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

Skip to comments.

Witnesses Back Up Zimmerman's Account Of Attack In Trayvon Martin Shooting, Police Say
Orlando Sentinel ^ | 3/26/12 8:33 p.m. EST | RENE STUTZMAN

Posted on 03/27/2012 5:32:25 AM PDT by Clint N. Suhks

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 151-200201-250251-300301-318 next last
To: wtc911
-- I'll wait. --

Fine by me.

201 posted on 03/27/2012 9:01:42 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: cpdiii

new cell phones are required to have a system to send a location to police when 911 is called. This is because a significant portion of the population has gone wireless.

It should be easy enough to plot the locations of the parties.


202 posted on 03/27/2012 9:06:29 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
LOL. How long did it take to google this? You seem to be missing the context and the point of the judgment. I think you need to reread what you provided. You got it wrong.

"In retrial of interstate kidnapping resulting in death case, trial court did not err under FRE 106 Rule of Completeness in excluding self-serving exculpatory statements of the defendant or hearsay statements by his attorney in a recorded jailhouse phone call, parts of which had been offered by the prosecution regarding the defendant’s plan to kill certain witnesses, because FRE 106 does not render otherwise inadmissible evidence admissible, in United States v. Lentz, 524 F.3d 501 (4th Cir. May 12, 2008) (No. 06-4691)"

The defendent has every right to submit a statement regarding his innocence and the circumstances surrounding the charges against him. It is up to the prosecution to prove that he is lying.

203 posted on 03/27/2012 9:08:21 AM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: faucetman

Oh, I dunno. If police officers handcuffed me and put me in the back of a squad car (have you ever been in one? hard plastic seat, grill in your face, doors that don’t open from the inside) and took me to the station, and I was not free to go - well, I would consider myself arrested - stopped - interfered with, even if not charged.

At which point I would read myself my rights, and get a lawyer. In a case like Zimmerman’s, medical attention and documentation.


204 posted on 03/27/2012 9:10:19 AM PDT by heartwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

>>Martin, of course, had no recording<<

No, he didn’t. Is there a recording of the girl’s call?
Had he been the scared little boy that the press is making him out to be, he would have called 911. I would have, even my 12-year-old says she would have.

Both people were picking for a fight.


205 posted on 03/27/2012 9:10:48 AM PDT by netmilsmom (I am Breitbart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: kabar
He's missed the fact pattern of the "self serving exculpatory statement" too.

I spent a number of posts a few days ago, first hinting (because it's better if a person figures out the legal framework), then giving up that the answer lies in the difference between hearsay and direct evidence. What I got for thanks was being called stupid.

206 posted on 03/27/2012 9:14:46 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: kabar
Self-servings statements are not limited to jail house phone calls.

They can be written documents, such as a letter stating something like..."You know I wasn't there...". Such a statement in a letter (or email) is worthless as proof of anything without the person to whom it was addressed acknowledging that it is a true statement. The same is true of un-corroborated statements to LE.

Self-serving statements are any self-exculpatory statements that lack neutral corroborating evidence or eyewitness testimony. Zimmerman's statement to Sanford PD meets this definition.

I provided one of many decisions that are out there to be found.

How about instead of giggling you provide one that supports your assertion.....

207 posted on 03/27/2012 9:18:36 AM PDT by wtc911 (Amigo - you've been had.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
Allow me to expand my statement ----

I'll wait, knowing that you won't because you can't.

208 posted on 03/27/2012 9:20:27 AM PDT by wtc911 (Amigo - you've been had.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
-- I'll wait, knowing that you won't because you can't. --

That's fine by me, too.

209 posted on 03/27/2012 9:24:35 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: backwoods-engineer
Apparently, the Sanford police bought it. Zimmerman has not been arrested, or even charged with anything.

All that means is that at that time, there was not probable cause for an arrest, or that they didn't think they could get a conviction. Investigations are ongoing.

210 posted on 03/27/2012 9:24:42 AM PDT by Darren McCarty (Time for brokered convention)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
Your speculation is biased by your indignation. It's very telling.

You are creating a scenario out of thin air simply to fit your belief. That is sad.

