• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

1 week... 7 witnesses... Let's review...

Grim17

Battle Ready
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
30,318
Reaction score
14,360
Location
Southwestern U.S.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
There have been 6 eye witnesses to the altercation that night who have testified so far, and one phone witness. Let take a look at the consistency of their statements, the credibility of their testimony, how it may have benefited or hurt one side or the other, and the strength of what they brought to the table.


The witnesses were:


witnessmap.jpg


The first thing I want to dig into, is credibilty... Did any of them have a reason to lie, was there any conflict of interest, or did any of them choose sides.



How many of them were either friends or enemies, with either Martin or Zimmerman prior to that night?


1 - Rachel - Martin's friend.



How many of them were aquainted with either Martin or Zimmerman prior to that night (other than Rachel), and did they know of their involvement in the incident prior to giving their statement to police?

1 - Jenna - Saw George at block meetings - Gave her statement to police prior to knowing of his involvement and her story hasn't changed since then.



How many witnesses have, or appear possibly to have, chosen a side in this case prior to their testimony this week, and has their testimony changed in that favor from their original depositions?

4 - Rachel - Obviously - Yes, it changed depending on the day of the week.
--- Jenna - Possibly follows Z's brother on twitter, but uncertain - Her testimony hasn't changed.
--- Selene - A "likes" visitor to "Justice for Travon" facebook page. - Her testimony did change negatively for Zimmerman
--- Selma - Her roommate supports Martin and indicated that they both were to be interviewed by BET for their pro-Trayvon special - I don't recall if her testimony changed from her deposition.



Based on those 3 multi-part questions, here's how I rank (from most to least) the credibility level of the witnesses based on their outside influences and/or possible conflicts of interest:

__ Spotless __

1. John
2. Jane
3. Jeannee

___ Good ____

4. Jenna
5. Selma

__ Toss up ___

6. Selene

__ Very Low __

7. Rachel


*****************************************************************

Here's some other rankings I threw together just for fun:


Most helpful to the prosecution: Rachel (runner up Jeannee)

Most helpful to the defense: John (runner up Jenna)

Most pleasant to look at: Selma

Most timid: Selene

Most confident: Jenna

Most unatractive: Rachel

Most annoying: Rachel

Most contradictions: Rachel

Most uneducated: Rachel

Most Tears shed: Rachel

Most foul/colorful language: Rachel

Most fortunate they weren't cited for contempt of court: Rachel




OK, have at it all you armchair analysts
 

Jerry

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2006
Messages
51,124
Reaction score
15,258
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
There have been 6 eye witnesses to the altercation that night who have testified so far, and one phone witness. Let take a look at the consistency of their statements, the credibility of their testimony, how it may have benefited or hurt one side or the other, and the strength of what they brought to the table.


The witnesses were:
555.jpg


OMG can't stop laughing LMAO!!!:lol:
 

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,307
Reaction score
4,772
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
How did you feel Selene's testimony changed? I seem to recall she was caught in a lie, I just can't recall exactly what it was at the moment.
 

AlfredENeuman

Active member
Joined
Jun 5, 2013
Messages
413
Reaction score
180
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
You left out Jon (the other Jon) who saw Mr. Zimmerman on the phone immediately after the murder. He took pictures of the back of Zimmerman's head and the body (capturing the state it was in after the shooting)

Did his testimony help or hurt?

Hurt, if you consider photographs of blood powerful evidence. They may be, but I think the effect of those is wearing off. Especially when you keep showing the same wound a few hours later cleaned up. But yes, that photo helps Zimmerman.

Helps, if you consider a few questions:

1. If he was so beat up, then why was he able to immediately get on the phone with someone and have a conversation?
2. Why did he never mention this phone call in any of his interviews. He says he immediately saw flashlights and was arrested, and was handcuffed. Where does the phone call come it?
3. Who did he call? If, and this is just not clear that it's anything yet, he called one of his cop friends or someone who can give him "self-defense advice", he's in a world of hurt. If he just tried his wife and didn't get through, it's just evidence that he wasn't that shaken up and neglected to tell police the whole story and is therefore just another piece. TBD.
4. The position of the body. The state will attempt to show that the position and location of the body doesn't match the story, since it's face down and not close to the sidewalk.
 

Grim17

Battle Ready
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
30,318
Reaction score
14,360
Location
Southwestern U.S.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
How did you feel Selene's testimony changed? I seem to recall she was caught in a lie, I just can't recall exactly what it was at the moment.
She inserted that "left to right" thing on the stand, but never said any such thing in any of her depositions... It seems to me that there was something else too, but I can't remember it... Anyway, you'll notice that other than Rachel, I have her at the bottom.

Keep in mind, I did not take into consideration a whole host of factors when I ranked them, like consistency of their testimony, how much detail they offered, how unique or crucial their testimony was, and a host of other things... I was just ranking their credibility as unbiased observers... I figured I'd leave some stuff for everyone else to take a crack at.
 

Grim17

Battle Ready
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
30,318
Reaction score
14,360
Location
Southwestern U.S.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
You left out Jon (the other Jon) who saw Mr. Zimmerman on the phone immediately after the murder. He took pictures of the back of Zimmerman's head and the body (capturing the state it was in after the shooting)
No I didn't... I was only including the witnesses who testified concerning what took place from the point they came in contact, until Zimmerman got up off of Martin after the shooting.
 

Grim17

Battle Ready
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
30,318
Reaction score
14,360
Location
Southwestern U.S.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Helps, if you consider a few questions:

1. If he was so beat up, then why was he able to immediately get on the phone with someone and have a conversation?
2. Why did he never mention this phone call in any of his interviews. He says he immediately saw flashlights and was arrested, and was handcuffed. Where does the phone call come it?
3. Who did he call? If, and this is just not clear that it's anything yet, he called one of his cop friends or someone who can give him "self-defense advice", he's in a world of hurt. If he just tried his wife and didn't get through, it's just evidence that he wasn't that shaken up and neglected to tell police the whole story and is therefore just another piece. TBD.
4. The position of the body. The state will attempt to show that the position and location of the body doesn't match the story, since it's face down and not close to the sidewalk.
JFC Alfred, read the title of this thread... It is not titled "Why in the world did George do that?"

This thread was created to discuss the 7 witnesses I listed above and the testimony they gave under oath this week.
 

AlfredENeuman

Active member
Joined
Jun 5, 2013
Messages
413
Reaction score
180
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
She inserted that "left to right" thing on the stand, but never said any such thing in any of her depositions... It seems to me that there was something else too, but I can't remember it... Anyway, you'll notice that other than Rachel, I have her at the bottom.

Keep in mind, I did not take into consideration a whole host of factors when I ranked them, like consistency of their testimony, how much detail they offered, how unique or crucial their testimony was, and a host of other things... I was just ranking their credibility as unbiased observers... I figured I'd leave some stuff for everyone else to take a crack at.
So anything not given in the first interview is therefore a lie? Or like John Good, can details be added at trial. For instance, John Good testified that he never saw a single punch or heard any slamming, no dialog, and only saw 8 seconds of what happened. Since he never said that before trial, was he lying?

FWIW, I think based on witnesses so far, the whole thing happened like this (taking every witness as truthful and piecing together what they say)

1. They are first heard by the T. But they go scrambling down towards where the cell phone fell. I think it's possible Martin hit Zimmerman here and ran. Zimmerman chased him. Jenna hears them scuffling away. They make it down to the flashlight spot. That's when Selene heard them moving left to right. The most logical reason is that Zimmerman and Martin ran down that way and then doubled back. When they clashed down there, they dropped the flashlight and cellphone.
2. They grappled in a standing position.
3. They fell on the grass, Martin on top.
4. Martin pushed Zimmerman onto the pavement. John Good came outside at this point. Zimmerman hits his head. Punches or wrestling occurs.
5. Zimmerman gets back on top, and shot him while on the grass.
6. Witnesses saw Zimmerman stand up as if "the person on top is the one who stood up".

I do not believe that Zimmerman had time after he shot for Martin to sit up, say "you got me", then fall over. Then for Zimmerman to spring up and straddle the kid, who was still yapping away at him and struggling, hold his arms, yell "help me restrain this kid" without anyone seeing all of this. People immediately looked when the shot occurred and I believe the witnesses. The person on top got up.

I'll add one more thing here. For people who think that Zimmerman could have sprung up after having his head slammed so many times that his vision was blurry and his head felt like it would "explode", and who had been punched 30 times and who had just shot someone, don't you agree that this calls into question is level of injury? A person who was being hurt like that would not be able to immediately get up and straddle someone. Either he sprung up quickly and swapped positions before anyone rushing to their windows could see it or he wasn't hurt, because that requires a lot of strength and clarity to make that move so fast.
 
Last edited:

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,307
Reaction score
4,772
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I thought this was a good summary of Rachel and her believability. I actually come to much the same conclusion as the author does.

Expert: Witness inconsistencies don't kill credibility | HLNtv.com

I believe the only particularly meaningful lie she told was about the words spoken between Martin and Zimmerman.

I believe the most likely is:
Trayvon:"Why are you following me for?"
Zimerman: "What are you talking about?"
and the "get off, get off" was a complete fabrication.
 

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,307
Reaction score
4,772
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
5. Zimmerman gets back on top, and shot him while on the grass.
6. Witnesses saw Zimmerman stand up as if "the person on top is the one who stood up".
Forensics will prove #5 wrong. I do believe George shot him from the bottom, Trayvon made some noises - death was not instant, according to the medical experts I've heard talk about it - and got on top of Trayvon. Witnesses appeared and saw George get off of Trayvon.
 

AlfredENeuman

Active member
Joined
Jun 5, 2013
Messages
413
Reaction score
180
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Forensics will prove #5 wrong. I do believe George shot him from the bottom, Trayvon made some noises - death was not instant, according to the medical experts I've heard talk about it - and got on top of Trayvon. Witnesses appeared and saw George get off of Trayvon.
We'll see, and if so, I'll rethink what my theory is. My guess is that forensics won't be able to say one way or the other, unless it's the by the location of the shell (which side does it eject to, etc). One thing that's not explained here is how they got to the T when they did. Remember, Zimmerman hangs up at 7:13:41. The end of the call with Rachel wasn't until sometime between 7:16:00 and 7:16:59. The first 911 call occurs at 7:16:11 which means that either they stood there arguing for MUCH longer than a few minutes, or else they both weren't at the T when Zimmerman says "he's running".

Either way, during this time, there's no way that Zimmerman was on RVC walking back to his truck.

Possible explanation? If you watch a video of someone walking the Trayvon route, it shows that when he says "****, he's running" Martin could have only made it to the clubhouse. It's possible then Zimmerman exits his vehicle by the clubhouse and the foot chase goes on for much longer than he said.

Otherwise, how does the testimony explain this two minute gap?
 

AlfredENeuman

Active member
Joined
Jun 5, 2013
Messages
413
Reaction score
180
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I thought this was a good summary of Rachel and her believability. I actually come to much the same conclusion as the author does.

Expert: Witness inconsistencies don't kill credibility | HLNtv.com

I believe the only particularly meaningful lie she told was about the words spoken between Martin and Zimmerman.

I believe the most likely is:
Trayvon:"Why are you following me for?"
Zimerman: "What are you talking about?"
and the "get off, get off" was a complete fabrication.
I see no reason to disbelieve her. I think she more than held her own against a skilled interrogator over seven grueling hours. We know they moved from the T down to the place where the murder happened. Jenna Lauer heard the same "grass sounds" as Rachel. And Jenna heard scuffling/running sounds that Selene picked up down by the flashlight. If you don't think Zimmerman chased him down there, how did Zimmerman move that far?
 

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,307
Reaction score
4,772
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
We'll see, and if so, I'll rethink what my theory is. My guess is that forensics won't be able to say one way or the other, unless it's the by the location of the shell (which side does it eject to, etc).
Forensics will say. They'll be able to determine how much the can will weigh down the top hoodie and cause the holes to be out of alignment when someone is on top and leaning pretty easily, I should think.

Nearly all guns eject to the right. From what I can tell the bullet casing was to the right, which would support Zimm being on the bottom.
 

What if...?

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
29,299
Reaction score
11,038
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I thought this was a good summary of Rachel and her believability. I actually come to much the same conclusion as the author does.

Expert: Witness inconsistencies don't kill credibility | HLNtv.com

I believe the only particularly meaningful lie she told was about the words spoken between Martin and Zimmerman.

I believe the most likely is:
Trayvon:"Why are you following me for?"
Zimerman: "What are you talking about?"
and the "get off, get off" was a complete fabrication.
That's the ONE thing I wish the cops had gotten to while it was pure.

If it was, z would have a problem of "amping up" the exchange to make it sound worse than it was (while still retaining deniability)
 

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,307
Reaction score
4,772
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
That's the ONE thing I wish the cops had gotten to while it was pure.

If it was, z would have a problem of "amping up" the exchange to make it sound worse than it was (while still retaining deniability)
I would agree. It would have been far better if they passed her on to the cops rather then to Crump and rather then doing the interview with the parents their, have it done in a police station. If the prosecution loses, I believe an argument could be made that Crump was partially responsible based on the way W8 was handled.
 

ABC10

Active member
Joined
May 18, 2013
Messages
273
Reaction score
130
Location
Sin City
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
How did you feel Selene's testimony changed? I seem to recall she was caught in a lie, I just can't recall exactly what it was at the moment.

The left to right thing.
My question is was it creepyass cracker or creepy asscracker. Was it a gay hate crime when Martin assaulted Zimmerman?
Wish I had seen the look of the faces of the Scheme Team when they saw Rachael.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Apr 24, 2013
Messages
2,655
Reaction score
509
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Ironically, the guy who said Trayvon was on top may have hurt Zimmerman more than he helped him by saying that Trayvon was punching him and not smashing his head on the concrete, as Zimmerman claimed ... if the jury thinks Zimmerman is lying, that could screw him ...

BUT, I've not followed it as closely as some of you have ... Does the jury have the option of convicting on a lesser charge, or does it have to be yes or no on second-degree murder? If it's the latter, that's going to be almost impossible to prove I suspect ...
 
Joined
Aug 4, 2010
Messages
89
Reaction score
57
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Ironically, the guy who said Trayvon was on top may have hurt Zimmerman more than he helped him by saying that Trayvon was punching him and not smashing his head on the concrete, as Zimmerman claimed ... if the jury thinks Zimmerman is lying, that could screw him ...
He actually didn't even say that. The prosecution made sure he clarified that he only saw arm movements, he never actually saw Martin's fists make contact with Zimmerman.
 

Grim17

Battle Ready
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
30,318
Reaction score
14,360
Location
Southwestern U.S.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
So anything not given in the first interview is therefore a lie?
Did I say that? When it comes to credibility or believability, it just simple math...

Changes or additions to testimony + bias or personal gain = Moderate to significant credibility loss
Changes or additions to testimony - bias or personal gain = Little to no credibility loss



Or like John Good, can details be added at trial. For instance, John Good testified that he never saw a single punch or heard any slamming, no dialog, and only saw 8 seconds of what happened. Since he never said that before trial, was he lying?
He did say that before... In fact, his original statement to police at the scene and in his deposition the following day, was of punching and MMA style fighting by Martin. But three weeks later, after giving it more thought, he realized that he might have made some assumptions or jumped to a few conclusions, so he clarified his statements and backed off of some of his previous testimony. Maybe you weren't paying attention too well... He made it clear on the stand that he didn't see all the punching, but at the time that was the impression he got. Good didn't lie at all.


FWIW, I think based on witnesses so far, the whole thing happened like this (taking every witness as truthful and piecing together what they say)

1. They are first heard by the T. But they go scrambling down towards where the cell phone fell. I think it's possible Martin hit Zimmerman here and ran. Zimmerman chased him. Jenna hears them scuffling away. They make it down to the flashlight spot. That's when Selene heard them moving left to right. The most logical reason is that Zimmerman and Martin ran down that way and then doubled back. When they clashed down there, they dropped the flashlight and cellphone.
2. They grappled in a standing position.
3. They fell on the grass, Martin on top.
4. Martin pushed Zimmerman onto the pavement. John Good came outside at this point. Zimmerman hits his head. Punches or wrestling occurs.
Some of that sounds logical, but the part about Selene just doesn't fit. They would have had to run 100 feet south to get past her house, then turned around and traveled 60 feet back to the north again for her story to make sense... And they would have had to go past her house quietly so she didn't hear them, then make noise when they turned around... Besides, the cell phone and other stuff was no more than about 10 feet from the body... Not 60 feet.

Like I said, some of that sounds logical, but there is no evidence and no eye witnesses that can coroberate it... Remember, this is about proving Zimmerman's story is false, not about Zimmerman proving it true.


5. Zimmerman gets back on top, and shot him while on the grass.
There is not one witness that has testified to seeing this and as the defense made clear in their opening, they will present scientific proof that Martin was on top of Zimmerman when the shot was fired... So you can very likely hang that one up.

6. Witnesses saw Zimmerman stand up as if "the person on top is the one who stood up".
Of course they did... Because they were describing what they saw after the gunshot.

I do not believe that Zimmerman had time after he shot for Martin to sit up, say "you got me", then fall over. Then for Zimmerman to spring up and straddle the kid, who was still yapping away at him and struggling, hold his arms, yell "help me restrain this kid" without anyone seeing all of this. People immediately looked when the shot occurred and I believe the witnesses. The person on top got up.

I'll add one more thing here. For people who think that Zimmerman could have sprung up after having his head slammed so many times that his vision was blurry and his head felt like it would "explode", and who had been punched 30 times and who had just shot someone, don't you agree that this calls into question is level of injury? A person who was being hurt like that would not be able to immediately get up and straddle someone. Either he sprung up quickly and swapped positions before anyone rushing to their windows could see it or he wasn't hurt, because that requires a lot of strength and clarity to make that move so fast.
Again, that all sounds nice on paper, but the prosecution has to come up with solid evidence to back up such a claim with... And thus far, they have been putting on witnesses that seem to back up Zimmerman's story, not prove he committed Murder.,
 

year2late

IIJAFM
DP Veteran
Joined
May 12, 2013
Messages
22,793
Reaction score
20,183
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive
That's the ONE thing I wish the cops had gotten to while it was pure.

If it was, z would have a problem of "amping up" the exchange to make it sound worse than it was (while still retaining deniability)
I would think in a case that has potential for accusations of racism...and especially in a case revolving around the killing of an unarmed minor.....they would have been more careful about tracking down eyewitnesses and ear witnesses immediately.
 

What if...?

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
29,299
Reaction score
11,038
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
I would think in a case that has potential for accusations of racism...and especially in a case revolving around the killing of an unarmed minor.....they would have been more careful about tracking down eyewitnesses and ear witnesses immediately.
It does look like they just took Zs word for it and were just going to move on before the outcry.
 

Grim17

Battle Ready
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
30,318
Reaction score
14,360
Location
Southwestern U.S.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
One thing that's not explained here is how they got to the T when they did. Remember, Zimmerman hangs up at 7:13:41. The end of the call with Rachel wasn't until sometime between 7:16:00 and 7:16:59. The first 911 call occurs at 7:16:11 which means that either they stood there arguing for MUCH longer than a few minutes, or else they both weren't at the T when Zimmerman says "he's running".

Either way, during this time, there's no way that Zimmerman was on RVC walking back to his truck.
There is a time gap, but let me first correct something. The call with Rachel wasn't formally ended. Your time frame is when the call was disconnected, which could have been at any time because Martin never hit the "end" button.

Even with that in mind, when Z ended his call he was at RVC as he stated during the walk through. He was probably 10 or 20 feet shy of RVC during the walk through, but from there it took him 30 seconds to reach where he said the confrontation happened near the "T". It seemed he was walking at a brisk pace in order to reach the spot where he said Martin came out of the darkness. So let's give him an extra 10 seconds for a slower pace, which brings us to 7:14:21. Then take into account he may have hesitated for a moment or 2 to think about where he wanted to be for police, or maybe just to contemplate the situation in general, or maybe he was fumbling with his phone. He also said he was still looking to see if he could spot him while he was walking. I'd say that might account for maybe an extra 15 seconds, bringing it to 7:14:36.

Now let's back track... The first 911 call at 7:16:11 was placed by Jenna. She testified that she decided to call when the 2 of them came scuffling by her patio and ended up on the ground between her house and John Good's. She also testified that from the time she made the decision to call 911, and the time the operator actually picked up, was around 30 seconds. That would place the 2 of them around 30-35 feet from the "T" at 7:15:41 She testified that she has no idea how much time elapsed between the time things started at the "T" and the time she decided to call 911. So roughly, that leaves a little over a minute from the time Zimmerman says the confrontation started, and when the 2 of them were about 10 -15 feet from the place where Martin would eventually be shot.

Now the day before Jenna testified, Jane (who lives north of her on the other side of the "T") took the witness stand and testified that from the time she heard the 2 voices that were in disagreement outside her window (when they first confronted each other at the "T") until she had turned her night light out and could see them on the ground in front of John's door, she estimates that a "couple of minutes" had passed. Now we know for a fact that it couldn't have been more than 2 minutes because according to Z's time line the confrontation started give or take, at around 7:14:21 and when the 911 operator picked up Jenna's call at 7:16:11, they were already on the ground, Zimmerman screaming for help, and John Good talking to them out his door. The reason I bring Jane's testimony up, is because she estimated "minutes", not "seconds" had elapsed from confrontation until Ground and pound.

