Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How far away was Jon Good's apartment from the scene of the fight? I don't think any of us know. He also claimed the one on bottom had a white or red jacket. Those are two very different colors---that also sounds a bit revisionist in my opinion, and may have been influenced by his seeing what color Zimmerman's jacket was later.
The prosecutors have been very poor at establishing the narrative for each witness, by not using the diagram of the complex enough, and not spelling out distances, even estimated ones.
I don't think they've ever even said the width of the dog-walk/alley way, unless I missed it. They also haven't said how far the condos and the porches are from the sidewalk. They're not giving the jurors a very good picture of what was going on. How would the jury know how far down someone's apartment is from the T if the lawyers never tell them? There's a big difference in hearing and seeing something from 10 feet away versus 30 or more feet away. Are they trying to lose this on purpose?
He was the closest witness to the fight. Here's a picture showing his vantage point to Trayvon's body.
My husband and I were walking to a hotel in the downtown of a big city yesterday. A guy walking the other direction saw us, passed us, and then immediately turned and started following us. Soon after that he put his hand on my husband's shoulder. He was just a panhandler, but he made us nervous with the way he was acting.
If Team Trayvon was consistent, they would say my husband had every right to punch him and then climb on top and beat him some more. They wouldn't have seen this situation the same though, because the panhandler was black and my husband is white.
Because I am consistent, I think if my husband had beaten him and sat on him, the guy would have had a right to shoot my husband to save himself. The guy following close behind us did not give us license to hit him.
If you are wondering how the story actually ended, my husband walked the guy across the street and bought him something to eat.
Zimmerman was following TM for a longer period of time, by automobile. TM was not in a big city where I assume there were other pedestrians about (increasing feelings of safety).
Your fight-and-flight instincts kicked in after a few seconds of being "followed" by a panhandler. TM's would have been off the charts, understandably.
...unless that person cared about helping the police that are on the way find and talk with that person.
Most people would not put them self in danger and police don't want you to do that. You and I know that Zimmerman would never have done that except that he had a gun. He reminds me of a busy body snitch because that makes him feel good.
When a young person dies it is typically the parents who are approached first and asked to provide a photo. The grieving parents don't always have an up to date photo handy and that's why initially you wind up with old photos or high school graduation photos. Later you get the more recent & informal photos taken by friends.
That theory was debunked last summer. This wasn't a case of grabbing the first photo they could find. That picture was put out to the media by the PR person hired by the Martin family. It was part of a deliberate misinformation campaign.
What specific statements did Z lie about, or contradict each other? Not just "whine whine, he kept changing his statement", exactly what did he say that differed? I honestly want to know, because I haven't heard him testify, nor seen the reenactment.
In one account GZ say he was approached at the T, was sucker punched and immediately went down with TM on top of him. In the re-enactment he realizes that this does not fit with the location of the body and shows how he made wimpy shoo-shoo waves with his hands and walked down the T before he was hit. The location he shows is still only 1/2 way to TM's body. His versions don't fit with the location of the body or the claim he was surprised and sucker punched at the T.
That theory was debunked last summer. This wasn't a case of grabbing the first photo they could find. That picture was put out to the media by the PR person hired by the Martin family. It was part of a deliberate misinformation campaign.
They hired a PR firm? Which PR firm was hired by the Martin's and when in relation to the death was the photo released?
Based on all of those previous calls, Zimmerman strikes me as the uber nosy neighbor - the one that's always watching what everyone is doing. Remember that one call about someone's garage door being open?? Plus, he never wanted to give out his address in case 'they' could hear him? I bet he's the type that will call the cops on any teenager walking along at night - we have some in my neighborhood like that.
It could be argued for wrongful death that if Zimmerman was not so worried about making sure he could tell where this 'suspicious person' went, nothing would have happened. However, that simply doesn't equal second degree murder. Wrongful death? I think so. Second degree murder? Haven't seen anything to prove that yet.
By the way - maybe it's just me - but the whole time watching him in trial and then those phone calls to the cops (plus his 911 call), I get the feeling Zimmerman's a major wimp. Not sure why. Just a feeling. It's how he comes across to me.
On Mother Jones site, there is a copy of all Zimmerman's calls to the police. On many of them he just gives his name as George, and on some he calls anonymously, identifiable by his phone number.
The same site has copies of all the burglaries at Retreat at Twin Lakes, and there were several. But they arrested at least one suspect, who was a friend of one of the teenagers living at Twin Lakes, and he was in possession of some of the stolen goods.
Seems clear you have never had much communication with people who are different from you physically and culturally. I understand completely what she meant by "hearing wet grass"....she just didn't know how to communicate or describe the actual sounds she heard. The prosecution could definitely have helped her out a bit with that but they didn't. At one point I think she did say it was a "thud" sound, or she put her hands together indicating the sound of something hitting the ground or some other object. You guys who are trying to hold up the the testimony of someone who was clearly not so articulate in terms of answering questions in court are grasping at straws to discredit her......focusing so much on trees you can't see the forest. Now, if a well-educated witness accustomed to describing sounds and events in detail had made those same mistakes, you might have a point.
Exactly right! As for the "wet grass" sound, if it the witness was aware that it was raining where TM was that night and heard sounds that led her to believe that TM and his phone were near the gound, the sound (maybe rustling or squishy) would lead her to think that it is the sound of wet grass. It would be a logical assumption for her, despite her not having the eloquence to explain it in the detail that I just did. She reached a logical conclusion, but lacked the skills necessary to explain why.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