Honestly, you seem to have Mr. Zimmerman pegged as an out and out vigilante bent upon hunting down the next black person he sees on the street and outright murdering him. I'm sincerely not even trying to exaggerate. This belief of yours, which is not currently supported by any known facts, has severely tainted your judgment over this incident, IMO.

If YOU were stupid enough to start assaulting someone who was following you but not threatening you, you deserve to be shot, IMO. I've been in similar situations before, and one where a man was getting ready to draw a gun on me until I answered his question. As soon as I answered it, the situation defused and we both went on our separate ways.

Why didn't your advocate simply respond truthfully to the questions posed to him? That behavior makes me believe he was up to something. But again, I can only draw such a conclusion from the known facts, and from what we currently know, your assertions are absurd, IMO.

211 posted on 03/27/2012 9:28:45 AM PDT by Pox (Good Night. I expect more respect tomorrow.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: wtc911; kabar

>> “Self-serving statements are any self-exculpatory statements that lack neutral corroborating evidence or eyewitness testimony. Zimmerman’s statement to Sanford PD meets this definition.” <<

.
Why are we not surprised to see that you are a part of the lynch mob?

You are on record opposing everything FR stands for.
.


212 posted on 03/27/2012 9:30:54 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (No Federal Sales Tax - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

A lousy attempt at sarcasm doesn’t make for fact.

The idiot gangbanger wannabee got shot for brutally attacking another person. I don’t see a problem with that at all.


213 posted on 03/27/2012 9:32:52 AM PDT by CodeToad (I'm so right-wing if I lifted my left leg I'd go into a spin.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
It's just a statement. Clearly Trayvon at some point turned and confronted Zimmerman.

How that happened and what happened asocciated with it makes the difference between murder, manslaughter and self-defense.

At first I felt, based on the media coverage, that Zimmerman was clerly in the wrong and should have been arrested. But as time has gone on and as facts come out I see why the police did not do so. Zimmerman's condition and injuries, and eyewitness accounts that cooberate Zimmerman's statement are making it more and more clear, IMHO, that Trayvon turned and assaulted Zimmerman without any real cause other than he did not like the guy following him.

Trayvon had a right to be in the subdivision as long as he committed no crime. Zimmerman, conversely had the right to observe and even follow Trayvon as long as he committed no crime.

If the truth is that Trayvon confronted and attacked Zimmerman, then he initiated violence and when he was pounding Zimmerman's head into the ground, Zimmerman had the right to defend himself.

A Grand Jury, if necessary, will decide. If it is so obvious that a Grand Jury is not necessary, then the facts of the case are so clear to the investigators that the conclusion is obvious.

We'll see...depite the MSM, the left, and even the President's efforts to the contrary.

214 posted on 03/27/2012 10:21:46 AM PDT by Jeff Head (quivalent of our AEGIS and they already have six of them. They need to build 16 f those. Their Ast)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
It's just a statement. Clearly Trayvon at some point turned and confronted Zimmerman.

How that happened and what happened asocciated with it makes the difference between murder, manslaughter and self-defense.

___________________________________________

There is nothing "clear" about this.

It is not known by the public whether Martin turned and confronted Zimmerman, if Zimmerman continued to look for him ("these assholes always get away") or if they bumped into each other.

Nor is it known who said the first word, who closed the gap or who threw the first punch.

Zimmerman's statement is not evidence or proof because it is self-exculpatory and not supported by neutral third-party statements or proof such as a CCTV tape.

For the record, based on what is known via Sanford PD docs and tapes, I do not think that Zimmerman can be charged.

215 posted on 03/27/2012 10:47:05 AM PDT by wtc911 (Amigo - you've been had.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

A NEW White PANTHER Leader has put a 20k bounty out for the new black panther leader.......


216 posted on 03/27/2012 10:49:52 AM PDT by geege
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
Well, it is clear enough since they turned out rolling in the dirt together and I do not believe Zimmerman did, or could have, caught Trayvon if he had wanted to...ergo, Trayvon came back. But that is my own supposition.

That aside:

based on what is known via Sanford PD docs and tapes, I do not think that Zimmerman can be charged.

That is because apparently the Police have two eyewitness accounts and their statements that do cooborate Zimmerman's statement and the injuries he suffered and his condition and that of his clothes when found by Police.

As I said, all of the evidence will be gathered and analyzed, and there will either be a Grand Jury or not based on that evidence.

