Previous NEN Calls

[RickyJim]

AFAIK this is the first occurrence of GZ being in his vehicle when calling NEN.   Asking if you had gotten a plate number (past tense) is different than asking to "let me know if he does anything" and" which way is he running" (present tense).  That GZ did not exit his vehicle while TM was in site or near his vehicle tells me he wasn't interested in being any more confrontational than the previous calls (something he was berated for by Serino).  During the re-enactment GZ's recollection was the operator asking him to get to where he can see TM (either fabrication or his recollection of the interpretation to "let me know if he does anything").  GZ also apparently stops immediately when the operator says that they didn't need him to follow TM.  I think it would be foolish to discount the difference in situations as well as the discussion with the operator in analyzing why GZ's actions were different this time.  I do think guys getting away in the past played a part as well.

How do you know none of the previous calls weren't from inside the car?  In the first, he refuses to give his home address because "he obviously is in the neighborhood" but at the end Shelly tells him, "Don't go out there".   Could George or Shelly see somebody from inside their house heading for the back entrance?  I think it likely he was in his car during the second call since he says he would let the police in at the back entrance.  I have seen no explanation why he didn't decide to do that also in the 2/26/12 call. 

Saying that he "apparently stops immediately when the operator says that they didn't need him to follow TM." is absurd.  Even though he was quite close to TTL, if he wasn't running after he left his car, he kept going down the cut through to RVC.  What would he have done if didn't "stop immediately"?  I don't think he would have entered the dogpath with only his penlight working. 

[nomatter_nevermind]

Could George or Shelly see somebody from inside their house heading for the back entrance?

I think so. The unit they were living in was right at the SW bend of RVC. Their front window would have a view all the way to the SE bend.

On the 8/6/11 call, Zimmerman said the two suspects were 'at the back gate', not just headed there. They wouldn't have been able to see the gate itself or the immediate area from their unit.

The gate is at the end of TTL, a block east of where it crosses RVC. That intersection is a block north of the previously mentioned bend. Those are short blocks, the width of one building and the associated lawns. It's enough for the gate, and the stretch of TTL leading to it, to be out of the view from the SW bend of RVC. 

I think it likely he was in his car during the second call since he says he would let the police in at the back entrance.  I have seen no explanation why he didn't decide to do that also in the 2/26/12 call.

This has been discussed. It is said that gated communities generally permit access for emergency vehicles. I would assume they would be legally required to do so.

On 8/6, Zimmerman said he would let the officers in the back gate because 'there's no code there'. I don't know exactly what that means, but I'm guessing the gate had to be opened manually on that particular day for some special reason, such as maintenance work.

[nomatter_nevermind]

GZ also apparently stops immediately when the operator says that they didn't need him to follow TM.

Saying that he "apparently stops immediately when the operator says that they didn't need him to follow TM." is absurd.

From the reenactment on, Zimmerman claimed he wasn't following Martin at that time. He was in full address hunt mode. He had already stopped following, or he never really was.

[nomatter_nevermind]

AFAIK this is the first occurrence of GZ being in his vehicle when calling NEN.

AFAIK Zimmerman could have been in a vehicle for most of the earlier calls. Generally neither the audio recordings of the calls, nor the Event Reports, give much or any indication of the caller's location.

If it was the first time he was in a vehicle, so what? What significance does Zimmerman being or not being in vehicle have?

Asking if you had gotten a plate number (past tense) is different than asking to "let me know if he does anything" and" which way is he running" (present tense).

I don't agree that the tense makes a substantive difference. That's being over-literal. If Zimmerman didn't have the tag number already, but could have gotten it just by looking out the window, do you think Sharon wouldn't have wanted the information?

In each case the dispatcher expressed interest in certain information. In no case did the dispatcher suggest Zimmerman change his location or put himself at risk to gain the information. Those are the only relevant issues I can see.   

[nomatter_nevermind]

Because she asked, ""You started a neighborhood watch group?" That seems like she's asking Zimmerman to talk about the reasons behind starting the neighborhood watch group.

Why does it seem that way? Where are you getting 'reasons' from?

You are just repeating your point, not explaining it.

Even if that's not what she intended, that's could be how Zimmerman interpreted it.

I don't see any reason to think he did.

I don't see how you can call what Zimmerman said a "spontaneous response to an open-ended request for an explanation of what happened that night" when Singleton had just brought up starting the neighborhood watch -- an event that happened months before.

They were were talking about the NW only because Zimmerman brought it up originally, in response to:

Singleton: Yeah, what, or whatever led up to this. Anything you want to tell me about what happened and why it ended up, what it ended up to, to where this, this, this boy got shot.

