Zimmerman Witnesses Practicum by Patricia


I decided to post Patricia’s latest version of her excellent work in progress as our Friday Night Practicum. She is attempting to put the evidence together to figure out what really happened.

I am posting it as an article, rather than leaving it in a comment where she originally posted it, in order to make it easier for everyone to read and comment.

* * *

To WhoNoze, Princess, Sandra, gbrbsb, The Professor and my fellow students –


My quoting WITNESS #6 is not the same as saying he’s going to be a great witness. (“Were you lying then, or are you lying now?”) Or that they’ll call him.

But the fact that he was willing to review his statements impressed me, and what he had to say answered this question that has long nagged me: “Where were the defensive wounds, on either Trayvon or Zimmerman?”

As I heard it, WITNESS #6 isn’t throwing his 911 call into the trash can.

He is saying (and I paraphrase wildly), “Look, it was dark out outside, and I may have interpreted the position of the top guy’s arms as delivering a beating, based on the stance I’ve seen on television, on MMA. Because on TV MMA, once you’re in that top position, you beat the crap out of your opponent. But in reality I didn’t see arm motion in the air, and it’s entirely possible that what I really saw was the top guy with his arms down, not necessarily because they just landed a punch, but it could be that he was in reality pressing down on the bottom guy’s arms to restrain him. Because I did see the bottom guy straining to get up.”

We’ve asked on this site, “What the heck was George doing all the time he was wrestling with Trayvon, that Trayvon doesn’t have a mark on him?” In other words, couldn’t HE land a punch on the kid?

Not if Trayvon had gotten control of Zimmerman’s arms – and when it comes to “reach,” the taller Trayvon would have had this singular advantage.

In the interview, WITNESS #6 is asked about his knowledge of MMA. Only what he’s seen on TV. Ever wrestled? Never.

Well, surely we all know by now that TV “wrestling” is scripted (they actually story-board the moves) to be visually brutal, as contrasted to Greco-Roman classic wrestling which relies on strength, leverage, etc. Further, the “man on top” position is favored, as it’s an easy camera angle. Gets very vivid shots.

But it’s nobody was filming a TV contest that night. A life or death contest is what Trayvon must have felt he was in. If his only “weapon” was the ability to hold Zimmerman to the ground, that’s what he would use.

But it would be more exhausting for Trayvon (who already spoke to DeeDee of his fatigue before the encounter) than for Zimmerman, and in the end the stockier, more muscular guy ultimately got the upper hand – and body.

I noted also that de la Rionda scheduled the interview with WITNESS #6 to see if he recalled the sounds of punching or head-banging, and WITNESS #6 was firm in saying “No.”

WITNESS #6 was the only witness who stepped a foot outside during the confrontation (I think it was literally “a” foot onto his patio). He saw the grappling in two locations: grassy area, then moving over to the concrete. Much closer than anyone else.

Later, from upstairs he observed Trayvon’s dead body in a solely grassy area.

With the contact with concrete (or sprinkler head) so close to the final moments, it proves to me that the cuts to Zimmerman’s head were very late in the encounter because

(1) they bled in the direction consistent with Zimmerman leaning forward over Trayvon,

(2) the blood outline was not washed off by any intermittent rain, and

(3) the crisp blood outlines are consistent with Zimmerman NOT being under Trayvon at the time of the shot, because the coarse St. Augustine grass would have scrubbed off some or most of the blood and blurred the outlines, and also

(4) the speed of coagulation for a young healthy male would be consistent with the scalp cuts (I’m tempted to call them “cutlets”) being just moments before the fatal shot.

I bow to WhoNoze in all things related to sound technology. He is the master! Yes, there was a time gap when WITNESS #6 is inside, securing his door, trying to get up the stairs to observe what he senses could be a dangerous conflict outside – and, I think, his fianceé is on crutches trying to get up the same stairs – dialing 911 (in competition with others at that point, who knows if there was a delay in connecting?).

So WITNESS #6 missed the shooting. And in that minute/seconds (WhoNoze is better equipped to ascertain the precise length of time; not my area of expertise) the wrestlers have moved onto grass, Zimmerman manages to mount Trayvon, pinning him to the ground unable to escape, snarl a few curses and shoot him through the heart.

Frisk the body, flip it, frisk again, check out exit wound. Get up, wander a few seconds in consternation, back and forth to the body, with hand clasped to forehead (“How the fuck am I going to explain THIS?”).

WITNESS #6 testified in interview as to how he saw the body originally placed (arms, legs). Other witnesses saw Zimmerman GET UP off the body.

WITNESS #18 was upstairs the whole time. She testified how dark it was (“I didn’t see because it was too dark.” and how little she could see, But what astounded me was, at 4:17 into her 911 call she cried, heartfelt: “that young boy.”

From her upstairs view, she could see that the victim was a youth!

She was the first to discern that. (Other than the killer, of course.)

She could also discern that the shooter was Hispanic, and stocky – again, remarkable in the night, although the arrival of flashlights may well have illuminated him.

I am not writing my “term paper” on dueling witnesses.

I report to you how WITNESS #6 put significant pieces of the puzzle together, and that they fit: (A) timing of the late sequence for the scalp cuts; (B) the restraint by Trayvon on Zimmerman’s arms that prevented swinging between the two and resulting lack of defensive hand injuries for both; (C) Zimmerman’s striving to rise from the restrained ground position (which he ultimately attained); and (D) How Trayvon’s body ended up in the all-grassy area.

I am not a Medical Examiner. I have no clue if there would be signs of, say, a painfully-twisted elbow that would show up post-mortem. (I did see the video of the screaming detained youth in Vancouver.)

Trayvon Martin was considered a John Doe. They had the confessed killer, the gun, and the fragmented hollow-point, which was the cause of death.

His body was remarkably free of external trauma except for the fatal hole in his torso. What other “cause of death” would they look for?

For the Murder 2 charge, would a twisted elbow matter?

Zimmerman does state he had “wrist control” … whatever that meant.

How both sides use the witness statements are up to them. Keep in mind that there are witness statements NOT YET RELEASED. More surprises coming down the track!

I would always consider witness statements the least credible evidence.

What O’Mara cannot dispute:

(A) the photo of Zimmerman’s bloodied head that proves yes, he could EASILY escape, being in the dominant position over Trayvon Martin, but CHOSE INSTEAD to fire the Kel-Tec into Trayvon Martin’s torso, and

(B) the trajectory of the 9mm hollow-point bullet that pierced Trayvon Martin’s heart and lungs.

Professor, fellow students, that’s the end of my report for today.

Thanks for reading.

373 Responses to Zimmerman Witnesses Practicum by Patricia

  1. Lonnie Starr says:

    An eyewitness provides details about what was heard and seen before and after George Zimmerman shot Trayvon Martin.

  2. Lonnie Starr says:

    “LezGetReal has been contacted by a former resident of the community who told us that the condominium board was well aware that Zimmerman carried a gun, as he brought it to community meetings. She also said that the neighborhood watch was made up of “drunks, trouble-makers and lunatics”.”


  3. Lonnie Starr says:

    It certainly seems that Zimmerman has been a very busy little bee, his 911 call history has him all over the place reporting suspicious activities in nearby communities have a look:

  4. Lonnie Starr says:

    You were probably hacked, that’s a google protected property, I’m sure we all know how google feels about public trust. Perhaps, if you would, go to google and report this link as a problem to them so they can figure it out (and they will). Otherwise, it’s just my private evidence/blog post/article collection, which I’m letting the public use too. Not meant to draw any discussions, there are enough places for that already. I like using it because I can change the order that things appear in, by simply adjusting the date and time in the adm panel.

    Oh, and if anyone finds anything good that should be stored, just leave a link in a comment, when I have time I’ll promote it to an article.

  5. Patricia says:

    Sorry, Lonnie and everybody – I meant link, not thread:

    http://zimmerman-vs-martin.blogspot.com/ enjoy.

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      Could it be that what you’re referring to as a crash is merely slow loading? There are a lot of pdf embeds I found scattered around a site, I’ve pulled them together here so I don’t have to wade through non relevant stuff. But alas, pdf embeds are slow to load and sometimes for some reason they either stop or pause, making it seem like the browser is stuck. This will go away as I get more stuff up, pushing the embeds off the main page, then they’ll load in the background. The page stats show me that an increasing number of people are using the site. So perhaps this is the answer.

  6. Malisha says:

    Working his lies into any series of events shouldn’t really be necessary if it is obvious — as it will be — that he is lying.

  7. Patricia says:

    longtimegeek –

    Lotta wisom in these statements:

    “I’m not fond of the idea of conceding many of GZ’s lies to simplify the presentation for the jurors.

    “I’d rather look for more ways to concede as few, if any, of GZ’s lies as possible.

    “I think it’s quite possible that this can be accomplished while simplifying the presentation for the jurors at the same time.

    THANKS and AMEN!

  8. Patricia says:

    Thanks, LTG. You know, there’s more evidence coming down the pipeline, so we all should keep an open mind.

    Saying that the jurors will believe all or most of Zimmerman’s claims does a disservice to the jurors’ intelligence and the talents of the prosecution.

    Validating Zimmerman’s spurious claims (then saying those claims don’t matter) is just shilling for the Zimmerman side. It’s another attempt to rehabilitate Zimmerman in the public’s eye.

    Contorting or revising any FL student’s statements, then adding “So you are actually helping MOM out in your theories.” is despicable. Tolerated it once; not toleratng it second time.

    So let’s get back to “extensive research, analysis and re-analysis” as you so aptly frame it. I figure that’s what we are here for. You are an important part of that process, and we all benefit from each other’s work.

    Thanks for sharing.

    • longtimegeek says:

      I’m also not sure about mataharley’s comment about GZ pulling TM’s clothing into his crotch, if GZ is on top. I suspect that GZ’s left hand wasn’t far from his gun, regardless of GZ’s and TM’s relative positions, because GZ was concerned about shooting his left hand. In GZ’s reenactment video, he held his left hand high.

      In another forum, someone speculated that GZ couldn’t have been on the bottom during the shot because he didn’t have the right pattern of gunshot powder or blood spatter on him. In a different forum, a credible nurse said that TM’s gunshot wound wouldn’t necessarily spatter blood. But, I thought the part about gunshot powder was interesting. Do you or anyone else know anything about this?

      By the way, I haven’t been extensively researching, analyzing and re-analyzing this case, because I need a break. My heart and brain are still struggling with the idea that GZ pressed the last bit of life out of TM–possibly at least enough that TM couldn’t even whisper dying words to the police and EMTs. Reading about GZ possibly applying a painful hold to TM and causing pained screams hasn’t helped either. I’m not sure I’ll get over this anytime soon.

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        I’m with you… I’ve read and seen various timelines worked out, none of which come close to confirming GZ’s narrative. When confronted with the import of these speculations, “running” gets changed to “skipping” and “MMA style blows” disappear entirely along with straddling. So, if anything, GZ narrative of innocence has been changing toward the one that leads along the pathways to guilt, not away from it.

        As if, for example: He surrounded by stacks of pennies, yet he leaves there and courses through stacks of nickels to dimes, to quarters and explains his travels as; “Because I needed to find a penny”.

        We’re supposed to swallow a story that he was attacked while returning to his truck, on the east-west path near the tee. His story flows smoothly from being surprised, overcome, helpless and terribly frightened of death when his head was about to “explode”, he remembers and draws his weapon and has no other choice but to fire! Only to find that he fires his weapon 40.5 feet away from where, he shimmied and struggled to get himself inches away from the concrete.

        Either ~40.5 feet don’t matter to him, or he’s trying to conceal the fact that he voluntarily traveled south of the tee, in the direction that TM was fleeing him.

        Please note that all his “confusion, forgetfulness and mistaken perceptions”, bar none, all work to exculpate him. Like the checkout girl who makes “mistakes and errors”, that always turn out to be in her own favor, is this believable? In a case where we would expect him to vigorously avoid a capital offense charge? I’ll say once, maybe. Twice? Perhaps, but more than that; never!

        Most attempts to construct timelines, using GZ’s own words while on his NEN call, fail too many times and in too many ways, because his claims are either not possible, unlikely, or otherwise just not supported by the evidence given. For example, the circling of his truck by TM, absorbs too much of the time GZ spent on his NEN call, for his subsequent actions to have happened at the stated times. Because of the distances TM would have to cover, at the rate he could move, the time to the next event in the call would have to be displaced.

        Here, there are several timelines here as well as links to other works like those done with the various CCTV cameras; http://bcclist.com/

        As you will see there is quite a bit of reading to wade through, but using F3 “find in page” function, you can easily get at the links and maps. I’m also trying to collect and label them, I’ll present them on my blog when I’m done.

        But the point is there are plenty of very good reasons to see that GZ is weaving tales that are not internally consistent with what happened. If you aren’t aware of the timelines, how the actions and statements play along side the clock, the distances to be covered and the events expressed in the NEN call, you can say almost anything about this matter and it will appear to be believable/possible, even though it is not.

        • Patricia says:

          Lonnie, if/when the prosecution addresses the timeline issue to debunk Zimmerman’s claims, they will need a creative graphic artist to make a terrific chart to put up on the screen, and to stay on the screen.

          Many jurors take notes, and are really “into it.” But these kind of data get lost if presented verbally. We at this site get the luxury of mulling over data for days/weeks/months but they have to keep up with the courtroom pace. The exhibit can also be requested by the jury as a reference during its deliberations.

          Juries have amazing power of comprehension and concentration – witness some of those complex banking scams in the billions that the feds have prosecuted. Too tough for “ordinary people” to comprehend? As it turned out, not at all. Teamwork led them to a verdict.

          When you think about it, the Zimmerman case in its entirety represents about 15 minutes in a single evening with less than three minutes that can’t be pinpointed as to the activity of the protagonists (at this time). I think we’ll see that resolved. Still two witness reports not revealed.

          I am wondering if anyone will put together “The Timeline According to George.” His elaborate tapestry of story-telling would consume double the time involved. Make a nice contrast to the real thing.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            A well put together timeline is easy to walk the jurors through. You show a location a time and event, then you move to the next event.
            You point to the time and then you can say “He claims he did this or that, but as you can see, there’s no time for him to have done it.

            The SP will have a field day with GZ and the timeline he’s testified to. There are things that happen too fast, unless he was rolling along really slow behind TM, there are things he says he witnessed, that would mean he’s stopped in the road to watch it happen. He’s maneuvering like a half crazed lunatic, and expects no one should have noticed or become concerned by his behavior. Then he claims things happened that simply could not have happened. Like TM coming back to circle his truck. It sounds good in the telling, until someone shows that at walking speed, the amount of distance would consume several minutes, that the chain of events simply don’t provide.

            Without a timeline, it’s easy for GZ to string together as many events as he needs to squeeze into the storyline, because, without a timeline to give away the impossibility of it, all one can do is accept it or reject it. Often that would require a bias. The timeline solves that problem by giving good reasons to throw out self serving artifacts GZ has tried to use.

          • Patricia says:

            Agreed, Lonnie, and thanks for the fuller description of using the timeline graphic. What I mean is that there should be a graphic up there on the screen to see, and as you’ve said, do the walk-through and the jurors will follow. The prosecution should not try to do it all verbally, without the graphic.

            Also a talented graphic artist often inserts icons as keys – a little phone, little car, etc. where applicable. (I’m not a graphic designer so that’s why I work with one that’s clever and imaginative)

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            I’ve come across several animated graphic timelines, but I haven’t put them up because, they pre-date the evidence dump and are easily seen to contain flaws. But, only for those well versed in timeline and timeline discussions, other people will only be confused by them.

            It is these timelines that reveal the severe anomalies in GZ’s several stories. There isn’t enough time on the NEN call, for example, for TM to circle GZ’s truck at either the clubhouse or on TTL. Because that would displace other events that are more critical or are more certain to have happened.

            GZ, for example says that after spotting TM coming through the western cut through near Taaffe’s house, he then drove around to park at the clubhouse, where TM comes along 5 seconds later.

            Now the timeline reveals that it’s 15 second drive from Taaffe’s to the clubhouse where he parked, but for TM it’s a 1minute 20 second walk. The only way TM can arrive five seconds behind GZ, is if GZ drives slowly around following TM to the clubhouse.

            Now that you mention it, damned the confusion, as I come across time line graphics I’ll put them up with warnings, as I come across them.

    • longtimegeek says:

      Oh, I forgot to mention that watching you and mataharley go back and forth was kind of like watching a battle of the titans. It looks like she’s already settled on a winning strategy, but I suspect that there is a better one out there, one that you’re probably headed towards. I’m not fond of the idea of conceding many of GZ’s lies to simplify the presentation for the jurors. I’d rather look for more ways to concede as few, if any, of GZ’s lies as possible. I think it’s quite possible that this can be accomplished while simplifying the presentation for the jurors at the same time.

  9. Patricia says:

    Professor Leatherman, Mataharley, Fellow Students:

    While this may read like I am jousting with my educational mentor, let me make clear that my submittals last week were NOT some strategy forwarded to the prosecution (expecting them to follow a scenario from a rank amateur, one without access to complete evidence to date or future evidence, and far, far in advance of the court date).

    Nor do I espouse the laundry-list school of courtroom presentation.

    When the decision is made as to what points to hammer and what to omit, economy should rule the day. The human brain can accommodate only so much at a time, particularly when the recipients (in this case, jurors) need to absorb critical information to reach their conclusions. But, that’s not my call to make.

    At the same time, I believe it’s important that advocates understand how the dots connect. And while all elements may never be known, understand where the dots DON’T connect, and avoid taking a position that can be destroyed by believable testimony and, more important, irrefutable hard evidence.

    “Be Prepared” as the Scouts say.

    I believe advocacy needs a narrative. You’re speaking to humans you want to impress with the logic and “rightness” of your case – and you want it retained. Then you decide how you hang the salient points on that narrative. For eons before man could read and write, he passed down tribal history. We are receptive to histories because it is in our genes.

    I will digress from the Zimmerman case to personal history. I’ve worked as a speechwriter for decades. In 95% of the assignments, the length is 3 minutes, sometimes truncated to 2 (if that’s envisioned, they get both the 2 minute and the 3 minute versions). That’s 265 – 400 words. Clients always complain: “How can I possibly tell them about this in 3 minutes?” I ask back, “What makes you think they can absorb more than three minutes?”

    If I may paraphrase, “brevity is the soul of success … “
    As in, “Works for me. Always.”

    But the submittals to this “academic site” are not so constrained. They are simply class papers.

    I fully concur with Professor Leatherman, Mataharley and other legal minds as they advocate THE LAW that obtains when Zimmerman sets off in pursuit of the profiled innocent, then reverts to mayhem when the B-movie doesn’t work out the way he planned.

    But O’Mara insists that his client was restrained by the victim, attacked by the victim, and had no avenue of escape.

    He is making George Zimmerman the victim, and Zimmerman is not.

    Mataharley is saying is that, while it doesn’t matter (because legal theory will prevail), in truth Zimmerman was really restrained under Martin when he fired the shot, and witnesses will attest to it; Zimmerman really could snake his gun out and fire within the confines between two bodies – and fire the perfect shot in the manner that he HIMSELF swore witness to; that forensic evidence on gunshot distance is worthless; that Trayvon Martin really did pound Zimmerman’s head onto the concrete, in addition to “breaking” Zimmerman’s nose – and that anyone on this site (in particular, Patricia) who disputes this lunacy is playing into Mark O’Mara’s hands.

    I say that’s bunk – a lot of bunk – and that this is an attempt to chill the research and analysis that we should be doing here.

    I wholeheartedly reject being depicted by Mataharley as a tool of O’Mara and the Zimmerman cabal … because I disagree – based on evidence – with her claims to Zimmerman’s conduct.

    Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

    It’s an attempt to chill analysis that is UNfavorable to Zimmerman.

    She has her opinions.
    She should present them for consideration, and debate.


    • longtimegeek says:

      Patricia – I like your comments and your approach. I like mataharley’s comments, also. But, I’m confused about some of mataharley’s comments. For example, I thought the reasonable person rule applied to using deadly force in a self defense case, not the GZ freak out rule. For another example, I can see the forensics and logistics excluding GZ being on the bottom at the time of the shooting. So, I’m not sure why a juror wouldn’t be able to get over that hump, regardless of the standard of proof by whom. I’m the type of person that does extensive research, analysis and re-analysis before putting together my final argument. So, again, I like your approach.

  10. Malisha says:

    Professor, your observation, “Difficult to visualize a psycho gangsta “skipping.” —

    Think of psycho gangsta getting all cheerful about the idea that he was just about to leap out of the bushes and viciously attack a creepy “homie” and off him. See? La-tee-Da, Umgunna kill a homie muthafucka, la-tee-da, zippity-doo-dah, oh yeah…

    • Brown says:

      Don’t forget to skip while singing the song
      : ^ )

    • longtimegeek says:

      It’s more likely that GZ cheerfully skipped out of the bushes to attack the muthafucka homie/friend (aka *sshole), slipped in the wet grass, and fell face first back into the bushes. Then, not to be deterred, he cheerfully skipped back out of the bushes again, slipped in the wet grass again, and fell backwards into a sign or sprinkler head.

  11. Malisha says:

    Mataharley, my take on the change from SYG to TSD is this: O’Mara has to know that he’s going to lose on the SYG because there is just too much evidence that his own client initiated the confrontation, had a wrongful intent, and so forth. They can’t wave a wand and get rid of all that evidence, and George’s idiotic attempts to explain each little piece of it away with a different explanation for each has come into utter hilarity. He looks like “Compulsive Liar” on the old Saturday Night Live skit.

    The position that I think O’Mara is retreating to is this: OK, my client went after Trayvon Martin, and my client intended to question Trayvon Martin, all in the interest of protecting his neighbors from harm and danger and all, but then, Trayvon Martin was so aggressive and so terrifying that George just became overwhelmed and felt he was being killed and couldn’t escape because Trayvon Martin was ON TOP OF HIM so he pulled his gun and shot in the true belief that he was defending his life, and you can’t blame him for that, because he was reacting to having his nose broken and he was screaming HELP HELP HELP.

    In other words, from “My client was innocently walking along looking for a street sign when he was the victim of an assault with intent to kill” to “My client was just trying to help out when he was hurt and ‘lost it’ and reasonably feared for his life and reacted.”

    Kinda changing “innocent victim” to “confused, mistrustful and frightened” — the same old three excuses O’Mara used for the lying at the first bond hearing.

    It’s always someone else’s fault and George always has the excuse of not really understanding. After all, when a kid appears, puts his hand in his waistband, circles, skips, and then calls you “homie,” you can get kinda confused.

    • mataharley says:

      Malisha, I don’t disagree that O’Mara sees GZ’s actions as a problem in his defense, as well as his conflicting statements of what led up to the event.

      I’m actually unaware that O’Mara, himself, ever stated he would be defending Zim on SYG from the beginning. I do see that media types tend to lump SYG, the pretrial evidentiary hearings and TSD all into one jumbled mess tho.

      Take, for example, this Orlando Sentinel article at the beginning of August.


      Zimmerman’s lawyer, Mark O’Mara, on Thursday formally announced that he would defend Zimmerman using Florida’s now much-debated “stand your ground” law.

      That means he’ll schedule a trial-like hearing, put on evidence and try to show that Zimmerman was afraid — and that it was a reasonable fear — that Trayvon was on the verge of killing or severely injuring him.

      If he’s successful, a judge will throw out the second-degree-murder charge.

      “There is clear support for a strong claim of self-defense,” O’Mara wrote in a blog post Thursday.

      Ms. Stuztman manages to confuse a reading audience into believing MOM will be using the nuances of SYG when, in the next sentences, he clearly states he’ll be using self defense.

      I can only attribute this to reporters thinking that only SYG defense cases utilize the pretrial evidentiary hearings, when that isn’t necessarily true. In fact, the basic differences between self defense/Castle Doctrine and SYG is that the right of self defense, and/or retreating, is no longer confined just to your home and property. However those rights are still not available to the aggressors, save in rare instances.

      The players and their roles simply come down to this.

      MOM/Zim will only deal with the fight and gunshot, saying Zim was justified in killing Martin (despite everything that transpired before) because he feared for his life, was getting beat, and was unable to retreat. They might even toss in the belief that TM threw the first blow, tho that isn’t actually provable.

      The State will try to prove the elements of M2 beyond reasonable doubt… meaning that the fight and death – even if TM did throw the first punch – only happened because of Zim’s decisions and actions that night, and are tantamount to criminal. And this is likely to point out that Zim had multiple opportunities of retreat long before the gun came out of the holster.

      If the State can convince the jury that Zim is responsible, his claim of self defense won’t matter because it was an event of his own making. MOM will hope the State’s case fails to portray Zim as responsible, and his assertion of self defense will prevail.

