George Zimmerman Arrested On Domestic Violence And Weapons Charge

[Jimmy Higgins]

By George I think you've got it!

Nope...It's an incredible strange strategy and not one you would think about while on the run. If Zimmerman wanted to be aggressive his strategy would have been to meet Martin right outside of his car when he walked by.

You seem to be mistaken. Zimmerman didn't want to be aggressive, he wanted to be a hero. What he didn't expect was that some teen who wasn't actually committing any crime being accosted and pushing back.

We do need to remember one minor detail, Zimmerman originally claimed that Martin jumped him from out of no where. The phone testimony puts that claim in great doubt. Zimmerman never testified at the trial, so we have no sworn testimony from him as to what happened.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Nope...It's an incredible strange strategy and not one you would think about while on the run. If Zimmerman wanted to be aggressive his strategy would have been to meet Martin right outside of his car when he walked by.

So what you are saying is Zimmerman is a guy who only acts in a cold, calculating, rational manner? And that he has control of his aggressive impulses?

You are the one is saying that he acted in a cold calculating rational manner while on the move in the middle of the night while trying to find someone. If his normal aggressive manner played through Martin would have been punch and had marks/bruises for it and when they were fighting, it would have been two sided.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So what you are saying is Zimmerman is a guy who only acts in a cold, calculating, rational manner? And that he has control of his aggressive impulses?

You are the one is saying that he acted in a cold calculating rational manner while on the move in the middle of the night while trying to find someone. If his normal aggressive manner played through Martin would have been punch and had marks/bruises for it and when they were fighting, it would have been two sided.

Except for one thing, Zimmerman may have simply been caught off guard. Puts his hand on Martin's shoulder, Martin pushes him back and to the ground.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Nope...It's an incredible strange strategy and not one you would think about while on the run. If Zimmerman wanted to be aggressive his strategy would have been to meet Martin right outside of his car when he walked by.

You seem to be mistaken. Zimmerman didn't want to be aggressive, he wanted to be a hero. What he didn't expect was that some teen who wasn't actually committing any crime being accosted and pushing back.

We do need to remember one minor detail, Zimmerman originally claimed that Martin jumped him from out of no where. The phone testimony puts that claim in great doubt. Zimmerman never testified at the trial, so we have no sworn testimony from him as to what happened.

And that's why the big deal about asking for the path that Martin took that he correlates with Jeantel's testimony. Her testimony was, "He ran, started walking again for a while and then turned around and saw him" If that doesn't jive with the logistical layout it very much calls into question if she remembered all the details and order correctly.

 

[ksen]

1) You're neglecting the fact that he was purchasing all the legal parts of purple drank.

2) You're neglecting the fact that it's likely he was casing houses.

3) I don't believe he was innocent--I think he didn't like being followed and attacked Zimmerman.

4) Why do you insist on slandering Zimmerman?

Oh my god. You are serious.

Just when you think you can't be surprised anymore . . .

 

[Nice Squirrel]

So what you are saying is Zimmerman is a guy who only acts in a cold, calculating, rational manner? And that he has control of his aggressive impulses?

You are the one is saying that he acted in a cold calculating rational manner while on the move in the middle of the night while trying to find someone.

I am? I must not have been clear enough. My arguments have always been that he was reacting to a perceived situation and took no steps to deescalate.

If his normal aggressive manner played through Martin would have been punch and had marks/bruises for it and when they were fighting, it would have been two sided.

Not necessarily.

- - - Updated - - -

You seem to be mistaken. Zimmerman didn't want to be aggressive, he wanted to be a hero. What he didn't expect was that some teen who wasn't actually committing any crime being accosted and pushing back.

We do need to remember one minor detail, Zimmerman originally claimed that Martin jumped him from out of no where. The phone testimony puts that claim in great doubt. Zimmerman never testified at the trial, so we have no sworn testimony from him as to what happened.

And that's why the big deal about asking for the path that Martin took that he correlates with Jeantel's testimony. Her testimony was, "He ran, started walking again for a while and then turned around and saw him" If that doesn't jive with the logistical layout it very much calls into question if she remembered all the details and order correctly.

How many steps in a "ran"?

 

[ksen]

And for the other part about Zimmerman acting like Zimmerman from the past and future, if he did we wouldn't be talking about this situation. He's thrown things, punched people, shoved people,

Z's history is that he only does those things to people that won't fight back.

but yet during this accident he did not fight and did not punch Martin. If he had done those things then the outcome would have been different. It would have just been a fight.

He had a gun on him, why did he need to fight back?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

You seem to be mistaken. Zimmerman didn't want to be aggressive, he wanted to be a hero. What he didn't expect was that some teen who wasn't actually committing any crime being accosted and pushing back.

We do need to remember one minor detail, Zimmerman originally claimed that Martin jumped him from out of no where. The phone testimony puts that claim in great doubt. Zimmerman never testified at the trial, so we have no sworn testimony from him as to what happened.

And that's why the big deal about asking for the path that Martin took that he correlates with Jeantel's testimony. Her testimony was, "He ran, started walking again for a while and then turned around and saw him" If that doesn't jive with the logistical layout it very much calls into question if she remembered all the details and order correctly.

