George Zimmerman to be charged in Trayvon Martin shooting, official says

Originally posted by pizzanazi75
reply to post by Libertygal

 

1. Is that all you could come up with?

2. Don't talk about things you admittedly don't know about. I do know where the body was. It has been reported. If you followed this case you would know that.

3. Alot of facts are known, you are choosing to ignore them to defend a child killer. You can keep say emotional this and that, it doesn't change the facts or the case or how little you know about it or the fact that you are making all types of assumptions to fit your 'facts' to defend a child killer.

4. He let the others speak for him. You can call that what you want. Still doesn't change the fact you don't know if he trust his new lawyer or not, your assuming that.

Is that all you can come up with?

Personal attacks?

I thought that wasn't allowed?

I answered each of your questions, point for point in a polite fashion, yet in the end all you can do is attempt to insult me?

I think, once again, my words speak for themselves.

I do consider myself to be fairly neutral in this, which is one reason up untill the past few days I have chosen to remain silent, and then chose this thread to articipate in. It seemed rather neutral until you started with the mudslinging.

I have a huge amount of empathy for the Martins, as well as the Zimmermans. Both families are suffering terribly, and I wouldn't wish anyone to have to suffer their pain. Again, I have stated this multiple times, so I couldn't care less how you view me. My words speak for themselves.

I don't take sides.

I am intrigued by the laws involved and how the case will play out in court.

I am interested in the legal findings, and I refuse to play into your emotional blackmail.

Find someone else to play your games, I am done responding kindly to you hence, I am done responding at all to you.

Originally posted by Libertygal
There is no evidence on the confrontation part, this is correct. Not direct, really, it is circumstantial, which may or may not be used in court. That does not discount it not being logical or not,

Well it will come down to the testimony of witnesses, Zimmerman, experts, and police. I'm not sure how strong of a case it will be if there is the conclusion that Martin's body was found back from where Zimmerman claimed Martin initially was. With this we'll just have to see.

I don't buy into that assessment. I followed someone that I was in *no* way ready to confront. You are jumping to a conclusion here. Martin had contacted the police, he knew they were on the way. When he was told, "We don't need you to do that,' he quickly states, "Ok". This does not sound like someone that is looking to be confrontational

I disagree. The fact that Zimmerman was persuing Trayvon at one point, who he clearly believed was on the run because of him, leads me to believe that he was ready to be confrontational, and he had a loaded gun handy to boot. Whether he was the one that first confronted Trayvon is up for debate, but the fact is that Zimmerman was armed, and Trayvon wasn't.

If there was the scenario that Trayvon approached Zimmerman after the call, and threatened Zimmerman, one would assume that Zimmerman would pull out his gun and told Trayvon to back off. If our logic then is that Trayvon attacked regardless, this doesn't make sense either. If somebody threatend me with a gun from a certain distance, I'd know that I would not have a chance. But then again, some people speculate that Trayvon could have ambushed him etc etc, we'll have to wait until when the this case is heard.

I called it a fallacy, because as I stated, on the tape, it is clear he is not breathing harder and faster like he was when the operator realized what he was doing,

Who said he was in continious persuit while he was on the phone with the operator? He may have continued to persuit after discussion with the operator.

Why go back to Zimmerman?

What makes you think he took much notice of Zimmerman? Zimmerman was the one that was suspicious and paranoid that Trayvon was up to no good, and we have evidence that Trayvon wasn't evidently doing anything wrong. Zimmerman believed that Trayvon was looking at him, at one point he thought that Trayvon was approaching him, but then Trayvon left off. Maybe he wasn't threatened by Zimmerman and decided to go back to his dad's place after a change of plans? Or maybe the accounts from Zimmerman of where Trayvon walked are inaccurate? You are basing Trayvons entire movement upon Zimmermans personal account that night?

I'm certain that there will be more revelations when this case is heard, we'll just have to wait.

oops not sure what happened to me post!

Originally posted by Evil_Santa
reply to post by shepseskaf

 

Not at all. It's been scientifically proven that people are only able to detect lies about 50% of the time, even if they're "trained" in lie detection.

blog.lib.umn.edu...

Human lie detectors have not much greater than chance statistics at detecting lies on others.