      • Malisha says:

        Well that’s interesting, Mataharley — perhaps O’Mara never said SYG himself and all the journalists and broadcast folks just added it in either because they’re dumb or because it’s sexy.

        I frankly do not understand the attraction of SYG. It would seem to me that the right to defend yourself doesn’t need to be enhanced with a two-part analysis, because if a person is threatened, he or she may not even think fast enough to effectively escape, and for someone else to second-guess that he should have tried seems inappropriate. But let’s say that O’Mara always wanted to use straight self-defense, or at any rate that he does now. The whole theory of self-defense depends upon his client’s credibility, which puts him right back where he (unfortunately) started out, because George shot his own credibility in the foot long before O’Mara was on the case.

        I don’t believe you can claim self-defense just because you got hurt while you were killing someone. This may have been George’s first kill, and although he pulled it off, it doesn’t look like it was easy.

  12. Malisha says:

    * * * This morning something came to me — even before my first dose of caffeine — YAY!

    The “gratuitous” negative comments made by Judge Lester about George Zimmerman were considered enough to tip the balance and not let him continue to preside over the criminal trial, although obviously he would not be the fact-finder in the ultimate trial (the jury would be). So let’s leave it at that. The judge’s impartiality and trustworthiness to act in a situation that would have an enormous effect on George Zimmerman’s future was not considered high enough above criticism for him to proceed.

    “Gratuitous” negative comments, mind you, that resulted from Judge Lester having information in front of him that he was evaluating with the education he had preparing him for such evaluation.

    OK, leave it at that.

    Now, LOOK at what George Zimmerman “gratuitously” said about Trayvon Martin when he had just seen him for the first time, did not know his name, had no idea who he was or where he came from, and had no training in assessing his character:

    “He looks like he’s up to no good”
    “Something’s wrong with him”
    “I don’t know what his thing is”
    “He looks high or something”
    “Asshole…[he’s one of them who] always get[s] away”
    “Fucking Punk!”

    Hmmmm. We’re not supposed to trust what Judge Lester said about how he judged the Zimmerman case? We don’t want to take his word for how he will conduct himself in the future with regard to Zimmerman?

    BUT…we should absolutely trust whatever Zimmerman says about Trayvon Martin, and about why he “had to” shoot him?

    Wow. Double standard.

  13. Malisha says:

    @ Mataharley, about the SPD, here are the reasons that I am pretty sure the SPD was not only complicit in trying to cover up the crime, but also carrying on a semi-organized witness intimidation program AND obstruction of justice.

    1) The young boy who was out walking his dog was guided by the police in giving his witness statement. His mother described the police correcting parts of his testimony (telling him what to say) and disagreeing with him when he gave them information that would have been damaging to George’s insistence that he killed in self-defense.

    2) At the same time, Bill Lee said they “couldn’t” charge George because they had NO EVIDENCE that he did NOT do the killing in self-defense.

    3) One of the witnesses pointed out that she tried over and over again to get her information to the police and they wouldn’t speak with her. She ultimately went public so she could get her information out.

    4) The police allowed George to clean up and wash his hands before interviewing him. They did not, therefore, collect evidence from his hands.

    5) The police contacted Wolfinger that night to get the “red light” on the prosecution; this is way out of order; they routinely keep a suspect at least until morning to make a determination like that.

    6) One witness who later gave a TV interview with both a voice-scrambler and a visual screen in front of him/her could not get the police to listen to the witness statement s/he was trying to offer. That witness definitely claimed that the shooter got up OFF the victim after having shot him.

    7) SPD failed to canvass the entire neighborhood that night, even though there were individuals on the scene of the crime, actually making CONTACT with the suspect (at least, and maybe even with the victim’s body!) who then went home and were not even patted down or searched, much less taken in to the station house and interviewed.

    8) The SPD chose not to transport George, allegedly covered with blood, to the E.R. that night before his interview at the station house, although that is protocol for any injured person at the scene of a crime. They let HIM make the decision about whether or not he would be taken to the E.R.; they canceled an ambulance that was going to take HIM into the hospital that night, at his request. This is so far out of line with SOP that it is not just a “mistake”: Here you have someone who claims to have been beaten within an inch of his life; he has blood all over him; you do not know WHOSE blood he has all over him; you let HIM decide not to go to the E.R.?

    No, the SPD’s conduct, even if you give them “the benefit of the doubt,” goes way WAY over the borderline of doubt and, beyond any reasonable doubt, shows that they were working hard on a cover-up from the get-there, and I will bet they still are.

    • cielo62 says:

      THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU! While all of the hoopla has been around GZ I was angry that no one was pointing multiple fingers at the SPD who REALLY messed up the investigation from the beginning! We can only hope the Federal Justice department is waiting to come down on them like a ton of bricks. Their actions reveal more than just incompetence. They show an institutionalized racism. They also clearly show “connections” where justice is tossed out the window to protect Zimmerman’s “boy”…. Again!

    • mataharley says:

      Malisha, my point was that the SPD wanted to charge GZ with manslaughter/unnecessary death right out of the gate, even with what they had in evidence. That was nixed by the local prosecutors office because they saw nothing that would conflict with GZ’s story that he was beaten, and shot in self defense.

      15 days later or so, it was in the hands of the State’s offices.

      • Malisha says:

        Actually, I believe only Serino and Singleton wanted to charge George; the rest of them were using the Florida code section (manslaughter/unnecessary death) that pertained to a police officer killing somebody accidentally while he was trying to stop a felony. I think they merely wrote that on the paperwork because they had to fill in the blank with SOME code section before they fixed the case. And there were at least three witnesses who independently told the press that the police were trying to coerce them into changing their stories, and that the police were not interested in getting the information from them to begin with, and that the police told THEM what to think and say about the matter. I believe the reasons we have not heard more about this is that even the Feds want to keep this relatively quiet so as not to have a situation on their hands that THEY cannot control, especially since the case has become political in an election year. But think of what would happen if the State had to sacrifice, for instance, Wolfinger — who is his political contingent? What if they had to sacrifice five or six cops?

        It is my firm belief that we will NEVER know the extent to which institutional racism and sheer corruption were involved in this case. Maybe 20 years from now somebody will reveal a little bit of it on his deathbed or something. I think it runs pretty deep.

  14. Patricia says:

    To mataharley ….

    My friend, you are risking a sharp crack on YOUR nose if you post statements like this (see your recent, below).

    I have ALWAYS stated that Zimmerman had Martin restrained in that final location in the grassy area where the fatal shot was fired.

    This is the SECOND time you have stated that I am helping O’Mara.

    I have maintained that Zimmerman had every opportunity to “escape” – or, more important, wait it out until SPD arrived – because he was sitting on Trayvon Martin’s body when he shot him.

    He had gained “the upper hand” — the upper body position – from the fatigued Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman was saddled across Trayvon, pinning his body and arms to the ground.

    He had a choice: sit tight, or fire the gun.

    He made that choice. And for all the puerile reasons his minor injuries gave him – you are right on!

    But you are right OFF reality when you claim I wrote that Trayvon Martin had Zimmerman restrained in those final moments. So knock off that crap about my helping O’Mara. That’s beneath you.

    Not sending thanks to you for this one!


    mataharley says:

    September 3, 2012 at 12:07 am

    “BTW, Patricia, I’m sure that MOM will agree with you that Martin had Zim pinned. Air Marshal Osterman also stated that Zim was attempting to sit up and get away.

    “Thus the reason that MOM is using self defense instead of SYG… because he states that Zim had no way to retreat because he was being bested by Martin.

    “So you are actually helping MOM out in your theories.”

    (end of mataharley excerpt)

    • Xena says:

      @Patricia. You are correct. All we need are GZ’s own words. GZ said that he had shimmied to the point where his jacket came up exposing his holstered gun that was clipped inside his pants. That means that GZ’s body was free at least from the waist up.

      GZ said that he had Trayvon’s arm restrained. Understand that to mean that GZ’s right arm was free to restrain — not pinned.

      GZ also said that he “aimed,” and in doing so, made sure that his left arm was not in his shooting path. Understand that to mean that his left arm was free — not pinned.

      So we have a man who is free from the waist up, with both arms free, but he was pinned by Trayvon giving him no choice than to shoot him in the heart?!?!?!? GZ really didn’t think his story through very well.

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        Yes, GZ, at this point in time, has robbed himself of a reason to shoot an unarmed person to death. That is, unless we can believe that TM could almost instantly kill GZ with his hands.

      • mataharley says:

        Xena, I am not the one who suggested that TM had control of GZ’s arms or pinned in any way. That was the speculation by Patrician in the original writing of this post.

        We’ve asked on this site, “What the heck was George doing all the time he was wrestling with Trayvon, that Trayvon doesn’t have a mark on him?” In other words, couldn’t HE land a punch on the kid?

        Not if Trayvon had gotten control of Zimmerman’s arms – and when it comes to “reach,” the taller Trayvon would have had this singular advantage.

        I don’t believe that TM ever restrained the movement of GZ’s arms. Especially if we are to assume there is covering of nose and mouth (both hands) or head banging going on.

        Ultimately, there is no way to ever prove how that fight went down. Only that there was a fight, and apparently GZ was losing it.

        The point of the M2 charges is that fight would not have happened by for GZ’s actions and choices that night.

      • Xena says:

        “George doing all the time he was wrestling with Trayvon, that Trayvon doesn’t have a mark on him?” In other words, couldn’t HE land a punch on the kid?”

        Trayvon does have a mark on him — a small cut on his right-hand ring-finger where a ring is worn It’s my suspicion that’s a defensive wound from the tactical flashlight, and that if the flashlight was knocked away hard enough, it could have hit GZ in the nose.

        mataharley wrote: “I don’t believe that TM ever restrained the movement of GZ’s arms. Especially if we are to assume there is covering of nose and mouth (both hands) or head banging going on.”

        I can believe the witness who said that it looked like Trayvon was trying to hold GZ down. That would be the case if Trayvon was trying to hold GZ down by the shoulders so he could get up and escape. Thus, we have GZ holding on to Trayvon’s clothes with one hand while rolling to his left-side to free his right-side to get his gun.

        mataharley wrote: “Ultimately, there is no way to ever prove how that fight went down. Only that there was a fight, and apparently GZ was losing it.”

        I disagree. We know there was wrestling, but not a “fight.” That in fact, other than Trayvon’s defensive wound, forensic evidence supports that there was no fight.

    • mataharley says:

      Patricia, at no point did I specify that you said “Zimmerman had Martin restrained in that final location in the grassy area where the fatal shot was fired.” I keep saying that fights are not static, and that the upper hand of any fight will often switch from person to person.

      MOM will be arguing, as he stated himself, that TM was beating him, that he was unable to escape and that he feared for his life. Suggesting that TM had pinned GZ down, at any point in the fight, is lending credibility to MOM/Zim’s defense by suggesting that he did not have the opportunity to retreat.

      Once he incurred his injuries, Zim doesn’t have a duty to retreat just because he gains the upper hand for a moment in time… which could shift the other direction while they were still in close proximity.

      • Patricia says:


        Re your comment, above: “I don’t believe that TM ever restrained the movement of GZ’s arms. Especially if we are to assume there is covering of nose and mouth (both hands) or head banging going on. ”

        Mataharley, YOUR brain (and allegiance) may “assume there is covering of nose and mouth (both hands) or head banging going on.”

        I REJECT that assumption ENTIRELY based on forensic evidence and the source: self-serving George Zimmerman out to save his sorry ass.

        Note that verbally bumbling Zimmerman starts out the statement re “smothering” with “MY hands, er … his hands on my mouth … ”

        It would be consistent for Zimmerman to try to stop Trayvon’s cries for help by trying to cover Tayvon Martin’s mouth. He was in a legal pickle he couldn’t figure his way out of – and the cops would discover it soon. Once again, Zimmerman supplies one of his verbal switcheroos: “I did it, but I’ll claim he did it. Makes my alibi better.”

        Why the hell would Trayvon Martin try to stifle ANYBODY’S cries for help at that time? Are you crazy? Trayvon Martin needed all the help he could get against this crazy, creepy, stalking, FuManchu stranger obviously up to no good and now involved in close bodily contact! Was he going to be raped, or killed, or what?

        Trayvon Martin didn’t know Sanford Police had been summoned by Zimmerman, which dispatcher Sean had confirmed to Zimmerman minutes earlier, “they’re on their way.”

        Trayvon Martin didn’t have a Kel-Tec tucked away in his back waistband to give him “Courage, Zimmermam-Style”.

        Trayvon Martin was under attack in a darkened area off the steet by whom … some murderous pervert? He would have welcomed yelling for help! He would have welcomed the Mormon Tabernacle Choir or the Yale Glee Club yelling for help!

        Get this straight: Martin yelled for help, Martin whimpered in fear, Martin screamed in terror from pain and terror.

        What did Zimmerman have to fear? Nothing but … discovery (again) that he was a sorry, stupid putz of a glory hound. Once again, a loser.

        Trayvon Martin did not place a hand on Zimmerman’s blody face or head, because forensics show zero, nada, zilch, NO Zimmerman DNA on Martin’s hands and shirt wrist cuffs.

        Further, I accept Witness #6’s statement, flawed though he may be considered, that in reality he saw no arm movements flailing down on Zimmerman and that Trayvon Martin’s arm position that he saw could well represent restraint of Zimmerman’s arms.

        What reinforces that as a conclusion, is that neither Zimmerman nor Martin suffered any defensive hand injuries, which each would have if they were protecting themselves from attack by the other’s fists.

        In addition, while Trayvon Martin was overmatched physicallty in this wrestling match, he did have one advantage: his height and limb length, greater that Zimmerman’s stocky build and appendages. And God, that kid had guts!

        On the ground, Trayvon had the reach to keep his attacker’s fists at bay. He just didn’t have the stamina or muscular strength to retain that position, and in the final grassy spot, Zimmerman overpowered him, and shot Tayvon Martin from above.

        You and O’Mara are afraid that the reality of the position in which your boy Zimmerman fired his gun, and the fact that he was not captured or restrained by Trayvon Martin, is going to fry Zimmerman’s ass. Well, don’t worry. The State of Florida will just keep that ass in the cooler for a long, LONG time.

      • mataharley says:

        “My boy”, Zimmerman? “Allegiance”? I can think of more than a couple of blogs full of people that would get quite the belly laugh at those accusations, Patricia. Especially with all the personal insults and heat I took saying I can see exactly why the State has charged him with M2 since he did hunt this kid, who wasn’t doing anything wrong, and create this situation.

        Why over at Conservative Tree House – a blog I’ve never commented before – I was accused by someone of already buying a rope for GZ.

        Now, here I am at FL’s place. Yet it seems that even amongst the supposed “friendlies”, there is no immunity to personal insults and false accusations. Rather ironic.

        What I try to do is keep the debate on an unemotional level that is workable within the State’s burden of beyond reasonable doubt. Just because I point out that what you envision is not workable within that level, and actually does more to bolster MOM’s case in some instances, does not mean that I think Zim is “my boy”, as you say.

        The reason I said if we “assume” there was GZ smothering going on (never even suggested that Zim smothered TM) is, again, trying to work with some parts of Zim’s story as being true. That is what the jury will start out with. That pesky presumption of innocence, you know. Also some things being undeniably true… says he was on his back, and having grass on his back, for example.

        Fact is, we have no idea of the order of Zim’s fight events. i.e. was the smothering before or after his nose injury? In fact, at what point in the fight did those injuries, or the smothering actually take place? Zim never says his nose was injured with the first punch. But that’s my guess.

        Since we don’t know in what order all of these things transpired, or when the injuries took place in that sequence, there’s no way to prove how the fight events went down. So other than dreaming up scenarios for possibilities and entertaiinment, it really doesn’t matter much for the M2 charge.

        Personally, I hope Zim sticks with his claim it was him screaming for help, because I want to hear him explain how he can scream for help while being smothered. I figure he has only two choices… he can choose to be the screamer, or he can choose to be the one smothered. He certainly can’t be both. Either way, he’s in trouble with his story.

        Now, considering your unnecessary petulant tone and inaccurate personal characterizations, I do believe I’m quite done bothering to read your “practicums”, Patricia. And since you are so sensitive to challenges on your speculations, you have no need to expect any further adversarial comments or observations from me. You and your fan club may enjoy yourselves without fear of contradiction.

        I only hope the State is not fool enough to fall into the hole you are digging for yourself, trying to expand into details not necessary for their case and virtually impossible to prove beyond reasonable doubt. But I suspect they will focus on exactly what they need to… the elements of M2 only… to achieve the conviction.

    • Malisha says:

      It is not impossible that George was on the ground under Trayvon for some period of time in between the time Zimmerman got out of the car and the time Martin died. It does not mean that either (a) Zimmerman was telling the truth about the story or (b) Trayvon attacked Zimmerman and pinned him down and beat him up or (c) that when George shot Trayvon, he was UNDER him. Or that EITHER of them was on the ground at that time.

      Looking at the time-line and hearing the 911 calls again, and incorporating bits and pieces of even George’s silly narrative replete with its lies and massive projections, I come up with the possibility that something like this happened:

      (1) George saw Trayvon, called NEN, began to ramble, planned out that he was gonna “bring in the suspect,” and alighted from the car in pursuit;

      (2) HE lost “visual” on the “suspect” and cut off the NEN call, telling them to call him when they arrived in the neighborhood; then he searched around the neighborhood for Trayvon;

      (3) He caught sight of Trayvon while Trayvon was still on the phone with Dee Dee, and when he closed in on Trayvon, Trayvon asked, “Why are you following me?” and George answered, “What are you doing here?” and smacked the phone out of Trayvon’s hand or did something that looked aggressive to Trayvon, who flung something and began to run, and maybe, got restrained for part of a minute by George, causing him to yell, “Get OFF, get OFF!” after which he either managed to elbow George’s face or somehow get George off him, scrambled up and ran, while George fell.

      (4) George recovered and pulled his gun, enraged and hurt, and began to either pursue or threaten, or some combination of pursue, threaten and painfully restrain Trayvon;

      (5) Trayvon tried to run again but was held by the clothing and shot by George.

      The reason I say this is that the bullet went in STRAIGHT, no angle. “Point blank” contact with the clothing but “intermediate” range with the skin. In other words, from 1″ to 14″ from his chest wall, but right up against his clothes. Also, the height of the bullet going into Trayvon’s chest would be exactly that height, and would have entered his body straight in exactly that spot, if both he AND George were standing UP when he was shot.

      Who saw whom on top of whom is another matter. It was dark, the police tried to influence the witnesses, people are prone to suggestion from authority figures, things were moving fast, etc. etc. And the likelihood of the bullet going in as it did if George was underneath, while George gets no GFR on his jacket or shirt, is probably somewhere between negligible and null.

      Anyway, that’s all I know.

  15. Malisha says:

    Zhickel: If you will notice, there were two different photos of Zimmerman’s head with the trickles/streams of blood. Neither one would match up at all with the “enhanced” frame of the video when he arrived at the police station, by the way. But OK, about those two photographs.

    The first was “received by ABC News” and immediately Professor Turley put it up on his blog saying it was “evidence of serious injury” to Zimmerman. No it wasn’t…he’s pro-defense, so he thought it should be adequate to show that Corey over-charged Zimmerman and blah blah blah.

    O’Mara, asked about the picture, said he did not know if or how it would be used by the defense. AHA!

    The second appeared with a bunch of other evidence, and it was not the same as the first. That is, if you were to make two separate prints of the two bloody-head pictures, on transparent plastic, and then you were to hold them over the other, they wouldn’t match up! What is more peculiar is the following: The first appears to have been taken out in the rain a few minutes after Trayvon Martin was killed. THEN he got cleaned up by the EMTs and THEN he appeared in the video in the police station garage with no blood on him and THEN there’s another photo of his bloody head against a wall somewhere, a greyish beige-ish colored wall. Same red jacket.


    How did all THAT happen? Can you venture a guess?

  16. Cielo says:

    I would expect that Osternan and GZ are 2 peas in a pod: if it benefits number 1, then go for it! But that’s a good point: CAN they use that book as evidence?

    • Malisha says:

      I think Osterman AND Taaffe had vested interests in making the “Neighborhood Watch” thing into a big deal for their proxy, George. I think Osterman had a lot to do with actions taken by Zimmerman after 2/26/2012. Notice: He comes into the station that very night without any bandaids on either his head or his nose, and then he goes home with Mark Osterman and Shellie. Next time he appears, BIG SILLY LOOKIN BANDAIDS on his nose and head. If he had a closed fracture (still only conjecture), what’s the damn bandaid on his nose FOR? Nevermind, don’t answer, it’s obvious.

      And now, the Osterman book is meant, IMHO, to do three things:

      1 – put out a version of events that the pro-Zims can set to music and spill their beer on;

      2 – make money for the GZ “poor George” fund; and

      3 – do PR research on which arguments fly, which arguments fail and how to do the rest of their story-boarding while influencing the largest possible number of people before having O’Mara cop a plea.

    • Malisha says:

      The book is not evidence of anything other than someone wrote a book.

  17. Xena says:

    The following is an extension of this subject/post. It addresses whether GZ used a take-down technique on Trayvon, and includes several vids. I did not want to post so much content in comments here.

    Thank you.

    • Patricia says:

      Zena, this is spectacular.
      Everybody should run those videos.
      Great Reuters article.
      Butterfly is a well-informed blog!


      • Xena says:

        @Patrica. No, THANK YOU! There are times I don’t express to others what I “see” or suspect. When someone else shares in agreement, it encourages me to lay it out. You were that inspiration.

        @Rachel. Thank you. There is something else I’m pondering, but need the help of someone who is familiar with the map and timing. It has been my impression all along that Trayvon began running when passing GZ’s truck at the mail boxes rather than the cut-through. There are plenty of dots giving me that reason.

      • Xena says:

        @Manberk. “@xena well that’s what George himself says. “He ran” comes within 30 secs of George suggesting TM was coming towards him at the clubhouse. That would be over a minute or more before it would have been possible for TM to circle his truck all the way down TT, b4 running. He probably started running right around the mailboxes, which also happens to match DDs story.”

        Yes!! It is my opinion that GZ began chasing Trayvon around the mailboxes and not at the cut-off.

        I am looking at the times; 7:11:45 – “Oh shit. He’s running.” At 7:12, wind is still heard in GZ’s phone. He is still running. Seems as though if he started running at the cut-off, he would have passed the T.

        7:12 – “He ran.”

        Then GZ says something strange. He didn’t want to give his full address because he didn’t know where the kid was. That conveys that GZ did not believe that the kid had ran but rather, GZ was close enough to the kid for the kid to hear him. Also at 7:12, Trayvon’s phone rings or vibrates, or whatever, but Trayvon is talking to DeeDee, can possibly be heard. GZ knows that Trayvon is near.

        It logically appears that since GZ had been following in his truck, that Trayvon would feel some sense of being safe since he had ran to the cut-off where there is no road for vehicles. DeeDee says that Trayvon was tired. Obviously, he had ran further than from the cut-off to the T.

        7:13 — GZ wants the cops to call for his location.
        7:13:39 — GZ ends his call with NEN dispatch.
        80 seconds later, the first 911 call is received reporting two people in an altercation.

        7:16 — Trayvon’s phone disconnects.

        So DeeDee was definitely on the phone with Trayvon during the altercation.

    • Rachael says:

      Wow Xena, very well done.

      • Manberk says:

        @xena well that’s what George himself says. “He ran” comes within 30 secs of George suggesting TM was coming towards him at the clubhouse. That would be over a minute or more before it would have been possible for TM to circle his truck all the way down TT, b4 running. He probably started running right around the mailboxes, which also happens to match DDs story.

    • whonoze says:

      Well, so not only is GZ a former bouncer and the protege of a LEO who knows these pain holds, but just as a generic cop wanna-be, we have to imagine he’d know about these YT videos. Who needs formal training in the Internet age?

      The videos also add weight to the idea that the “screams are from pain induced by a hold” hypothesis is highly inconsistent with the “GZ drew his gun at the beginning of the altercation” hypothesis.” The holds and manoevers shown in the videos would seem to require two free hands, and not be possible while holding a gun in one hand.

      So perhaps GZ is actually telling the truth (!!) when he says he “lost wrist control.” If he HAD wrist control, that could mean he was inflicting pain on TM by twisting the youth’s wrist, as demonstrated by Officer Darryl in the YT vids.

      Going back to W11’s 911 call, I note that the last loud scream consistent with the physical pain hypothesis occurs 6 seconds before the gunshot. There are two more screams after that, both less intense and more pleading in tone. The last of these, audio forensics expert Alan Reich has identified as the word “Stop.”