217 posted on 03/27/2012 11:00:29 AM PDT by Jeff Head (quivalent of our AEGIS and they already have six of them. They need to build 16 f those. Their Ast)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
But that is my own supposition.

_______________________

Exactly.

Now, if it turns out that your assertion that the police do in fact have witness statements that corroborate Zimmerman's statement that he was attacked then his statement would no longer fit the definition of self-serving.

But, the Sanford PD have not released any such statement.

218 posted on 03/27/2012 11:22:00 AM PDT by wtc911 (Amigo - you've been had.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Trayvons cousin is very active on twitter. He and Trayvon tweeted each other frequently using that account name. As far as I know, from everything I have read, no family member disputes that this was his Twitter account.


219 posted on 03/27/2012 11:41:20 AM PDT by jdsteel (Give me freedom, not more government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
Please provide a link to the report that says that Zimmerman was on his way back to his car.

Sigh...

Right here: Sanford, FL Press Release

If Zimmerman was told not to continue to follow Trayvon, can that be considered in this investigation?
Yes it will; however, the telecommunications call taker asked Zimmerman “are you following him”. Zimmerman replied, “yes”. The call taker stated “you don’t need to do that”. The call taker’s suggestion is not a lawful order that Mr. Zimmerman would be required to follow. Zimmerman’s statement was that he had lost sight of Trayvon and was returning to his truck to meet the police officer when he says he was attacked by Trayvon.

According to the Sanford, FL police, Zimmerman's official statement was that he was returning to his truck when Martin attacked him.

Satisfied?

220 posted on 03/27/2012 11:51:32 AM PDT by Ol' Dan Tucker (People should not be afraid of the government. Government should be afraid of the people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Does it hurt to distort things so vigorously? You think that by spouting nonsense, somehow the actual facts will get disregarded? Laughable. The young black kid was likely just another stupid thug culture devotee, and witnesses and evidence apparently support the version stated by the older gentleman. The only relevant facts to be considered, if Zimmerman’s (apparently corroborated) version is to be taken as the truth (and you have NOTHING to support any other version), are when perky little Trayvon stopped his assault, and whether Zimmerman could still feel like his life was in imminent danger at that moment. If so, then Trayvon voluntarily surrendered his right to life. If not, then Mr Zimmerman should face penalties. Everything that’s going on right now in the press and at these violence-inciting “protest rallies” are absolutely inappropriate, knee-jerk reactionism that is being used to keep certain people in the news... and possibly to distract from other news.


221 posted on 03/27/2012 11:59:38 AM PDT by Teacher317 ('Tis time to fear when tyrants seem to kiss.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
The legal system in the US operates under the assumption that nobody will lie to inculpate himself in a criminal matter but that most people will lie to excuplate themselves and avoid or lessen consequences of their actions.

Which is why there are laws against giving false statements to police officers.

In some jurisdictions a self-serving statement may not be admitted in court unless there are neutral corroborating witness statements or evidence such as a security video.

Source, please?

Maybe Zimmerman's statement is truthful...I don't know, you don't know and the legal system does not consider it evidence or proof.

A statement from one of those involved is not considered evidence? Source, please?

222 posted on 03/27/2012 12:04:14 PM PDT by Ol' Dan Tucker (People should not be afraid of the government. Government should be afraid of the people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: Pox
"the next black'? You are beyond funny. That's just something you've come up with in your own mind. Zimmerman lives in one of the world's most integrated communities. There's no record of him having any prior conflict with black people ~ and in fact there are black people living there, as well as Indians, Paks, Jamaicans, etc.

The cr*p about Zimmerman going after this kid because he was 'black" or that he "wore a hoody' is NONSENSE.

223 posted on 03/27/2012 12:09:27 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: albionin

Turns out Florida’s law lets even unarmed people take affirmative action if they ‘believe” there is a threat use deadly force’. Try this article out: http://articles.orlandosentinel.com/2012-03-17/news/os-qanda-trayvon-martin-shooting-20120317_1_law-enforcement-castle-doctrine-deadly-force or go to the statute most point to at http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=0700-0799/0776/0776.html (NOTE: believe is used 13 times in this chapter, so think long and hard about “believe” and what you “believe’ believe really means)


224 posted on 03/27/2012 12:09:34 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: kabar
You forgot the most important ingredient in the surfacing of the recordings ~ Martin's family had to sue the City to get them released. No one but the cops and district attorney's office had access to them earlier.