For some additional reading:

www.spring.org.uk...

So by stating that the lead detective should be an expert at detecting lies is quite untrue and something that only happens in hollywood.

I have to agree with you very much on this. I took an FBI certified course called Kinesic Interview and Interrogation with Daniel Sosnowski, and it was a wonderful course. Very enlightening, indeed. I learned a lot, but the one thing people fail to tell you is that not everyone is programmed the same. You do not get pat results from people that fit into simple outlines.

A video of some of the course:

www.patc.com...

Dan Sosnowski

www.patc.com...

As a part of our final review, we were asked to interrogate people and to offer an opinion of if they were lying or telling the truth based on the course. There was about a 50% failure rate, though some people did seem a bit more "on the ball" than others. It was much less common to have a higher rate than that.

People that did well were offered jobs at the end of the course. I was, but was unwilling to relocate for the job. Hence, I am here posting about it!

The other thing they don't tell you is interrogators are willing to, and most certainly will, lie to you.

Originally posted by Libertygal

Originally posted by Cosmic911
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

Zimmerman was lawfully in possession of his gun and had the permits required by law in order to carry and conceal it.

Hey X!

I do believe he was in violation of his Neighborhood Watch P&P by carrying a weapon, however, be it gun or knife, or whatever.

However he was acting as a private citizen that night as he was not on Neighborhood Watch patrol. It was clearly stated he was on his way to the store, hence, in his vehicle tending to personal business. We all still have a personal right and reason to be cautious of people in our neighborhoods and not just look the other way when we aren't "working".

Ok. I didn't know that. Thanks for the update. Sidebar: You can skip the personal lecture on being a citizen. I'm a veteran, a volunteer paramedic, and also have a CCW so I'm pretty versed on what my personal rights are. Having said that, I still believe his inability to perform recon from afar, listen to the advice from the dispatcher, and Not engage this kid led to an untimely death of a teenager (guilty or not guilty). He may have also inadvertently ruined the rest of his life. It has unfortunately cast a negative light on firearm ownership, which will be spun politically by the MSM. And we've seen how POTUS has already spun this story during an election year, overshadowing the hundreds of other deaths each year that have no political bearing.

reply to post by Libertygal

I do consider myself to be fairly neutral in this, which is one reason up untill the past few days I have chosen to remain silent, and then chose this thread to articipate in. It seemed rather neutral until you started with the mudslinging.

Neutral?!?! How dare you! You are supposed to pick a side and hurl insults at the other side. Didn't you get the memo?

Originally posted by Evil_Santa
reply to post by shepseskaf

 

Not at all. It's been scientifically proven that people are only able to detect lies about 50% of the time, even if they're "trained" in lie detection.

blog.lib.umn.edu...

Human lie detectors have not much greater than chance statistics at detecting lies on others.

For some additional reading:

www.spring.org.uk...

So by stating that the lead detective should be an expert at detecting lies is quite untrue and something that only happens in hollywood.

The lead detective didn't believe GZ's account because it didn't match up with the shooting scene evidence that he personally witnessed that night. Its called observation and deduction, something that every rational human being utilizes in order to determine the veracity of what they're being told by someone else.

Originally posted by antonia
Good luck finding him. Rumor has it that hes fled the state.

See this? This is a good example of what is wrong with this whole Zimmerman/Martin situation. While this poster was saying this about Zimmerman .. the man was turning himself in to police in Florida. Listening to rumors and faulty propaganda that are being pumped out by the main stream media are NOT the way to get to the truth.

Zimmerman hadn't fled the state. The police said they knew where he was all the time.
It doesn't matter if Martin wore hoodies or what color his teeth were.
Zimmermans marriage status is irrelevant.
Martins 'attitude' doesn't matter ... his actions are what matter.
ETC ETC

Let the police do a good investigation. All the armchair detectives here at ATS are arguing over rumors and media spin. We dont have the facts. We only have the spin. Let the trial bring them out. Let us see what really happened. At this point, none of us know.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Well it will come down to the testimony of witnesses, Zimmerman, experts, and police. I'm not sure how strong of a case it will be if there is the conclusion that Martin's body was found back from where Zimmerman claimed Martin initially was. With this we'll just have to see.

I agree.

I disagree. The fact that Zimmerman was persuing Trayvon at one point, who he clearly believed was on the run because of him, leads me to believe that he was ready to be confrontational, and he had a loaded gun handy to boot. Whether he was the one that first confronted Trayvon is up for debate, but the fact is that Zimmerman was armed, and Trayvon wasn't.

I can see what you are saying. I think he did believe, when he stated, "He is checking me out" that he felt Martin did indeed notice him. However, why was he running? Was he afraid? Or was he looking to run and hide to further check Zimmerman out? Again, these are just things we can only postulate on. *However*, if the timeline on the map theory play out, and the idea of him backtracking back to Zimmerman seems valid, one could state he ran to hide and then observe and confront Zimmerman when he felt it was timely.

Also, with Zimmerman being armed you could also have him feeling one of two ways. Like I stated, it was my opinion he seemed 1. comfortable and agreeable when the operator stated, "We don't need you to do that." and obviously ceased running after Martin. Hence, he felt safe with his gun until he realized as I said, he was like a duck in the barrel out in the open.

Or, 2., he was a hyped up hot tempered guy, a fight looking for a place to happen. Now, the media portrayed him this way and has since backed down from that. From the way he spoke on the phone, I didn't get that from him. I know that doesn't mean much, but listen honestly for yourself. He didn't seem to be "gunning for a fight".

This is all going to come down to character witnesses in the case, and the jury opinion of listening to him in those moments on that tape and forming an opinion of their own.

Again, if Zimmermans testimony is true, then he never brandished the weapon until Martin attacked him, the scuffle ensued on the ground, and Martin saw it and went for it. This, again, is circumstantial evidence, and remains to be played out in court. But, interesting to consider, regardless.

If there was the scenario that Trayvon approached Zimmerman after the call, and threatened Zimmerman, one would assume that Zimmerman would pull out his gun and told Trayvon to back off. If our logic then is that Trayvon attacked regardless, this doesn't make sense either. If somebody threatend me with a gun from a certain distance, I'd know that I would not have a chance. But then again, some people speculate that Trayvon could have ambushed him etc etc, we'll have to wait until when the this case is heard.

Actually, I think he was going for his phone, and that was when he got cold-cocked, according to Zimmerman.

I don't see it unfolding that way, but rather the way it was portrayed. He was on the ground before the gun was spotted, having never been brandished. I don't know what to think about the "ambush" part, simply coming up behind someone and saying, "You got a problem?" is not an ambush, IMO. The cold-cocking someone, well, thats just dirty fighting.

Who said he was in continious persuit while he was on the phone with the operator? He may have continued to persuit after discussion with the operator.

But, there wasn't time? Not from when he got off the phone to the incident.

What makes you think he took much notice of Zimmerman? (snip) Zimmerman believed that Trayvon was looking at him, at one point he thought that Trayvon was approaching him, but then Trayvon left off. Maybe he wasn't threatened by Zimmerman and decided to go back to his dad's place after a change of plans? Or maybe the accounts from Zimmerman of where Trayvon walked are inaccurate? You are basing Trayvons entire movement upon Zimmermans personal account that night?

Well, you and the 911 call.

But in particular, the 911 call. After he began to approach Zimmerman, he stopped and then ran. Then, Martins' girlfriends testimony sure plays a part, as well. Again, the dads place was his (the dads) girlfriends place. They lived together. Thats the apartment on the map.

I am basing it on what Zimmerman said, because... that's all we have?

I'm certain that there will be more revelations when this case is heard, we'll just have to wait.

I agree. I am finding it really interesting, in fact. I was very intrigued by the Anthony case. I am by this one, as well.

Thanks for the nice discussion tonight.

I think at the very least it's good that he's being charged and tried for what happened. If in the end it's determined that he acted in self-defense, at least it would go through the due process.I think it's even better for Zimmerman, a lot of the anger and outcry was because he was let off without even being charged.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by antonia
Good luck finding him. Rumor has it that hes fled the state.

See this? This is a good example of what is wrong with this whole Zimmerman/Martin situation. While this poster was saying this about Zimmerman .. the man was turning himself in to police in Florida. Listening to rumors and faulty propaganda that are being pumped out by the main stream media are NOT the way to get to the truth.