      So it seems to me at this point that the most likely scenario is that Trayvon was trying to get away from GZ and GZ applied a ‘takedown’ move, resulting in both men going to the ground. TM was probably on top at this point, due to GZ using his body mass to pull the young man down. Perhaps in so doing GZ banged his skull against the utility cover plate, producing the wounds on the back of his head. But TM being on top at this point does not mean he had any kind of control of the situation, as GZ may have already had him in some sort of grip. Moments later, GZ used one of those wrist and leg techniques demonstrated by Officer Darryl to flip himself on top, and continued to apply the wrist-twist move to subdue Martin with pain.

      GZ probably wanted TM to stop resisting and become passive, which TM, freaked out and in pain, was unwilling or maybe even unable to do. So TM kept trying to get free from the hold, and GZ kept twisting regularly to induce more pain. Finally, adrenaline pumping like crazy, Trayvon freed his hands. Perhaps it was even at this point that he landed his one largely ineffective shot at GZ’s nose. Regardless, GZ having lost his hold of his “suspect” was faced with an “oh shit, what do I do now?” moment, and responded by using his now free right hand to draw the Kel-Tec and send a hollow-point shell through Trayvon Martin’s ventricle.

      IANAJ, but I would call that First Degree Murder. Wayne LaPierre would probably call it self-defense. A black kid in a hoodie with a free hand is obviously a lethal weapon, right?

      • Dave says:

        Wayne LaPierre has wisely kept his mouth shut about the case.

      • Xena says:

        @whonoze. Thanks for that run-down. IMO, GZ had control of Trayvon and because of Trayvon’s screams bringing attention to what was happening, GZ pulled his gun and after Trayvon screamed “No” or “Stop”, GZ shot Trayvon to quiet the screams. GZ knew the cops were coming and as he told Hannity, he was scared and nervous, not wanting to be found standing there with a gun in his hand. (That, IMO, could not have been after shooting Trayvon.) Trayvon had absolutely no idea who this creepy looking grown man was who had followed him and then physically approached him on foot.

      • mataharley says:

        whonoze: So perhaps GZ is actually telling the truth (!!) when he says he “lost wrist control.” If he HAD wrist control, that could mean he was inflicting pain on TM by twisting the youth’s wrist, as demonstrated by Officer Darryl in the YT vids.

        The use of the term “wrist control” was accurately placed in context by Manberk and TruthBTold yesterday. It was not used in the MMA context, but in the police usage, by Serino in (2nd, I believe) interview with Zim.

        Rough audio translation from another Aussie Two, a commenter on another forum, along with some of his own added observations:


        Listen to Serino interview Tape #2 from the 27 minute mark

        They are talking about how the fight went down. GZ saying TM had “pressure on my nose and mouth, suffocating me”.. Then TM starts to reach toward the gun and says “you’re going to die”.

        “he let go so I didn’t need my hand anymore ‘cos he let go of my mouth …” (NEVER having said what defensive or other moves he was needing it for earlier)

        ” that’s when I grabbed his hand and I grabbed…grabbed my firearm and I fired”.

        (…Talk about what kind of gun…)

        Then Serino says “so you’d overpowered him, had his wrist, we call that wrist control, so you had wrist control on him….”

        GZ says moved his gun hand around “not wanting to hit my own hand that I was holding him with …I aimed past my hand…”


        The screams lasted just 18.83 seconds before ending with the gunshot (SA Majeski’s report in the May doc dump, pg 147). In that time, Zim – fighting a resisting TM – needed to accomplish:

        1: rolling left to draw his gun,

        2: “rotate” the grip (per air marshal Osterman’s statement, and likely due to the awkward reaching for the right handed holster while on his back on the ground)

        3: grab Martin by the inner/outer shirts and

        4: pull him down onto him so the barrel rested flush against the body

        5: and fire.

        Probably about the right time to do all that, and little time do do much else…. (i.e. punching the nose, take down moves, or flip positions from bottom to top)

        Conflict? Osterman says that Zim fired with his elbow on the ground. Zim says he extended his arm past his own hand that would be gripping Martin’s shirts.

        Logistics do not fit with GZ being on top when the gun was fired. If GZ is straddling TM at waist or hip level, it would be awkward, and unnecessary, for him to grab TM’s inner/outer shirts, pull them *down* towards Zim’s own crotch, to position the barrel against TM’s chest.

        Instead, being on top, he’d be likely to pull the shirts *up*, bringing Martin closer to him. That, however, would not result in perfectly aligned holes in the two shirts.

        Flip side? If GZ is still on the bottom, draws his weapon, TM is likely trying to pull up and back away from Zim’s “wrist control”. Zim grabs the inner/outer shirt and pulls down and towards him – perhaps with TM literally falling prone on top – for the shot. The other possibility is that when Zim pulls down and forward, TM literally tries to climb forward off of Zim and over his head.

        Again, this comes back to believing pieces of Zim’s story as true. If the jury is going to consider only these last seconds as the determining factor for self defense, they are likely to believe that Martin – on top – was assailing GZ.. just as he says. And Zim finally took the upper hand enough to fire.

        That is certainly what the defense is going to try and prove, and if that’s the only focus of the incident, Zim is going to be acquitted as exercising self defense, or perhaps charged with manslaughter (as Serino originally wanted).

        The State’s M2 charges, IMHO, cannot be ignored by the self defense strategy. And that’s a focus on the events that created the conditions for the death.

        • Patricia says:

          Thanks, Mataharley –

          Still trying to put the final moments together. Reviewing the following excerpt:

          ” … that’s when I grabbed his hand and I grabbed…grabbed my firearm and I fired”


          “Then Serino says “so you’d overpowered him, had his wrist, we call that wrist control, so you had wrist control on him….”GZ says moved his gun hand around “not wanting to hit my own hand that I was holding him with …I aimed past my hand…”

          I am wondering if Serino, using the term “overpowered him” to mean that GZ was now on top? How overpowered would GZ be if he was still under TM but had hold of ONE of TM’s wrists? Wouldn’t GZ use his body strength AND OTHER ARM to push up and get on top of Trayvon before drawing his gun? Use that other arm to give Trayvon a chop to the neck? It would be so easy for GZ to reverse positions if he now finally has hold of at least one of TM’s wrists.

          Wouldn’t he want to roll into the dominant position to make his shot?

          How was the “air lock” created unless GZ pulled them (grasped together in one hand) away from TM’s body.

          ZIMMERMAN WAS HOLDING TRAYVON ONLY BY TRAYVON’S WRIST? Is there any explanation of why GZ would hold TM’s wrist so close to where GZ was going to shoot? This was GZ’s dominant hand – surely strong enough to swing TM’s hand away from the line of fire.

          WHAT WOULD TRAYVON’S OTHER HAND BE DOING? Nothing? If GZ is in a prone position under TM, GZ’s not able to move about. Wouldn’t TM be able to SOMETHING to GZ (grab the gun arm, poke GZ’s eyes, etc) with TM’s free arm?

          I still can’t figure this: With TM on top, how did GZ get the space to shoot PERPENDICULARLY into TM’s torso? The trajectory is NOT ON A SLANT.

          And then there’s this other issue: now that GZ has the gun out, he’s “in control” of the situation, so why can’t he just say to TM “Get off me or I’ll blow your fuckin’ brains out?”

          Why did he have to shoot?

          Not tearing apart your hypothesis, Mataharley, but if Zimmerman is now only restraining Trayvon by one wrist, that’s a mighty flimsy restraint. Couldn’t Trayvon, if on top, roll away, punch Zimmerman, knock the gun away, what? At least deflect the perfectly aimed shot.

          I still keep an open mind, but Zimmerman shooting from the bottom still does not square with what I understand of the physical possibilities.

          But if Zimmernan can roll over (entirely possible, with his GZ’s strength and Trayvon’s increasing fatigue) and imprison TM’s torso and arms under himself (keeping in mind how narrow/linear TM was), Zimmerman is perfectly positioned to make a clean shot. Grabbing TM’s shirts in his other hand further steadies the target.

          I am still mystified by all this, Maraharley. Please help.


      • mataharley says:

        Patricia, Xena linked a YouTube that gave an example of the power one may have over another just by grasping a wrist with one hand. That video demonstrates how one may even flip someone over. But that doesn’t mean you *have* to flip a body over. Nor should you be reading anything in to Serino’s use of “overpowered”.

        Nor can we assume that Zimmerman possesses this skill. Apparently, by his injuries, Martin did have the upper hand at one time. So if GZ does have this skill, he’s pretty shoddy at it. However the instinctive grasp of the wrist would give GZ enough control to roll left, and access his gun. As I said, fights are not static, and positions of power (which are not defined by top and bottom positions) shift.

        The shirts, per the evidence (as FL pointed out quite some time ago) had to have been grabbed, and pulled *down* equally, at some point. Ergo we have to assume that, in the moment of the gunshot, GZ had the gun in his right hand, and was gripping the shirts in the other with a pulling down, and possible forward (closer to GZ’s body) movement.

        As I pointed out above, there is no logic to those shirts having the exact alignment of bullet holes were GZ on top. Perhaps you need to picture yourself straddling someone. You have to reach down to the the shirts below you, then pull them towards the crotch area to duplicate the forensic result. There is nothing that would control TM’s resistance with that movement, nor any logic for doing so. It’s awkward and ineffectual.

        Now picture yourself straddled atop again. You’re more likely to pull the shirts up towards you so that you can pull a body in closer to you for a shot. The holes would not only be out of alignment, but this would create a space between the shirts and the body because the body weight is suspended from the shirts.

        This is completely opposite if you were on the bottom, pulling down and towards you against someone trying to pulll up and back in resistence. This is because the body weight is closing the gap between the shirts with the help of gravity, or possibly even a loss of balance.

        By pulling the body weight up by the shirts (were you on top), now you have to force the muzzle down, thru that air space created by the body weight suspension, just to get close enough for the sear marks on the body. Remember that the ME’s examination of the sear marks reflects that of a barrel just about a hair breadth away from the skin, if not jammed up right against it… separated only by the clothing to buffer the power burns.

        Sorry… but I can’t get to GZ being on top at all. Not to mention there are too many witnesses that say the contrary… pesky detail, eh?

        I mentioned before the defense only needs to prove it’s *possible* that a perpendicular shot *can* be achieved while GZ is on his back, while the State would have to prove, beyond all reasonable doubt, that it’s impossible. That’s simply not going to happen. Especially since it’s even more improbable, if not impossible, for it to have happened with the positions switched.

        MOM’s strategy will try to keep you focused on the time between the punch to gun shot only. Play that game with him, and prepare to lose big time. They have everything they need for reasonable doubt. Let me go thru them again:

        * Witnesses can ID Martin on top,
        * There was grass on GZ’s back,
        * He has both nose and head injuries, and
        * It is possible for a draw of a gun, and a perpendicular shot while in that lower position.

        If you want to insert unrelated and slick jujitsu moves, remember the only one that any witness alludes had that skill during this fight is Martin.

        You can’t wander in and expect a jury will buy an unrelated and unsupported second version of the story that contracts these obvious facts that actually support Zim’s varied fables.

        I doubt the State would even attempt to go where you are trying to go. I don’t think they question that Martin was on top at the time of the shooting, or think it matters to their case. I’ll even go further and say that they’ve already suggested that Martin may have thrown the first punch, and find that action quite justified a response to Zimmerman’s actions that night. Remember Serino’s repeated question to Zim… “what do you think set this kid off?”

        Some of these details will be less important because of the elements of the M2 charges. The State will question who was where, when, and why it happened at all… suggesting it was GZ who escalated this entire event into an unintended murder by his imagined criminal status of Martin, his aggression and refusal to let the police handle it.

        Remember that it will be nothing to prove that GZ continued to search for TM when advised not to. He was 24 seconds away from his SUV when he finished his NEN call (not including getting out of the car). To hang up and return to the car was virtually the same amount of time… yet it’s beyond question he choose not to do that.

        Is that illegal? Of course not. But it’s also not illegal to eat a Big Mac while driving down the road. If, however, you get into an accident and kill someone because you were distracted by your Big Mac, the legality of that choice to dine and drive isn’t going to save you from manslaughter charges.

        Bottom line, I don’t see the first punch, or Martin’s position on top being as much of an issue in the State’s prosecution of the M2 elements. I can see the jury deciding on manslaughter in some ways. Acquittal? Only if the concept of self defense has gone off the deep end, and an aggressive hunter is now justified in shooting his prey, just because he’s losing the fight.

        • Patricia says:

          Mataharley, I am probably driving you as crazy as you are driving me, and neither of us will be satisfied, unless we were to have this reviewed in person by the Medical Examiner – and fat chance for this to happen.

          You’ve posited a number of items and deserve a reply to each one (which I will be sending), but we are always going to be at odds if we do not come to terms with one primary issue.

          I’ll quote you: “Remember that the ME’s examination of the sear marks reflects that of a barrel just about a hair breadth away from the skin, if not jammed up right against it … separated only by the clothing to buffer the power burns.”

          Bluntly, I don’t remember that at all.

          Do you not recall the research Mr. Leatherman reported on this? No barrel “just about a hair breadth away from the skin, if not jammed up against it.”

          The barrel was estimated at 2” to 4” AWAY FROM Martin’s torso.
          It was flush against THE FABRIC (not the body) – separated from skin by the 2” to 4” air gap created by Zimmerman grasping the shirts.

          He held both the outer hoodie and the under sweatshirt together at the same time, thus the holes in the shirts matched each other. That grasp pulled the shirts away from their normal alignment on the body that it would have in everyday wearing.

          Grasping the shirts was the way Zimmerman kept Martin from escaping.

          Thus, Zimmerman could precisely place the shot.

          Mataharley, let me print the July 15 post by Mr. Leatherman, below:


          July 15, 2012

          Amy L. Siewert is a Crime Laboratory Analyst employed by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement Crime Laboratory. She examined TM’s Fruit of the Loom dark gray hooded sweatshirt (Exhibit ME 12) and the light gray Nike sweatshirt (Exhibit ME 8) that he was wearing underneath the hoodie when GZ shot and killed him

          In her report dated March 22, 2012, she concluded:
          The sweatshirts each display a hole located in the upper chest area. The areas around these holes were microscopically examined and chemically processed for the presence of gunshot residues. Both holes displayed residues and physical effects consistent with a contact shot.

          In her bench notes, which the prosecution released in the recent document dump last Thursday, she specifically noted that her microscopic examination of the light gray sweatshirt (ME 8) “shows results consistent with a contact shot (tearing a hole, sooting around the hole, burning/singeing, no powder pattern, vaporous Pb surrounding the hole). She also noted that the hole exhibited “stellate” tearing. She described the hole in the hooded sweatshirt (ME 12) identically, but noted L-shaped tearing.

          These are the classic signs of a contact shot. That is, the muzzle of the gun was in contact with the outer hooded sweatshirt with the light gray sweatshirt immediately behind, or in contact with it.

          She also test fired GZ’s gun into squares of cloth cut from both sweatshirts and verified that the muzzle of the gun was in contact with the sweatshirts.

          She also noted that the holes in the sweatshirts align with each other.

          She also measured the vertical distance from the hole up to the neck seam at approximately 7 inches. The horizontal distance to the shoulder seam was approximately 7 1/2 inches.

          Although these holes align with each other, they do not align with the entry wound in TM’s chest.

          According to the autopsy report, the entry wound is 1 inch left of the midline and 1/2 inch below the left nipple.

          Therefore, the entry wound is approximately 3 1/2 inches below and 2 1/2 inches closer to the midline than the holes in the sweatshirts.

          Also significant is that the entry wound was caused by a gunshot in which the muzzle of the gun was at an intermediate range of 2-4 inches.

          What does this mean?

          I believe it means the sweatshirts were being pulled down or being held by GZ as TM was pulling back or attempting to stand up (and probably screaming for help as he did so) when GZ pressed the muzzle of his gun against the hooded sweatshirt and pulled the trigger.

          The two sweatshirts were in contact with each other (i.e., gripped together) and approximately 2-4 inches from his chest.

          The trajectory of the shot would have been straight through neither varying up or down nor left or right, if TM were leaning forward while attempting to get away, but restrained from escaping by GZ’s grip on his sweatshirts.

          Mataharley, I believe we both seek the same outcome: justice for Trayvon Martin.

          We can discuss fabric stretching, pain restraint, grass-on-the back and all the rest of it once we agree on the essential forensics of the case.

          I am always open to new information.
          I have reviewed the ME’s report.
          It substantiates Mr. Leatherman’s research.

          But it appears you have different information.
          We need to share on this website.
          Please tell me what you have.

          Dear friend, I send you my thanks.

          • cielo62 says:

            To both Patricia and Mataharley- your posts are fascinating in detail! I remember that the original reports I read stated the shit was from an ” intermediate” distance which was postulated to be 11-14 inches. I don’t know when that distance was shortened to 2-4 inches. The intermediate length said to me preFL (pre Frederick Learherman) that Martin was trying to escape and GZ trapped him and shot him. Not that shirts stretch that much but the hoodie on Martin in the 7-11 video look very baggy. Just my 2 cents. Please keep up the good work.

          • cielo62 says:

            I Am confused about something: if Martin had the upper hand and was straddling GZ then why did GZ flip him over after Martin was dead? Others wrote (I’m sorry I’ve forgotten names) that GZ flipped Martin over, assuming GZ was on top, to check for an exit wound? I’m of the opinion that both were attempting to stand up like in a semi crouch move where GZ would have to grab Martin to stop him from escaping, grabbed the shirts while Martin struggled to run away and GZ shot him. GZ would still be looking for an exit wound for an errant bullet left at the scene, the shirts would have to be pulled down and out, and Martin would fall backwards in the direction of his momentum. That would also account for the intermediate distance of 12-17 inches from the preliminary ME report.

      • mataharley says:

        BTW, Patricia, I’m sure that MOM will agree with you that Martin had Zim pinned. Air Marshal Osterman also stated that Zim was attempting to sit up and get away.

        Thus the reason that MOM is using self defense instead of SYG… because he states that Zim had no way to retreat because he was being bested by Martin.

        So you are actually helping MOM out in your theories.

        As to why Zim pulled the trigger, or even drew the gun during a fight with minimal injuries? I’ve said before I think he’s somewhat a wuss if he thinks these are life threatening injuries, was too quick on the trigger, and was an embarrassment to all we responsible gun owners everywhere. But my more important question is why did he put himself so willingly into this position at all by chasing after someone who he thought was a criminal?

        My only answer is he never envisioned genuine resistance, or that it would come down like this. I’ve never believed it was premeditated, or that he set out to kill TM. More likely he thought he could be authoritative and intimidating upon meeting Martin.

        Bad call. You scare the willies out of some one, and there is always a good chance they likely to right back when they feel threatened. Or maybe he just watches too many movies.

      • CommonSenseForChange says:

        @Patricia’s September 3, 2012 at 2:57 am –

        Spot on! I think the flaw in Mataharley’s hypo is that to pull the shirts down means the shirts were on top. That is not the case. The shirts can be pulled down by someone else while the shirts-wearer (Trayvon Martin) is on his back.

        I believe based on everything I know about this case, including witness statement interpretation, physical evidence, etc., that Zimmerman WAS on top and Trayvon was trying to escape. I think the fact that there’s evidence that the shirts were pulled down is just the icing on the cake because on top or not, you don’t pull on the shirts unless you’re trying to restrain the person or steady the target. You would never pull someone’s shirts towards you to escape a so-called deadly beating.

        Unlike news reports that some of the crump team and many other opiners of the facts of this case, I concede nothing about positions of Trayvon Martin or Zimmerman and I hope the state doesn’t drop the ball on this point. They are obviously picking their battles to fight based on the law, time and possibly disinterest/frustration in determining positions.

        Me too. But at the end of the day, I still want to know what happened and I find no reasonable, non-malicious explanation for Zimmerman jumping on Trayvon Martin’s back after he’d killed him.

        I come up with only:

        – check for bullet wound exit (if Zimmerman’s never shot a person before with a hollow point)

        – push blood out of body to alter the evidence of blood flow since there would be no blood evidence if shooting a person on their back with a bullet that explodes internally would cause the gravitational flow of blood downward from the bullet entry wound which would leave no blood flowing out of a victim’s body if he were shot while on his back

        – lying that he jumped on Trayvon Martin’s back because he was already on top and merely turned the body over to claim a frisking AFTER HE ALREADY KNEW WITNESSES WERE WATCHING IN THE DARK — “hey, what’s going on over there?”

        • Hi Patricia,

          I’m writing this brief comment to follow-up on Mataharley’s point. I’ve been meaning to mention this, but kept forgetting.

          Trial lawyers organize their thinking and strategizing before trial according to the elements that must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to obtain a conviction. They seek to avoid adding other interesting, but unnecessary issues, to those elements. This is an important application of the KISS Rule.

          I don’t mean to be stepping on his comment, but I understand him to be making the same point.

          Your narrative, while more interesting, presents a more complicated story to prove.

      • mataharley says:

        So sorry I’m “driving you crazy”, Patricia. LOL Certainly don’t mean to. Honestly, I can’t say that’s reciprocal. I like reading the alternative theories because it keeps the mind engaged, and either questioning or reinforcing my own current theories.

        But I still keep coming back to the basic ingredients of evidence and witnesses. If I’m only given eggs, milk and flour from the cabinet, I can’t pretend I have sugar, fruit or other ingredients your are offering up to change the outcome of my pancakes.

        INRE the Prof’s post on Siewert’s ballastic report. Thanks for repeating it, but I remember it well since it was the first post I had read here at the Leatherman blog, and I’ve been reading off and on since. I am well aware that the barrel was a contact shot thru the clothing because there was little residue.

        But I will do the required mea culpa and say that a “hair’s breadth” was an exaggeration on my part. Because of the area of stippling, this was a close shot, but not a hard contact shot (where the barrel is placed directly on the skin).

        As to the actual distance. I had followed up the release of the Siewert ballistics report (along with FL’s post) by returning to the ME’s description of the entry wound. Because there was stippling, they call it “intermediate range” in the report. I’ve not seen any official report state 2-4″ distance, save Mr. Leatherman on his post.

        After that post, I had done some reading at forensic sites to see what “intermediate” may mean. There are varying degrees and subcategories of contact (hard, near contact, loose or soft contact) intermediate and distant shots. i.e, a generically stated intermediate range can vary from a few centimeters up to a couple of feet.

        That sure doesn’t narrow it down much, does it?.

        A soft or near contact shot is going to leave the ring of soot, which TM’s entry wound did have. So that puts the “intermediate” range much closer to the “near contact” threshold (centimeters) than the other end (2 feet) of the more distant intermediate range.

        But then we come back to the clothing. Forensic sites also say then when a bullet passes thru layers of clothing, it makes determining actual distance, using traditional methods, considerably less reliable. For stippling to get thru two layers of fabric is going to require the fabric closer to the skin rather than further since it acts as a screen to both stippling and soot.

        It seems that all we can determine, what with all the caveats, is that it wasn’t directly against the skin, but was darned close to get a 2″ area patch of stippling, plus soot, through two layers of fabric.

        In the end, it’s not like it’s a looming question since Zim already admitted he was at close range. 1/4″ to 2-4″… sort of a moot point, don’t you think?

        This all brings me back to the shirts being pulled *down* when aligned with the entry wound. A Zim on top, pulling shirts down towards his crotch area, and up The entry was chest slightly below nipple level towards the center. Again, the air gap/weight suspension or resistance is going to be larger than if Zim were on the bottom, where the shirts contact shot would result in a closer proximity to the skin. And again, I think of stippling and soot traveling thru two layers of clothing when I consider this.

        Zim’s perpendicular shot from the top position is a very awkward position, would require him leaning somewhat forwards for the chest entry wound. .

        If he’s on the bottom, and Martin is pulling up and away from Zim grabbing his shirts, it’s much easier to get that trajectory. Especially if he fired with his elbow resting on the ground, which his air marshal pal said he did. (Zim, of course, changed that when speaking with the police… dunno why)

        All in all, I suspect that this is just going to be an agree to disagree moment between you and I, and we probably shouldn’t bore others with it much further. What I will say is that if I were a juror, you are no where near convincing me that a perpendicular shot was impossible while Zim was on his back. I already have reasonable doubt to the theory you propose, therefore, it’s an exercise in futility considering the State’s burden.

        As a juror, listening to your arguments, I will also say I wonder why you’re talking about it at all. It doesn’t really matter if Zim were on top or bottom, only that he fired at close range because he was in close proximity to Martin…. something he readily admits.

        The only point that MOM/Zim will make to me, the juror, is that the shot fired (at any distance) was the result of fear for his life. MOM will say that Zim was vulnerable – being on his back and beaten by a superior TM. The documented grass on his back, his obvious (if not petty) injures, and the lack of significant injuries to TM isn’t going to help the State (or you) arguing otherwise to me. So what difference does it make if he were on the top or the bottom?