You might ask yourself why they didn't release the recordings nearly a month earlier.

Regarding "stand your own ground' law, you addressed that law as it might affect Zimmerman's claim ~ but Martin has a claim as well. He didn't provide the cops with a statement. He's dead.

225 posted on 03/27/2012 12:09:52 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: Silentgypsy
The folks in Cleveland FORCED the guard on me. Otherwise I traveled and did what I wanted without guards.

Could have something to do with growing up in the most crime ridden and impoverished Zip Code in the state of Indiana.

To put it bluntly you people don't scare me at all.

226 posted on 03/27/2012 12:10:24 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

I wonder if Reginald Denny thinks Zimmerman did the right thing?

227 posted on 03/27/2012 12:16:48 PM PDT by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
Since there is no known corroborating neutral witness, Zimmerman's statement is, by legal definition, self-serving. There are dozens of easily found cases wherein such statements have been deemed inadmissable.

That isn't what Rule 106 is really about, is it? Rule 106 is really about excerpting testimony which may mislead the jury.

From: UNITED STATES v. LENTZ:

Rule 106 provides that “[w]hen a writing or recorded statement or part thereof is introduced by a party, an adverse party may require the introduction at that time of any other part or any other writing or recorded statement which ought in fairness to be considered contemporaneously with it.”  Fed.R.Evid. 106.   Its purpose “is ‘to prevent a party from misleading the jury by allowing into the record relevant portions of the excluded testimony which clarify or explain the part already received.’ ” United States v. Bollin, 264 F.3d 391, 414 (4th Cir.2001) (quoting United States v. Wilkerson, 84 F.3d 692, 696 (4th Cir.1996)).

 Rule 106 does not, however, “render admissible the evidence which is otherwise inadmissible under the hearsay rules.”  Wilkerson, 84 F.3d at 696.   Nor does it require the admission of “self-serving, exculpatory statements made by a party which are being sought for admission by that same party.”  Id.;  see also Bollin, 264 F.3d at 414 (“The fact that some of the omitted testimony arguably was exculpatory does not, without more, make it admissible under the rule of completeness.”).   We review the trial court's decision to deny admissibility of evidence under Rule 106 for an abuse of discretion.   See Wilkerson, 84 F.3d at 696.

Prior to the introduction of the recordings as evidence in this case, the district court carefully and individually considered all excerpts proposed to be included or excluded by both sides, but declined to allow into evidence various self-serving exculpatory statements made by Lentz to Salvato during the conversation as well as various hearsay statements made by Salvato which were unnecessary to place Lentz's comments in perspective. Having reviewed the proposed additions and the rulings of the district court, we are satisfied that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the omitted portions as they were neither necessary to avoid misleading the jury or to place the portions admitted into proper context.

228 posted on 03/27/2012 12:28:54 PM PDT by Ol' Dan Tucker (People should not be afraid of the government. Government should be afraid of the people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
We know that the police do have eyewitness statements that corroborate Zimerman's statement and his condition, the Police have already said that.

From the Orlando Sentinel Article:

There is about a one-minute gap during which police say they're not sure what happened.

Zimmerman told them he lost sight of Trayvon and was walking back to his SUV when Trayvon approached him from the left rear, and they exchanged words.

Trayvon asked Zimmerman if he had a problem. Zimmerman said no and reached for his cell phone, he told police. Trayvon then said, "Well, you do now" or something similar and punched Zimmerman in the nose, according to the account he gave police.

Zimmerman fell to the ground and Trayvon got on top of him and began slamming his head into the sidewalk, he told police.

Zimmerman began yelling for help.

Several witnesses heard those cries, and there has been a dispute about whether they came from Zimmerman or Trayvon.

Lawyers for Trayvon's family say it was Trayvon, but police say their evidence indicates it was Zimmerman.

One witness, who has since talked to local television news reporters, told police he saw Zimmerman on the ground with Trayvon on top, pounding him — and was unequivocal that it was Zimmerman who was crying for help.

Zimmerman then shot Trayvon once in the chest at very close range, according to authorities.