What part of any of the puts Zimmerman's own original claims into a positive light, ie that he was jumped from out of no where? The phone testimony implies that they both saw each other coming. The other details are quite irrelevant. If Martin didn't jump Zimmerman, everything Zimmerman has said is at strong risk of being a lie.

 

[ksen]

But that is based upon your assumptions. "Reasonable" includes stopping to talk on the phone, or to stalk Martin and tackle him.

You are correct. Zimmerman would have never used the gun he was carrying.

And which of the other incidents did Zimmerman use his gun?

Zimmerman never used his gun, as I explained in an earlier post. His gun discharged after his power ring went off.

So somebody that was aggressive and violent took the risky and gambling strategy of allowing himself to be hit, punched several times, head banged a few times and let me somebody get on top of him so he can then then unleash his power with his gun. That was a very bad strategy for an aggressive person.

Obviously not since he is alive and Martin isn't.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Z's history is that he only does those things to people that won't fight back.

but yet during this accident he did not fight and did not punch Martin. If he had done those things then the outcome would have been different. It would have just been a fight.

He had a gun on him, why did he need to fight back?

The aggressive position in a fight is to fight back, even with a gun. And having a gun you need to be even more aggressive because your fighting person has a dangerous weapon in the aresenal if they have access to your weapon. Zimmerman was very passive, he expected the neighbors to help and the police to show up instead of being aggressive.

- - - Updated - - -

You are the one is saying that he acted in a cold calculating rational manner while on the move in the middle of the night while trying to find someone.

I am? I must not have been clear enough. My arguments have always been that he was reacting to a perceived situation and took no steps to deescalate.

If his normal aggressive manner played through Martin would have been punch and had marks/bruises for it and when they were fighting, it would have been two sided.

Not necessarily.

- - - Updated - - -

You seem to be mistaken. Zimmerman didn't want to be aggressive, he wanted to be a hero. What he didn't expect was that some teen who wasn't actually committing any crime being accosted and pushing back.

We do need to remember one minor detail, Zimmerman originally claimed that Martin jumped him from out of no where. The phone testimony puts that claim in great doubt. Zimmerman never testified at the trial, so we have no sworn testimony from him as to what happened.

And that's why the big deal about asking for the path that Martin took that he correlates with Jeantel's testimony. Her testimony was, "He ran, started walking again for a while and then turned around and saw him" If that doesn't jive with the logistical layout it very much calls into question if she remembered all the details and order correctly.

How many steps in a "ran"?

Where does it matter how many steps did he run?

 

[ksen]

Martin seemed to feel frightened/threated by Zimmerman following him. That alone should have been enough to trigger Florida's SYG law in Martin's favor. Instead it was used to defend Martin's killer.

pathetic

 

[coloradoatheist]

Martin seemed to feel frightened/threated by Zimmerman following him. That alone should have been enough to trigger Florida's SYG law in Martin's favor. Instead it was used to defend Martin's killer.

pathetic

Did you support that guy in the store who say a black guy put a gun in his pants and enter the store so he attacked him?

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Z's history is that he only does those things to people that won't fight back.



He had a gun on him, why did he need to fight back?

The aggressive position in a fight is to fight back, even with a gun. And having a gun you need to be even more aggressive because your fighting person has a dangerous weapon in the aresenal if they have access to your weapon. Zimmerman was very passive, he expected the neighbors to help and the police to show up instead of being aggressive.

- - - Updated - - -

You are the one is saying that he acted in a cold calculating rational manner while on the move in the middle of the night while trying to find someone.

I am? I must not have been clear enough. My arguments have always been that he was reacting to a perceived situation and took no steps to deescalate.

If his normal aggressive manner played through Martin would have been punch and had marks/bruises for it and when they were fighting, it would have been two sided.

Not necessarily.

- - - Updated - - -

You seem to be mistaken. Zimmerman didn't want to be aggressive, he wanted to be a hero. What he didn't expect was that some teen who wasn't actually committing any crime being accosted and pushing back.

We do need to remember one minor detail, Zimmerman originally claimed that Martin jumped him from out of no where. The phone testimony puts that claim in great doubt. Zimmerman never testified at the trial, so we have no sworn testimony from him as to what happened.

And that's why the big deal about asking for the path that Martin took that he correlates with Jeantel's testimony. Her testimony was, "He ran, started walking again for a while and then turned around and saw him" If that doesn't jive with the logistical layout it very much calls into question if she remembered all the details and order correctly.

How many steps in a "ran"?

Where does it matter how many steps did he run?

Did he run two at a slight pace or a full 100 yard dash before the Lion Zimmerman rationally and with all his wits about him flying tackled the Gazelle Martin.

 

[ZiprHead]

I'd like to ask all these Zimmerman supporters: Would you be happy with your daughter entering into a domestic relationship with him?

 

[Jayjay]

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.

I mistook your reference to "width of six townhouses" to mean all the way to the end of the row of houses. Anyway, of course Zimmerman assumed that Trayvon was headed towards the back entrance, but that doesn't mean Zimmerman cut him off. Maybe he just stayed on RVC to watch if he would reach the entrance (as he had direct line of sight). That's just as plausible an explanation for the missing time as anything else.