        The moment of the gunshot is the centerpiece of defense’s arguments and I see no way for the State to shift that moment in time against the defense. Zim obviously believed his life was in danger, was injured, got the upper hand in the fight at some point, and fired because he feared of his life. End of story. Good luck convincing anyone otherwise.

        If the State believes they could get a M2 conviction based on the moment of the gunshot, they might as well hang it up now and save the taxpayers money. Since Florida doesn’t really address improper and unreasonable self defense in their laws (ergo a gun being an unreasonable response to the situation), it will come down to the jury’s subjection opinion as to whether Zim had a reasonable fear for his life. I think that stand alone argument will be won by Zim and MOM.

        Where the State’s power really lies is proving to the jury that Zim would not be fearing for his life at all but for his own actions… aka the elements of M2.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Sounds good to me, except for the fact that the concrete, which GZ claimed to fear, was going to send him into “diaperland” was a long way away and some time ago. He puts the life threatening beating down at the tee, but the evidence shows that they both left there, without a shot being fired. So that, now there’s this new altercation and contact, made along TM’s route home, while GZ claims he was trying to get away to get back to his truck.

          Remember also that GZ claims that before they left the tee area, he knew for sure that he had a gun and had drawn it. Of course, he also says that he fired it immediately first chance he got.

          So, if we believe his claim that TM attacked him and got the better of him, made him fear for his life so that he drew his gun and fired it then. We can only believe that he was mistaken about firing his gun. Because, he didn’t fire his gun where he said the life threatening action took place.

          That could only mean that, after drawing his weapon, he did not go back to his truck, but instead followed TM who was fleeing. He then caught him, detained him, wrestled with him then shot him.
          All without any new life threatening action against him being taken anew. So that now he’s pursuing TM with his weapon drawn and in anger.

      • mataharley says:

        Frederick Leatherman: I don’t mean to be stepping on his comment, but I understand him to be making the same point.

        Your narrative, while more interesting, presents a more complicated story to prove.

        Correct, and succinct summation, FL. Your only miss is that I am all female, albeit one hovering around your age.

        BTW, as a request for a future post overview, I’d like to hear why you believe FL stalking statutes, 784.048, do not necessarily apply in this case… especially since the State intends to prove depraved mind as part of their M2 elements. It would seem to me that they dovetail.

      • CommonSenseForChange says:

        Hello again @mataharley –

        I mentioned the flaw in your logic in a reply to Patricia. Wanted your take on it. Care to address? No worries if you didn’t/don’t see it.

        You will eventually.

      • mataharley says:

        CommonSense, I’m not ignoring you, but I’m also not sure what you want me to address. I don’t know what you mean by the following opening paragraph:

        I think the flaw in Mataharley’s hypo is that to pull the shirts down means the shirts were on top. That is not the case. The shirts can be pulled down by someone else while the shirts-wearer (Trayvon Martin) is on his back.

        I’ll skip the first sentence because I’m sure you’re not intending to imply the hoodie and inner shirt were tucked in to Martin’s pants.

        As to the second thought, of course the shirts can be pulled down by someone else, and that’s what I said. GZ would be the one pulling the shirts “down” and “towards” him… whether on the bottom or the top. One hand would be holding his firearm, and the other grasping TM’s shirts. Not sure why TM would be grabbing his own shirts, but I suppose… in some strange universe… that would be possible.

        Certainly grasping the shirts is restraining Martin at that point in time. Ultimately no one know how long the shirts were gripped, save that they were during the moment of the gunshot.

        Where Patricia and I disagree is that she sees that as one clue that GZ was on top, and I don’t. If you were trying to restrain someone, to keep them from getting away from you, it’s more likely to be when they are on top and trying to pull up and away to escape.

        If you’re the one on top, straddling the other, grabbing their shirts really isn’t going to do much. The weight on the body would inhibit someone getting up to run, and grasping the shirts, with a gun in the other hand, isn’t going to stop the person on the bottom from using his own hands/arms in resisting.

        I have tried my best to make clear that the State attempting to prove GZ was on top – when it clearly conflicts not only with what Zim says, what witnesses have said, plus the presence of grass on his back – is an exercise in futility.

        They need to remain focused on the elements of M2… not the positions and logistics that happened at the moment of the gunshot.

      • mataharley says:

        CommonSense, I see I forgot this:

        I find no reasonable, non-malicious explanation for Zimmerman jumping on Trayvon Martin’s back after he’d killed him.

        I don’t find it unreasonable for Zim not to know if his shot was fatal. Especially if Martin were immediately after the shot. It’s really only a small percentage of all gunshot wounds that are fatal… somewhere around the 5% range.

        Can’t imagine he thought he missed, of course. Not at that range. But perhaps he figured his 9mm wasn’t a lethal shot. Unless well placed (as it happened to be with TM), 9mm wounds can leave the opponent still functioning, especially with adrenaline flow. Worse if they are on an amphetamine like crack.

        I don’t think that anyone can argue that GZ is an overly bright lightbulb.

    • hinkster4ever says:

      Xena, ty this is so powerful in explaining things to me. AND helps me with my thoughts on the screams that have haunted me. The absolute feelings of hearing pain AND fear. This is gut wrenching. Excellent job by whomever composed it.

      And, how the size of Gz vs Trayvon shows how easily it would have been to over power a young teen. In the ER setting, I always saw the patient/victim/ or in some cases…the aggressor after the fight.

      • Xena says:

        @hinkster4ever. All I did was compile vids and published statements and include my op-ed. Those cries reached out and grabbed my heart. I cannot imagine the pain that Sybrina felt when hearing them. That they stopped immediately with the gunshot, makes me believe that it was Trayvon — not GZ. There’s no doubt in my mind that Trayvon found it best to run rather than try to fight a guy with a tactical flashlight in his hand. It was not going to be a fist fight. GZ knew it wasn’t going to be a fist fight.

  18. Hello says:

    A Zimbot by the name of Victor Wright has been consistently posting claims that the prosecution doesn’t have evidence to contradict Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense.

    #1 The blood flowed from Zimmerman’s tiny scrapes almost all the way down his head. This proves that Zimmerman was not laying parallel to the ground on his back while he was bleeding.

    #2 The blood trails from the two minor scrapes are almost in perfect condition. If he had his head smashed into the concrete or his head was touching the wet grass it would be impossible for the blood trails to be untampered with.

  19. Sandra E. Graham says:

    Well, I am concerned about the banning of ajamazin. I went back over the posts. A friend of mine who posts videos on YouTube and I spoke. She says once a TROLL finds a spot to land, the lesser trolls are quick to follow. Some squak a little louder than others. But, the aim is the same – disrupt, confuse, frustrate, defame, etc. I have not been in Professor Leathermans house very long. But, the accusations against ajamazin were coming from a few. They are like a dog with a juicy bone – won’t give it up. I will name names because I am not familiar with any of their posts until this whole controversy. If you know them and I am wrong, I will apologize. But, the site that they mention as proof is suspect, IMO. I don’t think ajamazin would disrespect the Professor or Crane-Station. I do know that ajamazin researches relentlessly and happened upon a coincidence of sorts. Read into it what you will. But ajamazin, would not make the comments that shows in the blog unless provoked. Even I was labeled a sychophant (brown-noser). Why, donèt know. Maybe because I came to ajamazins defence at times. Well, sychophant or not, I will do it again.

    The following commenters have contributed nothing to this blog except the attack on ajamazin:

    and maybe MichelleO

    Do any of the regular posters know them.

    They brought it up. They wouldn’t let it go. and the link is new. So, here we are ajamazin is banned and we haven’t heard these names since.

    • Dennis says:

      All I know is that ajamazin posted a reply to one of my comments and made absolutely no sense. I felt the person was criticizing me. I’m not quite sure how the posting system works on this blog because I never registered. All I have to do is type my email and name and click “post comment”. I’m not sure if there is any system in place to stop people from impersonating others on this blog. Perhaps Frederick knows more about that.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        Dennis – all I know is that it is probably best you name the person you are replying to before you start. It seems some comments nest themselves in where they shouldn’t go. There are some great IT folk here that will probably help you out in the morning.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        Why are you calling him Frederick, Dennis. Why are you writing in the familiar. You aren’t a tiny troll, are you. Because you are asking alot of really basic questions. This leads me to believe you have not followed the posts or viewed any of the available material. Here is my suggestion — read the documents, watch the interviews, then you will be able to be a more learned contributor and the questions raised will be discussed.

      • Rachael says:

        You know what? I can’t speak for Dennis, but you have been succsessful in running me off. I’m sure it won’t matter to you or the community though because I’m not a learned enough contributer for you.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        Rachael – This is not my blog and I have banished myself. So, please, as the Professor says, carry on. There is much to learn and I obviously offended many of you. Please don’t paint everyone with the same brush. I am new to this internet world and did not recognize when I had over-stepped my bounds. Talk about disruptive behaviour. My most-sincere apologies.

      • Cielo says:

        Don’t forget @rnsone! I suspected him to be a troll and still do. Seen it around lately? No? Well I guess it’s because he’s accomplished his mission.

    • Manberk says:

      I’m new, but I know Aja from twitter and she’s never been anything but in support of this process. I’m concerned to see her run off over speculation and hearsay. It may be hard to see how a hacking could happen but that’s not reality. It’s very easy. And the ppl who would do something like that visit here all the time. And if he did screw up, she’s human. If she didn’t do anything wrong here, that’s questionable. JMO.

  20. Dennis says:

    I was just reading an article which states that Serino says that Zimmerman thought the local gangs wore hoodies. I feel like Serino most likely will be testifying for the prosecution. I feel that his statements prove a few different things:

    #1 Zimmerman should have feared Martin if he was a possible gang member
    #2 Zimmerman did not fear Martin because he had a fully loaded pistol

    • Sandra E. Graham says:

      I don’t think there was any conversation about GZ thinking that the local gangs wore hoodies. Do you remember where you read it. I would like to read the whole article.

      I know (and I am not a lawyer) that Serino will be on the stand. If you listen to the interviews, you will find out how much of a witness he will be.

      But, I don’t think he would say that GZ should have feared Trayvon. That is a judgement. He asked the questions. He is not the judge.

      I don’t think he would say that GZ did not fear Martin because he had a loaded pistol for the same reason given at #1.

      I think GZ answered those questions himself.

      • Patricia says:

        Sandra, before M’OM, GZ had two “non-retained attorneys” who thought they were his attorneys but GZ jettisoned them.

        They obviously had been close to GZ for 2-3 weeks. At that time there was the furor over “Fuckin’ —-s” They said GZ said “goons.”

        I figure they must have asked him about what he said and he told them.

        In the document dump there is also a full-page report by one of the SPD gang investigators. Four gangs in Sanford. Three black, one Hispanic. All three black gangs call themselves The Goons. I forget the Hispanic gang’s name – off my radar.

      • Dave says:

        Patricia, “goons” wasn’t the name of a gang but rather local or regional slang for gang members in general.

      • mataharley says:

        Dave, sorta part true and not. Goons most certainly is a reference to named Gangs, but is also a popular term.

        Two places the Goons and their attire are referenced with Zimmerman. One is in the Serino/Singleton interview with Zim on Feb 29th (comparing the NEN call with questions of Zim), when he tells Zim what the Goons traditionally wear for profiling purposes. TM was not dressed in that attire, and Serino pointed out that his profiling was erroneous. Zim also denied having any instructions on profiling from LEOs when asked.

        The second place it comes up is in the July doc dump on pg 116 (an FBI interview with Sanford Investigator, Josh Memminger).

        Memminger explained to Agents about the gangs that are in the Sanford area: The gangs refer to themselves as GOONS, which is a Popular word in the community. There are currently three different groups of Goons. The first is the 14’th STREET GOONS and all members are African American and their colors are blue and black . The second group of Goons are the WASHINGTON OAKS GOONS and all members are African American except one male who is white. The Washington Oak Goons affiliate themselves with the BLOODS . The third type of Goons are the MIDWAY GOONS and Memming.r believed all members are African American. In addition, a fourth gang is the SENUNOS and members of this gang are Hispanic.

        Hemminger said the Goons attire depends on the weather. In the cold weather they are known to wear hoodies and dress in layers. In the warmer weather, the Goons typically wear “tall tees ” with jeans or shorts.

        Zim’s usage of the word in the NEN call would most likely be related to the common reference to these well known gangs, as he was taking Criminal Justice classes and involved himself in all thing law enforcement related.

      • Dave says:

        Thanks for the clarification, Mataharley.

    • I suggest the latter is more of what Zimmerman was thinking that night. A reasonable person would not go through those extremes unless he did have a loaded pistol giving the conditions darkness and rain.

  21. Dennis says:

    Does anyone else believe the news reports that Martin dialed 911? From information that I have gathered, 911 calls are not billable so they will not show up on normal customer phone records. They will need “ITMS logs” as stated by a person that works for a phone company.

    The one thing I do believe for sure, is that the FBI is analyzing this call to determine who is screaming and who is talking in the background..

  22. Malisha says:

    Can anybody tell me when Mark Osterman was present and when he was not present?

    Was Mark Osterman present on 2/26/2012 on the scene when Trayvon was killed? Soon after? That night at the police department? How soon did he arrive? Was he present the next day during the VSA session? Was he present during the walk-through where George gave his little charade? Was he present during the Serino/Singleton interviews? Did he visit George in jail? What circumstances, what kind of visits, contact visits? Tape recorded visits?

    • Malisha, the Conservative Treehouse has excerpts from Osterman’s book. He claims to have been on the scene. The first chapter seems to include yet another version of the GZ story with additional inconsistencies. Why “a friend” would publish something like this is beyond me. The prosecution is going to have a field day with him as a witness.

      • TruthBTold says:


        Yeah when I first learned about the book or what was being reported, I was like darn this is not really a good idea at all especially, at this juncture. Regardless of claims of intention, it’s in poor taste to me.

      • Malisha says:

        But the police did not report, in their written reports, that they apprehended George Zimmerman while a witness was there to back up his statement of self-defense, right?

        Does this make any sense?
        How is this possible?
        If Osterman was there it is pretty much a given that he was helping Zimmerman subdue and (obviously) kill Trayvon Martin, is it not? Otherwise why would Osterman not have phoned 911 immediately upon seeing a thug attack his friend George?

      • rayvenwolf says:

        @Diary: two words cha-ching. Only a complete halfwit would do something like this before the case has even started. With friends like this GZ doesn’t have to worry about any so called enemies.

        • TruthBTold says:


          My thoughts exactly. Must be another avenue of revenue stream for GZ, but according to some surprise surprise, there are some changes in account. Would GZ not want to make sure what is written is consistent? I don’t know. Like I said in another post, this book release is in poor taste. What else is he going to be addressing in the book? Hmmmm….

  23. hinkster4ever says:

    Back to the real reason we are all here without all the dramatics. I am interested in the guys saying Gz could have had Trayvon in some karate or whatever hold. And, I had forgotten he was a bouncer at a club. (Hope to hey he wasn’t packing his gun then!).

    I would guess that Gz would have to have some instruction in how to subdue a person. Would his friend Taffee have taught him. Or did he learn in attending maybe a fitness test to be hired by police department…or in a justice class he took?

    • Sandra E. Graham says:

      he was at the scene immediately after the shooting – right after the neighbour called Shelly. He conversed with law enforcement and witnesses and advised GZ to just tell the truth. He stayed with GZ because GZ did not know the process.

      he stayed at the scene, Shelly left in GZs vehicle. Shelly picked up a change of clothes for GZ and away went Shelly and Osterman to the police station to wait for George’s release. The police would not let him in to the rooms during the interview process.

      He was there with Zimmerman at the police station the next day for the reenactment. He did not participate in the reenactment. Although, he is apparently talking with someone at a white truck parked in front of where GZ says he parked his vehicle the night before.

      He is seen leaving the police station with GZ each time GZ was released from jail.

      GZ spent 6 weeks with Osterman before he was arrested.

      No information about jail visits that I can find. Can’t tell in the jail house calls if Osterman spoke with GZ. Maybe someone else has figured that out.

      He did write out an interesting statement. Have you read it. The statement tells you where GZ got the: Its not my gun, its THE gun stuff.

      Pretty well by his side throughout. I may have missed something but I am sure others will add.

    • Dennis says:

      Zimmerman said something about a “wrist-lock”. I interpret that as another freudian slip. Sounds to me like he had control of both of Martin’s hands. His own statements combined with physical evidence prove that the “concrete head smashing” and “MMA punches” never happened.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        I agree He has quite a number of Freudian slips during the interviews. He digs himself further and further into a hole it seems.

  24. TruthBTold says:

    Lonnie wrote,

    “Add that GZ doesn’t identify himself then either! Even while stumbling he can still talk. Would he have remained as secretive about what he was doing, if TM was armed and had gotten the drop on him? I think not.”

    Excellent point.

    “If he did get punched as he says he did, then he has to realize that he’s given offense! He never ever had any right to offend anyone! Yet he insists upon continuing to offend!”

    Another excellent point. Good post.

    • Rachael says:

      No one will ever be able to convince me otherwise that *IF* Trayvon ever laid a hand on GZ,he did so only in his own self defense of some scary guy who was following him and approached him in the dark in a threatening manner.

      • TruthBTold says:

        Totally agree Rachael. We all know he ran regardless of how GZ tried to change it to skip *snickering.* So considered he ran away, on his way back to Brandy’s house, to then all of sudden take a chance on an unidentified grown man. It makes no sense. TM was protecting himself or at least trying to, from GZ regardless of which way it is sliced and diced.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          In my opinion GZ made a big mistake in saying that TM skipped. We were all kids once, we know that skipping is something kids only do when they are completely happy bar nothing. Or, does anyone here ever remember themselves, or anyone else, ever skipping in the dark? It doesn’t happen, because people are afraid of the dark and consequently kids can’t be completely happy in the dark. So, we know that skipping is just not possible.

          What it does show is that GZ is pretty casual about fashioning lies, and he expects people to be foolish enough to believe him. As in: without enough knowledge to evaluate his lies and see them for what they are. Everyone is getting a queer feeling about his skipping remark, because they can’t visualize the mood needed for skipping at that time. So, even without being able to say why, they find it unbelievable. GZ is clearly playing everyone for fools.

          • Patricia says:

            Lonnie, God told Zimmerman:

            Say “skipping!”

          • Difficult to visualize a psycho gangsta “skipping.”

            Strange choice of words.

          • Lonnie Starr says:

            I think we need the advice of a behavioral psychologist. It also occurs to me that TM may be well past that age when skipping is done at all. I don’t remember any incident of skipping having occurred during my high school years by anyone. But, since they’ve studied just about everything else, I’d find it hard to believe that skipping hasn’t been studied as well.

          • fauxmccoy says:

            @ lonnie – well….. i might have skipped a class or two in high school, but only if i had a good excuse 😉

            i did not however skip down the halls, which is what gz expects folks to believe.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        I saw a poor photocopy of his CCW Permit but can not see when it was issued. I am curious about that. Both Shelly and GZ have CCW permits and matching guns.

        Those that follow GZs story may believe he just pointed and shot while Trayvon was on top. Not the case. He had to also rotate the firearm before doing anything else. Get it out of the holster, rotate the gun, make sure his other hand was not in the way, aim very precisely, THEN shoot.

        He had to rotate the firearm.

      • mataharley says:

        Sandra, I don’t know what date Zim obtained his CCW, but according to the July doc dump, it is noted on pg 86 (INRE speaking with the firearms instructors) that Zim obtained his certificate passing the firearms safety course in Nov 2009.

        Per the air marshals statement to the Fed investigators (the hate crime investigation, of which some of the statements were provided to FL prosecutors), he’s known Zim since 2010-11 and they went shooting once a month.

        So Zim may have had his CCW as early as late 2009, or early 2010.

  25. LeeLee~ I do apologize. I am but a visitor here, trying to understand this case. @rnsone spent way too much time digging up dirt which has nothing to do with this blog. I see that ajamazin has been banned, although I don’t understand this tweeting thing/ screen captures, etc. I respect many of the minds here, and have learned a great deal. While @rsone may have had the best intentions, I don’t trust someone whose sole intent was something occurring off-site and off-topic. Maybe the whole thing should have been addressed via email and not on thread within a very topical blog. Again, I offer my apologies if it seemed that I am not respectful of the Professor’s reputation and privacy. I won’t go as far as saying I apologize that @rsone isn’t a troll, but I respect what everyone has brought forth as evidence that he had valid charges. And with that, I bid a farewell.

  26. Leelee says:

    I respectfully beg to differ Cielo. The regular poster whom you refer to tweeted disparaging remarks about the professor. There are screen captures of the tweets with dates/times and furthermore I can attest to the authenticity of the screen captures as I, myself, independantly read and witnessed the remarks being tweeted in real-time that day.

    If you advocate the banning of @rnsone, then you should ban me too for corroborating and telling the TRUTH.

    The only person digging up dirt was your “regular poster”.

  27. Malisha says:

    Hinkster, after what has happened to people by sending e-mails, I don’t think anybody wants to try “unprotected e-mailing” on this thread! :mrgreen:

    • hinkster4ever says:

      It’s safe, hun. You send emails everyday. Nothing happened to her email……and I donated from my email from this site….it’s safe, and I am right now emailing to posters on the board 🙂 Aussie is right my ISP tracks back to Wisconsin where the main headquarters is. I live in Georgia.

  28. hinkster4ever says:

    Woot, woot I figured it out…will someone put their pointer on my photo and view profile and send me an email…see if it works….

    • ajamazin says:

      When you send an email, you are sending your IP address.

      Good way to get hacked.

      • aussie says:

        You can’t get hacked by your IP address being known. All it leads back to is your ISP provider, and will be shown as their head office…. I know people whose IP address traces back to not only 600 miles from where they are, but to another country.

        All that can happen is someone tries various passwords on your account(s) which may be easy to guess if you didn’t make a good one, that is ManyleTTer5W1thnuMBErsIncluded. “Open sesame” “Letmein” and “meagain” type passwords are ridiculous.

        On sites with lousy security they can claim to have forgotten it and get sent a replacement one fairly easily, too, so make sure the secret questions (if any) are ones you never talk about.

        You keep ONE email to get EMAILS on and another for joining up to sites with, ideally one for regular places and another for casual stuff. All with different names and all with complex passwords. And keep off sites like Quora and LinkedIn which insist you use your genuine real name.

        You can have “your email” sending out spam to people, too, without hacking : all you need is click a link with a Trojan that reads your address book and spams everyone in it. Don’t click on strange links from unknown sources.

        • Brown says:

          I’ve been there, its not a nice feeling. To have to go through all my email accts and facebook, close them then reopen with new passwords. I changed them to a 15 character passwords. It was so nerve racking to go to Redbox and rent a movie and the email on the screen that sent my confirmation was not my email. I lost files and had to have my brother who is a IT tech rebuild my security paks and other files missing from my harddrive by remote access. It was cool that I did not have to pay hundreds of dollars to fix my system. It only cost me a lecture from my brother. But I am extra careful nowadays.

        • Brown says:

          Also, you are correct on links. My brother also said that facebook and twitter are trojan magnets.

  29. hinkster4ever says:

    I follow the twitters from the court room in Drew Peterson trial, so better figure out twitter girls…lol…not all court’s allow camera’s.

  30. hinkster4ever says:

    dadblammit where’s my picture?

  31. hinkster4ever says:

    hmmmm added a photo and email i think

  32. hinkster4ever says:

    I agree. But I am so not understanding this word press blog stuff. I cannot find my information to add an email addy or an avatar lol….

  33. EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

    “Leathermanettes” and “Leathermanites” we have a case to discuss.. Back to investigating…

    • puck says:

      We need something catchier, something hip and edgy.

      • Dave says:


      • hinkster4ever says:

        lol puck

      • fauxmccoy says:

        leatherman and the suedes? (i like the sound of that … and always wanted to be a back up singer.)

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        leatherman and the suedes has my vote. love it.

      • M Onan Batterload says:

        Leatherman and the Suedes was the original name of the Supergay Transvestite Band.

        I would go with Leather Face – or even LeatherFist, if you want to keep the gay-rock vibe without being too girly.

        Not that there’s anything wrong with being girly, it’s just that this blog has a more violent, twisted feel. At least, this particular thread does. I don’t know about normally. I don’t come here too often; these WordPress blogs aggravate my claustrophobia.

        I’m not going to get hacked by commenting here, am I? If you see an offensive post with my name on it, you can be sure it’s not mine.

