So what you're saying is that the call from the girlfriend is bad news for Zimmerman?
That said, there's a lot of facts not out yet and I haven't been following it closely enough to really pass judgement. That's why I prefaced my comment that way. I don't know if it was an excusable homicide or not. I just think that if Zimmerman was following Trayvon then that will be a troubling fact for him. He may be able to show self defense. I don't know. Time will tell on that.
I just read your "debunking" thread on this and there were plenty of facts in there that I didn't know, so you've obviously been following this more closely than I am.
Last edited by Swampfox; 03-24-2012 at 11:00 PM.
Here is what happened in order (as far as we know. The facts are in flux right now.)I don't know what happened, but the short version of the best I can tell so far is it looks like Zimmerman was following Trayvon because he thought he was suspicious and then it gets fuzzy. There was some kind of altercation and Trayvon ended up dead and Zimmerman injured. I'm not a criminal attorney but it seems that if you're following someone that tends to show that you're doing more than just "standing your ground."
1. Zimmerman (who is short and overweight: 5'9'' and 220-240 lbs) follows Trayvon (a 6'3'' seventeen year old of 140-160lb.) in his SUV.
He is on an errand when he spots Trayvon.
2. Just after 7:00, Zimmerman calls the non-emergency dispatch operator for Sanford PD.
The call is about 4 and a half minutes long. When asked Trayvon's race, Zimmerman says "I think he's black" but he wasn't certain because he had a hoodie on.
3. Trayvon begins to approach Zimmerman's vehicle 58 seconds into the call.
The approach is about a minute long. Zimmerman mentions the approach and that Trayvon has something in his hand:
("Now he's coming towards me" 58 secs into the tape)
("And he's a black male" 1.08 into the tape)
("He's comin' to check me out. He's got somethin' in his hands." 1.24 into the tape)
Notice that Zimmerman wasn't sure Trayvon was black until he was full face. Also notice that Zimmerman is noticeably concerned.
4. About a minute into the approach, Trayvon starts to run. Zimmerman tells the dispatcher this.
("Shit! He's running. 2.06 into the tape)
5. Zimmerman gets out of his car, still talking to the dispatcher. You can hear the bell-like sound of the open door on the vehicle and you can hear when it closes.
(Car door opening "ding". 2.10 on the tape; Car door closing, 2:14 on tape)
6. Zimmerman starts to follow Trayvon on foot. The pursuit lasts for about 25 seconds. (2:14-2:39)
Zimmerman is no runner, and he is winded (out of breath) the entire 25 seconds.
(Windedness: 2.20-2.45 on the tape)
You can hear Zimmerman getting winded immediately after he starts.
(Heavy breathing begins: 2.20)
The breathing is heavy enough to tip off the police dispatch operator that Zimmerman was pursuing Trayvon.
("Are you following him?" 2.23)
It is after this that the dispatch operator tells him "We don't need you to do this." (2.26)
Ten seconds later, George seems to barely be able to get out his name:
("Sir, what is your name" 2.36)
7. Trayvon runs completely out of sight, and George tells the dispatcher.
("He ran" 2.39)
8. Zimmerman stops running. His breathing is less heavy and he is able to talk to the dispatch operator more easily. (2.39-2.45)
9. Zimmerman agrees to meet the police officer at a given location:
("Do you want to meet with the officer when they get out there?" 2.55)
("at the mailboxes" 3.43)
10. Zimmerman then changes his mind
"Could you have him call me and I'll tell him where I'm at?" (3.48)
11. After the call, Zimmerman claims that he went back to his vehicle. (approx. 7:05/6 pm)
Considering that Trayvon was gone and that George could not pursue anyone on foot for any length of time, I believe him. Did Zimmerman continue to pursue him in his SUV? The address he gave to the dispatcher seems to be only about a block away from the house behind which Trayvon died, but a lot depends on the geography of the development.
12. 7:06-7:15. A second and third altercation occur. There are two areas of confrontation (Witness Mary Cutcher): on the pavement (by the street) and in the backyard (in the grass).
(A full tape of Cutcher's testimony, uncut, has been removed from youtube, and only the shorter media interviews remain.)
Zimmerman claims that Trayvon came up to his vehicle, confronted him, and attacked him. Supporting this is that the first area of confrontation was on the pavement by the street (as per Cutcher). This also squares with the wound to the back of George's head: it hit a hard surface.
How the fight got into the back is not clear. Again, Mary Cutcher's original uncut tape talked about this, but that tape has been removed from youtube.
13. 7:??-7:15: A series of 911 calls (8 neighbors) to the Sanford police.
I cannot find the time when the calls began; only that the last one was at 7:15 and that there was a gunshot around that time.
14. 7:17: Officer Timothy Smith responds to call.
Not sure what exact time he arrives, but it doesn't take long. He finds the body and George Zimmerman who is cooperative.
Trayvon's body was located between 1231 Retreat View Circle and 2821 Retreat View Circle. George originally called from 1111 Retreat View Circle. which sounds like a block away, but it's hard to tell without having a map.
15. Officer Ricardo Ayala arrives after Smith. With Sanford Fire Department paramedic, he does CPR, to no avail.
17. 7:30: Trayvon pronounced dead by paramedic.