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.

The statement about looking for house numbers is irrelevant to the topic at hand, which is Zimmerman's location, not his motivation. And lies about what happened after he and Martin crossed paths is more plausible because it's simpler: by "elaborate lie" I meant a scenario which is both unnecessary and prone to being proven wrong by witnesses or other evidence. If Zimmerman had jogged around even the first house, why would he unnecessarily lie about it and risk being caught? He could still claim Trayvon jumped him from the bushes, and he wouldn't have to risk getting caught lying about his whereabouts.

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.

The flashlight that was working was the keychain one that he dropped. Your scenario requires that Zimmerman wondered through the bushes (or trees, it's not clear from satellite image how high they are) between the houses to the dark without a flashlight, and that he did this without hesitation because he barely had time to go around the house to meet with Trayvon in the time between the ending of his 311 call and the ending of Trayvon's call (which itself is not the time of the confrontation, which must have happened before).

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.

So you think it's ok to ignore evidence and make up unsupported scenarios, because Zimmerman defenders are doing the same thing? That doesn't make any sense at all. When discussing what happened, the point is not to demonize or exonerate Zimmerman but to find a scenario that fits the evidence with least amount of additional assumptions (such as Zimmerman dropping his keys or running through buildings and trees in the dark or making up elaborate lies about his whereabouts knowing he might be discredited if even a single person happened to see him).

Occam's Razor.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Martin seemed to feel frightened/threated by Zimmerman following him. That alone should have been enough to trigger Florida's SYG law in Martin's favor. Instead it was used to defend Martin's killer.

pathetic

Did you support that guy in the store who say a black guy put a gun in his pants and enter the store so he attacked him?

You mean the case where the armed guy was following the guy in the Walmart store? Because that didn't happen, and isn't a good parallel.

So you think it's ok to ignore evidence and make up unsupported scenarios, because Zimmerman defenders are doing the same thing? That doesn't make any sense at all. When discussing what happened, the point is not to demonize or exonerate Zimmerman but to find a scenario that fits the evidence with least amount of additional assumptions (such as Zimmerman dropping his keys or running through buildings and trees in the dark or making up elaborate lies about his whereabouts knowing he might be discredited if even a single person happened to see him).

Occam's Razor.

It seems rather certain that Zimmerman lied about Martin ambushing him. Zimmerman didn't even testify at his trial which would carry a little water about his original story being a lie.

 

[Jayjay]

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

But people aren't arguing probable paths. They are arguing specific paths with assumed speeds, distances and trajectories that cannot possibly be known and based upon the evidence are quite fantastical or magical.

The specific path that is consistent with Zimmerman's version is that he got out of his car, walked through the T to Retreat View Circle, stayed there for a minute or so, then walked back, and met with Martin near the T. What's fantastical or magical about that?

The alternative path that some people are proposing that Zimmerman ran down Retreat View Circle, then snuck between the buildings in the dark, without a flashlight, and cut Martin off is what requires some fantastical assumptions.

 

[coloradoatheist]

I'd like to ask all these Zimmerman supporters: Would you be happy with your daughter entering into a domestic relationship with him?

And the answer is no, but I also wouldn't want my daughter dating Martin either. You can make the right judgement in one situation but be wrong in a lot of others.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Did you support that guy in the store who say a black guy put a gun in his pants and enter the store so he attacked him?

You mean the case where the armed guy was following the guy in the Walmart store? Because that didn't happen, and isn't a good parallel.

So you think it's ok to ignore evidence and make up unsupported scenarios, because Zimmerman defenders are doing the same thing? That doesn't make any sense at all. When discussing what happened, the point is not to demonize or exonerate Zimmerman but to find a scenario that fits the evidence with least amount of additional assumptions (such as Zimmerman dropping his keys or running through buildings and trees in the dark or making up elaborate lies about his whereabouts knowing he might be discredited if even a single person happened to see him).

Occam's Razor.

It seems rather certain that Zimmerman lied about Martin ambushing him. Zimmerman didn't even testify at his trial which would carry a little water about his original story being a lie.

I'm going to go with the lawyers on this one and say that you only put your defendant on the stand if it can further your case. You don't need them appearing to be frustrated under cross examination.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Did you support that guy in the store who say a black guy put a gun in his pants and enter the store so he attacked him?

You mean the case where the armed guy was following the guy in the Walmart store? Because that didn't happen, and isn't a good parallel.

So you think it's ok to ignore evidence and make up unsupported scenarios, because Zimmerman defenders are doing the same thing? That doesn't make any sense at all. When discussing what happened, the point is not to demonize or exonerate Zimmerman but to find a scenario that fits the evidence with least amount of additional assumptions (such as Zimmerman dropping his keys or running through buildings and trees in the dark or making up elaborate lies about his whereabouts knowing he might be discredited if even a single person happened to see him).

Occam's Razor.

It seems rather certain that Zimmerman lied about Martin ambushing him. Zimmerman didn't even testify at his trial which would carry a little water about his original story being a lie.

Very few cases just the defense recommend testifying at a trial even if they feel they are right.