George Zimmerman Arrested On Domestic Violence And Weapons Charge

[Loren Pechtel]

Furthermore, Zimmerman's keys were dropped near the T, which is consistent with his version of events. Not saying that Zimmerman is necessarily telling the truth especially about who confronted whom, but at least based on what we know, it requires less mental gymnastics to assume that he was where he says he was than theories about him running around the neighbourhood.

Exactly. Not only can't we prove him guilty, his basic story makes more sense.

 

[Derec]

So any update with the pending case against him or are we just going to rehash the case from almost three years ago?

Taken on its own merits, throwing objects at each other is what quarreling lovers often do. I am not sure it by itself should be a criminal offense, otherwise a lot of people would be in jail.

 

[Arctish]

There's another possibility that fits the evidence.

It is possible Zimmerman did not follow Martin but instead hurried to cut him off.

I used to believe this when it was first discussed on the forums way back then, but changed my mind because the timeline just doesn't match.

If you're using Zimmerman's timeline, don't bother trying to get anything to match. The 911 call doesn't match what he told Serino, and neither one matches the walk-through.

I went back to check the discussion at the old forum archives. The timeline is not dependent on what Zimmerman told the police, it's constrained by the call log between Zimmerman and 311 on one hand, and Jenteal and Martin on the other. I just don't see there being enough time for Zimmerman to cut Martin off and chase him back towards the T before the fight.

Furthermore, Zimmerman's keys were dropped near the T, which is consistent with his version of events. Not saying that Zimmerman is necessarily telling the truth especially about who confronted whom, but at least based on what we know, it requires less mental gymnastics to assume that he was where he says he was than theories about him running around the neighbourhood.

Except you can hear Zimmerman hot-footing it in the recorded call, so we know he was at least jogging for part of the time.

We can speculate forever about where exactly Martin and Zimmerman went, but in the end we have no way of knowing. We don't know what would appear to them to be the best route to follow, or if either heard one of the neighbors and sped up, slowed down, or changed direction because he thought it was the other, etc. Frankly, there is only one reason to pursue this line of questioning. I call it the Thug of the Gaps argument. The idea is to find a gap big enough to accommodate the claim that Martin attacked Zimmerman in a manner not consistent with self defense and Florida's SYG laws, so that, if we cannot say with certainty where Martin went that night we cannot rule out the possibility, however implausible, that Martin reached the safety of home and then went back out to confront Zimmerman.

Of course, the Thug of the Gaps argument suffers from the same problem it exploits. We don't know exactly where Zimmerman was, either. But we do know he was safe from a fleeing Martin at the outset. We know he sought a confrontation, or at least created one by his choice to engage in armed pursuit of a teenaged pedestrian who had done nothing to warrant it. So no matter how big a gap you create in the timeline, no matter how well an aggressive teenaged pedestrian Thug might fit into it, Zimmerman fits it better. Everything we know about him, his history and his choices that night, point to Zimmerman being the Thug and Martin being the victim of his thuggery.

 

[Arctish]

Furthermore, Zimmerman's keys were dropped near the T, which is consistent with his version of events. Not saying that Zimmerman is necessarily telling the truth especially about who confronted whom, but at least based on what we know, it requires less mental gymnastics to assume that he was where he says he was than theories about him running around the neighbourhood.

Exactly. Not only can't we prove him guilty, his basic story makes more sense.

His basic story? Not the story he gave Det. Serino but an edited version his fans created for him? Well, if you let the fans do the writing even Superman's heat vision will start to make sense.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Came to meet him as in "changed his mind about avoiding the creeper from the car", or came to meet him as in "resumed walking home too soon and encountered the creeper from the car who was still lingering on the sidewalk"?

And if Jeantel's story is true, that he made it to the house and then went back, M starts the confrontation.

Jeantel never said Martin made it to the house. As you yourself posted:

Her story was always "Back by his house, near his house"

Not "at his house".

Her answer on the stand was "the back of his house" She then changed her answer later. I think she realized her mistake.

I think you misunderstood what Jeantel and Zimmerman's attorney West were talking about. I just reviewed that clip you posted. In it, West says he wants to talk about what happened after Martin ran. West seeks confirmation that Jeantel's impression was that at the time Martin ran he was intending to go to the back of his house, that about 20 seconds later she reconnected with Martin, and she didn't know where he was. She agrees this is correct. West then says and she agrees that at that point she believed he was close to home. So the summary I posted earlier appears to be accurate:

It is not accurate. I watched her testimony recently, and while it's a bit painful to follow because she's asked to repeat things over and over again, I think this list confuses the order of things. What Jeanteal said was that at first Martin saw a creepy ass cracker, and ended the call. Then when Martin had ditched him, he called her again and they started talking about basketball, and after a while he noticed the "nigga was still following", and then the confrontation started. Martin did not try to lose him at that point again, only earlier when Zimmerman was still in his truck.