      • whonoze says:

        The FLF (Fred Leatherman Front)
        Folbers (Followers of Leatherman Blog)

  34. truthseeker says:


    I have a question for you, asked by @LLMPapa after I quoted your theory that Zimmerman could have twisted Trayvon’s arm into a painful hold. (If you don’t recognize the username, Papa’s made a number of videos pointing to Zimmerman’s guilt, a few of which Professor Leatherman posted here). His question is about the “gym” portion of this statement: “We know Zimmerman had the weight-strength advantage, WE KNOW HE WENT TO THE GYM, and we know he had experience as a bouncer.” After searching, I can’t find anything stating that George went to the gym, and @LLMPapa wants to find out if he “missed something.” Could you tell me where you came across this info, so I can pass it along? … I’d very much appreciate it!

    • Patricia says:

      To Truthseeker and the excellent LLMPapa –

      I have wondered for some time if GZ worked out (prior to stalking TM) because he was much trimmmer then than in the old days. Also he hoped to be hired by SPD or another LE agency and there’s always a tough physical exam (you have to be able to run after criminals, climb over a 6 ft. board fence, etc.)

      I have always been aware of the physical strength disparity between GZ and TM.

      Roughly about two-three weeks ago I found a reference to his gym membership (possibly in the jail conversations with Shellie? Paying off his gym charges with the PayPal largess?).

      The problem with a lot of the documentation that the FL Sunshine Laws make available is that they cannot be copied and I regret (and knew it at the time I wrote my posts this week that I’d regret it) that I did not write down where I saw that.

      I am not an expert at keeping multiple issues on the screen at one time. But I remember clearly the great Eureka! moment when I read that. I expect it will surface again and I will make a special issue of it on this site.

      Sorry I cannot provide the documentation now, but it’s there. Not a gossip or hearsay item.

      While I work on a so many issues that include documentation, mostly governmental, I have never been involved with a project like this, where every day there is a hundred or more e-mails to read. You can’t just go back and read the end of the Leatherman Reports to get them because the e-mails are not presented in the reports in a time-linear fashion. Most are replies to previous comments by a classmate – so you have to read them individually to get the context. Not whining about this, but it’s time-challenging!

      So, I slipped up on documenting the gym reference, but I’ll get it for you.

      Thanks for being observant and thanks to LLMPapa for her excellent work. It is heartwarming to know that so many thousands of people care deeply about justice for Trayvon Martin, and the quality of their work is so high!

      • truthseeker says:


        Thanks much for your reply. After searching a bit further, I did find one reference, to GZ’s “gym bag,” which was used to stash his passport, but as someone pointed out to me, this could imply disuse. So, I’ll be looking forward to your follow-up answer!

        …I can’t imagine what wonders LLMPapa might come up with if armed with documentation that GZ worked out and didn’t just lose weight because of Adderall (Papa, BTW, is a man). But it certainly would aid me in quashing one of the many fairy tales Zimmerman supporters have spun to bolster his claim of self-defense – in which Zimmerman’s distinct weight advantage is ignored entirely, and Zimmerman is portrayed as a stature-challenged weakling, who was woefully out-of-shape, bereft of any training, incapable of chasing Trayvon due to his girth, and who didn’t stand a chance against a “powerful giant,” “experienced street fighter” / “gangbanger”!

        • Patricia says:

          Will keep looking – and thanks for correcting me re Papa’s gender. Have no idea where I got the wrong idea, because the handle would suggest a gentleman. I thought at the time it was simply to blur identity (and quite clever, at that).

          No need to blur identity these days. We’re all getting blurry-eyed on this case Tough to tell a man from a mongoose. (Well, maybe not so tough for another mongoose.)

  35. Malisha says:

    This appears very dumb on my part, but will somebody please explain (from the beginning if possible) what actually happened? Did @rnsone have anything to do with pliaja? Did Ajamazin have anything to do with…I’m lost.

  36. PYorck says:

    I apologize to Patricia for addressing this matter in her spot, but felt that I had to update everyone here.

    Or you could have invested about three extra clicks and made this a separate post, but then we would miss the opportunity to feel bad for dwelling on this in Patricia’s spot.

    Your treatment of @rnsone was despicable. You spend two lengthy posts rebutting the content of the ridiculous allegations that only a moron would have taken seriously anyway. At the same time the victim of your rush to judgment defending someone who is sacrosanct here for reasons that I can not fathom gets a one-line apology buried in unrelated material. Ok, that is much better than nothing, but would it have killed you to show a little class?

    • Leelee says:

      I agree with PYorck that @rnsone and others were mistreated. The screen captures of the tweets in question were not doctored. I am a witness. I was reading all the tweets that were made about the professor as they were being tweeted in real-time.

      At this point, what bothers me more than the actual tweets is the plausible deniability….akin to… “I wasn’t following him, I was just going in the same direction he was”.

    • Thank you for your comment. He will remove the off-topic paragraph and leave the apology. He will amend the title. We are very sorry and appreciate the feedback. While he is adjusting, he is again saying that he was wrong about this, he feels bad about it, and such a mistake will not happen again.

      He is working on that now, and, in the future if there is a similar issue, which I hope to God there isn’t, because I am going to throw myself out a window, we will follow your good suggestion and separate the discussion topic from the blog maintenance issues.

      Thank you again, PYorck.

    • Actually, @rnsone got more apology than he deserved. All he did was dig up dirt on a regular poster for NO OTHER REASON than to sow dissent. That is the mark of a troll. I hope he gets banned, along with YOU if you really think that one word that bottom feeder wrote was worthy of a reply let alone an aplogy.

      • AND I stand by my opinion. BUT none of this has anything to do with the case at hand.

      • Flash says:

        Ahh.. and the ignorant shall remain ignorant. And you, Cielo, are about as ignorant as they come. I take it you haven’t bothered to look at rnsone’s twitter account. Doesn’t take long to determine that he is the exact opposite of a troll. I hope to see you banned along with her (assuming that you aren’t her.)


        • cielo62 says:

          Hey “flash” I already apologized but speaking of ignorant you might look in the mirror before trashing someone else. I felt that person was a troll for very legitimate reasons, mostly that 1. The issue was off-site and 2. Was off topic. I don’t tweet or twitter or whatever. And the issue has zero to do with this blog. I don’t engage in gossip or name-calling (usually) so I doubt I’ll get banned. But keep it up buddy. Your almost there.

  37. CommonSenseForChange says:

    “Trayvon Martin was considered a John Doe. They had the confessed killer, the gun, and the fragmented hollow-point, which was the cause of death.”

    The ONLY way not to know Trayvon Martin was NOT a “john doe” wouldhhave been to knock on all the doors to the end of both the TTL and the RVC side of the crime scene. If this wasn’t done, it’s a problem. Trayvon Martin should have never been considered a throw-away black child.

    • Malisha says:

      CSFC, right ON right ON. The police that night were complicit and in my opinion should have been considered accessories after the fact. Not only should they have knocked on every single door in the entire gated community, not only to identify the victim but to find out if anybody had further information on the crime or the crime scene itself, BUT they should have done that in order to warn every single resident that there had been AT LEAST one person discharging a deadly weapon in their neighborhood that night. How did they actually know that George and Trayvon were the only two people in that area that night? Did they KNOW that there were no other people, armed or not armed, in that area that night, who might have had something to do with whatever happened? In fact, that question should have been on George’s mind in addition to the cops’ minds immediately after there was violence: IS ANYBODY ELSE lurking around here who might have a weapon and/or might be trying to do violence here?

      Only if the cops and George were so complicit as to make a TV crime show get canceled for stupidity in the plot-line could there have been any other reason to fail to canvass the ENTIRE AREA before proceeding, much less getting directions from Bill Lee to forget about the whole thing and let it go.

      This is more a crime on the part of the SPD than Zimmerman. They are beyond complicit, and they are getting more protection than Zimmerman, too, since Zimmerman’s protectors are not in places as “high” as SPD’s protectors, who apparently reach all the way to DOJ.

      • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

        Right on…

      • roderick2012 says:

        Malisha, I live in West Palm Beach FL and I happened to be watching the local news and there was a witness who came foward in either late March or early April.

        This person attempted to tell the police the location of the altercation. The police brushed off the witness and told this person that they knew the location of the fight and they didn’t need this witness’ assistance.

        (There was an altercation at two seperate locations)

        The SPD really screwed up this investigation and I am sure that O’Mara will use it to his advantage.

        • TruthBTold says:


          Really? Wow, that’s something. I’m trying to give the benefit of the doubt to SPD although, I am aware of the problem and history and this is not even about a conspiracy theory or something, but their actions that night seem to be questionable. Very strange.

      • mataharley says:

        Everyone may need to rethink their focus on SPD. Serino wanted manslaughter charges, and the police reports have been labeled unnecessary death from day one.

        The local jurisdiction prosecutors office said no since they didn’t have the extensive evidence they have now, and there was nothing significant to counter Zim’s stories. Remember there are elements of Zim’s story that are verifiable… grass on back, did have injuries, etc. Went thru this on the other thread.

        So SPD’s hands were tied. The PD can’t file charges… the prosecutors have that responsibility.

        Secondly, the case was turn over to the State prosecutors March 12/13th, just days after the news of the death and no charges hit the national media. So any witness speaking of two altercations in mid or late March would be referred to the State’s offices and not the SPD.

        INRE two altercations – of course that’s logical. Zim admits he was decked at the tee (and got up to continue the fight)… so that’s the first. Witnesses in the first two buildings also reported this. The second altercation would be at the site of death, of course.

        Unless the witness was present in the complex, what can they add? And does anyone think the State didn’t screen every one of those coming in with what may be additional evidence?

    • Rachael says:


    • Xena says:

      “If this wasn’t done, it’s a problem. Trayvon Martin should have never been considered a throw-away black child.”

      The SPD responded like all good-ole-boys when a person claims self-defense and called the deceased a “suspect.” They run the deceased’s fingerprints through the system to see if there’s a match. IOWs, they apparently wanted to identify the deceased as a criminal. And THAT is also profiling.

      • Malisha says:

        I agree with you Xena. Serino says to Zimmerman that it’s “Murphy’s Law — anything that CAN go wrong WILL go wrong” tht Trayvon Martin was NOT a PUNK and that he was a good kid.


        That shocked the socks off me. The fact that Trayvon Martin was not a criminal “went wrong” with the killing of Trayvon Martin? If only he had deserved killing?

        That’s like saying to a rapist, after the fact, “Wow, this went wrong, we found out she really was a virgin and a nun and engaged to a powerful very religious politician and therefore you couldn’t just rape her for being a whore, although obviously you had every right to assume, if things hadn’t gone wrong, that you were well within your rights.”

        I do understand that Serino was saying whatever he needed to say to draw George out, and that Serino would have charged him with SOMETHING if he could have gotten past the pro-Zim block in the SPD that night (and days later), but really —

        “You’re still the good guy here…”
        “If he was a punk, hey, two thumbs up…”
        “Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong…he was not a punk…”

        OMG. Look what we’ve come to. IF YOU’RE ONE OF US, GO AHEAD, Kill whoever YOU think is a punk and hope for the best; if it turns out badly, we’ll try something else.

      • aussie says:

        Please let’s try to keep to KISS.

        They don’t want or not want someone to be a criminal. They want to know who he is. Fingerprints are available. Routine to run them through, with SOME chance of providing an ID.

        Would you rather see someone with one conviction left to rot as a John Doe because they did NOT try running the fingerprints?

        It’s ROUTINE, not profiling.

        I”m more concerned they didn’t try to canvass the area hard enough on the night; had they found Trayvon was staying there, maybe they’d have taken a bit more care with the evidence.

        As it was, they had a stranger (and black at that) who allegedly attacked someone they knew. And who, being a stranger, was assumed to have no business there.

        Classic “them and us” situation in which you naturally have to back up the “us”. The only problem with this is, justice means justice for “them” too, for all that the “us” thinks the law is there only to protect them.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        aussie – I could go with you on this except for the fact that GZ was not charged for 44 (yes) 44 days. He could have gone on a Caribbean cruise, applied for citizenship in whonozwhere, and never be seen again in that time. No — that is not normal. To have someone who may be a murderer out on the street to do it again is NOT justice for anyone,

      • Dennis says:

        @Sandra E. Graham

        I agree. Serino wanted him charged with manslaughter at the bare minimum because he was qualified to interrogate Zimmerman and he knew his story was bogus. Any parent that lives in that area should be very disturbed by the behavior of that police department. Everyone says that if Zimmerman is acquitted, it is the police department’s fault for having an epic fail at investigating the unprovoked shooting of a teenage boy. The prosecutors have a job to convict the guilty and keep our streets safe from scum like Zimmerman. Zimmerman could have murdered another innocent boy in the 40+ days it took for them to finally charge them. I seriously don’t know how that prosecutor can sleep at night…and chances are they are a parent themselves.

      • Xena says:

        @Aussie. I disagree with you and this is why. It’s just as “routine” for the police to check the missing persons’ database as it is for them to run fingerprints through the system.

        Because there was a dead body with the person who killed him, and the person who killed him postured the deceased person as a “thug,” it no doubt set the foundation for how the SPD placed importance on identifying the deceased. Runaway juvenile? Nah. Teen trying to break into houses? Well, that’s what GZ said he suspected, so let’s run his prints.

        Sorry, but the attitude of the SPD reminds me too much of what happened with Jeffrey Dahmer’s last victim. In his underwear and bloody from head to toe, he ran to the police. Jeffrey told them they were simply having a lover’s spat, and the police allowed Jeffrey to take that kid with him. Police do have their personal prejudices.

      • mataharley says:

        CommonSense and Xena, those are somewhat unfair observations about the PD – i.e. a “throw away black child” and “good’ole’boys”.

        Remember that a resident (Zim) had stated he was a stranger in the neighborhood. So canvasing the homes after 8-9pm hours, without a morgue picture that hadn’t yet been provided, seems counterproductive use of their time in the immediate aftermath of a crime scene. Nor did anyone have any idea how old TM was.

        I don’t know if anyone was asked to view the body for a possible ID, but I would assume that was likely. Don’t know how many of the adult residents TM knew, but they did say he had some kids in the ‘hood he did know.

        In the end, TM’s father called the following morning and ID was established. Considering TM wasn’t a 24/7 resident in the complex, and wasn’t carrying ID, that doesn’t seem to be an outrageous length of time under the circumstances.

        I will also add that running fingerprints is not necessarily a sign you believe a person is a criminal, not profiling but merely trying to identify someone to contact next of kin. A perfect example is that many licensed professionals, including myself, are required to have background checks, including fingerprints, on file as a condition of that license.

        I’m equally sure that if I were found dead, not carrying ID, they would run fingerprints on me and learn my identity. I would hardly consider attempting to identify an unknown deceased victim as “profiling”.

      • CommonSenseForChange says:

        Indeed @ Xena. I have mixed feelings about that. I think some in the SPD tried to do their jobs without bias while others were just conditioned to be biased without ever knowing they were biased and yet others were straight up racists.

        If Trayvon Martin were Casey Anthony’s daughter Cayle, for example, would the SPD have only asked a handful of convenient witnesses for statements and shown a distorted pic of George Zimmerman to only a member of the HOA? Did they show Trayvon Martin’s pic to anyone on the crime scene that night? Did they show the pics to all the people who responded to their canvassing door knocks that night? Why is it that NOBODY in the set of homes where Trayvon Martin was staying gave a statement or experienced a wrap on the door in response to SPD’s investigation?

    • puck says:

      That they didn’t canvass the neighborhood clearly demonstrates that the police, like GZ, thought TM was an intruder, that he didn’t belong in the RATL.

    • Sandra E. Graham says:

      Malisha – Thank you for your comment. There has been alot to read today, for sure. This whole case has opened up a whole can of worms. It is tragic that Trayvon was murdered that night. That fact makes it worse because the problems in the SPD did not just start with the murder of Trayvon Martin. It is only because of Sabrina Fulton wanting answers and her HAVING to force the issue, that the eyes of the world are now witnessing major issues within the justice system from victims rights all the way up to the DOJ.

      The actions of the police, the EMTs (or should I say non-actions) demonstrated a complete disregard for the victim’s rights as well as possibly jeopardizing the safety of residents living in the complex.

    • Dave says:

      Couldn’t they have just called one of the numbers stored on Trayvon’s phone and asked the person on the other end who the phone belonged to?

      • Xena says:

        @Dave. Trayvon’s phone required a password. SPD did not have it. After Tracy identified Trayvon by his “death photo,” he said that would need to talk with his lawyer before giving the SPD the password. At that point since Trayvon had been identified, it should make accessing his phone moot.

        I remember there being a police report, and someone saying that the SPD HAD identified TM in the wee hours of the morning. No one seems to know how that happen, and I’ve not read any speculation on that matter either.

        There are some media reports saying that Trayvon dialed 911 within seconds of being murdered, that GZ is heard on the tape, and that the FBI has it. None of that has been confirmed by reputable sources. However, it gives me reason to question whether the SPD did receive a 911 call traced to Trayvon’s phone, therefore identifying him as the caller and the victim who was killed.

        • ajamazin says:


          The existence of such a tape is a possibility. If it exists, the FBI has it and I suspect it will be used by the DOJ at the appropriate time.

          It would not surprise me had Trayvon called 911.


      • aussie says:

        His aunt in Canada? the pizza shop?

        His MOTHER??? “excuse me we are the cops we wanna know whose phone this is ‘cos he’s just been shot dead” yeah I can see that going over real well.

        The only time at any incident the police will use the person’s phone is if they find an ICE (In Case of Emergency) number in it. They won’t go calling random people.

        There was a media report of TM making a 911 call, which was pulled off the air immediately. It was fake, based on a misunderstanding. It never happened.

        THINK ABOUT IT. DeeDee hears the start of the argument. WHEN would he have had time to call 911? how many 17 year olds WOULD call 911 anyway? and say what? “I’m a black kid in a strange place and some guy’s asking me what I’m doing here?”?????????????

        Do we really need to make a conspiracy theory about everything? what happened to common sense and trying to keep to at least some of the know facts?

    • Flash says:

      Yeah, but no one recognized him from the neighborhood. They didn’t think he lived there. *shrug*

  38. Dennis says:

    Frederick, is there any reason why the prosecution has not charged Zimmerman with false imprisonment and assaulting a minor? If you are in the act of a crime, any SYG claim goes out the window. I’m not sure about standard self-defense though. Thanks.

    • Malisha says:

      Dennis, since you asked the Professor, and not me, why George wasn’t charged with the other crimes he may have [read “probably”] committed that night, it does seem presumptuous of me to venture a guess, but I am known to be presumptuous at times, and sometimes I just go ahead and presume and then follow it up by sending Ferrero Rocher to patch up spats — most of my friends love Rocher so they don’t mind me shooting off my mouth occasionally.

      If I were Angela Corey I would have avoided charging George with any “additional” crimes because they would add somewhat vulnerable side-cars that could be attacked and gotten rid of, thus casting a pall over my MAIN charge and making me look like I had failed at something. That is, I would want to avoid any possibility of racking up a loss on the way to a win, because just as “nothing succeeds like success,” nothing messes up a good venture like a preliminary mishtunk.

      Anyway, that’s just me trying to second-guess the prosecutor. :mrgreen:

      • CommonSenseForChange says:

        Excellent advice, imo @Malisha. Prove what you know. Don’t get side-tracked/.

      • Rachael says:

        I agree with not charging him with that now because it would be presumptuous and something else to have to prove, but could he be charged with it additionally later?

      • Rachael says:

        I mean if it comes up in a trial that that is what happened?

      • Dennis says:

        Your explanation sounds reasonable. I was just assuming that since the prosecution seems to have evidence of murder, they would have evidence (DeeDee’s testimony) that Zimmerman tried to detain martin.

        My next question would be: can the prosecution use DeeDee’s testimony to prove that Zimmerman was committing a crime against Martin to show that Zimmerman was the aggressor, and that Martin was purely defending himself?

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      I think the SP can still go before a GJ? Anyone?

  39. CommonSenseForChange says:

    Dear Professor Leatherman, Crane Station (and the rest of the fam) –

    My turn to school you…

    Never feed the trolls. I appreciate you sharing your insights and knowledge. If you ignore the trolls, they will go away. We respect you and know you’re a bad ass atty!

    Stay safe and ignore them. Focus only on your goal and watch the idjits drop by the wayside as they try to derail you from good and purposeful arguments.

    When I was attacked (a long, long time ago), I simply took my complaint to the police (who were clueless of what to do) in order to make a record of harassment and bullying. Of course I took other precautions and took a good hard look at who was privy to my positions and cut off all questionable contacts.

    It worked for me. Haven’t heard a peep out of the f*ckers since.

    Negative publicity is good — unless you don’t want it! Examine what’s important to you and Crane and I’m sure you’ll get past the nutjobs and keep pushing forward!

    Best wishes and thank you for providing your legal expertise on matters important.

  40. Pooh says:

    Regarding GZ’s conflicting CYA stories about only getting out of the truck to look for an address, crossing the T towards RVC to look for an address, etc: I wonder how much difference it makes in the end, other than to demonstrate GZ’s “shimmying” around the truth.

    Because from TM’s point of view, no matter what GZ’s claimed purpose was, GZ would still have appeared to be following him, looking for him, walking around (for maybe two minutes?) waving his little keychain flashlight around.

    And of course, if GZ were truly heading away and back towards his truck, TM, who was obviously afraid of and avoiding GZ, would have had no reason to stop GZ from leaving by calling out to GZ and approaching him.

    • Manberk says:

      No question. Even in Georges story he continues in the same same direction. I thinks thats important. Suggesting he halted when 911 said to is hogwash and a diversion by the Zimorons. The person being chased would have no idea.

      Also, he’s actually up near the clubhouse when TM ran, since it happened 30 secs after he says that he was coming towards him there. Me thinks the best thing to do is forget his story entirely. It’s clouds the truth!

      • mataharley says:

        Manberk, GZ clarifies that he is at the clubhouse during the hand in waistbank (1’06” on NEN call) and coming to check me out (1’25” on NEN call). .

        The he’s running occurs at 2’08 on the NEN call, or 43 seconds later. Zim admits he’s already followed TM in his car to the TTL final parking spot when he sees him take off, and says he starts that run from the TTL/sidewalk intersection.

        For both Martin and Zim (following in his car) should be easily do’able in that time frame. It’s an approx distance from where he says he pulled in at the clubhouse, to where he parked of about 390-400′. That’s a pace of about 9′ per second and more than enough fudge time for it to happen without Martin having to run, or Zim having to speed in his car..

        At the same time, it totally blows Zim’s claim that he saw TM run, round the corner at the dog walk, then coming back to circle his car in that same time elapsed. (reenactment video BS) Physically impossible, unless TM possessed a Scotty-beam-me-up transporter in his pockets. Think that was left out in the evidence round up, eh?

  41. EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

    Everyone do have a wonderful day…

  42. EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

    Professor, how in God’s name did George and Shellie Zimmerman end up with the same judge. Trying not to speculate it appears a fix is in…

    • aussie says:

      Accident. This judge was allocated for Shellie. And now George has run out of judges so this is the only one left. Now Shellie can start the “unfair, I want a new one” because of the “conflict”.

      What a circus.

      • Rachael says:

        And a website begging for money for her defense @@

      • Rachael says:

        I mean now she can start her own.

      • puck says:

        Give Shellie to JKL. Hilarity will ensue.

      • Rachael says:

        @puck OMG lol then I would know for sure there is a god.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        To have Shelly go before Judge Lester would be the ultimate. This whole case just blows me away. LOL

        • It would indeed be something to see if Shellie had to go before Judge Lester, BUT somehow that strikes me as maybe the same thing; too much evidence that maybe he can’t be impartial with her case either.

      • Malisha says:

        There’s another judge available for Shellie so long as she is not represented by O’Mara, which I believe she will NOT be (O’Mara will not want to represent HER because of conflict, so that frees up that judge who recused himself, before Lester was appointed, because he had a close relationship with O’Mara).

        So it’s going to be all right, just so long as George’s sister doesn’t go and get herself charged with a felony in Sanford, too.

  43. GrannyStandingforTruth says:

    Professor Leatherman, I have a question.

    It just occurred to me that out of Trayvon’s own mouth he said that Zimmerman was following him. He told DeeDee that a creepy man was following him. Would that be considered proof that Zimmerman was following Trayvon?

    • rayvenwolf says:

      Its possible, but don’t forget if GZ carries that “going in the same direction” nonsense to the stand I believe and anyone with more knowledge feel free to correct me, but the pros will be able to use his prior statements of admitting he was following Trayvon if not his NEN call. “Are you following him?” “Yes.”

  44. TruthBTold says:

    First, I want to say to Professor Leatherman that I appreciate his apology to rnsone. I disagreed with the professor’s response to rnsone and his words of caution to me. I did not believe at all that rnsone was a troll. I am not rnsone, but FWIW, I appreciate recognizing an error and apologizing. I didn’t go and check out the tweets, but from what the professor, Crane, and others have mentioned and addressed, it definitely was ugly and unnecessary digging into the professor’s background (M.O.?), etc. Posters above me (Stamina, LeeLee, etc.) were spot on. Once you remove the blinders and explain aways for everything, you will see the truth as many of us have. I know I had gotten frustrated and turned-off by some things.

