Zimmerman should not be convicted of murder

[Kasumi of Vientown]

Arresting someone because they are “not black” is just as racist as arresting someone because they are black



Another installment in our soup to nuts deconstruction of the lies and obfuscations by the legacy media, and a host of opportunists, in the Trayvon Martin case. Along with what verified fact based information we can gather.

Every Day The media looks more and more insufferably inept. You don’t charge someone with a crime unless you think you can convict them, that’s basic prosecutorial ethics.

Throughout the past few weeks more new facts surrounding Trayvon Martin have been discovered thanks to the New Media doing the work the Institutional Lame Stream Legacy Media intentionally refuses to do. Simultaneously we discover how many lies and falsehoods are continuing. Today’s updates include:

Quote:

New photo/video images of the crime scene.
New information of initial media report from Trayvon family attorney Benjamin Crump (March 20th) originally revealing ”DeeDee” the audio witness, and describing Tracy Martin phone record discovery on Sunday March 18th.
George Zimmerman attorney Mark O’Mara requests recusal of Judge Jessica Recksiedler – Defendent’s Verified Motion to Disqualify Trial Judge

In short. This is perhaps the biggest national racial event since Rodney King. It is also shaping up to be the biggest media driven false public story since Richard Jewell. It’s in the process of becoming a watershed event; And, as more facts surface, it continues to look almost entirely fake. It’s a tempest in a teacup.

The whole thing is an institutionally media-generated racialist/socialist psycho-political agitator’s dream come true.

Today we will update and continue to outline and contrast the false narrative sold by the Legacy media types, TV, Print and Radio including: ABC, NBC, CBS, MSNBC, FOX, CNN, PBS, Associated Press, Reuters Media, USA Today, New York Times, Orlando Sentinel, Huffington Post and other like-minded affiliates.

For the sake of these continuing posts we are going to focus entirely on Trayvon Martin and not the infinite various nuances and side stories spinning out of the false narrative. I apologize for the length, but accuracy matters and context is needed.

SUMMARY of Content: In summary we now know Trayvon Martin was not the innocent 17-year-old (junior year) High School kid portrayed by the media as: a football player, a volunteer mentor, a math loving student, and loving respectful child, who “majored in cheerfulness” while serving a five day ten day suspension for tardiness. This was, and is, a complete fabrication. The truth is divergent in the extreme.



But that picture of an innocent child was exactly what the media wanted to sell, because it fit their chosen narrative.



The media even doctored photographs to make Trayvon look more child like.

It is also what the professional race-baiting Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, New Black Panther party wanted to portray; and it should be mentioned at the time of this writing they are still bitterly clinging to it. [******** losing grip rapidly.



When the truth is being presented, one does not have to work so hard to control, portray, obfuscate and spin. The media have been working very hard because [******** media has not been presenting ‘the truth’.



But now, against the sheer weight of the truth-telling, research, and presentation of facts by the New Media, the Legacy media is beginning to [********]. Their false construction is crumbling around them.

However, we are not going to let them just skulk back into the shadows. They, the media, created this mess – and make no mistake, this is a huge mistake – and now they are going to be forced to own it. All of it.



We will not allow the media to turn George Zimmerman into Richard Jewell. Not this time. This time we push back. Truth is on our side.

False - The media initially reported that Trayvon was suspended from school for five days because he was tardy. That narrative soon changed to the more truthful ten days. However, they missed the reasoning and a little research revealed much more.

Truth - We now know that Trayvon Martin was suspended from school THREE times in this school year. We do not know the details of the first suspension, rumored Tardiness. But Trayvon Martin was suspended the second time from school in October 2011 for an incident in which he was found in possession of stolen women’s jewelry and a screwdriver that a school security staffer described as a “burglary tool,” The Miami Herald has learned.



According to the report, on Oct. 21 staffers monitoring a security camera at Dr. Michael M. Krop Senior High School spotted Trayvon and two other students writing “W.T.F.,” an acronym for “What the f—,” on a hallway locker, according to schools police. The security employee, who knew Trayvon, confronted the teen and looked through his bag for the graffiti marker.

Trayvon’s backpack contained 12 pieces of jewelry, in addition to a watch and a large flathead screwdriver, according to the report, which described the screwdriver as a burglary tool.

“Martin was suspended, warned and dismissed for the graffiti,” according to the report prepared by Miami-Dade Schools Police.

Then in February 2012 that second suspension was followed four months later by another one, in which Trayvon was caught with an empty plastic bag with traces of marijuana in it AND a pipe. A schools police report obtained by The Miami Herald specifies two items: a bag with marijuana residue and a “marijuana pipe.” Trayvon was again suspended. This time for ten days.

You can read much more about Trayvon’s drug involvement at Wagist. Click HERE

The Martin family and attorneys et al are furious about the release of background school information to ABC news. Because one of their lawyers, Ben Crump, had filed an injunction to “seal” Trayvon’s school and criminal records earlier this month as soon as he was retained.

The parents argue the background information on Trayvon is irrelevant, yet simultaneously proclaim the background information on George Zimmerman is vital. A tenuous position at best because one of the points of contention is the behavior of both during their encounter.

False – Trayvon was a respectful peer and role model mentor.

Truth - Trayvon left a trail of communication from his twitter account that is retrievable via Google cache. His screen name was “NO_LIMIT_NIGGA” and his words speak for themselves. You can read 152 pages of his twitter communication at DAILY CALLER.



However – Warning, explicit language.

The Daily Caller has identified a second Twitter handle that was used by the late Trayvon Martin during the last weeks of 2011. Tweeting in December under the name “T33ZY TAUGHT M3,” Martin sent a message that read, “Plzz shoot da #mf dat lied 2 u!”



There are also concerning discussions within the twitter communication from Trayvon’s friends about his violent encounter with a School Bus Driver. In the conversation Trayvon is discussing having punched the bus driver in the face.



A reasonable person would think the media would be interested in this aspect. Wouldn’t confrontational violence be pertinent? Alas, once again the media shows they only report on that which affirms their pre-scripted narrative. Someone tell Anderson Cooper that it shouldn’t be hard to find that bus driver….. wait, nevermind.


Tattoo on back of Trayvon Martin's neck from Twitter Account. His mom's name is Sybrina

Another picture of Trayvon’s right arm tattoo and physique *Note this tattoo because it is evident in the “fight club” video:



Fight Club – U-Tube Channel

Below is a U-Tube video of Trayvon Martin refereeing a street style fight. Fight club? The video comes directly from Trayvon Martin’s U-tube channel.

Trayvon is the one with the white ballcap turned backwards, silver/black striped shirt, black jeans, and black “Cons” (sneakers). He is called by name by the camera operator, and while the video is grainy at the :47 mark you can identify his right bicep tattoo.

Unable to identify Vimeo video URL.

Apparently he was quite familiar, and comfy with “fighting” and physical confrontation. Another Legacy Media narrative destroyed.

Next?

Tea and Skittles

So let’s pause a minute here and put some common sense into the dialogue. Everyone has heard this story about Trayvon going to the store for “Tea and Skittles” right? But has anyone stopped to ask where this story, now urban legend originated? AND how anyone could possibly know? I mean, sadly the guy was dead. So how would anyone know he went to the store for Tea and Skittles.? It’s even mentioned in the affidavit for probable cause, yet there is no mention of Tea and Skittles in the police report of the scene?