As to the question whether Martin as almost at home or not, how would she know where he was? I don't think her testimony is at all relevant in establishing Martin's whereabouts.

.

Except she was always consistent with that with her story. He was by his house or he was back at his house. To know that, he would have had to tell her that. And the most logical place that he was at was near the house. It would require Zimmerman making huge lies on the 311 call and how would he know on the 311 what would happen to make him lie about it? So I consider the 311 call the most reliable of the testimonies. It wouldn't take much for Martin to say..I'm back at the house but I want to go check out if that guy is following me.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Mr. Foster was way out of line. There is nothing about his story that is worthy of admiration.

Of course I'm sure that some here would approve of his anti-gun paranoia, but that's only because they share that paranoia.

And one person, who claimed the right to kill minorities, would approve of Mr. Foster's choice of targets.

What makes you think Mr. Forster acted out of "anti-gun" paranoia? Perhaps he acted out of "black man with a gun paranoia".

Well, it is true some people are paranoid about armed minorities. That's why the press carefully cropped the picture of the black tea party protester so that you wouldn't see the race of the man carrying the rifle. His fellow protesters didn't seem offended by his race, but the photo croppers obviously were.

 

[Toni]

Came to meet him as in "changed his mind about avoiding the creeper from the car", or came to meet him as in "resumed walking home too soon and encountered the creeper from the car who was still lingering on the sidewalk"?

And if Jeantel's story is true, that he made it to the house and then went back, M starts the confrontation.

Jeantel never said Martin made it to the house. As you yourself posted:

Her story was always "Back by his house, near his house"

Not "at his house".

Her answer on the stand was "the back of his house" She then changed her answer later. I think she realized her mistake.

I think you misunderstood what Jeantel and Zimmerman's attorney West were talking about. I just reviewed that clip you posted. In it, West says he wants to talk about what happened after Martin ran. West seeks confirmation that Jeantel's impression was that at the time Martin ran he was intending to go to the back of his house, that about 20 seconds later she reconnected with Martin, and she didn't know where he was. She agrees this is correct. West then says and she agrees that at that point she believed he was close to home. So the summary I posted earlier appears to be accurate:

It is not accurate. I watched her testimony recently, and while it's a bit painful to follow because she's asked to repeat things over and over again, I think this list confuses the order of things. What Jeanteal said was that at first Martin saw a creepy ass cracker, and ended the call. Then when Martin had ditched him, he called her again and they started talking about basketball, and after a while he noticed the "nigga was still following", and then the confrontation started. Martin did not try to lose him at that point again, only earlier when Zimmerman was still in his truck.

As to the question whether Martin as almost at home or not, how would she know where he was? I don't think her testimony is at all relevant in establishing Martin's whereabouts.

.

Except she was always consistent with that with her story. He was by his house or he was back at his house. To know that, he would have had to tell her that. And the most logical place that he was at was near the house. It would require Zimmerman making huge lies on the 311 call and how would he know on the 311 what would happen to make him lie about it? So I consider the 311 call the most reliable of the testimonies. It wouldn't take much for Martin to say..I'm back at the house but I want to go check out if that guy is following me.

That makes absolutely no sense.

 

[laughing dog]

What makes you think Mr. Forster acted out of "anti-gun" paranoia? Perhaps he acted out of "black man with a gun paranoia".

Well, it is true some people are paranoid about armed minorities. That's why the press carefully cropped the picture of the black tea party protester so that you wouldn't see the race of the man carrying the rifle. His fellow protesters didn't seem offended by his race, but the photo croppers obviously were.

In what universe is this response remotely relevant?

 

[coloradoatheist]

Came to meet him as in "changed his mind about avoiding the creeper from the car", or came to meet him as in "resumed walking home too soon and encountered the creeper from the car who was still lingering on the sidewalk"?

And if Jeantel's story is true, that he made it to the house and then went back, M starts the confrontation.

Jeantel never said Martin made it to the house. As you yourself posted:

Her story was always "Back by his house, near his house"

Not "at his house".

Her answer on the stand was "the back of his house" She then changed her answer later. I think she realized her mistake.

I think you misunderstood what Jeantel and Zimmerman's attorney West were talking about. I just reviewed that clip you posted. In it, West says he wants to talk about what happened after Martin ran. West seeks confirmation that Jeantel's impression was that at the time Martin ran he was intending to go to the back of his house, that about 20 seconds later she reconnected with Martin, and she didn't know where he was. She agrees this is correct. West then says and she agrees that at that point she believed he was close to home. So the summary I posted earlier appears to be accurate:

It is not accurate. I watched her testimony recently, and while it's a bit painful to follow because she's asked to repeat things over and over again, I think this list confuses the order of things. What Jeanteal said was that at first Martin saw a creepy ass cracker, and ended the call. Then when Martin had ditched him, he called her again and they started talking about basketball, and after a while he noticed the "nigga was still following", and then the confrontation started. Martin did not try to lose him at that point again, only earlier when Zimmerman was still in his truck.

As to the question whether Martin as almost at home or not, how would she know where he was? I don't think her testimony is at all relevant in establishing Martin's whereabouts.

.

Except she was always consistent with that with her story. He was by his house or he was back at his house. To know that, he would have had to tell her that. And the most logical place that he was at was near the house. It would require Zimmerman making huge lies on the 311 call and how would he know on the 311 what would happen to make him lie about it? So I consider the 311 call the most reliable of the testimonies. It wouldn't take much for Martin to say..I'm back at the house but I want to go check out if that guy is following me.

That makes absolutely no sense.

Which part?

 

[Jayjay]

There's another possibility that fits the evidence.

It is possible Zimmerman did not follow Martin but instead hurried to cut him off.

I used to believe this when it was first discussed on the forums way back then, but changed my mind because the timeline just doesn't match.

If you're using Zimmerman's timeline, don't bother trying to get anything to match. The 911 call doesn't match what he told Serino, and neither one matches the walk-through.

I went back to check the discussion at the old forum archives. The timeline is not dependent on what Zimmerman told the police, it's constrained by the call log between Zimmerman and 311 on one hand, and Jenteal and Martin on the other. I just don't see there being enough time for Zimmerman to cut Martin off and chase him back towards the T before the fight.

Furthermore, Zimmerman's keys were dropped near the T, which is consistent with his version of events. Not saying that Zimmerman is necessarily telling the truth especially about who confronted whom, but at least based on what we know, it requires less mental gymnastics to assume that he was where he says he was than theories about him running around the neighbourhood.

Except you can hear Zimmerman hot-footing it in the recorded call, so we know he was at least jogging for part of the time.

We can speculate forever about where exactly Martin and Zimmerman went, but in the end we have no way of knowing. We don't know what would appear to them to be the best route to follow, or if either heard one of the neighbors and sped up, slowed down, or changed direction because he thought it was the other, etc. Frankly, there is only one reason to pursue this line of questioning. I call it the Thug of the Gaps argument. The idea is to find a gap big enough to accommodate the claim that Martin attacked Zimmerman in a manner not consistent with self defense and Florida's SYG laws, so that, if we cannot say with certainty where Martin went that night we cannot rule out the possibility, however implausible, that Martin reached the safety of home and then went back out to confront Zimmerman.

Of course, the Thug of the Gaps argument suffers from the same problem it exploits. We don't know exactly where Zimmerman was, either. But we do know he was safe from a fleeing Martin at the outset. We know he sought a confrontation, or at least created one by his choice to engage in armed pursuit of a teenaged pedestrian who had done nothing to warrant it. So no matter how big a gap you create in the timeline, no matter how well an aggressive teenaged pedestrian Thug might fit into it, Zimmerman fits it better. Everything we know about him, his history and his choices that night, point to Zimmerman being the Thug and Martin being the victim of his thuggery.

The point I was addressing is not who started the conflict, but where Martin and Zimmerman were roughly located. The hypothesis that Zimmerman dropped his keys at the T, then ran down the Retreat View Circle, snuck between the houses, and drove Martin back towards the T where they fought, is not plausible given the timeline between the calls. For the same reason it is not very plausible that Martin was all the way back at his house before turning back, but A) he had a head start compared to Zimmerman and B) the path between the houses is more direct than the alleged path of Zimmerman around the houses.

On the other hand Zimmerman's version that he only walked to RVC, then walked back, and met with Martin (which is not to say Martin ambushed him), is more consistent with the evidence.

 

[RavenSky]

The point I was addressing is not who started the conflict, but where Martin and Zimmerman were roughly located. The hypothesis that Zimmerman dropped his keys at the T, then ran down the Retreat View Circle, snuck between the houses, and drove Martin back towards the T where they fought, is not plausible given the timeline between the calls. For the same reason it is not very plausible that Martin was all the way back at his house before turning back, but A) he had a head start compared to Zimmerman and B) the path between the houses is more direct than the alleged path of Zimmerman around the houses.