Zimmerman hadn't fled the state. The police said they knew where he was all the time.
It doesn't matter if Martin wore hoodies or what color his teeth were.
Zimmermans marriage status is irrelevant.
Martins 'attitude' doesn't matter ... his actions are what matter.
ETC ETC

Let the police do a good investigation. All the armchair detectives here at ATS are arguing over rumors and media spin. We dont have the facts. We only have the spin. Let the trial bring them out. Let us see what really happened. At this point, none of us know.

Just for your information, the "rumor" that GZ had left Florida came directly from one of his former attorneys.

Here's the quote:

“You can stop looking in Florida, you can look much further away from that,” attorney Hal Uhrig said to those who are looking for Zimmerman. Asked whether his comments meant his former client was not in Florida, Uhrig confirmed Zimmerman had left the state.

So, the "faulty propaganda" didn't come from the mainstream media, it came straight from a lawyer who represented GZ.

Originally posted by Cosmic911

Ok. I didn't know that. Thanks for the update. Sidebar: You can skip the personal lecture on being a citizen. I'm a veteran, a volunteer paramedic, and also have a CCW so I'm pretty versed on what my personal rights are. Having said that, I still believe his inability to perform recon from afar, listen to the advice from the dispatcher, and Not engage this kid led to an untimely death of a teenager (guilty or not guilty). He may have also inadvertently ruined the rest of his life. It has unfortunately cast a negative light on firearm ownership, which will be spun politically by the MSM. And we've seen how POTUS has already spun this story during an election year, overshadowing the hundreds of other deaths each year that have no political bearing.

Wow, are most people on ATS like this now?

I didn't "lecture", sorry you took it that way.

So happy for all of your acheivements, I mean that with the utmost sincerity, seriously. Being a veteran is cool, but seriously, back down a bit, eh?

I think by listening to the 911 call, it is evident he did take the advice of the 911 dispatcher, and perhaps we have a differing opinion on that, but it's a free world as far as that goes, right?

As for the rest of it, no comment.

reply to post by shepseskaf


Maybe you should not listen to some glory hounds, claiming to be his lawyer? Those guys weren't his lawyers, they were salivating spotlight chasers.

Originally posted by King_John
I think at the very least it's good that he's being charged and tried for what happened. If in the end it's determined that he acted in self-defense, at least it would go through the due process.I think it's even better for Zimmerman, a lot of the anger and outcry was because he was let off without even being charged.

I agree. I do believe this will follow him the rest of his life. There are still people that would likely kill Casey Anthony if they saw her walking down the street, though. I think that will be the same thing for Zimmerman. Sad, but true. Either way, he is a dead man walking. They will get him in prison if convicted, or out if aquitted.

Thats why it is so sad for both families. They will never be the same again, and it's horrible. I wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy.

It is not just that it is tearing a nation apart, but think of those poor families on both sides. Not one of them deserved this.

Originally posted by cyb3rR3v0luti0nary
reply to post by shepseskaf

 

Maybe you should not listen to some glory hounds, claiming to be his lawyer? Those guys weren't his lawyers, they were salivating spotlight chasers.

No, that won't fly. Hal Uhrig and Craig Sonner both made numerous media appearances as GZ's attorneys. There was no dissent regarding this representation from GZ or his family.

From their statements, Uhrig and Sonner also communicated regularly with GZ in relation to the case.

Trying to relegate them as a couple of "spotlight chasers" is not accurate.

Originally posted by shepseskaf

No, that won't fly. Hal Uhrig and Craig Sonner both made numerous media appearances as GZ's attorneys. There was no dissent regarding this representation from GZ or his family.

From their statements, Uhrig and Sonner also communicated regularly with GZ in relation to the case.

Trying to relegate them as a couple of "spotlight chasers" is not accurate.

He never met them face to face. He never paid them. He never contracted with them. When he called the prosecutor he called them his "legal advisors". There is some talk about them coming out and talking about his case not being perhaps really legal. I liken them to ambulance chasers, but then, that is just my opinion.

From all appearances though, they seem to have interjected themselves into his case. Get arrested or have an accident, these guys crawl up from the woodwork to get the case, expecially when it goes public spotlight and high profile.