From the Washington Times … “And it all stems from Trayvon Martin, he of the walking home from the 7/11 store with Skittles and a can of tea. While wearing a hoodie“…

Where exactly did this “Tea and Skittles” narrative originate? His parents, his attorney(s)? Maybe they read something on his phone about his intention…

But did anyone stop to ask what he was talking about? Tea and Skittles is street lingo for “Marijuana and DXM, somtimes known as ecstasy“.

So is it more likely innocent childlike 17-year-old angelic Trayvon was coming back from a Snapple and Candy run. Or….

Is it more likely that a troubled teenager without supervision and a history of drug use, while serving a 10 day suspension for taking a baggie of pot and marijuana pipe to school, might have been talking about something else.

It is too much to expect the media to find out about this stuff? Never mind.

Oddly, Mr. George Zimmerman specifically mentioned to the police operator on the phone the suspicious subject he was witnessing appeared to be on drugs. But, I digress…..

We discover during a Fox interview with Craig Rivera where the “skittle story” came from. Well, maybe. According to the 14-year-old son of Ms. Brandy Green, “Chad” asked Trayvon to get him the candy when Trayvon said he was going to the store. The affidavit mentions the 7-11 and Tea and Skittles, so we’ll just accept this is now factual. For now.


Craig Rivera interviews Brandy Green and 14 year old Son Chad Green

(FULL INTERVIEW HERE) We discover that Brandy Green and Tracy Martin (Girlfriend and Dad) were in downtown Orlando at a restaurant and both the boys were home alone, Trayvon Martin aged 17, and Chad Green age 14.

So I guess we are to believe the story about Skittles and Tea stemmed from the 14-year-old son of Brandy Green, passed along via Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fulton. But, again, as with all the stuff from these peeps something just doesn’t pass the sniff test.

Just sayin’. I mean who wouldn’t believe that a 17-year-old kid, serving his third school suspension (this year), this time for drug use and a marijuana pipe in his backpack; and home alone – unsupervised albeit supposedly “grounded”; would hoof-it, at night, in the rain, right before the NBA All-Star game, for a single can of “Tea” for himself, and a bag of “Skittles” for his 14-year-old half-brother. Altruistic no?

[Kasumi of Vientown]

American Thinker posts many of the same questions in their article – The Story Unravels: New Questions about Trayvon Martin’s Final Hour

Quote:

&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_133528250634949][...] The story about the Skittles originated with the lawyer for the Martin family, Benjamin Crump. A spokesman for the law office confirmed that the information came from Martin’s girlfriend, and also, he believed, from a call to Tracy Martin. The law office hadn’t corroborated their account by looking at security camera tapes or at an electronic receipt from the store.

But a video does exist. The public relations director of 7-Eleven told me that, according to the company’s manager of security, a store camera captured an African-American male (she wouldn’t commit to “young”) purchasing a bag of Skittles and a can of tea (she wouldn’t say that it was “Arizona” tea). The hard disk with the video was removed after the story broke, and it has been subpoenaed by investigators for the state and/or county. The company has not made it available to the media.

The 7-Eleven, according to maps.google, is 0.8 miles from the entrance to The Retreat at Twin Lakes, a 16-minute walk. There is not much to see or do on Rinehart Road on a Sunday night, and it was raining hard. Even if he was not bringing the tea and Skittles to his stepbrother but was eating and sipping en route, Martin should have arrived back at his dad’s fiancée’s place before 6:50, and much earlier if he left the store closer to 6:00 than 6:30. According to logs (now deleted from the department’s website), Zimmerman called the Sanford police at 7:09:34.

Just as Martin did not go straight home after he first spotted the neighborhood watch captain, so, too, he apparently did not go directly to Brandy Green’s apartment from the 7-Eleven. What exactly he was doing between the time he entered the gated community and the moment Zimmerman noticed him will probably never be known. Though there may be some plausible explanation for his behavior, the idea that he was simply returning from a selfless errand when he caught Zimmerman’s eye seems less and less likely. (read more)

But then again…. Don’t all altruistic 16-year-old tattooed kids, who enjoy getting “head, and loose a** p***y”, carry around screwdrivers (described by teachers and school administrators as a “burglary tool”) in their backpacks filled with women’s jewelry, while writing “What The ********” on school lockers.

I mean, doesn’t that describe an all-American boy looking for every opportunity to hike in the dark, and rain, to 7-11 for “Tea and Skittles” when they turn 17? I mean really. Sheesh, to think there could be any doubt.

Trayvon Martin was allegedly out at night, on foot and in a rainstorm getting iced tea and skittles. Ok, here’s the address where the altercation took place from the police report: 2381 Retreat View Cir Sanford, FL 32771 The 7-11, you know, the place to buy skittles and an iced tea, where’s the closest one and how far is it on foot?



The closest “convenience store” appears close to a mile away. In a rainstorm, for a bag of skittles and can of iced tea, both ways? Possible? Sure. Plausible? That story ought to be able to be checked, and rather easily — all convenience stores these days have video recorders.

The Trayvon family can “leak” phone records to ABC to help sell their narrative. ABC can steal video from the police station to help sell the narrative (and then backtrack when it backfires). But interestingly when it comes to a simple 7-11 video we get ((crickets)) ?

See what happens when you inject common sense? The house of cards crumbles down.


Trayvon Martin's parents. Tracy Martin (Dad) left and Sabrina Fulton (Mom) center. Attorney Benjamin Crump (background)

Financial Opportunism

Trayvons mother also applied for Trademarks on his name in March .

Sabrina Fulton (Trayvon’s Mom) is seeking Trademarks for the phrases “I Am Trayvon” and “Justice for Trayvon,” according to filings made last week with the United States Patent and Trademark Office.

In both instances, Fulton is seeking the trademarks for use on “Digital materials, namely, CDs and DVDs featuring Trayvon Martin,” and other products.

The March 21 USPTO applications, each of which cost $325, were filed by an Orlando, Florida law firm representing Fulton.

Odd no? How many “grieving parents do you know that would be concerned with “Trademarking” their dead child’s name? And why?



But then again, the Trayvon “Brand” would be more marketable and valuable if the constructed image of the innocent child victim could continue.

Alas, now it becomes clear, why all of those people who stand to profit from the death of Trayvon, consider any fact based, or truthful, information too risky to the Trayvon brand.

This also explains why Sybrina Fulton (Mom) and Tracy Martin (Dad) hired an attorney named Benjamin Crump. The very first action that Crump took upon retention was to file an injunction to “seal” Trayvon’s school and criminal records. Thereby trying to hide the troubling background.


Benjamin Crump - Attorney for Trayvon's parents

Discovery of Trayvon’s background presented a risk. Not just a risk of character assassination toward their son per se, but a risk to the “brand image” being created. A financial risk. In addition, various Black organizations have invested themselves in the outcome of this case. Controlling the “image narrative” is a key component to their continuing ability to capitalize.




Benjamin Crump Esq has been quite revealing in the motivation surrounding the cries for the “arrest” of George Zimmerman. There is much more beneath the surface and is outlined in the following post. CLICK HERE The support and documention to show a financial purpose and motivation is becoming more clear daily. Much more to follow on this.

Financial Challenge Stage #2
“We Only Want An Arrest” (FIRST BASE)

Unable to identify Vimeo video URL.

First of all I just want to thank God; We simply wanted an arrest; we wanted nothing more than an arrest. We wanted nothing more, nothing less; We just wanted an arrest, and we got it, and I say thank you. Thank you Lord; Thank you Jesus….

- Sybrina Fulton, 04/11 (video here)



“We are not asking that he [Zimmerman] be convicted; We are asking that he be arrested”

-Benjamin Crump Esq.
Attorney for Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fuller
(Quoted to Piers Morgan on 4/3/2012)

And there you have it, the ulterior motive, the hidden agenda:

MONEY !



The Trayvon family is not seeking justice in the form you would think. No, they are seeking monetary justice, or more directly monetary gain. THAT is the motivation; and the absence of an “arrest” is what stood between them and their ability to sue in civil court.

Ask yourself why would anyone want an arrest without a conviction?

Quote:

“We are not asking that he be convicted; We are asking that he be arrested”

Why is that so important?

The answer can be found in the statutes of Florida law surrounding Justifiable Use Of Force (Statute 776) which outlines in Statute 776.032

Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force:

Quote:

(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.

(3) The court shall award reasonable attorney’s fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by the defendant in defense of any civil action brought by a plaintiff if the court finds that the defendant is immune from prosecution as provided in subsection (1).

Note that in section 2 of the immunity statute 776.032 a person is “immune” from criminal or CIVIL action if they are not arrested. The arrest itself can be interpreted as “Probable Cause” the force, or action taken, was unlawful.

Remember the key distinction between guilt or innocence in Criminal vs. Civil trials. In criminal trials the burden of proof is “beyond a reasonable doubt”. In civil trials the burden of proof is “with a preponderance of the existing evidence”; this is where probable cause comes into play. For the purpose of “monetary justice” it only takes an arrest; a subsequent conviction is not necessary.

Without an arrest there is no standing for a civil case awarding monetary damages to Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fuller against George Zimmerman, the HOA for The Retreat At Twin Lakes, and possibly the City of Sanford and all of their respective insurance companies.


Daryl Parks and Benjamin Crump

Without an arrest there is no implied probable cause which could lead to Compensatory and punitive damages for wrongful death.

They need an arrest. They DO NOT need a conviction.

The other approach to a monetary victory would be a “Federal” civil rights investigation and possible arrest on federal civil rights laws. Hence a better understanding of why attorney Benjamin Crump is fabricating information to the Federal Department of Justice. In the letter to the DOJ Crump said:

Quote:

“We look forward to your thorough and comprehensive review of the suspicious circumstances surrounding this meeting, and the decision to disregard the recommendation to arrest Zimmerman”

Quote:

In response State Attorney Norm Wolfinger released a statement on Monday saying he is “outraged by the outright lies” contained in a letter written by the attorney of Trayvon Martin’s parents, who are seeking a federal review in the case.

You can see how valuable the compassion of Washington DC power people can be in the engagement of the goal. Indeed many people wondered why Congressional members called a hearing into this one case. Perhaps “who” coordinated the hearing is the clarity needed in understanding the “why”, for at the heart of the conversation is the Congressional Black Caucus. Anyone remember the CBC and the victory called Pigford?

Successfully using the office of the President and Eric Holder’s DOJ to “leverage” a chosen outcome is, well, smart racial politics. Especially when there is a strong possibility of favorable public opinion driven by a misguided, and more than willing water-carrying media, to benefit the Oval Office.



Before Martin’s death, Crump was best known for representing the parents of a teenage boy who died after an encounter with guards at a Florida boot camp in 2006. The videotaped beating of Martin Lee Anderson attracted national attention and led to the closure of the state’s boot camps for juvenile offenders.

Benjamin Crump and his law partner, Daryl Parks, who testified at a congressional hearing on Capitol Hill, are Tallahassee-based personal injury attorneys who primarily handle wrongful death and negligence cases.



In a Huffington Post interview Ben Crump dodges the question of how, and if, he is being compensated by Trayvon Martin’s parents. “You do it because it’s the right thing to do,” he said. “As long as you make your goal to do right and do good, all of the money and financial material stuff will come”.

Beyond the reality of financial gain and self-interest there is even a more troubling consideration when you weigh the extent they are willing to go to for money. The flames of racial tension have been stoked to a white-hot inferno in Sanford Florida, and arguably quite hot around the nation.



The team at Breitbart picked up on the connection between the Trayvon Martin case and the Martin Lee Anderson case with an article a few days ago where they cited some analysis done by the Miami Herald. One key phrase in the Breitbart column was:

Quote:

The Herald failed to note one other similarity: the controversy over the victim’s death has little to do with the actual guilt or motives of the accused killer.

I doubt Breitbart actually knew at that moment how insightful that small paragraph actually is regarding the real motivation here; And therein lies the heart of the matter for Benjamin Crump, Daryl Parks, Tracy Martin and Sybrina Fuller.

The guilt or motives of the accused Mr. Zimmerman matter naught when weighed against the need for a compensatory judgement to fill their void.

Quote:

“We are not asking that he be convicted; We are asking that he be arrested” – Ben Crump

“We simply wanted an arrest; we wanted nothing more than an arrest. We wanted nothing more, nothing less; We just wanted an arrest, and we got it, and I say thank you. Thank you Lord; Thank you Jesus” – Sybrina Fulton

Indeed.


All Lawyered Up..

One of the key aspects of this fiasco to keep in mind is the “inability” of George Zimmerman to publicly defend himself or tell his story. Yet the family of Trayvon Martin, and their supporters, can talk 24/7 to every media outlet and personality.

It seems every day a new legal representative face appears in the media, or even on Capitol Hill as an attorney for Tracy Martin (Dad) or Sybrina Fulton (Mom). A partial list of their known lawyers are:

Quote:

Benjamin Crump Esq. (Family/Natl Media) – Personal injury lawyer
Daryl D Parks Esq. (Family/Natl Media/Gov’t Relations) – Personal injury lawyer
Ms. Jasmine Rand Esq. (Natl Media/Public Relations) – Personal injury lawyer
Ms. Areva Martin Esq. (Family/Natl Media)
Ms. Kimra Major-Morris Esq. (Financial/Family/Media)

This composes only a partial list of the National legal team hired by Trayvon’s family. Compared to Crump, Parks, Rand, Martin and Major-Morris, George Zimmerman is at a significant narrative disadvantage. And this doesn’t include the Florida States Attorney General’s office “Angela Corey”, from the Jacksonville Division, who is conducting the investigation, now prosecution, with her 65+ person support team of prosecutors and investigators.

Indeed, Zimmerman looks like: “A flea looking into a furnace”.

Also he cannot share his side of the story for two more reasons:

First, because he is literally under threat of bodily harm and injury. The New Black Panther party has placed a MILLION DOLLAR bounty on his head, “Wanted Dead or Alive”, and tens of thousands of people are rallying daily with the Black Panthers and professional race-baiters.



Even Spike Lee tweeted the address of Zimmerman’s home to his 248,000 followers. Fortunately for Zimmerman Spike Lee sent out the wrong address. However, profoundly unfortunate for the 70-year-old couple living there now housebound with around the clock security.

Secondly, if Zimmerman was to speak now every word, nuance, phrase and intonation would be scrutinized by not only the media, but by law enforcement who were under extreme pressure to arrest Zimmerman, with or without legal merit. He has been advised by his new attorney Mark O’Mara to keep quiet. He cannot talk without a ridiculous amount of risk.

[Kasumi of Vientown]

JUSTICE FOR ZIMMERMAN

To be continued when I get home from my DR appointment

[CosmicJazzKitten]

Olya

Orphan_Shadow

Pardon me, but I'm going to say something "racist". I noticed that Whites have a tendency to police the thoughts and lived experiences of non-Whites--especially Blacks. Now given the White is Right(tm) and Word of God(tm) thing this leads to the idea that Blacks can't possibly know anything or understand their own memories or feelings about what happens to them or around them, thus they so obviously need Whites to verify it. Racism must be filtered through a White lens.

Now, something like this would definitely affect the rate at which the word racism gets thrown around for kicks.... don't you think? neutral

To reply to both your posts at once.

I am not your "honey" or "sweet child."

Second, to prove that a crime has been committed in a name of a hateful ideology requires far more evidence than to prove that a crime has been committed by person X against person Y. Your gun, your fingerprints, the bullet from your gun in victims skull still requires proof beyond reasonable doubt to a jury.

How then do you prove a sentiment? Perhaps you would look at history of the individual in question. Is he a member of known racist groups? Has he been known to be exclusively or predominantly hostile to a particular segment of the population? Has he made public statements that denounce a group of people for reasons untrue? That may constitute a case for racially motivated crime. However, stating that racism exists in this country and applying it as infallible proof every time a person of one color brings harm to a person of another color is dishonest and short-sighted.

gaia_angelleft gaia_star gaia_angelright

You are when you such precious rashish things! emotion_kirakira

Well that's just it--it's hard to ******** prove---that's why many give up on pursuing justice and simply live with the feelings, the memories and any other negative consequences.

My father knew he couldn't prove that his co-worker was singling him out and trying to set him up as a thief (he did this by putting his stuff on top of my dad's stuff and he did it daily), so he just left that job. Sometimes it's easier to just give up and walk away--when you have the resources to do so. Other don't have the resources so they end up having to deal.

This crosses over to crimes. We'll never truly know about Zimmerman. That and when he slips up, people have a thousand excuses for why he'd yell ******** coons or if he'd yelled it at all or maybe he meant something else. Yeah... right. Ahem. Or why his pastime was profiling young Black men. emotion_eyebrow

Sometimes, against all slippery slopes, it makes me wish thought crime--via high tech gadgets--was a reality. It just might some of my co-workers sing like the nasty canaries they are... neutral

[CosmicJazzKitten]

Okay. We get it Kasumi. We get that you're in love with ZImmerman for ridding the world of another Black child. Put your boner in your pants. rofl

But seriously, it's NOT wrong to trademark your child's name to prevent wrongful use of it. And those shirts? It's wrong to raise money so you can pay for the legal battles? AT least that money's being earned and not pan handled. neutral

Kasumi of Vientown

JUSTICE FOR ZIMMERMAN

To be continued when I get home from my DR appointment

Ratings disabled, comments disabled, ChurchofScientology? Yeah... emotion_eyebrow

[Olya]

Orphan_Shadow

Olya

Orphan_Shadow

Pardon me, but I'm going to say something "racist". I noticed that Whites have a tendency to police the thoughts and lived experiences of non-Whites--especially Blacks. Now given the White is Right(tm) and Word of God(tm) thing this leads to the idea that Blacks can't possibly know anything or understand their own memories or feelings about what happens to them or around them, thus they so obviously need Whites to verify it. Racism must be filtered through a White lens.

Now, something like this would definitely affect the rate at which the word racism gets thrown around for kicks.... don't you think? neutral

To reply to both your posts at once.

I am not your "honey" or "sweet child."

Second, to prove that a crime has been committed in a name of a hateful ideology requires far more evidence than to prove that a crime has been committed by person X against person Y. Your gun, your fingerprints, the bullet from your gun in victims skull still requires proof beyond reasonable doubt to a jury.

How then do you prove a sentiment? Perhaps you would look at history of the individual in question. Is he a member of known racist groups? Has he been known to be exclusively or predominantly hostile to a particular segment of the population? Has he made public statements that denounce a group of people for reasons untrue? That may constitute a case for racially motivated crime. However, stating that racism exists in this country and applying it as infallible proof every time a person of one color brings harm to a person of another color is dishonest and short-sighted.

gaia_angelleft gaia_star gaia_angelright

You are when you such precious rashish things! emotion_kirakira

Well that's just it--it's hard to ******** prove---that's why many give up on pursuing justice and simply live with the feelings, the memories and any other negative consequences.

My father knew he couldn't prove that his co-worker was singling him out and trying to set him up as a thief (he did this by putting his stuff on top of my dad's stuff and he did it daily), so he just left that job. Sometimes it's easier to just give up and walk away--when you have the resources to do so. Other don't have the resources so they end up having to deal.

This crosses over to crimes. We'll never truly know about Zimmerman. That and when he slips up, people have a thousand excuses for why he'd yell ******** coons or if he'd yelled it at all or maybe he meant something else. Yeah... right. Ahem. Or why his pastime was profiling young Black men. emotion_eyebrow

Sometimes, against all slippery slopes, it makes me wish thought crime--via high tech gadgets--was a reality. neutral

That last part just about ends any and all conversation between us.

I have no wish to argue the decisions of the court or the justice of the system with someone who has no capacity to understand or believe in the presumption of innocence and proof beyond reasonable doubt.

I have no illusions about this system being perfect, but I shudder at the prospect of the opposite.

gaia_angelleft gaia_star gaia_angelright

[CosmicJazzKitten]

Olya

Orphan_Shadow

Olya

Orphan_Shadow

Pardon me, but I'm going to say something "racist". I noticed that Whites have a tendency to police the thoughts and lived experiences of non-Whites--especially Blacks. Now given the White is Right(tm) and Word of God(tm) thing this leads to the idea that Blacks can't possibly know anything or understand their own memories or feelings about what happens to them or around them, thus they so obviously need Whites to verify it. Racism must be filtered through a White lens.

Now, something like this would definitely affect the rate at which the word racism gets thrown around for kicks.... don't you think? neutral

To reply to both your posts at once.

I am not your "honey" or "sweet child."

Second, to prove that a crime has been committed in a name of a hateful ideology requires far more evidence than to prove that a crime has been committed by person X against person Y. Your gun, your fingerprints, the bullet from your gun in victims skull still requires proof beyond reasonable doubt to a jury.

How then do you prove a sentiment? Perhaps you would look at history of the individual in question. Is he a member of known racist groups? Has he been known to be exclusively or predominantly hostile to a particular segment of the population? Has he made public statements that denounce a group of people for reasons untrue? That may constitute a case for racially motivated crime. However, stating that racism exists in this country and applying it as infallible proof every time a person of one color brings harm to a person of another color is dishonest and short-sighted.

gaia_angelleft gaia_star gaia_angelright

You are when you such precious rashish things! emotion_kirakira

Well that's just it--it's hard to ******** prove---that's why many give up on pursuing justice and simply live with the feelings, the memories and any other negative consequences.

My father knew he couldn't prove that his co-worker was singling him out and trying to set him up as a thief (he did this by putting his stuff on top of my dad's stuff and he did it daily), so he just left that job. Sometimes it's easier to just give up and walk away--when you have the resources to do so. Other don't have the resources so they end up having to deal.

This crosses over to crimes. We'll never truly know about Zimmerman. That and when he slips up, people have a thousand excuses for why he'd yell ******** coons or if he'd yelled it at all or maybe he meant something else. Yeah... right. Ahem. Or why his pastime was profiling young Black men. emotion_eyebrow

Sometimes, against all slippery slopes, it makes me wish thought crime--via high tech gadgets--was a reality. neutral

That last part just about ends any and all conversation between us.

I have no wish to argue the decisions of the court or the justice of the system with someone who has no capacity to understand or believe in the presumption of innocence and proof beyond reasonable doubt.

I have no illusions about this system being perfect, but I shudder at the prospect of the opposite.

gaia_angelleft gaia_star gaia_angelright

Oh I believe in innocence it's just that some people continuously skip up and expose themselves... like Zimmerman and I believe he should have to defend himself beyond a reasonable doubt against those trying to expose his presumed guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Unfortunately, it seems Zimmerman has friends in high places and will someday get a book deal in which he describes how he did it.

Well good. I don't think the system is perfect either. Case and point: ZImmerman. I wish I could get into his head and learn all his nasty little subhuman secrets... neutral

[Olya]

Orphan_Shadow

Olya

Orphan_Shadow

Olya

Orphan_Shadow

Pardon me, but I'm going to say something "racist". I noticed that Whites have a tendency to police the thoughts and lived experiences of non-Whites--especially Blacks. Now given the White is Right(tm) and Word of God(tm) thing this leads to the idea that Blacks can't possibly know anything or understand their own memories or feelings about what happens to them or around them, thus they so obviously need Whites to verify it. Racism must be filtered through a White lens.

Now, something like this would definitely affect the rate at which the word racism gets thrown around for kicks.... don't you think? neutral

To reply to both your posts at once.

I am not your "honey" or "sweet child."

Second, to prove that a crime has been committed in a name of a hateful ideology requires far more evidence than to prove that a crime has been committed by person X against person Y. Your gun, your fingerprints, the bullet from your gun in victims skull still requires proof beyond reasonable doubt to a jury.

How then do you prove a sentiment? Perhaps you would look at history of the individual in question. Is he a member of known racist groups? Has he been known to be exclusively or predominantly hostile to a particular segment of the population? Has he made public statements that denounce a group of people for reasons untrue? That may constitute a case for racially motivated crime. However, stating that racism exists in this country and applying it as infallible proof every time a person of one color brings harm to a person of another color is dishonest and short-sighted.

gaia_angelleft gaia_star gaia_angelright

You are when you such precious rashish things! emotion_kirakira

Well that's just it--it's hard to ******** prove---that's why many give up on pursuing justice and simply live with the feelings, the memories and any other negative consequences.

My father knew he couldn't prove that his co-worker was singling him out and trying to set him up as a thief (he did this by putting his stuff on top of my dad's stuff and he did it daily), so he just left that job. Sometimes it's easier to just give up and walk away--when you have the resources to do so. Other don't have the resources so they end up having to deal.

This crosses over to crimes. We'll never truly know about Zimmerman. That and when he slips up, people have a thousand excuses for why he'd yell ******** coons or if he'd yelled it at all or maybe he meant something else. Yeah... right. Ahem. Or why his pastime was profiling young Black men. emotion_eyebrow

Sometimes, against all slippery slopes, it makes me wish thought crime--via high tech gadgets--was a reality. neutral

That last part just about ends any and all conversation between us.

I have no wish to argue the decisions of the court or the justice of the system with someone who has no capacity to understand or believe in the presumption of innocence and proof beyond reasonable doubt.

I have no illusions about this system being perfect, but I shudder at the prospect of the opposite.

gaia_angelleft gaia_star gaia_angelright

Oh I believe in innocence it's just that some people continuously skip up and expose themselves... like Zimmerman and I believe he should have to defend himself beyond a reasonable doubt against those trying to expose his presumed guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Unfortunately, it seems Zimmerman has friends in high places and will someday get a book deal in which he describes how he did it.

Well good. I don't think the system is perfect either. Case and point: ZImmerman. I wish I could get into his head and learn all his nasty little subhuman secrets... neutral

No. Zimmerman only has to defend himself IF the DA can put together sufficient evidence for the case to go to court. That's how we got away from torturing people until they confess to witchcraft.

The use of racial slurs does NOT set him as a racially motivated slayer beyond the shadow of doubt. It is no more conclusive example of racism than a husband yelling "I hate you you dumb c**t" as he beats her head in is proof of sexism. It can be used to cast doubt on his character, but it proves nothing.

And could you give me some proof for the bullshit I've highlighted in your post?

By the way, shooting a black kid makes Zimmerman no more subhuman than killing his white wife made O.J. subhuman. And, by the way, I have no issue with the fact that O.J. was acquitted.

gaia_angelleft gaia_star gaia_angelright

[Kaosgirl]

Kasumi of Vientown

Kiumaru

Kasumi of Vientown

Depends on the state. Some states allow you to try to apprehend criminals, but that I find questionable too. If all depends on the state.

Oh, I found the case I was trying to remember (I only remembered the chasing and stabbing correctly):

Here it is.

Nonetheless, I find the law detestable.

We'd have to look at the wording of the law in Florida,

http://law.justia.com/codes/florida/2005/TitleXLVI/ch0776.html

Took me 2 seconds to pull up. Seriously, for someone who talks of looking at all the information before making a decision, you don't seem to put much effort into actually doing so.

[Kaosgirl]

Kasumi of Vientown

Kaosgirl

Kasumi of Vientown

Kaosgirl

Kasumi of Vientown

The mainstream media is only telling us one side in the Trayvon Martin case for the most part, but evidence for the other side is on the net if one chooses to look. I have reached the conclusion that George Zimmerman is most likely innocent based on a careful examination of BOTH sides of the evidence.

I disagree with your conclusion, and suspect bias in your reading of the evidence. I would also point out that you *haven't* heard both sides of the story - because Trayvon is too dead to tell his side. You've heard his side, and you've heard the side of an eyewitness who - near as I can tell - only saw part of the alleged scuffle and who's claims were partially contradicted by two other bystanders within earshot.

Kasumi of Vientown

In Marissa Alexander's case there is only ONE side.

Actually, the victim deposition is available online if you bother to look for it - so there is, literally, the other side of the story. And it corroborates her claims.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/90595503/Marissa-Alexander-Alleged-Victim-Disposition

That link was enlightening, thank you. Her husband seemed like a p***k and all, by his own admissions, but the problem was that since he was so willing to openly admit his faults it kinda gave him credibility, but despite all the crap he confessed to, he insisted that he never coached the kids to lie for him, and apparently they all agreed that her husband was standing at a distance and wasn't approaching her when she fired the show. Sure, by his own confession he was verbally abusing her, but there was no imminent threat to her.

He was physically preventing her from leaving while verbally threatening her; even with the gun in her hands, which he could clearly see. He had a history of assault, against literally every woman he had been with including her, which he admitted to, an injunction against him, and was in a state of mind where he would have gone physical against her "if the children weren't there." An "if" that requires us both to take him at his word (after he's admitted to having lied to the police a few times already...) and to believe a reasonable person could have forseen in her place.

And the gun was not actually fired in the direction of anyone - not him, nor the children. So it wasn't even deadly force, meaning the additional requirements for the use of deadly force were not in effect. It was a warning shot, which we here in Canada, where there is no SYG statute, are required to give before invoking deadly force.

Meanwhile, Zimmerman uses deadly force in a fight against an unarmed kid he marginally outweighed, and we're supposed to just accept that he felt he was in danger of "imminent death or severe bodily harm" based on... an eyewitness who only saw a bit of the scuffle from a distance, didn't see the situation when the shot was actually fired, who's story is not corroborated by the evidence and partially contradicted by another who was in earshot.

To do so would undoubtedly create the appearance of a double-standard being invoked.

I agree that in her mind she probably had no other option, but the law in Florida does not let you recklessly discharge a firearm unless you are in real, imminent danger, and emotional abuse just isn't enough to prove that.

What the ******** are you even reading? This wasn't 'emotional abuse,' this was verbal threats from a man who *admitted* he was in a mood to kill *and* had an injunction against him due to his propensity to actually follow up on those verbal threats.

Kasumi of Vientown

She needed to wait until her husband was coming towards her.

No, that's what she needed in order to use lethal force. Which. She. Did. Not. Do.

Kasumi of Vientown

Anyway, the fact that they asked her husband

Who had previously admitted to lying to the police in the first place...

Kasumi of Vientown

if he had couched the kids seems to indicate that it wasn't just his word, that they had been interviewed regarding it too and said the same thing, but that is just a logical guess since it wasn't clearly asserted either way.

With all the things that he confessed to, it just makes him seem credible in the few statements that he did deny, you know?

With him admitting that he was a liar, I find his overall credibility entirely lacking.

And somewhat irrelevant, since it's not supposed to be about what he was actually thinking; it's supposed to be what a reasonable person *in her position* could have assumed he was thinking. Which, given the previous assault he had committed and his persistent efforts at preventing her from leaving, suggests to me that she was fully justified in her belief that she was in imminent danger.

Hell, technically (because he was forcibly confining her) there's even a case that he was in the process of committing a forcible felony.

Kasumi of Vientown

Anyway,were I the DA, I would have offered something like a couple years probation, at the end of which the felony charges would have been dropped to comparable misdemeanors, but that's just me.

Were I the DA, I would have charged him with felony: kidnapping. Good thing neither of us are DA's, huh?

Kasumi of Vientown

The judge has less latitude regarding a persons punishment once a jury has convicted her.

Which is also pretty moronic IMO. And it galls me that our federal government is imitating such stupidity.

[Omorose Panya]

Kasumi of Vientown

Omorose Panya

Kasumi of Vientown

Omorose Panya

Kasumi of Vientown

I looked up that case and there's just not much information on it. All we've got is her side. No one even bothered to identify the husband or ask the jury why they found her guilty. With such one-sided information it's impossible for anyone to make an informed judgment.

The parallels to Zimmerman's case are uncanny.

The case of Marissa Alexander seems to have similarities a little bit, but we can't be certain because all that has been reported is Marissa's side. We don't know what evidence the DA had that convinced the jury she was guilty, there was no interview with her husband or the DA or any of the jurors, so it seems a bit foolish to assume the similarities are 'uncanny' after hearing only one side.

If ALL media only showed the evidence that made George Zimmerman look innocent and if there was no references to the other side in that case anywhere on the net would that instantly convince you he was innocent?

Without having both sides, it's irresponsible to make assumptions.

We are comparing the beginning of each case, which means that you don't have enough information either way to have an opinion, and it's pretty one sided in both cases.

At any rate, they sure as heck didn't have Trayvon's side, did they?

Ah, well, the difference is that since Trayvon was dead there was no complaining witness, so they had only Zimmerman's version, and the facts, none of which can disprove any aspect of Zimmerman's version of things.

Why is not having both sides okay for Zimmerman but not Alexander? And you're suggesting that we have Travyon's side? Because we do not.

I was referring to the list you presented, not to every actual aspect.

[Camillo]

Kasumi of Vientown

Those photos are not all of the same person. All your "Trayvon" photo dumps prove are that you think all black people look alike. Racist.

[Omorose Panya]

Kasumi of Vientown

I'll admit that I stopped reading your post once I realized that it kept going and going and going and wasn't about to stop --- and all with seemingly the same point --- but I just want to say this: You might want to stop referring to "The Media" as if it is one thing operated by a hive mind of conspiratorial individuals, because it is not. There are various outlets here and there that have done this and that, and it is entirely reasonable and fair to point them out; however, you cannot portray "The Media" in general, as if all of it is engaging in deception, if you endeavor to be as accurate as possible.

Such an extreme significantly weakens your argument and makes it kind of silly.

[Kasumi of Vientown]

Continued From : http://www.gaiaonline.com/forum/extended-discussion/zimmerman-should-not-be-convicted-of-murder/t.79145327_616/

The FBI Arrives In Sanford

SANFORD, Fla. — FBI agents on Monday April 2nd were questioning potential witnesses in the Trayvon Martin shooting, confirming to NBC News that the agency had begun a “parallel investigation” that focuses on whether the teen’s civil rights were violated.

Agents are seeking information on George Zimmerman’s background and whether he was racially motivated when he pursued Martin after calling a 911 police dispatcher about his presence in the community, an FBI official told NBC.

The agents were at the Retreat at Twin Lakes, where Martin was shot dead by Zimmerman, the gated community’s neighborhood watch captain. (more)


THE 2005 ZIMMERMAN “ASSAULT” CASE

Another fabrication the media allows to continue without correction surrounds a prior 2005 arrest (non-conviction) of George Zimmerman. The media and talking heads have repeated this mantra long enough to embed it in the psyche of almost every reader/listener. They frame the arrest as a battery charge against a police officer.

But whoa… wait a minute. Arrest with NON-Conviction. Huh? Well the details are more nuanced and they prefer you not to know the full story because the headline fits their narrative, the content doesn’t.

In 2005 Zimmerman was in a bar having a drink with a friend. Unbeknownst to them an undercover sting operation was going on inside the bar with police officers posing as patrons to catch bar operators selling alcohol to minors.

An altercation between one of the undercover (regular clothes) officers and a friend of Zimmerman took place. Zimmerman thought his buddy was about to be in a bar fight so he interjected and shoved the guy away from his friend. The guy was part of the sting. Out of spite for the shove, and potentially frustration for no minor alcohol sales, they arrested Zimmerman and his pal.


One media outlet did report truthfully. ONLY ONE.

Quote:

In 2005, Zimmerman was charged with resisting arrest with violence. State alcohol agents said Zimmerman pushed them while they were arresting a friend of his during an underage drinking operation at a bar. Zimmerman avoided a conviction by going into a pretrial program that is offered to people with no prior arrests.

FACTS
Now some facts to deconstruct the left-wing media bias.


On Feb. 26, when Zimmerman first spotted Trayvon, he called police and reported a suspicious person. He called the non-emergency phone number (407-688-5199) not 911, but for the sake of expediency everyone has used “911″ so we will too. He was taught to call this number by police as part of the Neighborhood Watch program. He was asked by the police operator a question about describing the person. The operator specifically asked “is he black, white, or Hispanic” Zimmerman described Trayvon as a black male, wearing a grey or dark hoodie, acting strangely and perhaps on drugs.

Initial reports reflected that Zimmerman was fulfilling his shift on the neighborhood watch patrol. However, according to his brother, Robert, George was not “patrolling”, George was driving to Target to go shopping when he noticed Trayvon acting suspiciously.

This was further supported with an interview with George’s father on the Sean Hannity show (4/4 ) where he shared that investigators are in possession of George Zimmerman’s phone records showing a text to his sister that he was headed out to go grocery shopping at Target.

Zimmerman was Captain of the Neighborhood watch program because the Home Owners Association voted him as such. In this gated community there were eight burglaries, nine thefts, and a shooting just in the past year.

In fact, the local homeowners’ association reports that George Zimmerman actually caught one thief and aided in the apprehension of other criminals. The Miami Herald wrote about this on March 17th. None of the thousands of articles and cable news segments that came after, thought this was important.

