all.

      • Vicky says:

        I believe the State of Florida has very generous and fair guidelines by establishing bail amounts relative to the income of the individual. It seems to me that this approach (if the defendant is honest) not only supports the assumption of innocence, but allows all individuals accused of a crime an equal opportunity to meet the bail requirements. For some, a $1,000,000 bail is a drop in the bucket, while for others even a $5,000 bail is unachievable. IMO, the severity of the crime, flight risk and the history of the accused should carry more weight than whether or not they have access to the financial assets necessary to meet bail.

      • TruthBTold says:

        @Dennis,

        Two words I heard often as it relates to this case and its jurisdiction and that is, bondable offense.

        “If you are clearly 100% guilty from the evidence I would think that the judge would not deny you bond at all.”

        I believe you are misunderstanding the process and how our system works.

  75. This Posting Has Brought me to tears again! Thank You Professor For yet another thought provoking article

  76. Dave says:

    I wonder what, if anything, was taught about restraining suspects in the Criminal Justice courses that GZ took. His CJ instuctors should be interviewed.

  77. KA says:

    He was a bouncer, he knew how to do apply holds. He could not have worked at a Rave environment without it.

    I also suspect he took the CPR class since he was only missing one class to graduate and that was not the CPR/First Aid.

    • boar_d_laze says:

      I was a bouncer at the Anchor Inn in
      Emeryville in the early seventies, and that was a pretty tough club. But, funny, I but don’t remember taking a class for certification.

      • KA says:

        Sorry, certification class with the Seminole College……the CPR class is a CJ program class….but also I am fairly sure as a bouncer in Raves (illegal, overcrowded, drunk minors, etc) he had to deploy “holds” .

      • boar_d_laze says:

        @KA

        What I meant was, don’t be so sure about what bouncers know and don’t know.

      • KA says:

        AH…I am not so versed in the “bouncer world” I just made that assumption knowing what I know about raves..:)

      • ajamazin says:

        boar_d_laze,

        I expected KA to suggest you have ADD and simply forgot.

        KA,

        Please share with us what you know about raves and “bouncers”.

        hint: “bouncers” serve to alert the people if the police are spotted and “supervise” the drug deals.

      • KA says:

        AH, but see then I would get a major headliner and cover story complete with elementary school playground conclusions in the “GZ Supporter Sweepstakes” if I dared divulged any of that information….

      • boar_d_laze says:

        @aja

        I was hired to make sure that everyone who came in the club was of age; make sure that no one bothered female patrons; make sure that arguments did not become fights and to beat the crap out of assholes when and as necessary.

        Good times.

    • Tzar says:

      If you listen to Trayvon’s screams some of them are not for help, they are clearly from agony, I suspect he had the poor kid in some type of hold and was hurting one of his upper extremity joints.

      • Dennis says:

        Where these screams after the shot or before the shot? I’m confused. I honestly wouldn’t believe that Martin was still struggling after the shot. I think he straddled Martin to do two things. The first, checking Martin to see if he is armed. And second, to give the appearance to the witnesses that Martin was still struggling and that he had to continue to subdue him. At this point, I don’t think it even matters who the aggressor is anymore because Zimmerman’s actions after the shot prove that he did not want Martin to live and quickened Martin’s death. Even if Martin was the aggressor, which I’m not saying he was, Zimmerman should still be tried for murder due to his post-shooting actions.

      • Tzar says:

        @dennis
        the screams are before the shot obviously and the ones I speak of specifically, sound more like howling from pain

      • martingale says:

        Yeah, the screams are definitely from agony. I think it’s likely due to a great degree of fear rather than physical pain. I think he just wanted someone to come help him.

      • Ezz-Thetic says:

        I agree, Tzar. He was in pain. I don’t know how else to interpret “Ahhhhhh!!!”.

      • aussie says:

        That tape is half speed, so easy to hear.

        I always did hear a sound after the shot – a high-pitched short yelp. I’ve put that down as GZ when the hot casing hits him on the nose.

      • You are awesome! Trent Sawyer who has posted several awesome videos on Youtube pointed out exactly the same thing! The screams are sound like this kid was in agony.

  78. Justkiddin* says:

    IMO If the prosecution is looking at the case the same way you have well imo Z has essentially dug his own grave. (so to speak) Never in my life could I imagine shooting a kid but then to climb on his back knowing he is shot in the chest is just beyond all comprehension.
    I have believed all along that Z shot Trayvon because he had to. He assaulted a minor for no reason, he knew with his record that his ass was in deep shit. Why else would he initially lie about his prior arrest? Once Trayvon started screaming Z knew he had gone to far. jmo

    • KA says:

      Agreed.

      He attempted to restrain, he went too far and realized it.

      I think he was threatening to kill him to get Trayvon to shut up…he didn’t so he had to shoot.

      If GZ was that aware of neighbors coming out in his situation, he was hypersensitive to his surroundings, very aware of who was there and watching. .

      Notice he shot 20 seconds after the neighbor yelled he was calling the police.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        Agreed…in the Hannity interview, GZ declares he had to shoot, I ran out of time. (With a little shrug of the shoulders)

      • edgySF says:

        “Notice he shot 20 seconds after the neighbor yelled he was calling the police.”

