Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Trayvon Martin Killing: Friend Tells ABC News Howls on 911 Tapes Belong to Zimmerman, Not Martin
ABC News ^ | Saturday March 24, 2012 | Matt Gutman and Olivia Katrandjian

Posted on 03/24/2012 9:51:42 PM PDT by kristinn

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-165 last
To: cynwoody

Let’s ponder the evidence then.

http://www.sanfordfl.gov/index.html

Listen to call 1, that’s George’s only call.

Point 1: Where at any point in this call does george say “f***ing coons”?

Point 2: George begins to run after the suspect or at least give pursuit at faster than walking pace. The operator asks him are you following him. Yes, replies George. Ok, we don’t need you to do that. OK. He ran - past tense implies that Trayvon got away as opposed to he’s running which was stated earlier. The running stops, this is apparent because the noise of running stops. George obeyed the request.

At this point the operator asks where do you want to meet the officers and George says something about his truck. I am going to theorize that at this point George would be returning to his truck, because he is no longer chasing Martin, and I expect that he intended to meet the police there, however, this is my speculation.

In the very least we know that at this time he was no longer running after Martin, and he also stated that martin “ran”.

I cannot and will not state that Zimmerman started any sort of violent confrontation by evidence of this phone call.


151 posted on 03/25/2012 9:57:06 AM PDT by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: anglian

A stalking case has to be built with multiple incidents over a period of time.

Following someone isnot a crime, furthermore, George broke off the follow upon request of the 911 operator.

Listen to the call.

http://www.sanfordfl.gov/index.html

Call 1


152 posted on 03/25/2012 10:18:03 AM PDT by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies]

To: chris37

We need a neighborhood map with: entrances, crime scene, convenience store, Trayvon’s residence, Zimmerman’s pickup location, first sighting....

What do you think?

“I cannot agree that Zimmerman was the aggressor”, I too believe Trayvon’s case is weak, and getting weaker still for the race pimps lining up on his side.


153 posted on 03/25/2012 12:02:54 PM PDT by widdle_wabbit (taglines don't always work.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: wardaddy

Thanks for the ping. As usual, your post is excellent.

“their rate of violence towards whites is so much higher than the reverse it’s basically incalculable”

And we won’t hear much about that because it doesn’t fit the MSM agenda.

“whether or not Zimmerman was wrong doesn’t matter to me anymore”

I’m feeling the same way actually. The fact that this is a huge sensationlized media piece is enough for me to realize the race baiters, the media, the celebrities, the politicians speaking about this incident care nothing about anyone involved or the issues that make the climate what it is today. They aren’t interested in any factual information.


154 posted on 03/25/2012 1:11:39 PM PDT by Twink
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: widdle_wabbit

Personally, I don’t need a map, but I expect that we will have one eventually.

All the evidence needed to dispute the media manufactured version of events is right there in that recorded call.


155 posted on 03/25/2012 2:22:13 PM PDT by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: chris37

Thia Florida circus being about Obama and his using the White House to promote the Derrick Bell/Separatist teaching? That Reverend Wright was right, after all?

I agree, again. Absence of Map notwithstanding.


156 posted on 03/25/2012 4:27:04 PM PDT by widdle_wabbit (taglines don't always work.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: anglian; poinq; Enterprise
Being on the ground, having the crap beaten out of you, doesn't count as "self-defense"?

O.K. You're entitled to your opinion.

But has it occurred to you to ask "Why is this suddenly news, when it happened a month ago (Feb 26)?" The story was fully-reported locally, yet there were no protests at the time, nor any political issues raised.

So, why did it go national four weeks later? And why was the eyewitness testimony -- which led the local story -- left out of the initial accounts?

Who decided that the media should re-circulate the story four weeks after the fact? And why? In other words, "Who sought to...and is using...you?"

157 posted on 03/25/2012 5:55:04 PM PDT by okie01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: anglian; poinq; Enterprise
Being on the ground, having the crap beaten out of you, doesn't count as "self-defense"?

O.K. You're entitled to your opinion.

But has it occurred to you to ask "Why is this suddenly news, when it happened a month ago (Feb 26)?" The story was fully-reported locally, yet there were no protests at the time, nor any political issues raised.

So, why did it go national four weeks later? And why was the eyewitness testimony -- which led the local story -- left out of the initial accounts?

Who decided that the media should re-circulate the story four weeks after the fact? And why? In other words, "Who sought to...and is using...you?"

158 posted on 03/25/2012 5:57:40 PM PDT by okie01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: okie01
Please excuse my inquisitiveness, but:

WTF?

159 posted on 03/25/2012 6:03:47 PM PDT by Enterprise ("Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise
WTF?

Why is it suddenly national news -- four weeks after it was a routine local news story that evidently aroused no hackles or contention?

And, when re-circulated nationally, a key eyewitness account was left out -- an eyewitness account that actually led in the local story?

Surely, you understand why these questions need to be asked?

160 posted on 03/25/2012 6:56:40 PM PDT by okie01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 159 | View Replies]

To: okie01
Ok. I was unsure of the reasons you had pinged me. I agree with your statements and questions. And yes - you know it's coming - please don't call me Shirley.

:)

161 posted on 03/25/2012 7:04:06 PM PDT by Enterprise ("Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: okie01
There is confusion in this case between the terms "stand your ground," and "self defense." The "Stand Your Ground" statute in Florida defines the right of self defense where a dwelling is involved. In this case, there was no issue of Zimmerman defending himself in relation to any dwelling, so the "Stand Your Ground" law has no bearing. As I explained to others, even Zimmerman's lawyer has publicly stated that this is not a "Stand Your Ground" case. He said it is a "self defense" case.

Here is a link to the Florida Statute:

Title XLVI CRIMES

Chapter 776

JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE

View Entire Chapter
776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0700-0799/0776/Sections/0776.013.html

162 posted on 03/25/2012 7:53:24 PM PDT by Enterprise ("Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise
Agreed. The issue is not "stand your ground". Instead, it is "self-defense".

In fact, I'm wondering who identified it as a "stand your ground" case in the first place.

Somebody had to make it a public issue -- if Jeb Bush felt called upon to deny that it fit the definition. And it certainly spawned a liberal movement to "repeal stand your ground laws".

Yet, it clearly doesn't apply to the case.

163 posted on 03/25/2012 8:23:49 PM PDT by okie01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: okie01

Excellent observation. Liberals clearly don’t like the “Stand Your Ground” law, and are deliberately using this case to try to weaken it!


164 posted on 03/25/2012 8:33:41 PM PDT by Enterprise ("Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 163 | View Replies]

To: TheZMan

I wish it were so. I keep thinking if things get even worse than it is in this country, so many will have to see the light and admit they were wrong. Some are so brain dead/washed, they would never be able to admit they are wrong. Some are so prideful they would never admit it. Some are so deceitful and hateful they would never admit it. Some have an agenda like Obama and Sharpton that they will never admit it. Just like this case. It won’t happen. I’m hoping it will peter out once the steam is released—that’s if we are lucky.


165 posted on 03/25/2012 11:38:49 PM PDT by beaversmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-165 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson