She absolutely can testify as to what she heard over the phone. It was a direct observation. Now if she was talking to someone over the phone who told her what he was witnessing during the fight (and who then died at the scene due to a heart attack or something), what his girlfriend was told by that person at the scene she was on the phone with would be hearsay and not admissible (since she didn't witness or hear anything directly....it was being described by another party not directly involved).
0
Galt-
She absolutely can testify as to what she heard over the phone. It was a direct observation. Now if she was talking to someone over the phone who told her what he was witnessing during the fight (and who then died at the scene due to a heart attack or something), what his girlfriend was told by that person at the scene she was on the phone with would be hearsay and not admissible (since she didn't witness or hear anything directly....it was being described by another party not directly involved).
Hopefully, this case will at least help lead to either repealing the SYG statute (since self-defense as an affirmative defense already exists) or at least revising or modifying it. It was not created for situations like this at all & has a myriad of possible unintended consequences within scenarios which play out on a regular basis.
Hutch is right in that none of us knows what the prosecution has or what exactly happened from when/how the confrontation began to when Martin was shot dead. Believe it or not, I have some compassion for Z & both families, but the fact remains that Z chose to use deadly force (whether he snapped or not) & a 17 yr old kid who was doing nothing wrong is dead. Life has to be protected as precious & sacred and nowadays it's not treated or thought of as such all too often. To use deadly force is a huge responsibility & has to be accounted for.
My guess is the prosecution will punch large holes in Z's story & already know they can do it without much question. The girlfriends testimony will likely be big in that & regardless of how the fight started & who was on top when, I would think they believe they can convince a jury that the last screams came from Martin. Beyond that, I don't think a jury will buy that Z had any other alternative but to use his gun to prevent death or serious bodily injury AT THE TIME he pointed his gun & killed Martin. There have been NO witnesses that we know of so far that have even said they saw Z's head being slammed into concrete or that they were any closer than 4/5 ft to the sidewalk when they were fighting or when the shot was fired or had to have been fired. All Z has is a couple abrasions & some bleeding to support that even happened, but in itself shows & proves nothing in terms of justified self defense even under Fl's SYG statute.
Cashin....you can't say that he was doing nothing wrong if he was assaulting Zimmerman.
They both could've prevented this, Zimmerman by not following and Trayvon by turning into a physical confrontation from a verbal one.
While you're correct that there are no witness that have stated they saw his head being slammed into the concrete, there is a witness that says Trayvon was on top of him beating him up. Please tell me that you have some common sense!
The prosecution is trying to bite off even more than I had imagined. They are saying that Trayvon was profiled from the beginning and Zimmerman had intended to shoot him from the beginning. I think that is a very tough thing for them to prove.
Im sure the previous calls to the non emergency line could come into play on this and show that he likely never intended to use his weopon offensively. Anyone who would deduce that from his past calls to police is an idiot for real.
I agree that Trayvon was not doing anything wrong until the physical confrontation. You can't just go sucker punching anyone that comes to ask you a question and that sets a worse example than your SYG law.
0
Quote Originally Posted by cashin:
Hopefully, this case will at least help lead to either repealing the SYG statute (since self-defense as an affirmative defense already exists) or at least revising or modifying it. It was not created for situations like this at all & has a myriad of possible unintended consequences within scenarios which play out on a regular basis.
Hutch is right in that none of us knows what the prosecution has or what exactly happened from when/how the confrontation began to when Martin was shot dead. Believe it or not, I have some compassion for Z & both families, but the fact remains that Z chose to use deadly force (whether he snapped or not) & a 17 yr old kid who was doing nothing wrong is dead. Life has to be protected as precious & sacred and nowadays it's not treated or thought of as such all too often. To use deadly force is a huge responsibility & has to be accounted for.
My guess is the prosecution will punch large holes in Z's story & already know they can do it without much question. The girlfriends testimony will likely be big in that & regardless of how the fight started & who was on top when, I would think they believe they can convince a jury that the last screams came from Martin. Beyond that, I don't think a jury will buy that Z had any other alternative but to use his gun to prevent death or serious bodily injury AT THE TIME he pointed his gun & killed Martin. There have been NO witnesses that we know of so far that have even said they saw Z's head being slammed into concrete or that they were any closer than 4/5 ft to the sidewalk when they were fighting or when the shot was fired or had to have been fired. All Z has is a couple abrasions & some bleeding to support that even happened, but in itself shows & proves nothing in terms of justified self defense even under Fl's SYG statute.
Cashin....you can't say that he was doing nothing wrong if he was assaulting Zimmerman.
They both could've prevented this, Zimmerman by not following and Trayvon by turning into a physical confrontation from a verbal one.
While you're correct that there are no witness that have stated they saw his head being slammed into the concrete, there is a witness that says Trayvon was on top of him beating him up. Please tell me that you have some common sense!
The prosecution is trying to bite off even more than I had imagined. They are saying that Trayvon was profiled from the beginning and Zimmerman had intended to shoot him from the beginning. I think that is a very tough thing for them to prove.
Im sure the previous calls to the non emergency line could come into play on this and show that he likely never intended to use his weopon offensively. Anyone who would deduce that from his past calls to police is an idiot for real.
I agree that Trayvon was not doing anything wrong until the physical confrontation. You can't just go sucker punching anyone that comes to ask you a question and that sets a worse example than your SYG law.
Cashin....you can't say that he was doing nothing wrong if he was assaulting Zimmerman.
They both could've prevented this, Zimmerman by not following and Trayvon by turning into a physical confrontation from a verbal one.
While you're correct that there are no witness that have stated they saw his head being slammed into the concrete, there is a witness that says Trayvon was on top of him beating him up. Please tell me that you have some common sense!
The prosecution is trying to bite off even more than I had imagined. They are saying that Trayvon was profiled from the beginning and Zimmerman had intended to shoot him from the beginning. I think that is a very tough thing for them to prove.
Im sure the previous calls to the non emergency line could come into play on this and show that he likely never intended to use his weopon offensively. Anyone who would deduce that from his past calls to police is an idiot for real.
I agree that Trayvon was not doing anything wrong until the physical confrontation. You can't just go sucker punching anyone that comes to ask you a question and that sets a worse example than your SYG law.
Well, we don't know how the fight started or if T's action was an act of self defense itself. After all, T doesn't know Z or that he's a watchman, just that he's being followed by a strange guy & that he keeps following him. Yes, this could have definitely been prevented. If Z doesn't follow him & just waits for the cops as the 911 dispatcher asked it doesn't happen & if Z isn't carrying a gun, it doesn't happen.
Agree that the charge seems like overkill (expected manslaughter), but maybe they know more than what's been reported or are just overcharging him (as someone here said) maybe in hopes of a plea deal, hard to say til we know more. They can try to show ill will & profiling on Z's part by what he said on the 911 call, but I don't believe he intended to use his gun or kill anyone.
Again, we don't know that M sucker punched anyone & I find it very difficult to believe it happened like Z said (M just attacking him out of the blue as he was going back to his car) unless there had been a prior exchange of words already as I read in 1 account where it was said that T went up to Z's car, Z rolled down the window & M asked him if he was following him, Z said no & then rolled up the window before then following him & then meeting up & having the fateful exchange & fight. Then I could at least believe that part of his story was possible. Still too much that is not known & some of what's out there is probably not completely accurate -
0
Quote Originally Posted by bowlslit:
Cashin....you can't say that he was doing nothing wrong if he was assaulting Zimmerman.
They both could've prevented this, Zimmerman by not following and Trayvon by turning into a physical confrontation from a verbal one.
While you're correct that there are no witness that have stated they saw his head being slammed into the concrete, there is a witness that says Trayvon was on top of him beating him up. Please tell me that you have some common sense!
The prosecution is trying to bite off even more than I had imagined. They are saying that Trayvon was profiled from the beginning and Zimmerman had intended to shoot him from the beginning. I think that is a very tough thing for them to prove.
Im sure the previous calls to the non emergency line could come into play on this and show that he likely never intended to use his weopon offensively. Anyone who would deduce that from his past calls to police is an idiot for real.
I agree that Trayvon was not doing anything wrong until the physical confrontation. You can't just go sucker punching anyone that comes to ask you a question and that sets a worse example than your SYG law.
Well, we don't know how the fight started or if T's action was an act of self defense itself. After all, T doesn't know Z or that he's a watchman, just that he's being followed by a strange guy & that he keeps following him. Yes, this could have definitely been prevented. If Z doesn't follow him & just waits for the cops as the 911 dispatcher asked it doesn't happen & if Z isn't carrying a gun, it doesn't happen.
Agree that the charge seems like overkill (expected manslaughter), but maybe they know more than what's been reported or are just overcharging him (as someone here said) maybe in hopes of a plea deal, hard to say til we know more. They can try to show ill will & profiling on Z's part by what he said on the 911 call, but I don't believe he intended to use his gun or kill anyone.
Again, we don't know that M sucker punched anyone & I find it very difficult to believe it happened like Z said (M just attacking him out of the blue as he was going back to his car) unless there had been a prior exchange of words already as I read in 1 account where it was said that T went up to Z's car, Z rolled down the window & M asked him if he was following him, Z said no & then rolled up the window before then following him & then meeting up & having the fateful exchange & fight. Then I could at least believe that part of his story was possible. Still too much that is not known & some of what's out there is probably not completely accurate -
Again, we don't know that M sucker punched anyone & I find it very difficult to believe it happened like Z said (M just attacking him out of the blue as he was going back to his car) unless there had been a prior exchange of words already as I read in 1 account where it was said that T went up to Z's car, Z rolled down the window & M asked him if he was following him, Z said no & then rolled up the window before then following him & then meeting up & having the fateful exchange & fight. Then I could at least believe that part of his story was possible. Still too much that is not known & some of what's out there is probably not completely accurate -
Actually, it is quite plausible for Trayvon to have just been pissed off and scared that he was being followed which lead him to confront Z. He reportedly told his girl that he wasn't going to run.
Remember, Zimmerman may be overzealous and all that, but he is somewhat intelligent. Anyone who carries a gun on them and seeks out a physical confrontation is a complete idiot.
If you or I am carrying a gun, we are going to do everything we can to keep distance and avoid physical fist to cuffs. I don't think Zimmerman is that stupid. Plus, on the 911 call he sounded petrified of confrontation.
0
Quote Originally Posted by cashin:
Again, we don't know that M sucker punched anyone & I find it very difficult to believe it happened like Z said (M just attacking him out of the blue as he was going back to his car) unless there had been a prior exchange of words already as I read in 1 account where it was said that T went up to Z's car, Z rolled down the window & M asked him if he was following him, Z said no & then rolled up the window before then following him & then meeting up & having the fateful exchange & fight. Then I could at least believe that part of his story was possible. Still too much that is not known & some of what's out there is probably not completely accurate -
Actually, it is quite plausible for Trayvon to have just been pissed off and scared that he was being followed which lead him to confront Z. He reportedly told his girl that he wasn't going to run.
Remember, Zimmerman may be overzealous and all that, but he is somewhat intelligent. Anyone who carries a gun on them and seeks out a physical confrontation is a complete idiot.
If you or I am carrying a gun, we are going to do everything we can to keep distance and avoid physical fist to cuffs. I don't think Zimmerman is that stupid. Plus, on the 911 call he sounded petrified of confrontation.
Well, I don't believe that even if T was pissed & a little scared that he was being followed, that he just went up to Z & said what Z said he did and attacked & beat him as he claimed...to cause him to fear for his life. No way & when the girlfriend said run, he just said no, I'll walk fast. Z didn't sound scared on the call to me - just low key and a little depressed & irritated. Noone petrified of confrontation follows like he did after being told we don't need you to do it.
My guess is that the prosecution believes they can convince a jury of at least couple things & probably more. That Z's story about the confrontation is not truthful thereby discrediting him & swaying them on other elements. That it was Martin screaming at the end right before the shot & that the injuries he got were not sufficient enough to warrant justified self defense in a homicide. Especially in light of the last minutes before the shooting when the only witnesses so far only saw them on the grass away from the concrete -
0
Well, I don't believe that even if T was pissed & a little scared that he was being followed, that he just went up to Z & said what Z said he did and attacked & beat him as he claimed...to cause him to fear for his life. No way & when the girlfriend said run, he just said no, I'll walk fast. Z didn't sound scared on the call to me - just low key and a little depressed & irritated. Noone petrified of confrontation follows like he did after being told we don't need you to do it.
My guess is that the prosecution believes they can convince a jury of at least couple things & probably more. That Z's story about the confrontation is not truthful thereby discrediting him & swaying them on other elements. That it was Martin screaming at the end right before the shot & that the injuries he got were not sufficient enough to warrant justified self defense in a homicide. Especially in light of the last minutes before the shooting when the only witnesses so far only saw them on the grass away from the concrete -
Well, I don't believe that even if T was pissed & a little scared that he was being followed, that he just went up to Z & said what Z said he did and attacked & beat him as he claimed...to cause him to fear for his life. No way & when the girlfriend said run, he just said no, I'll walk fast. Z didn't sound scared on the call to me - just low key and a little depressed & irritated. Noone petrified of confrontation follows like he did after being told we don't need you to do it.
My guess is that the prosecution believes they can convince a jury of at least couple things & probably more. That Z's story about the confrontation is not truthful thereby discrediting him & swaying them on other elements. That it was Martin screaming at the end right before the shot & that the injuries he got were not sufficient enough to warrant justified self defense in a homicide. Especially in light of the last minutes before the shooting when the only witnesses so far only saw them on the grass away from the concrete -
I tried to google your claim about the no concrete and couldn't find jack shit. Plus, common sense, and experience tell me that its incredibly difficult for grass to cause a laceration on ones head.
Please link me to this witness who claimed no concrete or quit bringing it up. Besides, there is a concrete sidewalk where the incident supposedly happened.
0
Quote Originally Posted by cashin:
Well, I don't believe that even if T was pissed & a little scared that he was being followed, that he just went up to Z & said what Z said he did and attacked & beat him as he claimed...to cause him to fear for his life. No way & when the girlfriend said run, he just said no, I'll walk fast. Z didn't sound scared on the call to me - just low key and a little depressed & irritated. Noone petrified of confrontation follows like he did after being told we don't need you to do it.
My guess is that the prosecution believes they can convince a jury of at least couple things & probably more. That Z's story about the confrontation is not truthful thereby discrediting him & swaying them on other elements. That it was Martin screaming at the end right before the shot & that the injuries he got were not sufficient enough to warrant justified self defense in a homicide. Especially in light of the last minutes before the shooting when the only witnesses so far only saw them on the grass away from the concrete -
I tried to google your claim about the no concrete and couldn't find jack shit. Plus, common sense, and experience tell me that its incredibly difficult for grass to cause a laceration on ones head.
Please link me to this witness who claimed no concrete or quit bringing it up. Besides, there is a concrete sidewalk where the incident supposedly happened.
I tried to google your claim about the no concrete and couldn't find jack shit. Plus, common sense, and experience tell me that its incredibly difficult for grass to cause a laceration on ones head.
Please link me to this witness who claimed no concrete or quit bringing it up. Besides, there is a concrete sidewalk where the incident supposedly happened.
Just saying at the time just before, during & after Z chose to use deadly force, there are no witnesses that either say his head was being beat into the sidewalk or that the sidewalk was even in play. One unidentified woman who said she was watching it when the shot was fired said she thought it was the boy who was doing the screaming & that everything she saw took place on the grass at least 4/5ft away from the sidewalk.
Given the SYG law though, the severity of the injuries will won't matter as much as them being able to convince the jury that at the time the shot was fired, Z had no reasonable reason to fear for his life or severe bodily injury. Will be a tough case on both sides, but then who knows what all they may have -
0
Quote Originally Posted by bowlslit:
I tried to google your claim about the no concrete and couldn't find jack shit. Plus, common sense, and experience tell me that its incredibly difficult for grass to cause a laceration on ones head.
Please link me to this witness who claimed no concrete or quit bringing it up. Besides, there is a concrete sidewalk where the incident supposedly happened.
Just saying at the time just before, during & after Z chose to use deadly force, there are no witnesses that either say his head was being beat into the sidewalk or that the sidewalk was even in play. One unidentified woman who said she was watching it when the shot was fired said she thought it was the boy who was doing the screaming & that everything she saw took place on the grass at least 4/5ft away from the sidewalk.
Given the SYG law though, the severity of the injuries will won't matter as much as them being able to convince the jury that at the time the shot was fired, Z had no reasonable reason to fear for his life or severe bodily injury. Will be a tough case on both sides, but then who knows what all they may have -
Just saying at the time just before, during & after Z chose to use deadly force, there are no witnesses that either say his head was being beat into the sidewalk or that the sidewalk was even in play. One unidentified woman who said she was watching it when the shot was fired said she thought it was the boy who was doing the screaming & that everything she saw took place on the grass at least 4/5ft away from the sidewalk.
Given the SYG law though, the severity of the injuries will won't matter as much as them being able to convince the jury that at the time the shot was fired, Z had no reasonable reason to fear for his life or severe bodily injury. Will be a tough case on both sides, but then who knows what all they may have -
Really, because to the best of my knowledge, there is NOBODY that witnessed the shooting. Only 'John' who witnessed part of the scuffle.
I've never heard anything about this unidentified witness who saw the shooting. Do tell!
The back of his head aint gonna lacerate itself!
0
Quote Originally Posted by cashin:
Just saying at the time just before, during & after Z chose to use deadly force, there are no witnesses that either say his head was being beat into the sidewalk or that the sidewalk was even in play. One unidentified woman who said she was watching it when the shot was fired said she thought it was the boy who was doing the screaming & that everything she saw took place on the grass at least 4/5ft away from the sidewalk.
Given the SYG law though, the severity of the injuries will won't matter as much as them being able to convince the jury that at the time the shot was fired, Z had no reasonable reason to fear for his life or severe bodily injury. Will be a tough case on both sides, but then who knows what all they may have -
Really, because to the best of my knowledge, there is NOBODY that witnessed the shooting. Only 'John' who witnessed part of the scuffle.
I've never heard anything about this unidentified witness who saw the shooting. Do tell!
Don't know how credible she is & she said she wouldn't be a witness because it was too dark & she couldn't say for certain. Just saw an interview with her on TV awhile back & they didn't show her face & distorted her voice.
Obviously, I'm not saying he didn't get the lacerations from the sidewalk, but we don't really know how it happened & I haven't heard anyone say they saw it or that the last part of the fight took place even close enough for the sidewalk to be a factor.
0
Don't know how credible she is & she said she wouldn't be a witness because it was too dark & she couldn't say for certain. Just saw an interview with her on TV awhile back & they didn't show her face & distorted her voice.
Obviously, I'm not saying he didn't get the lacerations from the sidewalk, but we don't really know how it happened & I haven't heard anyone say they saw it or that the last part of the fight took place even close enough for the sidewalk to be a factor.
Don't know how credible she is & she said she wouldn't be a witness because it was too dark & she couldn't say for certain. Just saw an interview with her on TV awhile back & they didn't show her face & distorted her voice.
Obviously, I'm not saying he didn't get the lacerations from the sidewalk, but we don't really know how it happened & I haven't heard anyone say they saw it or that the last part of the fight took place even close enough for the sidewalk to be a factor.
Maybe a bumble bee came and stung him there after the fight, but before the cops showed up.
Ok, so now it sounds like you're totally backing off of the unidentified woman. Good idea especially since she allegedly isn't going to affect the trial or investigation with her statements or testimony.
So, if I get you correctly, you will not use logic to help you decide what likely happened? Your standard is simply this: If someone did not see it happen then it couldn't have happened.
Logic would say (because of the enhanced pictures and police report of bloody melon ) that the sidewalk DID in fact play a role in the fight.
Yet if Zimmerman said it happened then he is lying even if there is witnesses that corroborated his account?
0
Quote Originally Posted by cashin:
Don't know how credible she is & she said she wouldn't be a witness because it was too dark & she couldn't say for certain. Just saw an interview with her on TV awhile back & they didn't show her face & distorted her voice.
Obviously, I'm not saying he didn't get the lacerations from the sidewalk, but we don't really know how it happened & I haven't heard anyone say they saw it or that the last part of the fight took place even close enough for the sidewalk to be a factor.
Maybe a bumble bee came and stung him there after the fight, but before the cops showed up.
Ok, so now it sounds like you're totally backing off of the unidentified woman. Good idea especially since she allegedly isn't going to affect the trial or investigation with her statements or testimony.
So, if I get you correctly, you will not use logic to help you decide what likely happened? Your standard is simply this: If someone did not see it happen then it couldn't have happened.
Logic would say (because of the enhanced pictures and police report of bloody melon ) that the sidewalk DID in fact play a role in the fight.
Yet if Zimmerman said it happened then he is lying even if there is witnesses that corroborated his account?
She absolutely can testify as to what she heard over the phone. It was a direct observation. Now if she was talking to someone over the phone who told her what he was witnessing during the fight (and who then died at the scene due to a heart attack or something), what his girlfriend was told by that person at the scene she was on the phone with would be hearsay and not admissible (since she didn't witness or hear anything directly....it was being described by another party not directly involved).
I hate the hearsay rules of evidence, I am wrong about them probably 95% of the time
0
Quote Originally Posted by HutchEmAll:
Galt-
She absolutely can testify as to what she heard over the phone. It was a direct observation. Now if she was talking to someone over the phone who told her what he was witnessing during the fight (and who then died at the scene due to a heart attack or something), what his girlfriend was told by that person at the scene she was on the phone with would be hearsay and not admissible (since she didn't witness or hear anything directly....it was being described by another party not directly involved).
I hate the hearsay rules of evidence, I am wrong about them probably 95% of the time
She absolutely can testify as to what she heard over the phone. It was a direct observation. Now if she was talking to someone over the phone who told her what he was witnessing during the fight (and who then died at the scene due to a heart attack or something), what his girlfriend was told by that person at the scene she was on the phone with would be hearsay and not admissible (since she didn't witness or hear anything directly....it was being described by another party not directly involved).
Actually, and I hate to do this (and I will continue with my oath of not commenting on the evidence or lack thereof in the Zimmerman case).
The scenario above would be admissible as a present sense impression and an unavilable witness.
In fact, all of Martin's statements to the girlfriend are admissible.
0
Quote Originally Posted by HutchEmAll:
Galt-
She absolutely can testify as to what she heard over the phone. It was a direct observation. Now if she was talking to someone over the phone who told her what he was witnessing during the fight (and who then died at the scene due to a heart attack or something), what his girlfriend was told by that person at the scene she was on the phone with would be hearsay and not admissible (since she didn't witness or hear anything directly....it was being described by another party not directly involved).
Actually, and I hate to do this (and I will continue with my oath of not commenting on the evidence or lack thereof in the Zimmerman case).
The scenario above would be admissible as a present sense impression and an unavilable witness.
In fact, all of Martin's statements to the girlfriend are admissible.
Actually, and I hate to do this (and I will continue with my oath of not commenting on the evidence or lack thereof in the Zimmerman case).
The scenario above would be admissible as a present sense impression and an unavilable witness.
In fact, all of Martin's statements to the girlfriend are admissible.
That is kind of scary
She could ( if she wanted to ) make up a whole conversation from Trayvon.
Trey told me he was just coming from donating blood at the blood bank and the money he got from that he donated to Mother Teresa. He was still wobbling a little from all the blood he donated when a group of 10 white guys chased him yelling " Hey George, you are the neighborhood watch guy, lets Kill the punk" Treyvon ran and said he thought he had gotten away, but he was cornered by these 10 white guys
I heard Treyvon ask " hey guys, Why are you hassling me, I like your Tea Party shirts you are all wearing, I even like the Mitt Romney hats you are wearing "
They said, " we dont care, we are Tea Party members and we don't like your kind. Are you Kenyan born Muslim? "
Treyvon said no, and thats when I heard a voice that said " Hi kid, I am the neighborhood watch commander George Zimmerman, and I am going to shoot you"
I told Treyvon to punch him and run away, but he said he was afraid because at that moment Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and GW Bush had just showed up
I then heard a scuffle start and the phone went dead
0
Quote Originally Posted by djbrow:
Actually, and I hate to do this (and I will continue with my oath of not commenting on the evidence or lack thereof in the Zimmerman case).
The scenario above would be admissible as a present sense impression and an unavilable witness.
In fact, all of Martin's statements to the girlfriend are admissible.
That is kind of scary
She could ( if she wanted to ) make up a whole conversation from Trayvon.
Trey told me he was just coming from donating blood at the blood bank and the money he got from that he donated to Mother Teresa. He was still wobbling a little from all the blood he donated when a group of 10 white guys chased him yelling " Hey George, you are the neighborhood watch guy, lets Kill the punk" Treyvon ran and said he thought he had gotten away, but he was cornered by these 10 white guys
I heard Treyvon ask " hey guys, Why are you hassling me, I like your Tea Party shirts you are all wearing, I even like the Mitt Romney hats you are wearing "
They said, " we dont care, we are Tea Party members and we don't like your kind. Are you Kenyan born Muslim? "
Treyvon said no, and thats when I heard a voice that said " Hi kid, I am the neighborhood watch commander George Zimmerman, and I am going to shoot you"
I told Treyvon to punch him and run away, but he said he was afraid because at that moment Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and GW Bush had just showed up
I then heard a scuffle start and the phone went dead
"When he saw the man behind him again he said this man is going to do something to him. And then he said this man is still behind him and I said run."
Phone records have shown that DeeDee called Trayvon at 7:12 p.m., five minutes before police arrived, and remained on the phone with Martin until moments before he was shot.
DeeDee said Martin turned around and asked Zimmerman why he was following him. "The man said what are you doing around here?" DeeDee recalled Zimmerman saying.
DeeDee said she heard someone pushed into the grass before the call was dropped...
She heard someone pushed into the grass...What does that sound like ? ..
If the jury accepts her claim of someone pushed to the grass moments before the shot was fired ...all they have to do is check Trayvon and Zimmermans cloths ..to see who had grass stains..one could reasonable conclude that the person on the grass would also be the one on the bottom of the pile..
0
This is not like a signed statement by Trayvons girlfriend Dee Dee but it is a statement made by her :
"When he saw the man behind him again he said this man is going to do something to him. And then he said this man is still behind him and I said run."