Singleton 'brought it up' only in the sense that she was calling Zimmerman's attention to what he said earlier, to get the interview back on track after an interruption. It seems clear to me that she was still inviting Zimmerman's response to her earlier, open-ended question. 'And?' is pretty open-ended.

[nomatter_nevermind]

I might be wrong but every time the detectives and even the Dispatcher interrupted Zimmerman, he began again at the point of the last question.

Response to the general point on George as a Witness thread.

The last question before the interruption was 'Had you seen him before?' (2/26-1, 4:28)

Singleton never asked Zimmerman to explain why he started the NW.

[MJW]

Why does it seem that way? Where are you getting 'reasons' from?

You are just repeating your point, not explaining it.

First time:

Singleton: OK. OK, you started a ah
Zimmerman: neighborhood watch.
Singleton: neighborhood watch. OK.
Zimmerman: With Wendy Dorval and ah ah Sergeant Herkz, Officer Buchanan, and I’m the coordinator, and there’s been a few, um, times where I’ve seen a suspicious person in the neighborhood, um, we call the police, the non-emergency line and these guys always get away, they
Singleton: OK, what made them suspicious?
Zimmerman: This gentleman in particular? Um, I’d never seen him in the neighborhood. I know all the residents. Um, it was raining out, and he was leisurely walking, taking his time, looking at all the houses.

Second time:

Singleton: door opens and closes…unintelligible…OK, let’s get back to where we were. OK, um, you started a neighborhood watch group.
Zimmerman: Yes, ma’am.
Singleton: OK. and
Zimmerman: Um, I had called before and the police had come out, but these guys know the neighborhood very well and they would cut in between buildings and lose..
Singleton: You’re saying these guys. Who are these guys.
Zimmerman: Ah, the people committing the burglaries.
Singleton: So you’ve seen more than one person like looking suspicious and doing these burglaries?
Zimmerman: Yes, ma’am.

The second time is a virtual replay of the first. Singleton asks about Zimmerman starting the neighborhood watch;  Zimmerman explains how he'd call the police before, but the suspicious people would get away; Singleton asks about the other suspicious people Zimmerman had seen.

[leftwig]

I want to clarify a point.  When I suggest this is the first call that I know of where GZ was in his car, I am referring to the specific calls quoting his actions being different (the ones where he didn't get the license plate and the other where he mentioned not wanting to confront the individual).   He could have been in his car when reporting garage doors open or kids playing in the street, but I don't think those calls have any relevance to this discussion. 

AFAIK Zimmerman could have been in a vehicle for most of the earlier calls. Generally neither the audio recordings of the calls, nor the Event Reports, give much or any indication of the caller's location.

If it was the first time he was in a vehicle, so what? What significance does Zimmerman being or not being in vehicle have?

I didn't realize an explanation was necessary.  A car would offer a sense of security, protection from a confrontation and the ability to flee quickly if necessary.  Walking up to a suspect would be considerably more risky.

I don't agree that the tense makes a substantive difference. That's being over-literal. If Zimmerman didn't have the tag number already, but could have gotten it just by looking out the window, do you think Sharon wouldn't have wanted the information?

We are at an impasse as I see a dispatcher asking real time questions as being a significant difference that might lead to a change in actions.  Asking to "let me know if he does anything" and "which way is he running" are not requests other dispatchers made.  Again, I don't think this was the sole reason GZ acted differently, but I do believe it played a role.

In the previous call, did the dispatcher ask if he had gotten a plate number or if he could get one?  Do you think GZ could have gotten the tag of the vehicle parked by the back gate by looking out the window of his house?  Do you think GZ wouldn't have gotten the plate number if he could have without being conspicuous?

In each case the dispatcher expressed interest in certain information. In no case did the dispatcher suggest Zimmerman change his location or put himself at risk to gain the information. Those are the only relevant issues I can see.

This case was different as GZ was observing real time and the dispatcher was asking for real time information and  prompting GZ's involvement.  Sean asked that GZ let him know if this guy does anything.  GZ apparently interpreted this as a request for him to get to somewhere where he could observe TM.  I don't think GZ felt he was putting himself at risk by doing this from the security of his vehicle.  Sean asked GZ which way he was running.  I don't think he meant for GZ to get out of his vehicle and follow TM.  I don't think at that moment GZ felt he was putting himself at risk by getting out of the vehicle to see if he could tell where TM ran off to.

Like the other NEN calls, I don't believe GZ wanted to put himself at risk and confront the suspect and in the last case he had several opportunities to do so and did not.  I'm not sure how those suggesting GZ confronted TM reconciles this fact.