When police arrived less than two minutes later, Zimmerman was bleeding from the nose, had a swollen lip and had bloody lacerations to the back of his head.

In a statement released by the Sanford Police Department, they indicated that the information was not released officially and anyone releasing information could be subject to displinary action up to firing, but then they said that,

"the information provided in the article is consistent with what the Sanford Police Department provided to the State Attorney's office."

229 posted on 03/27/2012 12:36:44 PM PDT by Jeff Head (quivalent of our AEGIS and they already have six of them. They need to build 16 f those. Their Ast)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks

As more and more information comes out on little Trayvon, the picture becomes clearer. I pray for Zimmerman’s safety right now.


230 posted on 03/27/2012 12:46:01 PM PDT by Paved Paradise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory; cpdiii
Elsewhere someone noted that Zimmerman called the cops on something other than a 911 number.

That was explained as not a problem because the calls to that line as well as the 911 calls went to the same dispatch center.

So, a question, was the GPS locator invoked when that call went through the other number?

231 posted on 03/27/2012 12:55:02 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

You need to get a grip. Who are “you people?” I’m a little old lady. Anyone who’s scared of me definitely needs his/her bolts tightened.

I just hope that what you write doesn’t convince some naive person that they can don their cloak of invisibility and cruise those mean streets.

P.S. I sidestepped the guards. All they ever did was grouse about it.


232 posted on 03/27/2012 12:55:27 PM PDT by Silentgypsy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 226 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Dan Tucker
Am I satisfied with the veracity of Zimmerman's statement?

Absent the release of corroborating statements or evidence such as CCTV recordings....no.

I do not take any self-serving statements as being automatically truthful.

233 posted on 03/27/2012 1:04:31 PM PDT by wtc911 (Amigo - you've been had.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
Zimmerman's statement is not evidence or proof because it is self-exculpatory and not supported by neutral third-party statements or proof such as a CCTV tape.

How many times must you be reminded that Zimmerman doesn't have to prove himself innocent. The state must prove him guilty of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt. There is plenty of physical evidence and witness testimony to corroborate Zimmerman's version of events.

234 posted on 03/27/2012 1:10:36 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 215 | View Replies]

To: kabar
There is plenty of physical evidence and witness testimony to corroborate Zimmerman's version of events.

_____________________________

How many times are you going to ignore a request that you provide links to any document, tape or transcript from a reliable source (read LEO) that shows evidence or witness testimony that Martin attacked Zimmerman?

You keep refering to these witness statements...how hard could it be to provide a link to one?

235 posted on 03/27/2012 1:20:25 PM PDT by wtc911 (Amigo - you've been had.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
No one cares whether the self righteous there's a racist under my bed crowd is satisfied or not.

They never are.

236 posted on 03/27/2012 1:20:53 PM PDT by mac_truck ( Aide toi et dieu t aidera)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 233 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
Absent the release of corroborating statements or evidence such as CCTV recordings....no.

There are corroborating statements.

I do not take any self-serving statements as being automatically truthful.

Fair enough. What picture does the physical evidence paint?

Absent the gunshot wound to his chest, what other injuries did Martin suffer?

237 posted on 03/27/2012 1:26:41 PM PDT by Ol' Dan Tucker (People should not be afraid of the government. Government should be afraid of the people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 233 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head
All of that is old ground. A number of freepers have repeatedly stated that witness statements support Zimmerman's assertion that Martin attacked him. I am waiting for anybody to provide a link to any such witness statement.

FWIW...WABC news just reported that the homicide detective who interviewed Zimmerman didn't buy his story and wanted to charge him but the county prosecutors said that they didn't feel that they could convict on the evidence.

As I said earlier...I don't think that he will ever be charged...precisely because there are no witnesses to the start of the fight.

There may be a civil suit but who knows how that would go...

238 posted on 03/27/2012 1:27:32 PM PDT by wtc911 (Amigo - you've been had.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
You might ask yourself why they didn't release the recordings nearly a month earlier.

I am flabbergasted you would ask such a question given the statement of the Sanford City Manager on the case:

"The Sanford Police Department has conducted a complete and fair investigation of this incident. We have provided the results of our investigation to the Office of the State Attorney for their review and consideration for possible criminal prosecution."

