Zimmerman 2nd degree murder

[Excon]

In some sense I suppose.
But in some sense it's been confirmed more than once.

ABC and Reuters got the same info at two different times. And according to the reports, there are at least two sources [the minimum for multiple]. So that is also a version of confirmation.

So, it's a little more confirmed than Martin starting the physicality of their altercation.

What's more, it something that both verifiable and falsifiable, unlike the Matrtin started it thing which is only falsifiable (afaik).

Trace it back to the original report, and you have a reporter who plays fast with his descriptions.
As reported, "multiple sources told". All anonymous.
When the report first came out.

My reply then is the same as now.
Multiple sources?
Yeah... Crump, Rand, Trayvon's Mother and Trayvon's Father.

The last one being most likely.

I have seen people on this board dispute it.

See! There you have it.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Trayvon's Mother and Trayvon's Father.

The last one being most likely.

Especially since they talked to Serino about his intentions....

 

[ric27]

It's a reasonable assumption given he sought an arrest warrant.

Like you said yourself, you're just speculating.

 

[sharon]

Like you said yourself, you're just speculating.

Listen to this witness.

Video - Woman Says She Witnessed Trayvon Martin Shooting - National Crime | Examiner.com

 

[Simon W. Moon]

isn't that the fabrication/presentation of the martin family attorney?

AFAICT, the purported fabrication that Wolfinger decried involved him coming to the station within hours of the shooting and, with Chief Lee, overruling Serino.

 

[sharon]

AFAICT, the purported fabrication that Wolfinger decried involved him coming to the station within hours of the shooting and, with Chief Lee, overruling Serino.

The Quran-burning pastor is going to host Zimmerman rally in Sanford... and the Zimmerman family will testify at the bond hearing tomorrow by telephone.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Trace it back to the original report, and you have a reporter who plays fast with his descriptions.
As reported, "multiple sources told". All anonymous.
When the report first came out.
My reply then is the same as now.
Multiple sources?
Yeah... Crump, Rand, Trayvon's Mother and Trayvon's Father.

.
One problem with that theory is that what the Parks Crump team said is not the same as what ABC said.

Another problem is that Reuters described their source as a law enforcement source.

 

[j-mac]

Listen to this witness.

Video - Woman Says She Witnessed Trayvon Martin Shooting - National Crime | Examiner.com

What a bunch of crap that is....This so called "eyewitness" is useless.

j-mac

 

[Simon W. Moon]

What a bunch of crap that is....This so called "eyewitness" is useless.
j-mac

This so called "eyewitness" is perfectly cromulent.

swm

 

[j-mac]

This so called "eyewitness" is perfectly cromulent.

swm

A distinction that is perfectly incromulent....hap tip to the Simpsons reference....heh, heh...


j-mac

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

"I don’t know about that, but as far as the process I can tell you that the police went to the state attorney with a capias request, meaning: ‘We’re through with our investigation and here it is for you.’" ~ Angela Corey

but she did not tell us that the lead investigator's recommendation was to arrest/try zimmerman did she?
isn't that the fabrication/presentation of the martin family attorney?

She said, "the police went to the state attorney with a capias request." That alone tells you he wanted Zimmerman charged. That comes from Angela Corey, not the Martin family attorney.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

It's a reasonable assumption given he sought an arrest warrant. Why on Earth would he want Zimmerman charged if he believed Zimmerman lawfully acted in self-defense?

You do not know that.

Hey, you didn't answer my question!

Why would Serino want Zimmerman charged with a crime if he believed Zimmerman lawfully acted in self-defense? I can't think of any reason.

 

[Excon]

You mean point out when you make **** up? Like you did here?

No, I meant what I said.
You make things up.

Much of it has to do with you reading **** into reports and statements, that isn't there.
Other times it is because you do not understand the terminology being used.
Other times is because you just do not comprehend what it is that you read and assume is says something it doesn't.


That is what I mean.

Wolfinger denied he had a meeting with Lee (and possibly Zimmerman's family) the night of the shooting and he denied having any communication that night with Serino about charging Zimmerman with manslaughter. He never denied there was an affidavit filed.

When you assert he did, when he clearly did not, how else can one describe what you claim without saying "you are making **** up?"

Again. Maybe it will sink in this time.

Just what do you think the communication is that's being denied?
That would be to quash, suppress or overrule an alleged affidavit or recommendation.​

He implied he had no communication with Serino on the matter on the day of the shooting. He does not deny that Serino filed an affidavit; he doesn't even speak about it.

It is all denied as a communication.

Bull****. Here is evidence it exists.

"I can tell you that the police went to the state attorney with a capias request" ~ Angela Corey​

That is not evidence of what you speak. You are confused.
She is not talking about the alleged affidavit here.