In fact the Miami Herald goes on to interview neighbor, Ibrahim Rashada, who is black. Rashada confirms that there has been a lot of crime in the neighborhood and indicates to the reporter that the perpetrators are usually black.

One of the commonly repeated media narratives is of George Zimmerman being a vigilante type personality. Nothing could be further from the truth as outlined in this report from an investigative piece done by The Philadelphia Enquirer, and intentionally ignored by all other National Media Outlets:

Quote:

people are wondering if the 28-year-old Zimmerman is an earnest if somewhat zealous young man who was just looking out for his neighborhood, or a wannabe cop who tried to take justice into his own hands.

Attorneys for Martin’s parents say Zimmerman is a “loose cannon.”

“He’s a wannabe police officer,” lawyer Benjamin Crump said. “Why did he have a gun?”

But some neighbors welcomed his vigilance, at least before the shooting.

Samantha Leigh Hamilton, an auto-dealership employee who has lived on Zimmerman’s street for about a year, said that she once left her garage door up and Zimmerman noticed it while out walking his dog. He notified another neighbor, who let Hamilton know.

“The only impression I have of George Zimmerman is a good one,” Hamilton said Wednesday.

Hamilton said another neighbor, a black woman, would regularly inform Zimmerman when she was out of town so that he could keep an eye on her place. Hamilton said that when she moved into the middle-class, racially mixed community of about 250 identical townhouses, the black neighbor told her, “Hey, if you need anything, you picked a really good area, since George is part of our neighborhood watch.”

Zimmerman, who was captain of the neighborhood watch and licensed to carry a gun, made 46 calls to police since 2004, according to department records.

Hamilton said there had been several break-ins in the past year, including one three doors away in which burglars took a TV and laptops.

“When I hear about him calling the police constantly, it kind of makes sense to me because we had so many break-ins recently,” she said.

The homeowners association’s February newsletter said that Sanford police had beefed up patrols in the neighborhood and that officers on bicycles were making random checks of front yards and backyards. It was not clear how big the neighborhood watch was, but Zimmerman was the dominant force.

“If you’ve been the victim of a crime within the community, after calling the police, please contact our captain, George Zimmerman … so we can be aware and help address the issue with other residents,” the newsletter said. It added that the neighborhood watch group was looking for more participants at its monthly meetings.

Zimmerman moved with his parents from Manassas, Va., to Florida about a decade ago. He lived with his parents in nearby Lake Mary for several years before moving to the Retreat at Twin Lakes, records show. He lives in the gated community with his wife, Shellie, a licensed cosmetologist, but is now in hiding because of death threats.

The selling George Zimmerman as a racist narrative ran smack into a significant push back from Zimmerman’s family (4/2). In a letter to the NAACP his family refuted the allegation(s), and provided specific example of how George had put himself on the line for his black community. While this was exceptionally underreported by the media, they did begin to back off the racist narrative around April 10th.

The letter also described how Zimmerman was one of “very few” in Sanford, Fla., who spoke out publicly to condemn the “beating of the black homeless man Sherman Ware on December 4, 2010 by the son of a Sanford police officer.”:

Quote:

“Do you know the individual that stepped up when no one else in the black community would?” the family member wrote. “Do you know who spent tireless hours putting flyers on the cars of persons parked in the churches of the black community? Do you know who waited for the church‐goers to get out of church so that he could hand them fliers in an attempt to organize the black community against this horrible miscarriage of justice? Do you know who helped organize the City Hall meeting on January 8th, 2011 at Sanford City Hall??”

“That person was GEORGE ZIMMERMAN. Ironic isn’t it?”

“The main point for this letter is to explain to you that the black community has labeled George a racist without any investigation at all,” the letter continued. “Regardless of the fact that George personally spoke to many of your constituents, not one has stepped forward and said, ‘Hey I know that face. That is the Hispanic guy that was standing up for Sherman Ware. That was the only non‐black face in the meetings for justice in this case.’”

“You know as well as I do that there are many NAACP followers that recognize George from the Ware case as well as many other good things that he’s done for the black community.”

READ FULL LETTER

In addition the framing of the “supposed” racial slur during the 911 audio tape has now been debunked and shown that he said “[******** cold” as he was watching Trayvon Martin. Video Here

In the affidavit filed the special prosecutor, Angela Corey, claims the verbage was “******** punks”, still nothing of racial intent.

George Zimmerman would not know Trayvon Martin because Trayvon was visiting, staying with his Dad’s girlfriend, Brandy Green, in the Orlando sub-division. Both the Dad and the girlfriend were not supervising Trayvon at the time. Neither adult were home. We now know they were in Downtown Orlando having dinner.

Much controversy has been “created” by the media about the fact Zimmerman was “following” Trayvon, as if that represented some form of unusual behavior.

Zimmerman was driving to Target when he noticed Trayvon outside the community clubhouse. Being as he is captain of the Neighborhood watch patrol, of course he’s gonna follow the suspicious person. That’s what concerned citizens do. See something suspicious – Say something to police – and Keep watch. DUH?

This point is not in contention by either Zimmerman, his attorney, or the other side. It is a manufactured talking point of the race-baiters. AND it is being promoted by an agenda driven biased media.



While on the phone with police George Zimmerman stopped the car and got out of his SUV to follow Trayvon on foot.

When a dispatch employee asked Zimmerman if he was following the 17-year-old, Zimmerman said “yes”. The dispatcher told Zimmerman he “did not need to do that”. Zimmerman replied “OK”, and states he immediately turned back toward his SUV.

There is an exceptional breakdown of the timeline including maps of the complex available at Wagist “Evidence that Trayvon Martin Doubled Back“. I highly recommend readers visit the analysis including a timeline, maps, and phone records which substantiate Zimmerman’s account of losing sight of Trayvon, and being confronted while en-route back to his vehicle.



0:15 – The best address I can give you is the clubhouse. [A]
0:45 – He’s just staring at the houses. Now he’s staring at me.
1:00 – He’s coming towards me.
1:20 – He’s coming to check me out.
2:08 – s**t, he’s running.
2:14 – Sound of truck door being closed. [C]
2:20 – He’s heading towards the back entrance. [referring to E]
2:25 – Are you following him? Yep.
2:45 – He ran… Zimmerman stops and completes the 911 call. [E]
3:05 – Call ends.


Entire Transcript:

Quote:

Dispatcher: Sanford Police Department. …

Zimmerman: Hey we’ve had some break-ins in my neighborhood, and there’s a real suspicious guy, uh, [near] Retreat View Circle, um, the best address I can give you is 111 Retreat View Circle. This guy looks like he’s up to no good, or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.

Dispatcher: OK, and this guy is he white, black, or Hispanic? Zimmerman: He looks black. Dispatcher: Did you see what he was wearing?

Zimmerman: Yeah. A dark hoodie, like a grey hoodie, and either jeans or sweatpants and white tennis shoes. He’s [unintelligible], he was just staring…

Dispatcher: OK, he’s just walking around the area…

Zimmerman: …looking at all the houses.

Dispatcher: OK… Zimmerman: Now he’s just staring at me.

Dispatcher: OK–you said it’s 1111 Retreat View? Or 111?

Zimmerman: That’s the clubhouse…

Dispatcher: That’s the clubhouse, do you know what the–he’s near the clubhouse right now?

Zimmerman: Yeah, now he’s coming towards me.

Dispatcher: OK.

Zimmerman: He’s got his hand in his waistband. And he’s a black male.

Dispatcher: How old would you say he looks?