Zimmerman certainly did not wish to retain them, he chose someone else.

Perhaps them claiming he left the state was intentional public misdirection so Zimmerman could get some sleep and turn himself in? To call off the blood hounds. Perhaps Zimmerman himself lied to them intentionally to get them to leave him alone. They admit they were constantly trying to contact him. They smelled those dollars.

Originally posted by shepseskaf
Just for your information, ... the "faulty propaganda" didn't come from the mainstream media, it came straight from a lawyer who represented GZ.

Just for your information ... the FORMER lawyer is just that .. FORMER .. and had no way of knowing anything about where Zimmerman was. And where did you all get that rumor from? The main stream media. The police themselves had said that his wearabouts were not an issue.

And obviously that former lawyer and the main stream media, once again, got the information WRONG.

Originally posted by Libertygal
Originally posted by shepseskaf

No, that won't fly. Hal Uhrig and Craig Sonner both made numerous media appearances as GZ's attorneys. There was no dissent regarding this representation from GZ or his family.

From their statements, Uhrig and Sonner also communicated regularly with GZ in relation to the case.

Trying to relegate them as a couple of "spotlight chasers" is not accurate.

He never met them face to face. He never paid them. He never contracted with them. When he called the prosecutor he called them his "legal advisors". There is some talk about them coming out and talking about his case not being perhaps really legal. I liken them to ambulance chasers, but then, that is just my opinion.

From all appearances though, they seem to have interjected themselves into his case. Get arrested or have an accident, these guys crawl up from the woodwork to get the case, expecially when it goes public spotlight and high profile.

Zimmerman certainly did not wish to retain them, he chose someone else.

Perhaps them claiming he left the state was intentional public misdirection so Zimmerman could get some sleep and turn himself in? To call off the blood hounds. Perhaps Zimmerman himself lied to them intentionally to get them to leave him alone. They admit they were constantly trying to contact him. They smelled those dollars.

edit on 12-4-2012 by Libertygal because: (no reason given)

All that may be very true, but the point is that the information about GZ fleeing the State came directly from a known source and was not some kind of speculative conspiracy theory, as postulated earlier.

There are many, many layers to this onion and it all needs to be peeled back so that the truth can be revealed.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by shepseskaf
Just for your information, ... the "faulty propaganda" didn't come from the mainstream media, it came straight from a lawyer who represented GZ.

Just for your information ... the FORMER lawyer is just that .. FORMER .. and had no way of knowing anything about where Zimmerman was. And where did you all get that rumor from? The main stream media. The police themselves had said that his wearabouts were not an issue.

And obviously that former lawyer and the main stream media, once again, got the information WRONG.

edit on 4/12/2012 by FlyersFan because: typo

It was a direct quote from a known source, not something that anyone else made up. The media simply reported what was said. Whether Uhrig was accurate in what he communicated, and the reasons that the statement was made, have yet to be determined.

Originally posted by navy_vet_stg3

Originally posted by ahmonrarh
How do you know he was acting in self defense??

Try reading the POLICE REPORT. Funny, George said he was screaming for "help" yet he didn't even realize his own voice was being captured by the 911 call. Maybe ALL the cops are involved, right, and Zimmerman's split open head, and busted up nose, along with his shirt showing evidence of a struggle was just trumped up, right?

Meanwhile, people have laid out the paths of both Zimmerman and Martin, based off of FACTS and the phone calls to 911.
Source 1
Source 2

Originally posted by ahmonrarh
from the 911 recording, he was heard calling the kid a F-n coon...just before he was advised not to pursue the kid and just keep an eye out.....

Doh! Looks like you're WRONG again. He said "F-n cold". After being told to he doesn't have to pursue (2:25 in the 2nd video), Zimmerman says, "Ok", and you can clearly tell he STOPPED running, because the noise of the wind across his microphone stops. So, tell ANOTHER LIE!

Originally posted by ahmonrarh
looks like it throws the self defense plea out the window to me....

No, considering every one of your points is a LIE!

It's sad because in the military we were taught that we were all one color: OD Green. You have obviously forgotten that or maybe never subscribed to it?

Everything you just wrote is wrong, he said "coons" and he did not stop pursuing the kid.