On the other hand Zimmerman's version that he only walked to RVC, then walked back, and met with Martin (which is not to say Martin ambushed him), is more consistent with the evidence.

Not really. No one is suggesting that Zimmerman ran all the way down Retreat View Circle, then cut back into the alley. I think he jogged across the top of the T (dropping his keys) and onto RTV going towards the back entrance where he figured Trayvon was heading. When he didn't see Trayvon in the street, he cut back to the alley at the first opportunity, which was only the width of six townhouses. not much at all.

But none of this really matters at all because no matter exactly what route each took, Zimmerman was pursuing Trayvon and then Zimmerman killed Trayvon. Those facts will never change, yet Zimmerman got away with his actions unpunished.

Now, Zimmerman has continued in his long pattern of violent aggression yet we are up to 600+ posts of people trying to justify, minimize and/or down right excuse Zimmerman's actions on that night. It's ridiculous.

 

[Jayjay]

The point I was addressing is not who started the conflict, but where Martin and Zimmerman were roughly located. The hypothesis that Zimmerman dropped his keys at the T, then ran down the Retreat View Circle, snuck between the houses, and drove Martin back towards the T where they fought, is not plausible given the timeline between the calls. For the same reason it is not very plausible that Martin was all the way back at his house before turning back, but A) he had a head start compared to Zimmerman and B) the path between the houses is more direct than the alleged path of Zimmerman around the houses.

On the other hand Zimmerman's version that he only walked to RVC, then walked back, and met with Martin (which is not to say Martin ambushed him), is more consistent with the evidence.

Not really. No one is suggesting that Zimmerman ran all the way down Retreat View Circle, then cut back into the alley.

Neither was I. Even circling around one building is implausible, let alone two or three.

I think he jogged across the top of the T (dropping his keys) and onto RTV going towards the back entrance where he figured Trayvon was heading. When he didn't see Trayvon in the street, he cut back to the alley at the first opportunity, which was only the width of six townhouses. not much at all.

He does not sound out of breath at the end of the 311 call, so if I broke for a run that leaves very little time for Zimmerman to reach the entrance. Plus it adds assumption that Zimmerman necessarily had to construct an elaborate lie to the police and risking that nobody saw him. And dropping the keys for no reason is another additional assumption that is only required to make this hypothesis work. This is the mental gymnastics that I was referring to.

But none of this really matters at all because no matter exactly what route each took, Zimmerman was pursuing Trayvon and then Zimmerman killed Trayvon. Those facts will never change, yet Zimmerman got away with his actions unpunished.

Now, Zimmerman has continued in his long pattern of violent aggression yet we are up to 600+ posts of people trying to justify, minimize and/or down right excuse Zimmerman's actions on that night. It's ridiculous.

So why cling to the theory that Zimmerman cut Martin off, if it doesn't even matter?

 

[RavenSky]

Not really. No one is suggesting that Zimmerman ran all the way down Retreat View Circle, then cut back into the alley.

Neither was I. Even circling around one building is implausible, let alone two or three.

You keep insisting that it is implausible, yet you can't support that with anything other than your opinion. As I noted, one building is 6 townhouses wide - that is well within the timeframe.

I think he jogged across the top of the T (dropping his keys) and onto RTV going towards the back entrance where he figured Trayvon was heading. When he didn't see Trayvon in the street, he cut back to the alley at the first opportunity, which was only the width of six townhouses. not much at all.

He does not sound out of breath at the end of the 311 call, so if I broke for a run that leaves very little time for Zimmerman to reach the entrance. Plus it adds assumption that Zimmerman necessarily had to construct an elaborate lie to the police and risking that nobody saw him. And dropping the keys for no reason is another additional assumption that is only required to make this hypothesis work. This is the mental gymnastics that I was referring to.

What are you even talking about "reach the entrance"? The entrance of what? No one has ever suggested that Zimmerman made it anywhere near the back entrance, only that he assumed that was where Trayvon was heading.

As for elaborate lies, that is all Zimmerman did offer. All that bullshit about wandering around looking for street names and house numbers for 911 even though he stated he did not intend to stay in that location to wait for police - what was that other than an elaborate lie to account for his time when we all know he was really pursuing Trayvon against all instruction? What about Zimmerman's elaborate lie that Trayon jumped out at him from behind the (non-existent) bushes? Zimmerman IS a liar, known to be a liar from before, during and after his killing of Trayvon.