The case was and is still under investigation. Releasing the tapes would appear to complicate such an investigation. You don't want to release such information until you have had a chance to interview everyone you can. I am concerned that the substance of the girl friend's reported conversation with Martin could have been influenced by the release of the tapes. Her conversation was not recorded.

Regarding "stand your own ground' law, you addressed that law as it might affect Zimmerman's claim ~ but Martin has a claim as well. He didn't provide the cops with a statement. He's dead.

It was really a case of self-defense not "stand your ground." Zimmerman was on his back with his head being slammed against the pavement. Somehow, the weapon went off. Zimmerman's media advisor, Joe Oliver, suggested in an interview that there could have been an accidental discharge of the weapon. If you want to create a scenario, when Martin was on top of Zimmerman, he discovered the weapon in Zimmerman's waistband and tried to grab it, which is why Zimmerman was screaming for help. During the scuffle over the weapon, it went off.

I am sure that the forensic information will give us a better indication of what happened including who shot the weapon and how close to Martin was the muzzle. We can engage in all the speculation we want, but we don't have the facts that the police do. And they determined that the physical evidence and witness testimony supported Zimmerman's version of events.

Zimmerman could be the one dead today, not Martin. I wonder whether Martin's version of events would prove that he acted in self-defense. I am sure Al Sharpton, Farrakahn, Jackson, Obama, Spike Lee, et. al., would be defending this poor black boy. Would you be defending Zimmerman?

239 posted on 03/27/2012 1:33:02 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
From the city manager's statement:

Why was George Zimmerman not arrested the night of the shooting?

When the Sanford Police Department arrived at the scene of the incident, Mr. Zimmerman provided a statement claiming he acted in self defense which at the time was supported by physical evidence and testimony. By Florida Statute, law enforcement was PROHIBITED from making an arrest based on the facts and circumstances they had at the time. Additionally, when any police officer makes an arrest for any reason, the officer MUST swear and affirm that he/she is making the arrest in good faith and with probable cause. If the arrest is done maliciously and in bad faith, the officer and the City may be held liable.

According to Florida Statute 776.032 : 776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—

(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.

(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.

Why weren’t the 911 tapes initially released?

There are exemptions to the public records laws for active criminal intelligence and for ongoing investigations. In this instance, the 911 calls made by neighbors in the subdivision, and the non- emergency call made by Mr. Zimmerman are all key to the investigation by Sanford Police Department. In consultation with the Office of the State Attorney, the Sanford police department had decided not to release the audio recordings of the 911 calls due to the ongoing investigation. Many times, specific information is contained in those recordings which is vital to the integrity of the investigation. At the time, it was determined that if revealed, the information may compromise the integrity of the investigation prior to its completion. The 911 tapes have since been released.

240 posted on 03/27/2012 1:38:54 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Dan Tucker
1) There are corroborating statements...

****A number of freepers have asserted this. None have provided a link to any statement that supports through eyewitness account that Martin attacked Zimmerman. Can you?

2)What picture does the physical evidence paint?

****I assume that you mean the bloodied nose and back of Zimmerman's head with the wet, grass-stained shirt back.

They paint of picture of somebody who got punched in the nose and fell backwards, hitting his head. These bits of information say absolutely nothing about who started the fight or how the two combatants ended up in the same space.

I assume that you're a grown man and that you've been around the block. Have you ever seen a guy start a fight then get his ass kicked? I have, plenty of times.

241 posted on 03/27/2012 1:38:59 PM PDT by wtc911 (Amigo - you've been had.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
All of that is old ground. A number of freepers have repeatedly stated that witness statements support Zimmerman's assertion that Martin attacked him. I am waiting for anybody to provide a link to any such witness statement.

Fair enough. Perhaps you could provide links to witness statements and physical evidence, such as CCTV, etc., that refutes Zimmerman's version of the events.

There may be a civil suit but who knows how that would go...

Doesn't Florida's Stand Your Ground law specifically prohibits civil suits in cases where no criminal charges have been filed?

242 posted on 03/27/2012 1:39:14 PM PDT by Ol' Dan Tucker (People should not be afraid of the government. Government should be afraid of the people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | View Replies]

To: mac_truck

What does race have to do with it?


243 posted on 03/27/2012 1:41:42 PM PDT by wtc911 (Amigo - you've been had.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 236 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
A number of freepers have asserted this. None have provided a link to any statement that supports through eyewitness account that Martin attacked Zimmerman. Can you?

Can you point to eyewitness accounts that refute Zimmerman's version of events?

They paint of picture of somebody who got punched in the nose and fell backwards, hitting his head. These bits of information say absolutely nothing about who started the fight or how the two combatants ended up in the same space.

They also paint a picture of Martin attacking Zimmerman, exactly as the eyewitness statements claim.

I assume that you're a grown man and that you've been around the block. Have you ever seen a guy start a fight then get his ass kicked? I have, plenty of times.

Can we also assume you've read about instances where someone with criminal intent attacks a CCW holder only to get shot and killed in the process? I have. Plenty of times.

244 posted on 03/27/2012 1:47:53 PM PDT by Ol' Dan Tucker (People should not be afraid of the government. Government should be afraid of the people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: Teacher317

There was an utterly horrible column in the Dallas Morning News today written by a gal named J. Floyd. It portrayed the usual leftist line that Zimmerman was an overzealous, cop wannabe.

I let her have a piece of my mind (now I don’t have much left).

As long as we’re guessing here (and that’s all we’re doing at this point—but at least we are making educated guesses)— I’m guessing that Trayvon decided he was being disrespected and turned on the man following him.

Since the man was going back to his truck, Trayvon got the jump on him and was having a nice time doing a little beating on the guy. I doubt if it occurred to him that Zimmerman had a gun.

That J. Floyd woman also was hysterical about the fact that Zimmerman was ‘carrying.’

Most of us would carry in that situation, I know I would.


245 posted on 03/27/2012 1:53:30 PM PDT by altura
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies]

To: wtc911
A number of freepers have asserted this. None have provided a link to any statement that supports through eyewitness account that Martin attacked Zimmerman.

Can you provide any eyewitness statements or physical evidence that does not support Zimmerman's version of events?

IOW, where's your proof he's lying about what happened that night?

246 posted on 03/27/2012 1:53:59 PM PDT by Ol' Dan Tucker (People should not be afraid of the government. Government should be afraid of the people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: wtc911

You are correct, there are not wintesses to date who witnessed the start of the fight...but we do have two winteses now about the fight not long after it started and their testimony tends to support and backup Zimmerman’s statement...ie. Trayvon was on top of Zimmerman beating him about the head and slamming his head against the ground.

The physical condition of both Trayvon and Zimmerman also supports Zimmerman’s statement, ie. broken nose, bloody face, lacerations on the back of his head, grass stains, etc.

I do not think there is enough evidence to go after Zimmerman...I believe that he actually did defend himself in the end...and he was clearly loosing the altercation and in the process of being injured. Without clear evidence that all of that was a result of Trayvon defending himself, then there is no evidence to support a prosecution of Zimmerman.

But, as I have said, if the convene a Garnd Jury that will mean the prosecution, for whatever reason believes they have such evidence (or they feel politcally pressured to hold one in any case) and jurors will have to decide if it stands muster to go to trial. If they do not convene the Grand Jury then they do not have the evidence to even start the process.

Thanks for the dialog.


247 posted on 03/27/2012 2:04:22 PM PDT by Jeff Head (quivalent of our AEGIS and they already have six of them. They need to build 16 f those. Their Ast)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 238 | View Replies]

To: heartwood
Even by Zimmerman’s account, Martin did not attack from behind. He approached from behind, they had words, and he punched Zimmerman in the nose. .

Annnnnd? Come on heartwood, what happened next?

248 posted on 03/27/2012 2:10:55 PM PDT by Hot Tabasco (No matter what you post here, someone's going to get pissed off......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Redleg Duke
Your ramblings indicate too much LDS in the 60s!

Mormonism? Glad I didn't hang in his commune, my peace mates did LSD..........LOL!

249 posted on 03/27/2012 2:18:21 PM PDT by Hot Tabasco (No matter what you post here, someone's going to get pissed off......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
Trayvon is missing the magic ingredient ~ no time spent in prison. If his record had included that Zimmerman wouldn’t even have known he was around.

Huh? What the heck did you just say?


250 posted on 03/27/2012 2:25:50 PM PDT by Hot Tabasco (No matter what you post here, someone's going to get pissed off......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 151-200201-250251-300301-318 next 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