Your struggles with the English language are scary.

lol
You couldn't understand what Dusk actually meant and wanted to argue it.
You wanted to say that Trayvon's state of mind mattered to the legality of Zimmerman's actions when it didn't
And even thought it should be evident that your thoughts are not a keen as you think they are, you want to argue this.

It is actually your grasp of it that is in question, not mine.

she said, "I don't know about that," in the context that she doesn't know about the specific charges specified in the capias.

Bs. She is clearly speaking about what was being asked about, in context.

A Sanford Police incident report shows the case was categorized as “homicide/negligent manslaughter.”
...
Asked to confirm that the police recommended a manslaughter charge, special prosecutor Angela Corey said: “I don’t know about that​

Let me confuse you even more since you can't seem to grasp the factual information from misreported bs.

MEDIA ADVISORY

SANFORD, FL – N ARCH 27, 2012 – The City of Sanford wishes to clarify a statement made at today’s press conference related to the police report on the Trayvon Martin case. A reporter stated that based on the description of the incident on the report, that the officer on scene wished to have Mr. Zimmerman arrested and charged with the “Uniform Crime Code” listed on the report. That is not accurate.
All police reports from all law enforcement agencies require a “Uniform Crime Code” to qualify an incident and for statistical purposes for tracking types of incidents. This code does not indicate a formal charge that will be lodged against an alleged offender. It is used for internal processing and to type cases.
MEDIA ADVISORY​

Do you see your mistake now? She wasn't saying she didn't know if a capias was submitted, she said she didn't know if it recommended manslaughter charges. She went on to say that a capias was indeed filed...

"I can tell you that the police went to the state attorney with a capias request" ~ Angela Corey​

:doh
She is telling you what the police did at the end of their investigation. They followed through with the process. Duh!

 

[Excon]

Hey, you didn't answer my question!

Why would Serino want Zimmerman charged with a crime if he believed Zimmerman lawfully acted in self-defense? I can't think of any reason.

Yes I did.
You do not know if Serino wanted Zimmerman charged.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Just what do you think the communication is that's being denied?

According to Wolfinger, it seems to be about communication between Wolfinger and Serino.
I am not sure why shouldn't take Wolfinger at his word for what is he talking about when we're already taking him at his word for what he is talking about.

It is all denied as a communication.

Wolfingerdidn't deny all communication. that would be silly. He deinied communication between Wolfinger, Lee, and Serino as was alleged in Crump's letter.
Wolfinger is specific about what he is talking about, afaict.

Let me confuse you even more since you can't seem to grasp the factual information from misreported bs.

MEDIA ADVISORY

SANFORD, FL – N ARCH 27, 2012 – The City of Sanford wishes to clarify a statement made at today’s press conference related to the police report on the Trayvon Martin case. A reporter stated that based on the description of the incident on the report, that the officer on scene wished to have Mr. Zimmerman arrested and charged with the “Uniform Crime Code” listed on the report. That is not accurate.
All police reports from all law enforcement agencies require a “Uniform Crime Code” to qualify an incident and for statistical purposes for tracking types of incidents. This code does not indicate a formal charge that will be lodged against an alleged offender. It is used for internal processing and to type cases.
MEDIA ADVISORY​

This is a response to someone's assertions based on the reports which were released.
The reports which were released are something different than what we're talking about, which is Serino's affidavit--which has not been released.

She is telling you what the police did at the end of their investigation. They followed through with the process. Duh!

I think the point is that the capias is presented by SYb as separate evidence from the Serino affidavit to support the assertion that the PD decided there was enough evidence to press charges.

I think the caricature of a rebuttal would be to ad hom the SPD. "The SPD are cowards who caved into pressure from race hustlers and that's why they made the capias."

 

[Excon]

According to Wolfinger, it seems to be about communication between Wolfinger and Serino.
I am not sure why shouldn't take Wolfinger at his word for what is he talking about when we're already taking him at his word for what he is talking about.

The whole hubbub is about the alleged affidavit.
The communication is what he is talking about. It didn't happen. It is a lie.
You can not have a discussion about something that didn't exist.

He invited an investigation into the matter.

Do you honestly think he would do that knowing an affidavit exists, so they could return with something like the following: "The affidavit exists but Wolfinger had no meeting about it and did not communicate any suppression of it." ???
BS

There is no actual evidence that said affidavit was filed.
That very reporter plays fast with what is known and has drawn conclusions that are not supported.
You can see from the news reports how it evolved into such a claim.

This is a response to someone's assertions based on the reports which were released.
The reports which were released are something different than what we're talking about, which is Serino's affidavit--which has not been released.

lol
Do you think this all happened on the same day for a reason?
Focus on what is being discussed.