Phone records have shown that DeeDee called Trayvon at 7:12 p.m., five minutes before police arrived, and remained on the phone with Martin until moments before he was shot.
DeeDee said Martin turned around and asked Zimmerman why he was following him. "The man said what are you doing around here?" DeeDee recalled Zimmerman saying.
DeeDee said she heard someone pushed into the grass before the call was dropped...
She heard someone pushed into the grass...What does that sound like ? ..
If the jury accepts her claim of someone pushed to the grass moments before the shot was fired ...all they have to do is check Trayvon and Zimmermans cloths ..to see who had grass stains..one could reasonable conclude that the person on the grass would also be the one on the bottom of the pile..
She could ( if she wanted to ) make up a whole conversation from Trayvon.
Trey told me he was just coming from donating blood at the blood bank and the money he got from that he donated to Mother Teresa. He was still wobbling a little from all the blood he donated when a group of 10 white guys chased him yelling " Hey George, you are the neighborhood watch guy, lets Kill the punk" Treyvon ran and said he thought he had gotten away, but he was cornered by these 10 white guys
I heard Treyvon ask " hey guys, Why are you hassling me, I like your Tea Party shirts you are all wearing, I even like the Mitt Romney hats you are wearing "
They said, " we dont care, we are Tea Party members and we don't like your kind. Are you Kenyan born Muslim? "
Treyvon said no, and thats when I heard a voice that said " Hi kid, I am the neighborhood watch commander George Zimmerman, and I am going to shoot you"
I told Treyvon to punch him and run away, but he said he was afraid because at that moment Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and GW Bush had just showed up
I then heard a scuffle start and the phone went dead
Your comment, while obviously tongue-in-cheek, proves my point about how bad the police investigation was.
The police did not obtain a statement from her until she had details of the incident. A good attorney will make this point in cross examination.
Had they interviewed her on the night this happened, she would not have obtained any outside details of the incident.
It is unfathomable that police would not have looked at Martin's cell phone, reviewed the time of his last call, then called that number to determine if they had any relevant information to add.
0
Quote Originally Posted by J_Galt:
That is kind of scary
She could ( if she wanted to ) make up a whole conversation from Trayvon.
Trey told me he was just coming from donating blood at the blood bank and the money he got from that he donated to Mother Teresa. He was still wobbling a little from all the blood he donated when a group of 10 white guys chased him yelling " Hey George, you are the neighborhood watch guy, lets Kill the punk" Treyvon ran and said he thought he had gotten away, but he was cornered by these 10 white guys
I heard Treyvon ask " hey guys, Why are you hassling me, I like your Tea Party shirts you are all wearing, I even like the Mitt Romney hats you are wearing "
They said, " we dont care, we are Tea Party members and we don't like your kind. Are you Kenyan born Muslim? "
Treyvon said no, and thats when I heard a voice that said " Hi kid, I am the neighborhood watch commander George Zimmerman, and I am going to shoot you"
I told Treyvon to punch him and run away, but he said he was afraid because at that moment Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and GW Bush had just showed up
I then heard a scuffle start and the phone went dead
Your comment, while obviously tongue-in-cheek, proves my point about how bad the police investigation was.
The police did not obtain a statement from her until she had details of the incident. A good attorney will make this point in cross examination.
Had they interviewed her on the night this happened, she would not have obtained any outside details of the incident.
It is unfathomable that police would not have looked at Martin's cell phone, reviewed the time of his last call, then called that number to determine if they had any relevant information to add.
if they did find one, I woukd first make application for a search warrant to look at phone numbers / texts, but that certainly could have been obtained within an hour or so.
If in fact there was a phone and the police did not go through this procedure it was indeed lackadaisical police work
0
sorry, I had to try that once
But, you are right
if they did find one, I woukd first make application for a search warrant to look at phone numbers / texts, but that certainly could have been obtained within an hour or so.
If in fact there was a phone and the police did not go through this procedure it was indeed lackadaisical police work
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