Zimmerman: He’s got button on his shirt, late teens. Dispatcher: Late teens ok.

Zimmerman: Somethings wrong with him. Yup, he’s coming to check me out, he’s got something in his hands, I don’t know what his deal is.

Dispatcher: Just let me know if he does anything ok

Zimmerman: How long until you get an officer over here?

Dispatcher: Yeah we’ve got someone on the way, just let me know if this guy does anything else.

Zimmerman: Okay. These assholes they always get away. When you come to the clubhouse you come straight in and make a left. Actually you would go past the clubhouse.

Dispatcher: So it’s on the lefthand side from the clubhouse?

Zimmerman: No you go in straight through the entrance and then you make a left…uh you go straight in, don’t turn, and make a left. s**t he’s running.

Dispatcher: He’s running? Which way is he running?

Zimmerman: Down towards the other entrance to the neighborhood.

Dispatcher: Which entrance is that that he’s heading towards?

Zimmerman: The back ******** [unintelligible]

Dispatcher: Are you following him?

Zimmerman: Yeah

Dispatcher: Ok, we don’t need you to do that.

Zimmerman: Ok

Dispatcher: Alright sir what is your name?

Zimmerman: George…He ran.

Dispatcher: Alright George what’s your last name?

Zimmerman: Zimmerman

Dispatcher: And George what’s the phone number you’re calling from?

Zimmerman: [xxx-xxx-xxxx] Dispatcher: Alright George we do have them on the way, do you want to meet with the officer when they get out there? Zimmerman: Alright, where you going to meet with them at?

Zimmerman: If they come in through the gate, tell them to go straight past the club house, and uh, straight past the club house and make a left, and then they go past the mailboxes, that’s my truck…[unintelligible]

Dispatcher: What address are you parked in front of?

Zimmerman: I don’t know, it’s a cut through so I don’t know the address.

Dispatcher: Okay do you live in the area? Zimmerman: Yeah, I…[unintelligible] Dispatcher: What’s your apartment number?

Zimmerman: It’s a home it’s 1950, oh crap I don’t want to give it all out, I don’t know where this kid is.

Dispatcher: Okay do you want to just meet with them right near the mailboxes then?

Zimmerman: Yeah that’s fine.

Dispatcher: Alright George, I’ll let them know to meet you around there okay?

Zimmerman: Actually could you have them call me and I’ll tell them where I’m at?

Dispatcher: Okay, yeah that’s no problem.

Zimmerman: Should I give you my number or you got it?

Dispatcher: Yeah I got it [xxx-xxx-xxxx]

Zimmerman: Yeah you got it.

Dispatcher: Okay no problem, I’ll let them know to call you when you’re in the area.

Zimmerman: Thanks.

Dispatcher: You’re welcome

Visit the entire construction at Wagist

Nope, as indicated in the 911 transcript, the first place Zimmerman saw Trayvon was near the “clubhouse” [A]. Which he identified to the Police operator as the “best address I can give you” (See map below).



The sidewalk [F] was where Trayvon eventually ran but not until after walking past Zimmerman’s truck [C].

Zimmerman was talking on his phone to police when Trayvon walked past looking at him. Zimmerman drove a little way, parked, then jogged/walked toward the back enterance [E]. Zimmerman told dispatch he thought the person was headed to the back exit gate.

Zimmerman lost sight of Trayvon because Trayvon turned right down the path [F] toward home [D]. Zimmerman told the dispatcher he had lost sight of the person while continuing toward the back entrance [E]. That was when the operator asked him “are you following them, because we don’t need you to do that”, to which Zimmerman replied “OK” before turning around and heading back toward his vehicle.

Zimmerman explains in his statement that Trayvon then approached him as he was returning to his SUV. According to Zimmerman Trayvon approached from his “left rear”, which makes sense if you look at where Trayvon ran [F], and where Zimmerman was returning from [E].





A view of the sidewalk "F" from Ms. Brandy Green residence "D" (on right) toward point of confrontation in the distance.

There’s only one thing wrong with the Zimmerman description. It totally makes sense. Not only has it been consistently told, recorded, and his statement never wavered one bit. It was also repeated in various contexts during five hours of interrogation and then during a crime scene walk-through step by step re-enactment with police the next day.

What does that consistent and sensible description mean? It means Trayvon initiated the confrontation and subsequent attack.

Zimmermans explanation, along with his recorded voice describing his position, proves Trayvon was heading “BACK” toward Zimmerman and intercepted Zimmerman near the intersection of the two sidewalks.

That was exactly where the scuffle took place, and was witnessed first hand by “John” who lives at the unit labeled [G]. This was the location where Trayvon was shot.

Quote:

It really is not that difficult to piece this together from 911 recordings, witness statements and police reports once you are familiar with the logistics. But the media continually is witnessed misleading viewers?

(*Note HatTip to Wagist who is has also reconstructed the entire event, and who also concludes that Trayvon “doubled back“. Trayvon had to double back, because in the police recording Zimmerman lost sight of Trayvon. [F] is the only place he could have run while Zimmerman ran toward [E]. Why Trayvon didn’t just continue to [D] HOME essentially explains the motivation of Trayvon and backs up Zimmerman’s account).

Much false controversy has been made about the police dispatcher instructing Zimmerman not to follow the person (Trayvon), but it really is a moot point. It is standard protocol for all operators to say “do not engage” or in this case “we don’t need you to do that”, because they are trained to avoid liability by police departments fearful of being sued. As soon as the police dispatcher told him not to follow, he stopped, turned around and attempted to walk back to his vehicle.

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

According to the police report George 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. His nose was broken and bleeding when police arrived.

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

Video of Zimmerman account HERE

An independent witness from the next house [G-above] gave the same descriptive to police of Trayvon on top of Zimmerman punching him and pulling his head up and down slamming it into the sidewalk.

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 actually Zimmerman requesting help.

*Strangely, Trayvon’s own father, Tracy Martin, disputed his attorneys and contradicted himself on this issue. Originally he told police officers and investigators the voice calling for help was NOT his son Trayvon. Outlined in this video below:



One witness, named John, 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. He described with specificity what both people were wearing and their exact body positioning.

[Kasumi of Vientown]

Omorose Panya

Kasumi of Vientown

I'll admit that I stopped reading your post once I realized that it kept going and going and going and wasn't about to stop --- and all with seemingly the same point --- but I just want to say this: You might want to stop referring to "The Media" as if it is one thing operated by a hive mind of conspiratorial individuals, because it is not. There are various outlets here and there that have done this and that, and it is entirely reasonable and fair to point them out; however, you cannot portray "The Media" in general, as if all of it is engaging in deception, if you endeavor to be as accurate as possible.

Such an extreme significantly weakens your argument and makes it kind of silly.

I'm reading and copying the evidence, so it's not my language, but there has been a definite rush to judgment by the media and the facts of the case have been ignored. For example, Trayvon's father emphatically said that the person yelling for help WAS NOT his son Trayvon. Why isn't the media covering that?

Charging Zimmerman with anything was unethical and irresponsible. The evidence is not there. They cannot win their case against Zimmerman, but if it gets before a jury George Zimmerman is opened up to the possibility of civil lawsuits, and that's just bullshit. The evidence so far indicates that he is innocent, and a prosecutor cannot ethically charge someone with a crime if they have zero chance of winning.

It comes dangerously close to Prosecutorial Misconduct, meaning once he's found not guilty he could have a strong case for suing the state of Florida, and many of the media outlets that lied through their teeth, slandering him.