    Nonetheless, the general consensus is still love and support for the Leathermans.

    Now back to the regularly scheduled programming.

    Dueling witnesses. Obviously, the witnesses will play a role in this case, but I don’t believe that the case will be so dependent on witnesses. GZ has provided enough rope to hang himself. One interesting thing regard WJeremy is his fiancee saying, “get in here.” Does that suggest that he was outside? Unsure. Could he have been somewhere in the house and she wanted him to be in a room or wherever she was? Possibly. Some have mentioned how clear the screams were captured suggesting that maybe he was outside, but those houses are short two-levels I believe. Plus, they were on the grass which doesn’t seem to be far away.

  45. princss6 says:

    I’m looking forwarding to reading this…I must have missed it in the other thread. Thanks, Professor for giving Patricia’s response it’s own post.

  46. Malisha says:

    If George chooses not to testify, however, they can put an empty chair there, and question it like this:

    George, isn’t it true that you decided you had to bring in your catch that night so you could prove you were worthy of a badge and an official uniform and gun and didn’t have to just play cops and robbers any more?

    George isn’t it true that you called NEN rather than 911 because they told you to stop calling 911 constantly already?

    George isn’t it true that you decided you were going to apprehend this guy but you were unprepared for him to resist arrest?

    George isn’t it true that when it looked like this asshole was going to get away you felt you had to shoot him for failing to recognize your authority?

    George isn’t it true that you thought the fix was in and you’d go free and when that didn’t happen, you began to go boo hoo and you haven’t stopped yet?

    George, isn’t it true that it’s god’s plan to get you convicted and sentenced and you can’t question that?

    • hinkster4ever says:

      lol, Malisha…does an empty chair equate to Gz’s lack of thinking skills in a empty head….:)

    • puck says:

      I don’t think “Eastwooding” will still be a popular meme by the time this goes to trial…

    • TeeTee says:

      I hope that GZ looks back over his life and realize it’s been one epic failure after another…this, being his greatest! GZ, I pray that you will fall on your knees before God, confess your sins, repent, receive His forgiveness, ask the Lord Jesus Christ to come into your heart…allow the Holy Spirit of God to work in and through you. You talk about it being ‘God’s Plan’…well, He knows all about what you’ve done! He’s waiting for you to do the right thing…ADMIT WHAT YOU’VE DONE! Put an end to all of this and give Trayvon Martin’s family the chance to truly grieve the loss of their son. There is no amount of medication that will erase from your mind, the act you committed that evening. It will remain with you in this life and you will be held accountable for it in the next!

  47. Malisha says:

    GZ to voice-stress guy: To be honest, I had forgotten that I had my fire-arm until I felt his hand on my chest after my jacket came up. [BTW how could he actually realize his jacket rode up while he was screaming for help, being suffocated, having his head explode and bleeding like a stuck pig?]

    GZ in another statement: I carry my gun everywhere except to work.

    Oh yeah. Go ahead, testify, George, go ahead. :mrgreen:

    • Lonnie Starr says:

      For sure everyone knows GZ did not forget he had a gun with him. If he didn’t have a firearm he’d never have gotten out of his truck to go in the same direction as “the suspect”. GZ is no hero, he’s a coward! A hero would have identified himself! Not guess that it might be too dangerous to do so one minute, then continue to follow while armed the next.

      Every scenario that has GZ as “possibly innocent” has to focus on a small portion of the events of that night, to the exclusion of most everything else. While theories of guilt are able to incorporate the widest range of the nights activities and evidence. Anyone besides me notice this?

    • rayvenwolf says:

      Malisha: when I heard that I knew he was full of it. He had just left his house which means he’d just put that gun on, but totally forget about it. Yeah its a small gun, but you don’t forget you have something like that on you. Its a) stupid and b) dangerous.

      Oh and to answer your question the same way he knew/felt that Trayvon saw/felt his gun without Trayvon actually saying such.

  48. Dave says:

    No sane, unarmed man would EVER follow a fullgrown male stranger into a dark alley at night because any normally intelligent person being followed in such a situation would assume that the pursuer was either armed, crazy, or both and intended to attack him and would respond to the situation accordingly, probably violently and possibly noisily.

    • hinkster4ever says:

      Dave, Remember the Hannity show interview where Gz smirked and said emphatically “NO” when asked was he afraid of Trayvon….since he stated Trayvon was reaching in his waistband did he have a fear of a weapon being there….NO, smirk by GZ……or words to that effect?

      I think Gz is/was sane and he had no fear at all as he said. He recognized Trayvon as a teen….with nothing to cause Gz to fear him. That Gz chose to run from the “creepy man”….gave Gz a greater indicator that there was nothing to fear from Trayvon…IMO

      • ajamazin says:

        If Hannity won’t talk, they can waterboard him. I think he said that it wasn’t torture.


      • Dave says:

        I agree that GZ is sane. He was not afraid of Trayvon because he was armed (and knew it) and Trayvon’s running away strongly suggested at least that the latter was not armed. I don’t believe that Zimmerman would have followed Trayvon without the belief that his gun gave him a decisive advantage.

  49. Lonnie Starr says:

    Just a few thoughts:

    1. Can we discount GZ’s claim that there was a confrontation/fight at the tee?

    2. If we cannot, then we must accept that something happened at the tee.

    3. If something happened at the tee between GZ and TM, it is clear that they separated and moved separately south.

    4. South is the direction that TM was intending to go.

    5. West is the direction GZ claims he was intending to go.

    6. If they separated at the tee, and were then, therefore, free to go their separate ways. Why does GZ, who is armed, wind up going in the direction that TM intends to go in, while claiming TM is the aggressor? When, in fact, it should have been GZ heading west and TM, as the aggressor, should have followed GZ to the west?

    7. Is there any importance to the fact that GZ is on TM’s preferred route, instead of TM being on GZ’s preferred route? Remembering that GZ did not realize he had a firearm with him at that point in time?

    • Malisha says:

      Question: Is there any importance to the fact that GZ is on TM’s preferred route, instead of TM being on GZ’s preferred route?

      My guess at the answer: Yes, because GZ being on TM’s preferred route indicates GZ was following TM.

    • hinkster4ever says:

      I asked our esteemed retired attorney…Boar_D this question a few threads back….ie: did Gz have a right to be at the T or the back walk….here is c&p’d wonderfully enlightening answer:


      The direct answer to your question, is that Mr. Zimmerman had a right to be where he was. Hold that thought, though.

      There’s a reason the defense decided not to invoke “stand your ground” section 776.013 and instead to rely on “traditional self defense” section 776.012. An infinite number of lawyers speculate an infinite number of reasons, but so far the only one who counts — Mr. O’Mara — hasn’t been clear.

      One thing that is clear, is that the “duty to retreat” does not apply in Florida.

      My guess is that 776.012 is a better fit for Mr. Zimmerman because Mr. Zimmerman wants us to believe that he was on the move on the way back to his truck when the altercation began; and because he was not defending a physical place or position, he was not “standing [his] ground” or anyone else’s.

      As a practical matter of trial strategy, the defense wants to avoid the concept of “stand your ground” because the evidence from the Dee/Martin phone call shows that Martin waited in one place while Mr. Zimmerman approached him; and thus had the better claim to “SYG.”

      No matter what the defense wants us to believe, the prosecution will seek to put the case into the “use of force by aggressor” statute 776.041(2), by showing that Mr. Zimmerman “provoked” Mr. Martin’s use of force against Mr. Zimmerman.

      In short, the prosecution (me too!) would say that although Mr. Zimmerman had a right to be where he was, he did not have the right to do what he did.

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        Even if I give you that, that doesn’t quite end the matter because: the shooting did not happen there, where GZ was approaching TM.

        The shooting happened at a later time, at a place far, far way!

        So I can reiterate: Was it along TM’s preferred path? Or was it along the path that GZ claims he wanted to travel?

        After they separated at the tee, GZ should have continued back towards his truck, where he claimed he had his only interest in getting to. Obviously TM did go in the direction that we know he had to go in, if he was to get home.

        So, if both parties were telling the truth, there should have been nothing further or, TM should have wound up being shot, closer to GZ’s truck. Instead he’s shot closer to his home. So, then, what provoked GZ to go in the same direction as TM, when TM was going away from him?

        GZ may have some right to be there, but not for the purposes of following anyone!

        Since GZ’s only purpose for being in that area, was for the expressed and obvious, proven and admitted purpose of following someone whom he suspected of some criminal dream of his own imagination, he had no right to do this. Therefore it follows, he did not have a right to be there for the purposes that got him there.

        GZ knows this and that is why he contrives a story about looking for an address he knows will be useless! I believe that after a jury gets a good look at GZ’s stated reasons for being there vs the alternative purposes of his being there, they’re going to decide that GZ was definitely not entitled to be there at all.

        Or, maybe jurors aren’t or won’t be allowed to use rules that should have governed GZ’s conduct while performing NW activities?

      • Dennis says:

        Very nice article. The prosecution will attempt to prove that Zimmerman provoked the force that was used against him. They will also prove that Zimmerman’s wounds were the result of Martin defending himself. The wounds on Zimmerman are consistent with someone defending themselves, not giving an aggressor style beatdown.

      • hinkster4ever says:

        Lonnie, my question that Boar_d answered was…..since Gz lived in a different area of the gated community….did he have a right to be on that certain walkway…..

        What I derived from Boar_d’s response is yes during any time Gz could walk freely about the area…..but…..he says hold on…..and goes on to explain the case law….

        Once Gz stepped from that truck after saying “shit, he’s running”….these a-holes always get away,ect…..Gz became the aggressor and Trayvon who was running out of fear from the ‘creepy’ man had a right to….and this is my thought here…..Trayvon had a right to fear his life was in danger/or expected great bodily harm from the ‘creepy’ man chasing him. Per DeeDee, didn’t she tell Trayvon to run, run…..after Trayvon had thought he had lost the aggressor and Trayvon was out of breath and said he could not run anymore?

        Anyway, agree with you Lonnie, Gz had no right to be there following Trayvon, and certainly no right to kill Tayvon. And, I think the prosecution has a lot of evidence to convict Gz…JMO

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Which is to say that after citing GZ’s statutory rights to wander the neighborhood freely, which I never took issue with, he agrees with me that “for the purpose(s) of” then becomes the determinate factor of what right the actor has.

          Once GZ’s purpose is obtained and reviewed, if that purpose is not a legal, lawful or otherwise prohibited for good and lawful reasons, such as official and/or police direction for reasons of safety, as is the case here, GZ has lost his right to be where he is.
          Because his purpose is neither supported nor recognized at law.

      • Rachael says:

        @Dennis I agree with you and Trayvon was the one in a position to have every reason for defending himself against some lunatic watching him, taking up chase then confronting him.

      • mataharley says:

        hinkster4ever quoting boar: There’s a reason the defense decided not to invoke “stand your ground” section 776.013 and instead to rely on “traditional self defense” section 776.012. An infinite number of lawyers speculate an infinite number of reasons, but so far the only one who counts — Mr. O’Mara — hasn’t been clear

        According to the news reports, MOM is quite clear on his reasons, and decided he is pursuing traditional self defense because GZ was being held captive by TM, unable to retreat/escape. Boar’s observations may, however, have predated MOM speaking out publicly on his strategy. So this isn’t a slight against Boar’s observations.

        Mark O’Mara, who is defending George Zimmerman against a second-degree murder charge in the fatal February shooting, said the traditional self-defense approach is appropriate because the facts suggest his client couldn’t retreat from a beating Martin was giving him.

        Zimmerman’s attorneys had said last week that they would use Florida’s controversial “stand your ground” law, which allows people to use deadly force – rather than retreat – if they believe their lives are in danger.

        “The facts don’t seem to support a ‘stand your ground’ defense,” O’Mara said.


        IMHO, and I’m certainly not alone, this has never been available as a SYG defense for GZ. But it would have been an excellent one for TM, had he prevailed in the encounter.

        The defense will always attempt to keep the jury’s focus confined only to the time between the first verbal/physical encounter and the death (as the Zim supporters do), and ignore everything that transpired prior. They will stress that TM drew first blood, and there is no evidence or witness that can effectively disprove that.

        Whether they successfully keep the relevant facts narrowed only to that last minute of TM’s life, and achieve an acquittal, remains to be seen. Since the State charged M2, they would force prior events, and that evidence, into their presentation. And that is why I speculate the State chose that charge.

        INRE the pretrial evidentiary hearing’s potential success. Considering the low percentage of immunity grants in these hearings since 2005, my guess is no judge is going to assume the responsibility of dismissing, or granting immunity to Zim, and will recommend this goes to a trial by jury. To do so, they would have to see GZ’s statements and story as unquestionably true.

        Maybe that’s possible, but I think unlikely. Every bit of it requires a squeaky clean and credible GZ from the onset. Unfortunately the evidence and his own behavior during the bond hearings, as well as interview and various statements – all available in the file to any presiding judge – will cast a pall over his credibility.

        BTW, I provided this site to Crane-Station on another thread. But if someone missed it, you might find it interesting. The Tampa Bay Times has been busy compiling a searchable and sortable SYG database. It includes fatal and non fatal cases, and all weapons involved.


        Actually, I’ll be surprised if MOM does go the pretrial hearing route, and isn’t just trying to make the State squirm. Many criminal defense lawyers have negative opinions towards these mini-trials since judges feel more comfortable letting jury’s decide (unless slam dunk obvious), and it exposes their defense strategy poker hand, up front, to the prosecution.


        In cases where the facts are in dispute — and even if they don’t seem to be — the judge is likely to deny the Stand Your Ground immunity motion, said Ralph Behr, a Florida criminal defense attorney who has filed eight motions for immunity, all of which have been denied. More typically, a judge will choose to have the case go to trial, where the defendant must take his or her chance with a jury, just like other criminal defendants, he said.

        “Most judges, I think, are comfortable letting the adverserial system play out before a jury rather than make decisions themselves,” said Behr.

        Maggie Jo Hilliard, an attorney in Atlantic Beach, Florida, thought she had made a good argument for immunity in the case of 18-year-old Rashad Martinez. The former juvenile inmate had been charged with murdering another former inmate, 19-year-old Tremayne Lovett, and in a motion for immunity under Stand Your Ground, Hilliard cited previous incidents in which Lovett beat up Martinez. She also presented a eyewitness to a confrontation preceding the shooting who believed that Lovett was carrying a gun.

        But a judge denied Hilliard’s immunity motion in 2010, and after a trial, Martinez was convicted in sentenced to life in prison in February. “I can say I disagree with the jury but it does me no good. I have to trust in the system of justice that we have,” said Hilliard.

        The Stand Your Ground evidentiary hearings have other risks, as well. Some defense lawyers don’t file such motions on the grounds that the hearings give the prosecution an advance preview of the defense’s case.

        “You’re basically conducting a mini trial,” said Christopher Frey, a defense attorney in New Port Richey, Florida. “You’re putting your cards on the table before you pick a jury.”

        The only benefit I see by MOM attempting this judicial path is to garner more sympathy for immunity being denied, translating into donations/dollars from supporters.

        Just fodder for debate… or side bets. :0)

    • TruthBTold says:

      Great questions Lonnie. Something that DeeDee said and I am unsure how or if it can relate to your questions regarding directions, but she stated that TM said he’s about to run from the back. Maybe that means from the back of the houses?

      “If something happened at the tee between GZ and TM, it is clear that they separated and moved separately south.”

      Hmmmm…..damaging. Right because, if I am understanding you correctly, they weren’t locked in a struggle however many feet to the site of the shooting. GZ wants us to believe that after being punched in the nose, he stumbled or so a few feet (different version that being knocked right down as he originally stated). I guess TM was just watching him as he did this. Also, if GZ was on the sidewalk or the Tee concrete when TM appeared from the darkness, why not “stumble” more on the sidewalk as opposed to grass. Also, if TM stated “do you have a problem and let’s not forget homie,” why not take off running as opposed to standing there and reaching for a phone, which makes no sense. What was he going to tell them? Notwithstanding the obvious of never should have exited his truck, looks like GZ had opportunities to retreat but for, he was looking for TM and making sure that these buttholes don’t get away.

      • Lonnie Starr says:

        Add that GZ doesn’t identify himself then either! Even while stumbling he can still talk. Would he have remained as secretive about what he was doing, if TM was armed and had gotten the drop on him? I think not. I think he’d have quite quickly answered what he was doing there. But that shouldn’t have required gunpoint to get a response. Thus he’s in the course of being an “aggravated vigilante”, one who intends to do great harm, if he doesn’t get immediate and unconditional compliance. That’s certainly not NW, that’s a dangerously abusive bully/stalker.

        If he did get punched as he says he did, then he has to realize that he’s given offense! He never ever had any right to offend anyone! Yet he insists upon continuing to offend!

        “What are you following me for?” Says: “I’m offended and bothered by your activities so far, who are you and what are you doing / why are you doing this?” All very reasonable questions of someone who knows he has already told the police that there may be a criminal to come look at and question. GZ refuses to respond in a rational way, after acting in what appeared to be an irrational way. Thus he’s prolonging a hostile situation, that he could have tried to abate. That’s a provocation!

        Yet, the first thing he does, after he gets up off the ground, is go in the same direction that TM went. Then, some time after he catches up with him, he shoots him. Those are facts we know occurred, even if we can’t figure out what the real story, word/confrontation wise was.

      • Manberk says:

        Lonnie, I think this question is the very reason George made up his story that has him getting a street name ( the need for an address story came after, at first it was just a street name in the 1st Singleton intvw, I believe) no one ever asked for on the street on which he lives and never wavering from that path in and effort to suggest he wasnt following, Don’t think he or whomever helped come up w. the story realized the evidence wouldn’t match. He says he was facing TM, who was south, when punched and fell backward taking him ever further away from where to body was found. We also have a witness that has a chase, or people running by also south of the T. Even in George’s changing story during the reenactment stumbling forward is in conflict with the evidence.

        • Lonnie Starr says:

          Thank you Manberk. What a lot of people aren’t paying attention to, (or rather; expressing), for their own reasons, is that not all of the evidence collected, will be used by either side to build their case. What both sides will want to do is, not construct their case, in such a way that the evidence that isn’t being used, provides glaring/unexplainable contradictions (as in “impeachments”).

          Thus I’m fashioning scenarios that drop the minor tidbits and try to deal only with the evidence that “peaks above the waves of controversy”.

          That being so, it is clear that GZ needs to put some reason to his exiting the truck and traveling “in the same direction”, that doesn’t put him in violation of the rules he agreed to abide by for NW.

          While the reason he picks is a clearly false one, it does show that he is ever mindful of what he is supposed to be doing, as opposed to what he intends to do. Meaning that he is using NW rules to fashion his story. Which, in turn means, he is on NW, else why fashion and offer any threadbare denials?

          If, in his mind, he had a right to be where he was, and a good reason for doing the things he does, then all he has to do is provide his reasons, and his rights are what they are.

          Instead he’s trying to explain that: While not performing NW duties, he was mindful of the rules and did not violate them except perhaps accidentally, because of how critical the situation had become.

          Both the prosecution and the defense know that, jurors are not going to let GZ have it both ways. Or, in fact, “all ways”! They will not allow that he was both following NW rules, breaking them, and doing so because the situation he created became dangerous.
          Then coming around on a second pass, claiming that those rules don’t and did not apply at all, because he wasn’t “on NW duty”.

          So, there’s the “back story” conundrum he’s building into, that a jury will find itself facing in their deliberations. If the jury finds itself debating NW rules to determine what GZ should or should not have done, then GZ is toast. Of course, the SP needs to get it before the jury one other thing; That NW “on/off duty” has no “on / off switch”. One goes on duty whenever and where ever circumstances require them to be a NW’er.

          Finally as for “right to be there”, all rights are ultimately defined by the purpose of the actor. For example, a person has no right to break into your home and stand in your living room. UNLESS they are there for the purpose of rescue, then the whole rights thing flips.

    • Xena says:

      IMO, when GZ reached the T, he heard or saw Trayvon, dropped his keys because he needed a free hand, and walked towards Trayvon. (Tactical flashlight in one hand. Keys in another. No free hand to use to hold on to Trayvon, or maybe get to his gun.)

      Not once in all his statements neither in his re-enactment, does GZ mention when he dropped his key and tactical flashlight, neither why. The tactical flashlight being found on the grass close to Trayvon’s body questions GZ’s story. GZ gives absolutely no explanation for how he managed to hold on to that tactical flashlight for about 40 ft South of the T, and while also doing the shimmy while being pinned on his back.

      I do not believe that Trayvon was on the side of the dog walk where he was killed when GZ heard or spotted him. Rather, I think that the altercation went from the side of the dog walk where Brandy Green lives, to the opposite side. If I remember correctly, the 7-11 bag was found on that side of the dog walk. That might explain why some residents thought the screaming was getting closer to their residence.

      • mataharley says:

        xena: I do not believe that Trayvon was on the side of the dog walk where he was killed when GZ heard or spotted him. Rather, I think that the altercation went from the side of the dog walk where Brandy Green lives, to the opposite side.

        Just some logistics to consider.

        GZ stopped and finished his NEN call just short of the tee intersections of the dog path and E-W cut thru sidewalks. Were TM hiding in the bushes on the east side of the row of buildings, he is likely to have Zim, on the phone, in his line of site.

        If, however, he is hiding in the bushes lining the western row of buildings, it’s not likely. But he may have heard sounds of Zim’s voice to know he was nearby, or that someone was. Remember that Dee said he was “scared” and that his voice had gotten “low”. This may be so that he didn’t disclose where he was concealed to anyone by talking too loudly.

        In the end, if he hid behind bushes in that row of buildings (which I think is likely), I’m not sure it’s important which side it was.

        About the plastic bag… doesn’t take much of a breeze to pick it up and move it around. So where it was ultimately found is not necessarily the place it was dropped, unless there was something in it to weigh it down. I’m under the impression the bag was empty, ergo vulnerable to breezes prior to the LEOs arrival.

        About the tactical flashlight… don’t know that there is anything to prove Zim was carrying it, or in his pocket – falling out at the final battle at the death site. But logic would suggest it is the latter, and Zim never said he was holding that flashlight for the duration of the struggle. Obvious, if he was, he would have attempted to use the larger flashlight as a weapon instinctively.

        Zim’s only mention about his flashlight is that he was having a hard time getting it to work, and I thought that was the key chain light.

    • angela_nw says:

      Yes this is significant – and that not only does Zimmerman want us to believe that Trayvon pulled the first punch, but also that Trayvon had dominance over George’s body for several minutes and for 40 feet in that linear direction moving south – it is simply not believable. imo

      • TruthBTold says:

        Exactly Angela. The question that has been asked by many of us, is what was GZ doing with his hands at any point prior to him gaining “wrist control” and discharging his weapon? He demonstrated some silly swatting like motions during the re-enactment video that doesn’t add up.

      • angela_nw says:

        my comment here was actually in response to Lonnie up above + Xena good observation as well (location of bag) and yeah how could Zimmerman continue to hold on to his big flashlight for 40 feet while being overpowered – not logical. imo

      • angela_nw says:

        TBT I agree

      • TeeTee says:

        Something I’m now questioning after reading the rehashing of the altercation at the T…if Trayvon has approached from the south as GZ claims, his back facing south and punches GZ…wouldn’t GZ have fallen back north, towards the sidewalk where the T intersects?

        • TruthBTold says:

          Good question TeeTee. I touched on something similar yesterday. Even if we were to believe his account, it appears that he would have moved towards TM when TM “called out to him.”

  50. gbrbsb says:

    Whew! It’s so difficult to keep up with ya’all.

    Professor however much I admire Patricia’s analysis and find them compelling in so many parts, in the previous thread Mataharley made, imo, an extremely well thought out legal response playing devil’s advocate precisely to this “practicum” both of which in turn created a back and forth of fascinating replies and counter replies between them, all of which in fairness to both of them imho also belonged here.

    No offence Patricia as your work is truly grand!

  51. Patricia,

    I salute you!

  52. Manberk says:

    Wrist control describes holding ones wrists to control their hands, or their ability to strike. Combat sport and self defense move. But where you would hear it most frequently is actually in MMA.

    • TruthBTold says:


      Or law enforcement as they use that term frequently. Actually, it was Detective Serino who used those words when GZ was describing that part of the incident.

  53. whonoze says:

    @ Patricia (or no longer Patricia)
    W11’s 911 call begins before the gunshot but after the fight has started. She tells the 911 operator, “I think they’re yelling ‘help’,” but the word ‘help’ is not audible in the background.