So, as you can see, who is the aggressor is not clear. Zimmerman calls 911 and Trayvon approaches him. When Trayvon runs, Zimmerman gives chase for 25 seconds and gets winded. Zimmerman claims to go back to the SUV and claims that Trayvon approaches him at his SUV. Somehow, both young men end up on the grass. George has wounds and grass on the back of his jacket, indicating a defensive posture for at least part of the time. Witnesses report both men on the top or bottom at different points. Everyone hears a scream but only one person claims to have seen the screamer and he sees George. Mary Cutcher assumes the screamer was Trayvon, but they don't approach the fight scene until after George has shot Trayvon. George tells Mary's roommate to call the police.
Everything hinges on whether George returned to his SUV after the 911 call and whether Trayvon attacked him there. Witnesses heard the altercation but, for the most part, did not see it.
Last edited by Elspeth; 03-25-2012 at 01:01 AM.
Interesting. Do you know what the standard is for the stand your ground law in Florida? I'd be interested in seeing it applied to what is known so far.
The Stand Your Ground law requires that the shooter be in "reasonable fear of his life." The law makes it possible for you to shoot your attacker without having to retreat (when you can) from the scene. which can be a public area. The police cannot charge you with a crime under the law if you were in reasonable fear of your life.A stand-your-ground law states that a person may use deadly force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of a threat, without an obligation to retreat first. In some cases, a person may use deadly force in public areas without a duty to retreat. Under these legal concepts, a person is justified in using deadly force in certain situations and the "stand your ground" law would be a defense to criminal charges.
In most states, if you shoot your attacker in fear of your life, you can be arrested and have to go to court to defend yourself, especially if you did not try to get away when you could (retreat). You can be declared "not guilty" if the jury believes your plea of self-defense. Or you could be convicted if they don't.
That's the way I understand it. There are 2nd amendment folks for more knowledgeable than I on this board, and I concede to them in advance if they have a different explanation.
Wiki has more info about the Florida law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-your-ground_law
2011 Florida Statutes CHAPTER 776 JUSTIFIABLE USE OF FORCE
776.012 Use of force in defense of person.—A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other’s imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat if:
(1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the imminent commission of a forcible felony; or
(2) Under those circumstances permitted pursuant to s. 776.013.
776.013 Home protection; use of deadly force; presumption of fear of death or great bodily harm.—
(1) A person is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent peril of death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or great bodily harm to another if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person’s will from the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle; and
(b) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred.
(2) The presumption set forth in subsection (1) does not apply if:
(a) The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the dwelling, residence, or vehicle, such as an owner, lessee, or titleholder, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person; or
(b) The person or persons sought to be removed is a child or grandchild, or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of, the person against whom the defensive force is used; or
(c) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in an unlawful activity or is using the dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle to further an unlawful activity; or
(d) The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who enters or attempts to enter a dwelling, residence, or vehicle 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 entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer.
(3) A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.
(4) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person’s dwelling, residence, or occupied vehicle is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence.
(5) As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Dwelling” means a building or conveyance of any kind, including any attached porch, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed to be occupied by people lodging therein at night.
(b) “Residence” means a dwelling in which a person resides either temporarily or permanently or is visiting as an invited guest.
(c) “Vehicle” means a conveyance of any kind, whether or not motorized, which is designed to transport people or property.
776.032 Immunity from criminal prosecution and civil action for justifiable use of force.—
(1) A person who uses force as permitted in s. 776.012, s. 776.013, or s. 776.031 is justified in using such force and is immune from criminal prosecution and civil action for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 943.10(14), who was acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer. As used in this subsection, the term “criminal prosecution” includes arresting, detaining in custody, and charging or prosecuting the defendant.
(2) A law enforcement agency may use standard procedures for investigating the use of force as described in subsection (1), but the agency may not arrest the person for using force unless it determines that there is probable cause that the force that was used was unlawful.
(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).
776.041 Use of force by aggressor. —The justification described in the preceding sections of this chapter is not available to a person who:
(1) Is attempting to commit, committing, or escaping after the commission of, a forcible felony; or
(2) Initially provokes the use of force against himself or herself, unless:
(a) Such force is so great that the person reasonably believes that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm and that he or she has exhausted every reasonable means to escape such danger other than the use of force which is likely to cause death or great bodily harm to the assailant; or
(b) In good faith, the person withdraws from physical contact with the assailant and indicates clearly to the assailant that he or she desires to withdraw and terminate the use of force, but the assailant continues or resumes the use of force.
I may have missed it posted earlier in the thread... but on the Today show this morning, Zimmerman's lawyer revealed that Zimmerman has a broken nose and a black eye, several scratches..
Wonder how he got those?? Hmmmm...
And there are reports of a witness..
It appears to me that Trayvon's father has made it nearly impossible to prosecute Zimmerman, because of the inconsistencies of his tale.
He could never be put on the witness stand because the defense would make him look foolish and expose his "tale of two nights". They would refer to one testimony and then the other, and then ask him what he was hiding.
Then the defense would call out the school to give the details regarding exactly why this 17 year old didn't have to go to school.
In the end Trayvon would be revealed to be something other that the Obama look alike we have all grown to know and love, and some of the jurors would be reluctant to convict unless Trayvon was shot in the back and it could be shown that Zimmerman threw himself on the ground and ran then into a wall, bloodying his nose.
Sounds like a long shot to me.
An eye witness has now alledgedly come forward substantiating Zimmerman's story of being attacked by sweet little Trayvon. Here's a link:
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|