Posted on 04/12/2012 6:26:26 PM PDT by dewawi
Oh my God, no wonder Allen Dershowitz is calling it a disgrace. This looks like something a 3rd grader would put together. It even makes a mistake as to what the Dispatcher told Zimmerman when he said he was following him. Remember: the Dispatcher said "You don't have to do that". Well in this affidavit, the State claims the Dispatcher said something else DESPITE IT BEING ON TAPE!
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
I think it will be damned hard to comvince a jury of guilt given all of this:
http://www.wagist.com/
I think it will be damned hard to comvince a jury of guilt given all of this:
http://www.wagist.com/
yes- he was moving i nthe oposdite direction
I beleive when he followed zimmerman who was headed back to his truck to leave the scene to meet with the police when martin attacked him- the kid was apaprently less than 20 seconds away from his own father’s home, but decided NOT to go there and instead turned around and confronted zimerman which was asd we know a fatal mistake for the punk- and I say punk, because it is now pretty clear that martin could have avoided the hwole hting by just heading toward his fathers house but decided apaprently that he was ‘gopign to teach zimmerman a lesson’ and ifact apparently told zimmerman he was goign to kill him- he acted like a punk, and payed the price by picking on someone that was actually able to defend himself agaisnt a punk
If this is to be the evolution of justice, it would make no sense to ever call the police. Plain ol vigilante justice will be the only way to remain safe.
I flip thru the channels and I hear this Nancy Grace woman just totally convinced Zimmerman is the epitome of evil - like she isn’t even listening to any reason. Can someone give me some insight into why she is so whacked out about this?
All very good points.
I am curious about the alleged phone call with the girl friend. In the affidavit, Martin’s actions and feelings about what was happening are described based on this alleged call. Now I’m assuming there is some verification of a call having been made (although I’ve not read about it). Have you read if Zimmerman ever mentions that Martin is on his phone when Zimmerman is talking to the 911 operator?
I have not seen that Zimmerman makes any note of that. Have you?
Not exactly lying but very loose with the facts. They use hearsay evidence from Martin’s girlfriend, assume that Zimmerman ignored the dispatcher’s advice (which they deceptively made to sound like an order) and took the mother’s word that it was Martin screaming, while his father originally said it was not his son. They assume that Zimmerman confronted Martin when there is no evidence of it. Zimmerman’s only response to the dispatcher’s advice was okay.
The dispatcher said “We don’t need you to do that”.
That seems to be the consensus with most of the legal panels.
When seconds count the police are minutes away.
In the affidavit it says Zimmerman “profiled” Martin. Interesting, I thought only the police could legally be charged with profiling anyone...he may have been biased against him due to his perceived race but to say he profiled him is not a valid legal argument in my opinion.
In fact, the only bias shown on the tape recording is he was biased against punks and assholes.
I always thought hearsay evidence was inadmissable.
But...but...the official "narrative" is that the dispatcher "told him not to do that". Apparently they don't seem to understand that a court of law is not a network newscast.
Law and facts are irrelevant to Zimmerman’s case. He must and will be convicted. Zimmerman’s conviction is too important not to occur.
Nancy never heard of a defendant, that she didn’t think was guilty as hell.
Is it normal for an affidavit to be so slanted? It asserts that Martin "was not committing a crime." Yes, at the moment, but he was behaving in such a way that a reasonable observer might suspect he was planning to commit a crime (burglary). It should be easy enough to establish whether the neighborhood had in fact experienced several recent burglaries--the affidavit assumes that Zimmerman is imagining the danger (based on his assumed prejudices against people who look like Trayvon).
The statement that "Zimmerman confronted Martin" seems to be conjured out of thin air. Zimmerman claims Martin confronted him, and no witness saw anything other than that.
Does Zimmerman get to have impartial experts determine that the voice calling for help is his, or would it be racist to question the assertion of Trayvon's sweet mother?
That’s why I wonder how long the girlfriend had between the killing and when she was questioned, to learn what was known about the incident and think up details that would make it sound like Trayvon was being pursued.
I’m guessing the girlfriend said something like, “Go get him!” or worse.
According to the girlfriend, his cell phone was in his pocket and Trayvon was wearing a headset, so it was not necessarily noticeable that Trayvon was speaking on the phone.
I thought the dispatcher said, “we don’t need you to do that”. Basically the same thing, though.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.