"... [highlight]that the officer on scene wished to have Mr. Zimmerman arrested and charged[/highlight] with the “Uniform Crime Code” listed on the report. That is not accurate."​

I think the point is that the capias is presented by SYb as separate evidence from the Serino affidavit to support the assertion that the PD decided there was enough evidence to press charges.

There is no evidence of a capias being filed on the 26th, or that serino filed an affidavit.

 

[justabubba]

The whole hubbub is about the alleged affidavit.
The communication is what he is talking about. It didn't happen. It is a lie.
You can not have a discussion about something that didn't exist.

He invited an investigation into the matter.

Do you honestly think he would do that knowing an affidavit exists, so they could return with something like the following: "The affidavit exists but Wolfinger had no meeting about it and did not communicate any suppression of it." ???
BS

There is no actual evidence that said affidavit was filed.
That very reporter plays fast with what is known and has drawn conclusions that are not supported.
You can see from the news reports how it evolved into such a claim.




lol
Do you think this all happened on the same day for a reason?
Focus on what is being discussed.

"... [highlight]that the officer on scene wished to have Mr. Zimmerman arrested and charged[/highlight] with the “Uniform Crime Code” listed on the report. That is not accurate."​

There is no evidence of a capias being filed on the 26th, or that serino filed an affidavit.

investigator is on the stand being grilled right now
(MSNBC is what i am watching; don;t know if other channels are carrying it)

 

[Kreton]

George Zimmerman Case: Exclusive New Photo Shows Bloodied Back of Head - ABC News

For those of you who dont think Zimmerman was assaulted.

 

[Excon]

(MSNBC is what i am watching; don;t know if other channels are carrying it)

The Communist News Network is carrying it also.
Oops!
I mean CNN.

 

[justabubba]

The Communist News Network is carrying it also.
Oops!
I mean CNN.

investigator was quite evasive, and thus helpful to the defense

 

[Eighty Deuce]

investigator was quite evasive, and thus helpful to the defense

HLN had it too, and will feast on this case as it did with Casey Anthony, coverage permitting.

Judge went with the defense bond motion.

 

[Sheik Yerbuti]

No, I meant what I said.
You make things up.

Much of it has to do with you reading **** into reports and statements, that isn't there.
Other times it is because you do not understand the terminology being used.
Other times is because you just do not comprehend what it is that you read and assume is says something it doesn't.


That is what I mean.



Again. Maybe it will sink in this time.

Just what do you think the communication is that's being denied?
That would be to quash, suppress or overrule an alleged affidavit or recommendation.​

It is all denied as a communication.

The one making stuff up is you. You are the one assuming Wolfinger meant "affidavit" when he said "communication." It was reported that Serino wanted Zimmerman arrested but that Wolfinger's office rejected that. That would be the communication he denied. Wolfinger said nothing about an affidavit. And while you're projecting that I'm making **** up, here is the perfect evidence that it's you who's making **** up.

lol
You couldn't understand what Dusk actually meant and wanted to argue it.

Even you posted evidence that by 7:15 on that night, it was already so dark out, the naked eye could not see the horizon.

You wanted to say that Trayvon's state of mind mattered to the legality of Zimmerman's actions when it didn't

It does matter and was already brought up in this morning's bond hearing.

And even thought it should be evident that your thoughts are not a keen as you think they are, you want to argue this.

You can't even type coherently as you critique what I have said. :roll: You meant, "even though it," not, "even thought it." But this comes from the person who claimed a woman who clearly identified Zimmerman was "ambiguous," so I consider the source from the one trying desperately to impeach her eyewitness account.

It is actually your grasp of it that is in question, not mine.

Cries the poster who claims it wasn't dark that evening in Sanford even though every witness who described it, said it was. :roll: Projection is not your friend.

Bs. She is clearly speaking about what was being asked about, in context.

A Sanford Police incident report shows the case was categorized as “homicide/negligent manslaughter.”
...
Asked to confirm that the police recommended a manslaughter charge, special prosecutor Angela Corey said: “I don’t know about that
​

Let me confuse you even more since you can't seem to grasp the factual information from misreported bs.

MEDIA ADVISORY

SANFORD, FL – N ARCH 27, 2012 – The City of Sanford wishes to clarify a statement made at today’s press conference related to the police report on the Trayvon Martin case. A reporter stated that based on the description of the incident on the report, that the officer on scene wished to have Mr. Zimmerman arrested and charged with the “Uniform Crime Code” listed on the report. That is not accurate.
All police reports from all law enforcement agencies require a “Uniform Crime Code” to qualify an incident and for statistical purposes for tracking types of incidents. This code does not indicate a formal charge that will be lodged against an alleged offender. It is used for internal processing and to type cases.
MEDIA ADVISORY​

:doh
She is telling you what the police did at the end of their investigation. They followed through with the process. Duh!