        I missed that. Wow. He was in a hurry to complete his mission.

        I wonder when he decided on “his mission”.

        Before he left his truck?

        Out on the gun range?

        Or did he just lose his temper because TM fought back?

        He never should have been permitted to have a gun…much less a CCW.

        – he had been arrested prior to killing TM

        – he had a history of violence

        – he was on multiple prescriptions for mental disorders

      • julia says:

        I think you’re right. It all moved very fast and got out of control. George panicked and felt he had to kill him to keep him from talking. That 20 seconds bothers me…good catch KA.

      • thejbmission says:

        I love reading here. Excellent comments! I agree with you all.
        Ever since the day I found out that GZ did not tell TM who he was or why he was following him, I felt strongly that GZ was on the hunt to hurt this young man.
        On the Hannity show, GZ said something very telling, imo. When asked if he thought TM was carrying a weapon when he was circling his truck and supposedly reaching in his waistband” GZ said “no, I thought he was just trying to scare me.” (paraphrasing) That speaks volumes as to GZ’s mindset.
        I think that explains it all. It’s the motive. It explains why he said, “these a-holes always get away”. It explains why he didn’t heed to the operators warning him not to follow him. Imo, from that point on he was on a mission to get this kid. In GZ poor pathetic mind, Trayvon just “dissed” him as my teenager would say. TM did disrespect Zimmerman and he was going to make him pay.
        And I agree with KA,
        GZ had gone too far in his quest to restrain TM and he had no choice but to silence him. There’s an audio enhancement on YouTube where you can hear someone say, “I’m begging you.. ”
        If that can be proved in court, I have a feeling GZ will spend a long time in jail.

      • Dennis says:

        @thejbmission

        Zimmerman is so stupid that he admitted that he did not identify himself to Martin as a neighborhood watch/concerned citizen. The detective that wanted him charged with manslaughter that night says that he grilled Zimmerman about how he had two separate opportunities to identify himself, yet Zimmerman failed to do so. He believed Martin was a criminal, so instead of trying to communicate with Martin he watches from his car. Once Martin is creeped out by Zimmerman, he attempts to get away from him by cutting through backyards. At this point, Zimmerman’s delusional mind strongly believes him to be a criminal since he ran away from him. Just like the detective said, if he had identified himself as neighborhood watch instead of creeping the kid out, this whole incident might never have happened. The detective also was smart enough to not buy his BS story regarding getting out of his car to look for a street sign or address. They know for a fact that he passed by townhouses that had the address in plain view from the lighting.

    • Tzar says:

      ITA 100%, imo he went too far when he called the police on a teenager in the act of walking home talking to his girlfriend bringing snacks to his step brother so they could watch the second half of the all-star game. Who the f*ck does that? GZ was a disaster waiting to happen.

      • TruthBTold says:

        @Tzar,

        You are spot on. Also, considering that shortcut or cut through is frequently used by kids, what is the problem? I see “Trayvons” all the time. No need to call the damn police for walking about. I can’t wait until the State opens up with the can you tell is again what made him suspicious?

      • GZ was a disaster waiting to happen.

        Zimmerman was on a fast track to disaster with the guy at Carmax, the stalking of the girlfriend, the assault of law enforcement, the abuse of the dog and then the killing of an innocent kid.

      • Dennis says:

        I’m really upset that the neighbor didn’t try to help Martin or break up the altercation. Had the neighbor done more to help the teenager that was screaming outside for help, Martin might still be alive. If some kid outside my house was screaming for help I would not be sitting there waiting for the police to come help them. Police are only good for writing tickets and sending people to prison for non-violent crimes like possession of marijuana. It is sad that people depend on police so much, yet they are never there when you need them.

      • edgySF says:

        Exactly, SouthernGirl2.

        Don’t forget his cousin. GZ apologized to her & his parents, and agreed to stay away from her.

      • martingale says:

        @ Dennis: It’s easy to say you’d run out and break up the altercation when you aren’t in that position. I don’t blame the neighbors at all for calling the police and waiting. I think they should have been keeping a better eye on things, but most people aren’t going to endanger themselves in a situation like this.

      • google Kitty Genovese for an example of the behavior you describe.

        Jesus Christ! And the monster is still living!!!!!!!!!

      • KA says:

        Sociologists study on the Genovese syndrome found that the more people that witnessed a crime in progress the less likely there would be one that stepped forward. The concept of “diffusion of responsibility” actually asks as a deterrent to action creating this phenomena.

        I can’t remember this names, but it became quite an interesting area of research study.

      • bettykath says:

        I don’t understand all the standing around watching. I watched an accident happen. Car tailgating motorcycle and then hitting it. Cyclist on the ground immobile. Many people around across the road with some standing by the car talking with the driver. No one near the cyclist who was bleeding profusely. Since I’d be inclined to punch the car driver in the face, I approached the cyclist and applied pressure to stop the bleeding. But then, I learned along time ago (second grade?) that just because someone is leading and has lots of followers it does NOT mean that they know where they are going.

      • If I am not mistaken, he also chased someone on the highway. I cannot seem to find a link to that particular article.

      • rayvenwolf says:

        Diary I think that its mentioned in the second evidence dump. And yeah he did. GZ claimed the guy spit at/on him/his car. The other driver said he was just spitting his gum out.

      • I love all of the comments on here! Tzar you are awesome along with thejbmission, Dennis, Julia, Rachel….wow! There are some pretty INTELLIGENT people on here.

        “GZ had gone too far in his quest to restrain TM and he had no choice but to silence him. There’s an audio enhancement on YouTube where you can hear someone say, “I’m begging you. ”

        I had to quote this because I have listened and viewed the YouTube videos by Trent Sawyer and I have heard it slowed down and that is Trayvon Benjamin Martin screaming and begging for his life. Trent points out that he believes that others are involved and that two of the neighbrs might have actually been there when TM was begging for his life. This entire case stinks and everyone involved in this case needs to go down and GZ needs to go to prison for the rest of his sorry life.

  79. CherokeeNative says:

    Professor, I have to add this. If any one person is going to go down in the books as an example of what NOT to do when you are looking at the potential of being held or arrested for criminal charges, it is going to be GZ. His name will be on the lips of every law professor from here after. Had GZ just kept his mouth shut from the moment he was relieved of his weapon, he would not be where he is today. That he didn’t – is what I really believe was a part of God’s plan.

    • Dave says:

      If GZ had kept the door of his truck shut, Trayvon Martin would not be where he is today.

      • fauxmccoy says:

        while that is also true, the fact that gz repeatedly spoke with SPD without advice of counsel is precisely why he is facing M2 charges. had he not done so, it is far less likely that he would have been charged at all. he voluntarily gave the prosecution much of the evidence that will hopefully put him away for a good long time. i can see why cherokee native would consider that ‘part of gods plan’. i am not a believer myself, but respect those that are.

      • Tzar says:

        @ fauxmccoy
        GZ felt he was amongst friends, who needs a lawyer amongst friends and he was right too, too bad for him the Martins were not willing to go away quietly and accept the dehumanizing degradation and violation of their precious boy.

      • Rachael says:

        it reminds me of the volunteer fireman who set fires so he could always be the first one there, work with the real firemen and be a hero.

      • Rachael says:

        “too bad for him the Martins were not willing to go away quietly and accept the dehumanizing degradation and violation of their precious boy.”

        Now see, this is where I have so much trouble with all the “haters.” What parent would accept without question that their child could be walking down the street doing NOTHING, unarmed and be admittedly shot by someone who claimed it was self-defense and walked away because (he thought) there were no witnesses.

        Would you accept it? I wouldn’t. I would NEVER accept it and I don’t know any parent who would.

        Am I emotional? Yes, but who wouldn’t be? We can’t have crazy people shooting children (yes children) because they “look” suspicious or because they were suspended from school.

        My GOD, in what society would that ever be okay?

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        If GZ had not made the NEN call, there would be little evidence to convict.

      • Tzar says:

        @ Rachel
        “Now see, this is where I have so much trouble with all the “haters.” What parent would accept without question that their child could be walking down the street doing NOTHING, unarmed and be admittedly shot by someone who claimed it was self-defense and walked away because (he thought) there were no witnesses. ”

        Now consider the gall of the chief of police who tried to get the martins to live with this pain and insult and lied and told them that Zimmerman had a “squeaky clean” record, who let them agonize for 3 days looking for their missing son, all the while Chief lee and DA Wolfinger had Trayvon’s cell phone in their possession and had id’d him.

        think about the gall of these people
        think about how little they valued Trayvon’s life and the welfare of his family
        think about how little they valued justice
        think about the hubris they displayed

        and for what? so this nut job can go back on the streets?

    • @ CherokeeNative, Tzar, Rachael

      What you guys said!!!!!!!!!!

  80. This has made me LIVID all over again.

    • I know the feeling! I am about to blow a gasket in this office! A couple of Physicians what I work with, stated this same thing when I asked them why was GZ staddling the body and pushing TM’s head into the grass. He certainly wasn’t attempting to give CPR? I work as an NP in the Trauma Section of a Hospital and I have seen this condition of the brain swelling.When I showed the Physicians what I had read, they both stated, this is very possible and that is why TM’s head was swollen. Brain Swelling? I am so angry, god please don’t let this man get away with this! George Killerman, dehumanized and defiled the son of Tracy Marin and Sybrina Fulton. He humiliated this boy and this boy did nothing to deerve that kind of humiliation.

  81. Tzar says:

    Such an attempt at suffocation or strangulation would be a possible aggravating factor in Trayvon’s global cerebral edema, found at autopsy.

  82. CherokeeNative says:

    So much for self-defense….if anyone ever believed that theory. Thanks Professor – once again, you hit the mark.

  83. Tzar says:

    “Now you’s can’t leave.”
    -Sonny from A Bronx Tale

  84. EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

    Yes GZ did…

Leave a Reply to bettykath Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s