Then there's Jeannee, in the corner house across from Jenna. She heard the first sounds coming from the area of the "T", looked but saw nothing, returned to her living room to watch TV, heard more sounds getting closer and went back to her patio door, saw nothing again, went back to watch TV, heard the yelling for help, them went back to her patio door and saw both them and John Good. Although she also could not estimate the time that had elapsed between the first noises toward the "T" and seeing them on the ground, I don't think a minute or 2 is unresonable...

Based on the time line and the witness testimony, I don't think your "run past Selene's house and then run back" theory is very plausible. If I had to take a guess of where that minute or so went, I would say most likely that once Martin punched him in the nose, he lost all concept of time and instead of him immediately stumbling 40 or 50 feet and being pinned on the ground in just a matter of seconds, he actually stumbled around for quite a bit longer than he remembers with Martin beating on him... He also may have taken a bit longer to start moving back toward his truck then he remembers after hanging up with police... Or it could be a combination of the 2... Either way, I don't see the unexplained loss of a minute or so as that big a deal here... After the experience Zimmerman went through that night, I can't see how anyone would expect a person to have total recall right down to the smallest most minute detail.

Now if there was say a 5 minute gap, then I would have been all over that right from the get-go.. But a minute, minute and a half... Just doesn't seem too significant, especially when you look at the timeline, George's story, and how they both fit with the witness testimony.


Now can you get back to the topic of analyzing the witnesses?
 

buck

DP Veteran
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
11,307
Reaction score
4,772
Location
USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I would think in a case that has potential for accusations of racism...and especially in a case revolving around the killing of an unarmed minor.....they would have been more careful about tracking down eyewitnesses and ear witnesses immediately.
They tried. The family and Crump refused to hand over information to allow them access to the phone and find out about recent phone activity. The cops can only do so much. Without assistance from the family their job becomes that much more difficult and time consuming.
 
Last edited:

sharon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
11,600
Reaction score
1,344
Location
Georgia
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
We'll see, and if so, I'll rethink what my theory is. My guess is that forensics won't be able to say one way or the other, unless it's the by the location of the shell (which side does it eject to, etc). One thing that's not explained here is how they got to the T when they did. Remember, Zimmerman hangs up at 7:13:41. The end of the call with Rachel wasn't until sometime between 7:16:00 and 7:16:59. The first 911 call occurs at 7:16:11 which means that either they stood there arguing for MUCH longer than a few minutes, or else they both weren't at the T when Zimmerman says "he's running".

Either way, during this time, there's no way that Zimmerman was on RVC walking back to his truck.

Possible explanation? If you watch a video of someone walking the Trayvon route, it shows that when he says "****, he's running" Martin could have only made it to the clubhouse. It's possible then Zimmerman exits his vehicle by the clubhouse and the foot chase goes on for much longer than he said.

Otherwise, how does the testimony explain this two minute gap?

Trayvon was standing under the mail kiosk at the clubhouse.. in the light and out of the rain. And it looks like he was there for quite a while talking on the phone.. Perhaps as early as 6:54 PM... when the rain picked up.

Remember the testimony from the T Mobile exec? He confirmed that George made a phone call at 6:54 PM.. I hope we learn more about that later... as in who George was talking with before he called NEN.

I don't believe that George left his house by car after 7 PM or that he was headed to Target. I think he watched TM for a lot longer than he admits. Driving by Taaffe's house from his house and then on to the clubhouse doesn't take long.

Further, you can't see the mail kiosk from where George claims he parked in front of the clubhouse... its around the corner.

All that may change the timeline and George's account.

In part I think that's why they will call Shelie Zimmerman to the stand... and I don't think she will perjure herself on what time George left the house or if they had mentored kids that Sunday. She can claim spousal privilege on anything George said to her in private.

When George said "he's running" Trayvon had left the mail kiosk, walked past George's truck and then began to run.

George's story doesn't track IMO.
 

sharon

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 25, 2012
Messages
11,600
Reaction score
1,344
Location
Georgia
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
They tried. The family and Crump refused to hand over information to allow them access to the phone and find out about recent phone activity. The cops can only do so much. Without assistance from the family their job becomes that much more difficult and time consuming.
Tracey Martin didn't have TM's pin number on the phone... and by the time the phone was returned to him from SPD.. I believe that was March 2 ... he no longer trusted the SPD investigators.
 
Top Bottom