The forum really didn't need another example of you exhibiting your struggles with the English language.

Corey's response to being asked to confirm if police recommended manslaughter charges was, "I don’t know about that..." She does not deny (nor confirm) that police recommended a manslaughter charge early on.

 

[Simon W. Moon]

The whole hubbub is about the alleged affidavit.

To you, perhaps. But Wolfinger tells us what he is writing about in his statement. He does not reference the affidavit. He references Crumps' letter.

The communication is what he is talking about. It didn't happen. It is a lie.
You can not have a discussion about something that didn't exist.

He invited an investigation into the matter.

Do you honestly think he would do that knowing an affidavit exists, so they could return with something like the following: "The affidavit exists but Wolfinger had no meeting about it and did not communicate any suppression of it." ???
BS[/quote]I find the scenario you present to be as unlikely as you do. That's why I am trying to hew closely to what Wolfinger said.

As Wolfinger said, he contest that any such meeting or communication occurred. the meeting was him coming to the PD "within hours of the shooting" and the communication was Wolfinger, (and Lee), over ruling Serino.
Wolfinger was not there, so the communications could not have happened.

There is no actual evidence that said affidavit was filed.

There are separate accounts of it existing. You are free to define evidence however you please to exclude these reports of its existence.

That very reporter plays fast with what is known and has drawn conclusions that are not supported.
You can see from the news reports how it evolved into such a claim.

I am not sure who you're referencing here.

lol
Do you think this all happened on the same day for a reason?
Focus on what is being discussed.

"... [highlight]that the officer on scene wished to have Mr. Zimmerman arrested and charged[/highlight] with the “Uniform Crime Code” listed on the report. That is not accurate."​

Focus on what is being discussed:
​

Somehow you forgot the first part of that sentence you're quoting

"A reporter stated that based on the description of the incident on the report, that the officer on scene wished to have Mr. Zimmerman arrested and charged with the “Uniform Crime Code” listed on the report. That is not accurate."

This is not about Serino's affidavit. It's about the police report which was released to the public.
It's about a response of a reporter based on the description of the incident on the report where it is indeed noted about negligent homicide or some such.
Further, it references "the officer on the scene"--the one who filed the report that we have seen already. It does not reference

There is no evidence of a capias being filed on the 26th...

Does Corey not say when it was filed?

that serino filed an affidavit.

Other than the reports of people having seen the thing, you're right.

 

[Excon]

The one making stuff up is you.

No. That would be you.

You are the one assuming Wolfinger meant "affidavit" when he said "communication."

I am assuming he meant everything the letter entailed.
You are not, because you believe just the two items he mentions, are the "outright lies" he is denying.

It was reported that Serino wanted Zimmerman arrested but that Wolfinger's office rejected that. That would be the communication he denied.

That is denied by denying the meeting.

Wolfinger said nothing about an affidavit.

"outright lies contained in the letter"

Cries the poster who claims it wasn't dark that evening in Sanford even though every witness who described it, said it was. :roll: Projection is not your friend.

Interesting!
I claimed it wasn't dark, did I?
Interesting!
lol
I remember claiming it was Dusk, and you denying it because you didn't know all of what dusk entails.

Yes, projection is not your friend. I don't think it is anybodies friend, which is why I would suggest you stop.

The forum really didn't need another example of you exhibiting your struggles with the English language.

Those would be your struggles with the English language. lol
You didn't even know all that Dusk entailed, and I have the problem? :doh lol.
And you didn't know, or even understand, that Trayvon's thoughts, his state of mind, was irrelevant to the legality of Zimmerman's actions. Yet I have the problem. :doh
And now you are again displaying you inability to understand what is written.
From what I say, all the way to what Corey was saying. :doh

Corey's response to being asked to confirm if police recommended manslaughter charges was, "I don’t know about that..." She does not deny (nor confirm) that police recommended a manslaughter charge early on.

Still having problems understand what was said.
If you don't get it by now I suppose you never will.
I did try to help. Too bad.

 

[Excon]

To you, perhaps. But Wolfinger tells us what he is writing about in his statement. He does not reference the affidavit. He references Crumps' letter.

And what does that letter contain?

Oh yeah... that's right.

I find the scenario you present to be as unlikely as you do. That's why I am trying to hew closely to what Wolfinger said.

Follow the reports.

There are separate accounts of it existing.

Follow the reports to the source.

Somehow you forgot the first part of that sentence you're quoting

I already provided it and didn't need it for the point I was making.

Follow the reports.
Whether you want to believe it or not, it is all talking about the same thing.
Follow the reports.

Other than the reports of people having seen the thing, you're right.

lol
What specific people saw it?

Really a ridiculous thing to assert.
lol