    From this, my hypothesis would be that someone WAS yelling ‘help’, and hearing that motivated her to pick up the phone and call, so that’s what was in her mind, but by the time she dialed and got through the ‘helps’ had yielded to screams.

    The very first thing audible on the recording are the sounds Alan Reich parses as someone saying “I’m begging you!” That is followed directly by an anguished scream. Following the ‘arm hold’ thesis: that would suggest that the aggressor responded to a plea for mercy by inflicting even more pain. (Depraved mind indeed.)

    It’s hard to guess at the timing of when the witnesses saw what before they made their 911 calls. The investigators don’t seem to care about time much, although i think it’s crucial.

    Re: JohnW6, we don’t even know if he heard the screams. He says he heard someone yelling for help, and GZ says he yelled at him for help, so I’m thinking that was before W11’s call begins, and before the real screaming starts. I told thing there’s anything on the recording that could be JohnW6 saying “I’m calling 911” either, so that probably occurred before as well

    I wonder if the SPD ever played W11′s 911 call for W6. You’d think they want him to correlate what can be heard on that recording with what he saw and when he saw it, eh?

    But maybe he was already retreating into his unit by the time the screams began and didn’t see anything of their source.

    I am very suspicious of John W6, primarily because his statements were what got GZ released without being charged, and his tone changes so much between his 911 call and the his police statements. I think it is highly likely his statements were ‘poisoned’. My guess is that he is weak-willed, and the cop taking the first statement (Ricardo Ayala) fed him a lot of leading questions, and he basically bullshitted the whole MMA thing to try to cooperate with the police (who, I’m guessing, just wanted to clear the case and go home by finding corroboration for GZ’s version). He then turned it up a notch in his recorded interview with Serino. But after he learned who Trayvo was, and got a better idea of the circumstances, he realized he might be facing an obstruction charge, and has been trying to walk his earlier statements back in a way that doesn’t make him seem like a total fabulator.

    If I’m right about him seeing the beginning of the struggle, calling out quickly, and then retreating into his unit before any of the real violence goes down, then I am very suspicious of how long it takes him to call 911. He doesn’t call until more than a minute after the shot, and if he left his back room before W11’s call starts, that’s almost another minute — so like two minutes total. That’s a lot of time in that situation.

    And here i may be being way too judgmental, but I think JohnW6 is a coward, and if he’d had any cojones Trayvon would be alive. He sees two guys fighting on his patio, it looks bad enough that he thinks he should call the police — and he runs away to a point where he can’t see anything. He could have stood in his doorway, and continued yelling at the men, “We’ve already called the police, and right now I’m taking of video of everything you guys are doing with my camera phone, so break it up before someone gets really hurt and you wind up going to jail!” (Even if he didn’t have a camera phone, he could have faked it by holding up whatever phone he has. it’s not like the guys on the ground could tell.) Now, would i have both the presence of mind, the courage and the sense of civic and humane duty to do that? Or would i have run away? (Admittedly, I don’t know how the fiance on crutches figures into the equation either…) But like most people old enough to remember the Kitty Genovese case, I’ve told myself, “That was so wrong. Someone should have helped her. I don’t want to be those people who turned their backs.” And these days, you don’t even have to intervene physically. So many people have these little video-recording-capable devices with them all the time now… A potential augmentation of the panoptic powers of the state that would probably blow Foucault’s mind if he were still alive. If JohnW6 could have taken a video of the whole thing, and ran away instead, I don’t know how he lives with that…

    • whonoze says:

      Somehow I typed “I told thing” when I meant “I don’t think”. That’s just too weird. Something is wrong with how my brain is guiding my fingers, srsly. Don’t get old, kids, it messes you up.

    • Manberk says:

      In Johns FBI report he states that while he told them both he was calling the 911, no one including George responded, and certainly not with “he’s killing me” as George describes. Makes me wonder if it ever happened at all. Neither Joe nor John corroborate George’s version of those series of events and comments right before and after. There are also many sounds caught on the 911 calls or reported by witnesses. Most have an ow, ow, ow sound getting louder and louder before the cries for help. But George makes no mention of it. He says he only said help after losing the position battle and having his head bashed in which seem from his statement to have happened rather immediately, and not drawn out as long as we hear, and was reported by those in earshot.

    • Malisha says:

      It’s impossible to figure out how we would have acted if we were Trayvon, if we were W6, if we were another witness, or even, probably, if we were George. For instance, when I hear people suggest that Trayvon could have acted differently to prevent his own death I go ballistic; how DARE they? But even on the part of the witnesses, how would I have acted? I have no earthly idea.

      As a post-Holocaust Jew, I spent my entire childhood trying to figure out how I would have behaved IF I had been a Jew in Germany, IF I had been in the Warsaw ghetto, IF I had been in the camps, and then, even worse in a certain way, IF I had been a German in Germany, IF I had been a non-Jew in Poland, on and on and on ad nauseam. Really. It doesn’t work.

      But that said, here’s what I really believe about W6, and why.

      1. I believe he knew George Zimmerman (remember George saying “I know all the residents here”?) and probably was a sort of compatriot in the “guns versus punks” mentality in that neighborhood. I think he also knew Frank Taaffe, the neighborhood Gestapo.

      2. I believe he gave his initial stories not only to go along with the version the police were promoting/selling, but also to protect his buddy, George Z, and also, to protect the home-owners from any kind of liability for the death of “the guy.”

      3. But I believe that once there was national attention and lots of people were pointing out that the “MMA style punches” story HAD to be a lie because there was no physical evidence of that kind of action on either Trayvon’s hands or George’s face, W6 got scared that his initial stories would put him in a perjury charge or even get him victimized somehow; I don’t think he has a father who’s a judge or a hot shot lawyer and I think he came to realize that he might be trading off his OWN well being for that of George Zimmerman, and so I think his story began to change, and then changed quite a bit, and even now he’s probably hoping this thing doesn’t go to trial. I’m sure he was chagrined that all the evidence was opened up to the public. He may be irrationally believing this will go away on a SYG so the homeowners don’t get sued…

    • Stamina says:

      At least he went outside and tried to talk to them to break it up. No one else even left their house. I think it’s kind of silly to hate on W6, because we don’t like what he has to say.

    • Mirre says:

      Check page 24 of the second document dump. On march 26, John changed his statement as to where he was when he called 911. He suddenly remembered he was in the kitchen area when he called 911 and not going upstairs as he’d claimed before.

      • whonoze says:

        W6 “suddenly remembered he was in the kitchen area when he called 911..”

        Then he’s lying or he’s he’s got ‘issues’ because he could have seen or heard everything from the kitchen, and, again he didn’t call 911 until over a minute after the gunshot.

      • Mirre says:

        Exactly, that would mean he had a front row seat from themoment he came back inside until 7:18:00.
        It is in a one line memo on the same day that he had the interview with Bernie de la Rionda. It looks to me, he was getting worried about a possible perjury charge.

      • Mirre says:

        One correction, he was in the kitchen when he heard the shot. He doesn’t say he was in the kitchen when he called 911.

  54. whonoze says:

    @ Fred and Aja
    Screen grabs from social media pages are pretty easy to forge. They’re bitmaps, so it’s just basic Photoshop editing. I could do it, if I wanted to put in the time. I think some of the supposed screen grabs from the social media pages of ‘Trayvon’ and ‘DeeDee’ that have been posted on sites like “The Last Refuge” are forgeries that originated on the neo-Nazi site “Stormfront.” The “White Power Web” seems to have several participants with the IT and graphics skills to generate this kind of fakery, but also to hack into accounts, spoof email and what not.

    In short, take any web-related material that seems to incriminate enemies of the far right with more than a grain of salt.

    There some small consolation, perhaps, in that you’ve pissed of these folks enough that they’re trying to subvert you.

    @ Aja
    I know you’re a young firecracker, and that’s cool, but in this forum you might want to have JUST A LITTLE BIT less of a chip on your shoulder. Some of your take-no-prisoners posts leave you open to suspicions that you COULD be the author of some wacky tweets.

    I know I’m an old at 58, and really don’t ‘get’ the whole social media thing, but I have no idea why anyone Tweets, or why anyone follows Tweets. Itj ust seems stupid and superficial at best, and downright destructive and lunatic at worst.

    • Tzar says:

      whonoze, I did not know you were 58. Much respect my elder. I appreciate the work you have put into this case.

    • Manberk says:

      FYI, tweeting is no different than leaving a comment here, except you get an immediate response. It’s no more destructive than the author is. Just another medium. You also generally do not see comments unless you are already in correspondence with that person, or search specifically for that subject matter.

    • Sandra E. Graham says:

      If you don’t get the whole social media thing and feel it seems stupid and superficial (at best), then why do you participate using that same medium. Are you stupid, superficial, lunatic, or destructive. Or are you someone who is embracing a wonderful new form of communicating with others. I am also 58 and just retired. I now have the time to explore what the technology can do — something all of my God-children have worked with all of their lives and find most-natural. I don’t think any one of them would describe social media as you just have.

      • Sandra~ Well of course younger kids wouldn’t describe THEIR forms of communication as anything BUT “normal”. I’m only 50, and I also see Twittering, FB, MySpace, etc as amazingly shallow. I realize that some kids have over 500 “friends” and yet never spends any time outside DOING anything in real life with any of them! Blogging is NOT the “same medium” as we leave messages within a longer conversation, and usually around one topic. As I understand it, Tweeting can be about anything at any time. FB is always changing; like personal commercials. Aside from commenting on a few newsites, I stay away from social media. This is my favorite blog.

    • ajamazin says:


      Thank you for the possible explanation.

      My email address posted to this website several times when I replied to comments via my email account. I did not catch it immediately and problems began!

      Thank you for the insight and I will most assuredly take your advice to heart!

      Justice for Trayvon is the challenge we face.
      We must not be diverted from our goal.


      • MichelleO says:

        AJAMAZIN: That would pretty sad to learn that you the one behind such a vile thing. It was you who I found to be a trove of important and interesting information, when I was new to the Trayvon Martin case. For which I thank you.

        • ajamazin says:


          Rest assured, we remain united in a common goal.

          “We are people from every corner of the globe. We represent every religion, every ethnic group, every Nation under the Sun, but we are one nation, we are one people.

          Our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children’s future.

          It is our duty to make our nation safe for diversity, with equality and freedom abundant for all.”

          John F. Kennedy


      • SearchingMind says:


        Just say how deeply sorry you are to the Professor and the participants here who may have trusted you. I am sure the Professor will forgive you. Even the Professor realizes that we all sin against one another at one point or another and that without forgiveness, we may never move on. Offering heartfelt apology would also help you turn your life around, make you more mature and responsible, etc. But “deny, deny, deny” is a path to decay and destruction.

    • Stamina says:

      “Screen grabs from social media pages are pretty easy to forge.”
      1. No they aren’t.
      2. Other people saw the tweets. Don’t believe me? Go ask Bigboi and the other people she was tweeting to.

      3. You’re suggesting that the screen shots were photoshopped out of thin air. Ajamazin says: “Thank you for the possible explanation.” Basically, nodding her head saying “Yeah, that could be it.” But I thought she said she was HACKED? That was her explanation. She can’t keep her stories straight.

      Also, see all of the other points I made above. As well as the point made about “all of her tweets in between the ‘fake tweets’ to other people about other subjects about 36.000 times.”

    • Rachael says:

      I’m 56 and don’t get Twitter or Tweeting either. My 20-year old daughter-in-law described it to me as “it’s like stalking”

      • Xena says:

        @Rachael. I’m on the high end of 61. When I first started using the internet back in 1995 it was on Compuserve. That in fact, I don’t know if there was another consumer ISP other than Compuserve. Compuserve had it own forums. It was a community. Subsequently, I was moderator for several Compuserve forums. At that time, Compuserve assigned email addresses consisting of numbers, and when people joined forums, they used their real names or a variation thereof. People were genuine.

        Around 1999, Compuserve switched to a 2000 web version for their forums and fewer people participated in them. (Dial-up was still being used. The web based version was slow when using dial-up.) Then came AOL and “handles” were born. AOL users could access Compuserve. A very distinct difference could be seen as people were able to hide behind handles — personal attacks; disrespect of TOS; harassment. They literally used virtual terrorism against Compuserve members.

        I resigned my volunteer moderator posts and as of mid 2001, stopped contributing to Compuserve forums — stopped reading them too. It was nothing like the “old days” and because of my experience, I never took interest in the social sites such as MySpace, FB and Twitter.

      • rachael says:

        @Xena – yeah, I started on the internet about that time too, maybe a year or 2 earlier – had to for my job. But socially I started with a medical transcription site where many of us used/use real names and though the site has moved about 3 times, we have kept touch all these years. However, there were and still are some who post anonymously or with monikers and say some awful things. Just like on these blogs and comment sections of news articles, I honestly do not know if these people are really that miserable in real life – if they are really like that and feel they can say things like that because they are hiding behind anonymity or they are just trolls who like to stir things up – though neither one makes any sense to me.

        I reluctantly joint FB in May and a couple of other work-type networking sites. I use the internet heavily for work and school, but just don’t care for most “social” networking, as it seems to turn adults into 6th graders. I’m so glad I found this site and love it and a couple others that have been mentioned on here because there just is not all that crap.

      • Xena says:

        @Rachel. Yes. The internet has transformed since the mid 1990’s. The concept of treating others as you want to be treated, and not saying anything on a computer that you wouldn’t say to someone’ face, is a thing of the past in many internet venues.

    • ajamazin says:

      In certain parts of the Mid East, twitter is the best and perhaps, only, way to send and receive information.

      • hinkster4ever says:

        PLEASE stop it! Enough is enough. As you have been told some of us have followed your posts on HERE and twitter and you are derailing a great blog and causing great people to stop coming here! I do not care if you twittered or not, but you have caused enough harm. Respect the Professor and Crane’s house, PLEASE.

      • MichelleO says:

        Ajamazin: You say that your account has been hacked. I know you from HP and Twitter, and remember when there were people posing as you. If you are not doing what other’s are accusing you of; please stay. Many people on HP stayed with the Trayvon Martin case because of people like you, who have been such a font of significant information.

      • SearchingMind says:

        @ Ajamazin,

        I am wondering if you could stop introducing: “middle east” and “Zionist” (which I saw in one of your comments on previous posts) to this site. I am really bothered by that. The way you make use of the word ‘zionist’ I find very offensive! Here we use the evidence and the law to try to figure out what happened on that dark rainy night a young man may have been executed with the State looking the other way thereafter. No more. No less.

        Like I said before: ‘OWN UP’ and ‘APOLOGIZE FROM THE BOTTOM OF YOUR HEART’. That’s the only responsible thing to do. Even if the Professor does not let you back after that, you shall have at least redeemed yourself.

    • Dennis says:

      Image tampering leaves noticeable artifacts which can be discovered in Photoshop. An example of some highly doctored images are the NASA moon photos and the Obama birth certificate.

      I hate Twitter as well…we have something in common.

    • Leelee says:

      Perhaps screen grabs can be forged but I was reading all the tweets she made as they were being tweeted, in real time. Ironically enough I am like Witness #18 and you may believe or me or not, that is your choice.

  55. Xena says:

    Professor. I have some vids and lab reports on the issue of physical take-downs and the screams for help. Since I want them available to support my opinion, I would like to post it to my blog, giving you and Patricia credit for inspiring it. Is that okay with you? I’ve had an interest in this aspect for some time now, and am now bubbling over knowing that I’m not the only person considering this may have been the case.

    I posted the following on The JBMission — in pertinent part:
    July 16, 2012 at 5:17 pm
    “There is something I want to share and get opinions. I have a friend who is a Sheriff. She’s petite, about 5’4″ and 100 lbs. One time she described to me how she had to take down a huge guy and did take him down but then needed help from another Sheriff until she could cuff him.

    It is my impression from the recording with the screams for help that some pain is expressed in those screams. When cops take-down a person, they take one arm behind the back and pull up REAL HARD while pushing the person forward so they fall face down. With one knee in the back of the person, they then cuff the one hand while reaching for the other to bring around. But GZ had no handcuffs and TM was struggling to get away. Thus, the wrestling and rocking from side to side reported by witnesses.

    At some point, TM is either face up or standing when he is shot. I do believe that GZ rolled TM’s body over face down and that is how he got TM’s blood on his jacket sleeve.”

    • Tzar says:

      this is a very plausible scenario, I also keep in mind that GZ may have had momentary accomplices who blocked or restrained TM from fleeing

  56. Mirre says:

    I don’t think w6 saw a that much. If you listen to the statements and 911 calls made by w6, w17 his fiancee, and w19 the woman that opened the door to go outside with her dog, and match the times provided in tchoupi’s chart with the events, he only poked his head out the door for about 10 sec around 7:16:15 and then didn’t look again until after w13 was already on the scene around 7:18:00.

    W19 was outside when w6 said I’m calling 911. In her interview with Serino, she reenacted her movements. It took about 60 sec after she heard W6 to get to her upstairs window where she thought she heard the shot and called 911. Her call was logged at 7:17:15.

    W17 gives a more coherent statement about what she and W6 were doing than w6 does.

    I think it is possible that w6 heard GZ’s statement to w13.

    W18 is the only witness we know of that watched the event unfold.

  57. Dennis says:

    Frederick, you raise a good point that DeeDee knows that Martin was tired from running away from Zimmerman. Since Zimmerman was following/locating Martin using his vehicle most of the time, he was nowhere near tired, unlike Martin.

    I believe that Zimmerman was on top of Martin because Martin would most likely fall down trying to run away if he was very fatigued. I could easily see Zimmerman having the upper hand due to high height/weight advantage and the fact that he had way more energy than Martin.

    • Sandra E. Graham says:

      Mirre – Human nature being what it is , there are only two reasons Witness 6 did NOT see it all – fear or he is not nosey like the rest of us. He may have only stepped outside long enough to have seen a gun was involved or he stood inside the patio watching it unfold. I think he moved back into the house as soon as he saw a gun.

      • Dave says:

        He may have recognized Zimmerman and known that he routinely went armed.

      • Dennis says:

        I don’t look into the witness reports too much. The stories have changed so the witnesses, just like Zimmerman, have a bit of a credibility problem if you ask me. In many wrongful convictions, witness misidentification is usually the cause. It was dark and I’m afraid that none of these witnesses can be 100% regarding what they saw. I am still shocked that a teenage boy is screaming bloody murder for help, yet not a single person did anything but call the police. Sad society we live in…

      • Mirre says:

        I just found another change w6 made to his statement. On page 24 of the second document dump, he remembers that he called 911 from the kitchen area and not while walking upstairs. This was on march 26. Interesting isn’t it? It all happened right in front of his kitchen window. And he called 911 at 7:18:00.

  58. Patricia says:

    Professor Leatherman –

    First, I need to tell you this: I’m really, really tired of Patricia.

    But this does seem like a great opportunity to ask you: what are “we” (our side) facing next?

    It’s either a self-defense trial or SYG trial or a variation in between – and it’s with a jury, right? Not a bench trial?

    How many jurors? How many jurors to reach a decision?

    It’s on the preponderance of the evidence? Does not have to be “beyond a reasonable doubt?”

    Can O’Mara give ALL the testimony for his client, and the client NOT be cross-examined? Or would the state have to cross-examine O’Mara as some kind of proxy for his client? Or does the defendant absolutely have to face cross examination?

    Does the State of Florida start out to prove there was no self-defense (or SYG), then attorney for the Defendant responds (or rests his case without testimony) then the State sums up?

    Or is the burden of proof upon the defendant who is seeking this escape?

    How could you decide the issue of self-defense or SYG if guilt had not first been decided?

    It has the be self-defense based on the “reasoable fear” by a REASONABLE person, right?

    What about witnesses and recordings? If only parts of witnesses’ recordings are entered, can the other side require them to be placed in their entirety? Can they be entered without the individuals present to be cross-examined about what they said?

    Can they use “stunt doubles” to re-create some of the impossible positions/movements GZ said he took or made?

    Lastly, what about a split jury, 3-3?

    If it has to be 4-2 and 4 only believe 51% of the defendant’s claim of self-defense and 2 jurors believe 5% of the defendant’s claim – does the creep get off?

    Elucidate, please.



    • Dennis says:

      I believe 2nd degree murder in Florida must be a unanimous vote to convict, which means all 12 jurors must vote guilty, or they must all vote not-guilty. If there is not a unanimous vote for guilty or not-guilty, it will end in a mistrial. If all 12 jurors vote not-guilty, the defendant is acquitted and they can’t be charged with the same exact crime again due to double jeopardy. If there is a mistrial, the court will decide if they should do another trial with a new jury or drop the charges.

      • Patricia says:

        Dennis, I’m talking about the self-defense/SYG aspect, which is heard BEFORE the trial. That’s next. Have no clue about the process. FYI for the actual trial, it’s 6 jurors.

        Seems all very wierd to me, but I.m only a student here.

    • Dennis says:

      They do a 6 person jury as well? I recall the Anthony juror having 12 people. Does anyone know who decides how many jurors there are?

    • Xena says:

      @Elmore. LOL!!
      An immunity hearing is decided by a judge. No jury.
      The defense presents its side first. The standard is preponderance of the evidence.
      An attorney cannot testify for the client at any proceeding. Defendants do not have to testify in criminal trials, but immunity hearings generally require that the defendant testifies as they are the only party who can testify what they felt giving them reason to use deadly force in self-defense.

      I’m sure the Professor will address the rest and also correct me if I’m mistaken.

    • SearchingMind says:

      Self-defense/SYG statute grant immunity to anyone who acted within its margins. A defendant who believes that he/she is entitled to the said immunity, may motion the trial Court to find him/her immune from prosecution and dismiss charges. The trial Court holds what is called pre-trial evidentiary hearing to determine if the preponderance of the evidence warrant granting immunity from prosecution (i.e. if the evidence of the defendant is superior to the evidence of the prosecution). The trial Judge alone decides on the Motion. No jury is involved.

      On the sidebar, Patricia. Your article is just awesome. Would you marry me?

    • Hi, Patricia.

      First, you do mighty fine work.

      Second, I want to apologize again to you for going off topic during your allotted time due to my continuing struggle with trolls who are now claiming that I am a member of some incredibly vast multi-generational conspiracy of white supremacists who want to rule the world. After all, that has to be the case because I have “a history of representing white supremacists,” where the phrase “history of white supremacists” is defined as representing one white supremacist in one case during a 30 year career. And get this, I actually am a closet Zimmerman supporter because his family also belongs to this conspiracy, but I’m in deep cover, a virtual “wolf in sheep’s clothing” attempting to discredit Martin supporters by destroying Zimmerman’s claim of self-defense. That has to be the dumbest idea I’ve heard in a long time. The problem is that the. Enough about me. Let’s get to your questions.

      You asked,

      “It’s either a self-defense trial or SYG trial or a variation in between – and it’s with a jury, right? Not a bench trial?

      How many jurors? How many jurors to reach a decision?

      It’s on the preponderance of the evidence? Does not have to be “beyond a reasonable doubt?””

      My Answer: The first immunity hearing will be before the judge without a jury. It will be conducted just like an SYG hearing, except Zimmerman will not be claiming that he stood his ground. Instead, he will be claiming traditional self-defense. The SYG statute has a separate subsection that authorizes a pretrial immunity hearing for all of the marbles in traditional self-defense cases which is the same as the procedure followed in SYG cases.

      The defense will have the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence at this hearing that Zimmerman reasonably believed that he was in imminent danger of suffering death or great bodily harm when he shot and killed TM.

      The key word to remember in that definition is “reasonably” because it changes what would otherwise be a subjective test into an objective test.

      In other words, the test is not whether George Zimmerman believed he was in imminent danger of suffering death or great bodily harm when he shot and killed TM.

      The test is whether a reasonable person in the same situation would have used deadly force.

      If the judge decides that Zimmerman proved by a preponderance of the evidence that a reasonable person would have believed he was in imminent danger of suffering death or serious bodily injury when Zimmerman shot and killed TM, the judge will grant Zimmerman’s motion for immunity and immunize him from criminal prosecution and civil suit. The State can appeal that decision.

      If the judge decides that Zimmerman failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that a reasonable person would have believed he was in imminent danger of suffering death or serious bodily injury when Zimmerman shot and killed TM, the judge will deny Zimmerman’s motion for immunity and the matter will be scheduled for a jury trial.

      The burden of proof switches to the prosecution at the jury trial. It has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a reasonable person would not have believed himself to be in imminent danger of suffering death or serious bodily harm when Zimmerman shot and killed TM.

      Two more legal rules need to be mentioned:

      The defendant does not have a duty to retreat before using deadly force in self-defense.

      An aggressor cannot use deadly force in self-defense unless the other person responds to the aggressor’s initial use of force with excessive force (i.e., more force than was reasonably necessary to prevent suffering an injury), a reasonable person would have believed that the use of that excessive force created an imminent danger of suffering death or serious bodily injury and the aggressor offers to withdraw and attempts to withdraw before using deadly force.