As for dropping his keys at the T, during one of his many variations of what happened that night, he claimed that he was fumbling for his flashlight while jogging across the top of the T. (He had two flashlights but one was not working, iirc) I have long believed that Zimmerman dropped his keys without realizing it at that time. No "elaborate lies" needed for that.

But none of this really matters at all because no matter exactly what route each took, Zimmerman was pursuing Trayvon and then Zimmerman killed Trayvon. Those facts will never change, yet Zimmerman got away with his actions unpunished.

Now, Zimmerman has continued in his long pattern of violent aggression yet we are up to 600+ posts of people trying to justify, minimize and/or down right excuse Zimmerman's actions on that night. It's ridiculous.

So why cling to the theory that Zimmerman cut Martin off, if it doesn't even matter?

Because you and others keep clinging to the fiction that Martin cut Zimmerman off, and quite a few others here even go so far as to blame Trayvon for his own death, justifying all of Zimmerman's actions. It is disgusting and should not be allowed to go unaddressed - resulting in the 600+ post derail of a bunch of people yet again slandering a dead teenager while defending his violent aggressive killer. If the Zimmerman defenders had stuck to the OP topic, no one else would have to call bullshit on the circumstances of his killing of Trayvon.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Personally I'd like to know where these people are getting their data points on the exact time and movements through space of Martin and Zimmerman. Are both to walk the same course at a constant speed? Or do we allow that people on cell phones often cease walking at points during the conversation? COuld either one have stopped to look where the other one was?

I'd also like to know how these exact movements negate Zimemrman's violent reactionary history and pump up Martin's super-thugness.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Personally I'd like to know where these people are getting their data points on the exact time and movements through space of Martin and Zimmerman. Are both to walk the same course at a constant speed? Or do we allow that people on cell phones often cease walking at points during the conversation? COuld either one have stopped to look where the other one was?

I'd also like to know how these exact movements negate Zimemrman's violent reactionary history and pump up Martin's super-thugness.

Getting it from several places, maps of the neighborhood that it took place, the walkthrough video with the images of the spaces, the 911 call.

They don't necessarily negate either, but they also negate Jeantel's story of he ran, started walking and talking for a few minutes and then saw him behind him and following him. It also would support the idea that M was at home and decided to double back to confront his pursuer.

And I went through the video and there are bushes around the houses at different spots, and plants along with the wall between houses.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Personally I'd like to know where these people are getting their data points on the exact time and movements through space of Martin and Zimmerman. Are both to walk the same course at a constant speed? Or do we allow that people on cell phones often cease walking at points during the conversation? COuld either one have stopped to look where the other one was?

I'd also like to know how these exact movements negate Zimemrman's violent reactionary history and pump up Martin's super-thugness.

Getting it from several places, maps of the neighborhood that it took place, the walkthrough video with the images of the spaces, the 911 call.

I need to know exact locations throughout the actual time. Not speculation.

They don't necessarily negate either, but they also negate Jeantel's story of he ran, started walking and talking for a few minutes and then saw him behind him and following him. It also would support the idea that M was at home and decided to double back to confront his pursuer.

I need to know where you get your data that actually tracks them. The exact data points you are using. Not "someone said and they were more reliable", I need to know where you get the exact movements of these two individuals through time and space.

And I went through the video and there are bushes around the houses at different spots, and plants along with the wall between houses.

There is video of Zimmerman and Martin encounter and sooting? Why wasn't this brought to the attention of the authorities? Do we know it is them? What happened on this video?

 

[coloradoatheist]

Can the same thing be asked for by the people that said Zimmerman followed Martin after the dispatcher told him not to?

 

[coloradoatheist]

But you also don't need to have the exact locations to figure out the probable paths of both people.

 

[RavenSky]

George Zimmerman has proved himself to be a violent aggressive liar in at least six known situations that did not involve Trayvon Martin. Yet, on a thread about GEORGE ZIMMERMAN yet again being aggressive and violent towards someone WHO WAS NOT TRAYVON MARTIN, multiple people simply can not acknowledge that maybe... just maybe... George Zimmerman was violently aggressive towards Trayvon Martin, killed him, and then lied to cover his own ass after.

Mind boggling.

 

[Rhea]

So any update with the pending case against him or are we just going to rehash the case from almost three years ago?

Taken on its own merits, throwing objects at each other is what quarreling lovers often do. I am not sure it by itself should be a criminal offense, otherwise a lot of people would be in jail.

Wait, WHAT!? You think quarreling lovers OFTEN throw objects at each other?! This is your reality?