      Note: Our own Boar d’ laze dug up a couple of Florida Supreme Court cases decided in approximately 1951 and 1952 which held that the definition of an aggressor includes a person who follows another person in an aggressive manner. (Note: I am speaking from memory about these two cases. Need to check the cases for a precise statement)

      Florida uses 6 person juries for all felonies except when the charge is Murder 1.

      You said,

      “Can O’Mara give ALL the testimony for his client, and the client NOT be cross-examined? Or would the state have to cross-examine O’Mara as some kind of proxy for his client? Or does the defendant absolutely have to face cross examination?

      My Answer:

      No, O’Mara cannot testify for his client and nothing he or any other lawyer says can be considered as evidence by the jury. Lawyers argue what the facts are or should be based on what has been admitted into evidence. Before they can argue what the evidence means, they have to persuade the judge to admit the evidence.

      This creates a problem for the defense because there likely won’t be much, if any evidence supporting self-defense admitted into evidence during the prosecution’s case in chief. After the prosecution rests, O’Mara will have to decide whether sufficient evidence supporting self-defense has been admitted to allow him to argue self-defense effectively.

      If the answer is “yes,” he may recommend Zimmerman not testify, but if the answer is “no,” Zimmerman will have to testify.

      You said,

      “What about witnesses and recordings? If only parts of witnesses’ recordings are entered, can the other side require them to be placed in their entirety? Can they be entered without the individuals present to be cross-examined about what they said?”

      My Answer:

      A witness has to lay a proper foundation before the trial court will admit a recording into evidence. That normally requires testimony from the person who made the copy describing how he did it and authenticating it as a true and correct copy of the original. After it is admitted, counsel may ask to play it for the jury, usually at some point while questioning a person whose voice was recorded. Best to play the whole thing so that it does not look like anything is being hidden from the jury

      You said

      “Can they use “stunt doubles” to re-create some of the impossible positions/movements GZ said he took or made?”

      My Answer

      Trial judges have broad discretionary powers to admit or exclude evidence. Recreations using stunt doubles must reproduce the conditions in effect at the time and location where the event occurred. That may not be possible to determine, so I think the lawyers are going to have to work with charts, or possibly computer simulations.

      “Lastly, what about a split jury, 3-3?

      If it has to be 4-2 and 4 only believe 51% of the defendant’s claim of self-defense and 2 jurors believe 5% of the defendant’s claim – does the creep get off?”

      My Answer:

      A jury has to be unanimous to reach a verdict. A failure to be unanimous results in a hung jury and a mistrial.

      If that happens, the prosecution gets to decide whether to retry the case.

      I hope I have answered your questions. If not, please ask again.

      • SearchingMind says:

        Hi Professor, I see we posted our comments almost at the same time. I am proud my legal analysis are perfectly in tune with yours. That tells me that, even though I am just a few months old in the business of lawyering, I am on the right track.

      • EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

        Once again Professor, don’t give the ZBots any more steering power… Any thinking person who follows this blog knows you are not attempting to discredit the Martin supporters with some grand conspiracy.

        The secret is to, “IGNORE THEM” You do not operate in the gutter like them….too much class…at least you take documents and bring out the points.

        They can’t bring out anything except, “slander” against you when their points are disproven…

        Keep up this great site… Peace my brother….

      • Dennis says:

        I am hearing from others on this blog that forensic evidence places Zimmerman on top of Martin before the fatal shot. I am not very familiar with ballistics or anything like that so if anyone has an update regarding the forensic evidence please be so kind to post.

      • Dennis says:

        Frederick, is the defendant open to cross-examination by the prosecution at an immunity hearing? Thanks.

      • MichelleO says:

        PROFESSOR: I would like to say, in ajamazin’s defence, that I have seen proof of both her HP and Twitter accounts being hacked into. She has not been on HP for some time now (how we miss her); but I remember a poster on HP and Twitter responding with her avatar; her subsequent protest on HP, and then her disappearance. I think I have not seen her on HP since June or July.

    • SearchingMind says:

      Self-defense/SYG-defense is an affirmative defense. To put that defense forward, the defendant in the present case MUST take the stand. O’Mara cannot put that defense forward since Counsel’s arguments are not evidence. There is practically NO way Zimmerman can avoid taken the stand either during a pre-trial evidentiary hearing or during the hearing itself. Not taking the stand would essentially take self-defense/SYG out of the equation, by so doing seal Zimmerman’s fate and send him to the gallows. If Zimmerman takes the stand, he would be diving into a deep pool full of piranhas. If he comes out of that pool alive, the prosecution shall have botched the operation.

      • Malisha says:

        I like the way you phrased that, SearchingMind. My position on this whole case has always been that in order to prevail IN COURT George will have to take the stand. Not that there cannot be a self-defense or even a SYG without the defendant testifying for himself, because there have been many instances in the literature (and right now I can’t cite them but I will when my access to the database is reinstated next week) where witnesses who saw the entire event play out were able to testify at such a hearing instead of the defendant. In a case I read, four witnesses saw the entire encounter from beginning to end in broad daylight in the driveway of the home owned by the defendant, for instance. There are no such witnesses (unless we just do not know about them yet, of course) in the Zimmerman case.

        I’m dusting off and displaying yet again (at the risk of boring folks) my prediction: Lots of motions practice until people in the general public are less anti-Zimmerman or more bored, and then a quick plea deal and then, based on whether or not something truly corrupt and illegal can be worked out without NOBLE finding out about it, George gets off by some method other than ordinary or even extraordinary “law.”

      • GrannyStandingforTruth says:

        SearchingMind, that was excellent! I like the way you explained it. You’ll be a great lawyer.

      • hinkster4ever says:

        Whopee another legal mind on the blog! So glad to have all the great legal minds to help us! Good luck in your career.

      • KA says:

        I believe BLDR said as much to Judge Lester when he said in the second bond “we will welcome that [SYG hearing] because then we can cross examine him, we have wanted that opportuntiy ” (paraphrased)

      • Professor, I want to thank you for your blogs. I look forward to reading every chance I get.You have a knack in explaining the logic in this case and determining the seen as it interacts with the unseen.

      • roderick2012 says:

        SearchingMind: If you recall O’Mara used the small clip of the re-enactment video to allow George to testify about his ‘injuries’ at the second bond hearing.

        Does anyone think that the professor should start a thread addresssing possible prosecution strategies?

        My biggest fear is that O’Mara will use all of the SPD’s mistakes as Malisha noted in detail in one of her posts to claim that the investigation was botched and raise reasonable doubt.

        That would elimate all of the crime scene evidence such as the position of the body (which we know that Zimmerman moved).

        I would suggest that the prosecution rely mostly on the re-enactment video, the police interregations and ballistics report and steer clear of having any of the officers from the SPD especially Serino because he’s compromised on several levels testify on the behalf of the state.

    • SearchingMind says:

      @ Professor

      “This creates a problem for the defense because there likely won’t be much, if any evidence supporting self-defense admitted into evidence during the prosecution’s case in chief. After the prosecution rests, O’Mara will have to decide whether sufficient evidence supporting self-defense has been admitted to allow him to argue self-defense effectively. If the answer is “yes,” he may recommend Zimmerman not testify, but if the answer is “no,” Zimmerman will have to testify”.

      To answer the question (under what circumstances would Zimmerman be forced to testify?) that arise from your analysis, I go back to the affidavit of probable cause. There is nothing there containing Zimmerman’s self-defense story (or stories). That tells me a lot:
      (a) the prosecution does not believe that story;
      (b) during the presentation of its case in chief, the prosecution will not be introducing any evidence that would even remotely suggest that Zimmerman acted in self-defense;
      (c) the prosecution calculates that by so doing, Zimmerman would be forced to the stand to put forward his self-defense;
      (d) the prosecution believes it can imperatively impeach Zimmerman if he takes the stand and effectively seal his fate right there.

      If I read the prosecution strategy well, there is NO way Zimmerman can avoid taking the stand. For, if he does not take the stand, that would mean disaster for the defense. And if he takes the stand, he will be right where the prosecution wants him. It seems to me that the prosecution boxed Zimmerman in right from the start. That’s quite shrewd – if you ask me (and it is not difficult to understand why the affidavit of probable cause was thin).

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        Thank You SearchingMind. What you have written here does answer many WHYs for me.

      • Dennis says:

        Although the judge instructs the jury that a defendant at trial refusing to testify is not an admission of guilt, I have read that many jurors still would like to hear from the defendant. I’m not very familiar with defense strategies, but if I was accused of murder and telling the complete truth about what happened, I would testify. If you are a liar with zero credibility like Zimmerman, you never want to take the stand and testify. He has lied and contradicted himself so many times that the prosecution will light a fire under him during cross-examination. O’Mara wouldn’t even let Zimmerman testify at the 2nd bond hearing, that is how bad his credibility is. The self-defense hearing will require Zimmerman to testify as to why he believed it was reasonable to shoot Martin. I wonder why O’Mara would even subject Zimmerman to cross-examination. He would be better off just trying to confuse the 6 village idiots they put on the jury. I only say “village idiots” because the average juror is an idiot, just look at the 12 that acquitted Casey Anthony.

  59. Sandra E. Graham says:

    Until more evidence comes out, I think you are as close as close can be. I do believe Witness 6 will be torn to shreds unless he admits being influenced by either Osterman or Zimmerman at the scene while giving the first statement. I think he saw more than what his statements show. But, we have to go with what there is.

    So far, so good Patricia. Your summaries are top-notch A+ worthy.

  60. KA says:

    Prof Leatherman. No single person that knows anything about what that woman writes (vlpate2) would believe a single accusation. She is the master of hypocritical behavior and if it is on her blog site, it is most likely not true. She loves drama and likes to get praise and adoration for her hate. She seems to have several, equally hateful, minions that follow her every word.

    I cannot imagine a Trayvon supporter believe a single vile thing that comes from her site. She is the epitome of hate and discord. Most everyone who follows this case on Twitter knows who she is now.

    With that said, I think the sprinkler head makes a lot of sense. It is clear that Zimmerman’s head did not touch the ground based on the pictures we have. It will be obvious to any jury member seeing them. It clearly paves the way, I believe, to the fact the “head banging” episode never happened.

    • Malisha says:

      Mark O’Mara, confronted with the photograph first aired by ABC and shown by Jonathan Turley’s thread as if it was “evidence of serious injury,” supposedly exonerating Zimmerman, had only this to say about the photo: He wasn’t sure IF or HOW the defense would use it. After that, he spoke about a broken nose but he never spoke about a head-bang on concrete. He’s no dummy.

      • Zhickel says:

        Malisha, when that photo of the back of Zimmerman’s head first started making the rounds, I examined it closely. I am almost 100% sure the blood was enhanced to make it look much more red.

        Unimportant detail, I know but consistent with the emotion – both real and manufactured that surrounds this case.

  61. Tzar says:

    I don’t think witness 6 missed the shooting, I think he is lying about missing it. bcclist has a very nice piece on the matter

    • Sandra E. Graham says:

      I wonder if photos are taken of the sprinkler head. If I could get in my car and drive there, I would.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        KA – if everyone seems to know who this person is, why can the police not move in on her. Personally, I have not seen any of her posts and don’t want to either. I just wonder why there is nothing any one can do.

      • Patricia says:

        Sandra –

        Check out the Rain Bird Google site for the model.
        Rain Bird 1800-SAM Spray Head.
        I’ll likely stop by Home Depot’s Garden Center for a replacenent tomorrow.

        If there’s some weight bearing down on your head, and you have a shaved head, and especially if the plastic was chipped by a tractor/mower going over it, and you’re dragged across it, it’s possible you could get a 1″ cut and a quarter inch cut on a sprinkler head. You wouldn’t know what bit you.

        Incidentally, I checked this out, Sandra: the pop-ups would not be working that night because there’s a FL state law that requires a rain sensor be next to the control box. To save water you can’t water in the rain. So there’s an automatic turnoff. The head would be fairly “flush” with the ground.

        FYI, I talked to the landscaping company that had the Retreat View Circle contract at the time of the shooting (they’ve since been replaced) and talked to the technician who told me what systems they used and the placements (on 12 ft. diameter) and yes, the dog run area is irrigated.

        Sure this is a long shot, but it is far more likely than Zimmerman being whacked like a coconut.

      • Sandra E. Graham says:

        Excellent – The pattern of the injuries will probably be a perfect fit. Of course, keep us posted. I will check out the rainbird now. Thx.

      • Rachael says:

        Wow Patricia, you are amazing!!! Love you!

      • hinkster4ever says:

        I have always wondered about those white squares you see in the grass…are those the sprinkler heads you are speaking of?

        We have a water meter hidden under a metal square lid but it is about an inch down in the ground to avoid the lawn mower blades…but, you cannot see them like you see them in the photos along the screen.

    • Malisha says:

      Where can we find bcclist? What is the nice piece on the matter called? Can you tell me the url to look for?

  62. Patricia~~kudos, kudos, kudos… you never cease to amaze me. I could actually visualize what may have occured on the evening of Feb 26th. The pieces of the puzzle seemed to interlock. Thank you so much!

    • Sandra E. Graham says:

      Tzar — I am going to look for that piece now because he seems to have seen everything before and after and conveniently leaves during those few critical moments. Naw. Don’t think so.

    • Cielo says:

      Patricia- now THIS seems to make more sense than other stories I have read. Thank you for your insight and for being concise.

  63. Fred~~I have been down the road your walking now and so has my blogger friend. Their goal is to disrupt. In order for them to achieve that goal, they strive to take our focus off the knowledge we all share here and put our attention on them. By acknowledging them in posts and comments, we are feeding them. WordPress has TOS ( Terms of Service) which explain the rights of a blog owner. Among those rules and regulations, they state no one can use your name when they start a blog without your permission. You can find them HERE

    You can also report any individual who breaks those rules at this address.. abuse-report@wordpress.com

    I am aware of eleven blog being shut down in just over three months because the TOS regulations were not followed.

    I hope this will be of some help and there will be light at the end of this tunnel of disruption.

    • TM says:

      Mainstreamfair, In all fairness and in all around consideration having been both Blogger and blog commenter/observer, there is a side which is rarely if ever brought to top. That of a Blogger and the opportunity they have of exposure of private information ID’s, IP’s Names, Cities, Emails and all other information which can and has been used by themselves or passed on to another for use in comments under different names, for the purpose of support and encouragement or to drive out because of hatreds and jealousies. It is not always the Blogger who is under attack often it is an innocent who has walked into a group of bullies or individuals attempting to hold favor on a blog, give or take different situations. In most cases it is blog eat blog (bloggers) Individuals can be entwined by whatever discussions they agree or disagree with. WordPress has rules and regulations for the Blogger yet the Blogger can operate with abuse and harassment at will, toward innocent individuals who happen upon and dare set foot into their blog or anyone else’s blog. Blog/stalker, blogger/stalker. Best that all share in appropriate responsibility.

      Certainly, here on this blog Professor and Crane-Station have extended to their despair, politeness and tolerance of attack from that of another blog and/or of individuals. This entry may be taken as insult by some, constructive awareness by others.

  64. hinkster4ever says:

    Patricia, as I said, your thoughts make a lot of sense to me. I have heard many screams of pain before, but these screams on the tape of Trayvon have such gut wrenching fear in them. Pain control was one of the things I specialized in. These screams have the fear factor in them that make me cringe.

    The ‘creepy’ man as Trayvon described Gz to DeeDee scared him enough he ran. He ran out of fear, and that is why when Gz opened that door and stepped out ‘following’ him…..Gz became the aggressor and Trayvon’s fears became reality.

    • ed nelson says:

      [“Pain control was one of the things I specialized in. These screams have the fear factor in them that make me cringe.”]

      I have followed some of this for a while, and my thinking is, that
      Travon’s screams would be from pain from some kind of… Jujitsu like holds.
      I had a few of these demonstrated to me and some others, and it is so painful to have your wrist twisted back, or other joints twisted, and one is in a constrained position where he can’t do a damn thing to counter or defend… the pain is bad news! The feeling of helplessness is bad news!

      The idea that the poor Travon was screaming because some “creepy” thug had a gun on him, well, come on… he would do better than that!! He would do what any sensible person would do: hunker down… play stupid, just think of the options for escape and other, or play ball and give up your wallet…. throw the wallet and money out on the street and take get out!

      Scream is bs, it isn’t in the playbook, unless your are retarded, and he wasn’t, unlike like his attacker!!

      • Digger says:

        ed nelson, just may have come up with a factual assessment.
        I can understand why someone would not stand there and scream when someone has a gun in their face, even though I think GZ did have the gun drawn and “aimed” best thing is to try and be calm. Do you think that GZ shot Trayvon for that very reason, he was screaming?

      • Dennis says:

        I agree that Martin would more likely be screaming from being held against his will and from pain as well. If I was 17 and was being attacked or grabbed by a crazy stranger I would be screaming for help too and fighting for my life.

      • hinkster4ever says:

        In the ER I have seen a lot of horrific injuries…..without getting graphic….so screams are things that come with horrific pain….but it is the FEAR factor I hear in the seeming long screaming in the tape….with seemingly no breaks for intake of breaths ect……just something I cannot describe…..it’s gut wrenching.

        One of your articles on your site, Whonoze, causes me to wonder if it is the “mother” in me….maybe knowing this is a child…causes me to hear it as more in fear….our sublime thoughts do give us our own take on things…..

      • Rachael says:

        Hinkster, I hear total fear too, but it is possible that so much fear could be fear compounded by pain. But yes there certainly is a fear facto and it is gut-wretching to listen to. Imagin being detained in a painful hold, gun at your chest with someone questioning you, accusing you and telling you were gonna die

      • princss6 says:

        Several have mentioned adrenaline and I’m sure there was adrenaline pumping through Trayvon’s body. The fact that there seems not to be any injuries other than the finger and gunshot wound, would lead me to believe that any such holds or locks could not have been so extreme as to cause pain. And if they aren’t severe enough to cause injury, then wouldn’t the adrenaline mask the pain he may have felt. I hear fear and a pleading for someone anyone to come out and help him.

  65. Malisha says:

    I sure hope the prosecution is reading and studying all the work that has been posted here! Patricia, you and Sling Trebuchet RULE! (Any chance of y’all getting together for a TV show called “Bloggers” in which you and guest stars solve murders?)

    Professor, what a ridiculous and offensive journey some of these pro-Zims have gone on! I remember seeing that Ajamazin’s e-mail was hacked into; I would venture a guess that the source of the “Let’s you and him fight” stuff is a result of the illegal conduct of the hackers who arranged that — although I’m quick to admit that I know nothing about how, electronically, that could be done.

    By the way, I think it is perfectly admirable to defend “white supremacists” or anybody else who is accused of high crimes, if you are a criminal defense attorney. OUR SYSTEM is adversarial and for it to be fair, there have to be good advocates on the defense side as well as on the prosecution side. I think Adolph Eichmann deserved a superb and independent defense. If George Zimmerman were to get the death penalty (had he been charged with Murder-I), I would have been on the side of the people trying to get his sentence commuted or overturned!

    Carry on, thank you MUCH MUCH MUCH >>>>>>>>>>!

    • Stamina says:

      1. If you’ve read this blog as long as I have, you’d know that no one other than Ajamazin would have researched someone’s genealogy to the extent that they would have found that information out.

      2. Even her previous posts (read: BEFORE SHE WAS HACKED) talked about Leatherman’s ancestry. (And Zimmerman’s, and Taaffe (her favorite), and about thirty other people connected to the Zimmerman case.)

      3. She has also said not to trust Lester and Angela Corey in the past, so there you have that “paranoia” streak in her (completely consistent with her doubts about the Professor.)

      4. The tweets weren’t deleted until AFTER rnsone brought it to the attention of the blog. (IF she had ACTUALLY been hacked, the first thing she would have done would have been to see what the hacker had tweeted. Then immediately tweet out that a hacker had done it and delete them)

      I’ve seen the tweets. That was her. That’s all I have to say about it.

    • Dennis says:

      I sure hope the prosecution would be reading Frederick’s mind blowing articles. I wouldn’t be surprised if Zimmerman or O’Mara have visited this blog already.

  66. ajamazin says:

    RE: Off Topic Update Regarding Rnsome’s allegation that Ajamazin has posted some comments on Twitter that disparage me

    The comments in question were not tweeted by me.

    • Leelee says:

      Did someone hack your twitter account then ?

      • ajamazin says:

        My email address was posted on this website. [I am told it was a glitch in Word Press.]

        My email account consequently suffered a  major malfunction.

        I was subsequently ‘locked out’ of my twitter account and HP account which is linked to my email.

        I do not understand hacking. My brother was able to recover my accounts for me. 


    • Leelee says:

      So the tweets to “bigboithedog” that #Leatherman is a “wolf in sheep’s clothing” and that #leatherman is trying to make Trayvon followers look foolish” were made by the hacker and you since deleted them ?

    • Stamina says:

      It was on your account.. they were statements expressed in the way that you would express them.. and the statements were directly related to an area of research that you are particularly interested in and have commented on this blog countless times. No offense, but they were obviously tweeted by you.

      Frankly, you may be the teacher’s pet, but there are many other people on this blog that don’t really care for what you bring to it. Which has been a lot of trouble. I’m not sure Frederick Leatherman is wise to tolerate your presence.

      That’s just my two cents and everyone is entitled to their opinion.

    • shannoninmiami says:

      who ever hacked your twitter account must of been a thoughtful hacker because they allowed you to tweet in between the ‘fake tweets’ to other people about other subjects about 36.000 times. wow!

    • thejbmission says:

      I believe you ajamazin.
      To Professor Leatherman,
      You owe us no explanation. I applaud you for trying but you’ll soon find out that in Blogdom, there’s no recourse. They are simply distracting you. I know explicitly the way this works. I’m theJBMission, one of very few who blogged in defense of Casey Anthony.
      Had I blogged under my real name, I’m not sure if my family would have wanted me to continue. Educated people know The World Wide Web is not factual. The good people that participate on this site are not going anywhere. Seekers of the truth come here to read. You’re site is the most civilized and informative.

      I learned the hard way that the less attention they receive the less they enjoy it. As for Ajamazin? Divide and conquer. That’s what they do best. That and tell lies. Rock On!!

    • Sandra E. Graham says:

      LeeLee is a troll

  67. Tzar says:

    oh man I will be back for this in the morning, with a nice cup of joe

  68. EveryoneIsEntitledToTheirOpinion says:

    As previously stated by me – Dear Professor, don’t feel you have to respond to the ZBots slanderous statements against you and your family. You have a right to your privacy..

    ZBots are misguided vessels and this student will just ignore their ridiculous comments to slander your character.

    Professor, if you did represent a white supremacists; it is ok you are were an attorney. I’ll never believe you would participate in their belief so don’t respond to the slander/foolishness.

    Your students here are of all nationalities I believe.. No one take the Zbots serious they are desperate souls clinging to the Zimmerman life line. You are above them… they operate in the gutter because they can not defend GZ actions.

    He is just what he is a “racist” in my opinion… “these a–holes always get away.” “it is God’s Plan” clarified his racism to me.

    Keep up this great site… Peace….

    • Rachael says:


    • Sandra E. Graham says:

      Ditto. Ditto.

    • Xena says:

      (Applause) Professor, EveryoneIsEntitled is correct. FWIW, GZ fans on Yahoo articles impersonate the prosecution’s supporters. Among comments posted while impersonating include “confessions” of having diseases, being gay, changing their position, and demeaning other prosecutor supporters. This is then used for other GZ fans to join in in group bullying of the person. Someone suggested using distinct avatars, but then a GZ fan figured out how to copy avatars. They appear fuzzy, not clear.

      Although Yahoo’s TOS provides that impersonation/misrepresentation is a violation, they require those complaining to jump through hoops. I know. I went through it. On that day, I decided to never again post comments on Yahoo articles.

      By the time that Yahoo followed-up with me, my impersonator had ridden her/his horse into the sunset, probably because they received no reaction from me — not even my knowledge of what they had done. That’s what they want. They want to at least feel that they have you upset. They want to know how you plan on resolving the problem, and then they will continuously mock you on an hourly basis asking why you haven’t reported them and saying no one can stop them.

  69. Justkiddin* says:

    Sad to read this mess is still going on. I would hope it is all a misunderstanding. If not shame on us for being fooled. It says a lot of the people who are doing this though, dragging your daughter into this and your deceased father. Must have been raised by wolves. jmo
    Patricia, You have an amazing mind. I do not know how you can discern the mess Z has made. Hopefully we will soon see those other statements so you can have it all laid out for us before trial. Thank you for all your hard work.

Leave a 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 )

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

%d bloggers like this: