Retreat at Twin Lakes Clubhouse Videos

[nomatter_nevermind]

Is your claim is that Zimmerman ran back up to the T to drop the keychain there?  Strange that nobody mentioned it.

Why would he have to run? 

W-18 said on her 911 call that she saw Zimmerman walking.

I don't know of anything in the discovery that is inconsistent with Zimmerman walking to the T before Officer Smith arrived. None of the statements or police reports were specific about where Zimmerman was standing when he was taken into custody.

Early in the discussion of the discovery I conjectured that Zimmerman might have dropped the keychain when he raised his hands to surrender.

W-18 didn't overhear the conversation between Zimmerman and W-13, but she did hear Zimmerman admit to the shooting. To me that suggests Zimmerman might have moved closer to her window before Smith appeared.

[whonoze]

The one thing I don't understand about your compilation is all of the UTurns.  You have one on RVC early on and one or two others on TTL.  ((Sorry working from memory))  In the lower screen, you have the truck making a solid U-turn every time.  Considering the turning radius for a truck that size and the width of the street, I would think a three point turn would be more appropriate or accurate.

I agree. The animation is an approximation. The video states that, and specifically notes we do not know where or how exactly the vehicle turned. Not knowing, I just put the solid U-turns in because they're easier to animate. (I'm not an animator, and the work is quite difficult and time consuming). I did put in a two-step turnaround for the vehicle moving from facing the mailboxes to GZ's final position, because it matches the visual evidence, and it seemed important to show that. I put the time into the things that were important, and where I could match the animation to the videos with accuracy. For example, those U-turns are three key-frames each, and there's probably a dozen or more keyframes getting GZ past the mailbox and around the bend.

The second turn on RVC could have been a genuine U-turn if the vehicle used the parking area in front of the clubhouse for extra radius. But without tests that would match the 2/26 footage to known paths of a Ridgeline there's no way to know for sure.

As the video states, we can't say definitively that the first two passes are the same vehicle as the third (which does have to be Zimmerman), but the probablity is pretty good.

--

The transcript looks a little 'biased' to me. I got a laugh out of 'f-ing puddles'.  He said 'coons', not that that means anything different than 'punks' in that context, or is evidence of bigotry (i elaborate on this at http://whonoze.wordpress.com/2012/05/27/why-coons-or-punks-doesnt-really-matter/).

[whonoze]

Is your claim is that Zimmerman ran back up to the T to drop the keychain there?

No.

[RickyJim]

Why would he have to run? 

W-18 said on her 911 call that she saw Zimmerman walking.

I don't know of anything in the discovery that is inconsistent with Zimmerman walking to the T before Officer Smith arrived. None of the statements or police reports were specific about where Zimmerman was standing when he was taken into custody.

Early in the discussion of the discovery I conjectured that Zimmerman might have dropped the keychain when he raised his hands to surrender.

W-18 didn't overhear the conversation between Zimmerman and W-13, but she did hear Zimmerman admit to the shooting. To me that suggests Zimmerman might have moved closer to her window before Smith appeared.

Using Occam's razor, the best explanation for the keychain being found were it was is that it dropped out of Zimmerman's hands during the initial struggle with Martin.  We know he was using the light on it to navigate the cut through.   I can't see any reason for Zimmerman going from John's lawn towards the T except to retrieve his keychain and if he did that, he would have put it in his pocket.

[nomatter_nevermind]

Using Occam's razor, the best explanation for the keychain being found were it was is that it dropped out of Zimmerman's hands during the initial struggle with Martin.  We know he was using the light on it to navigate the cut through.

How do we know that?

If we assume Zimmerman dropped the keychain at the start of the struggle, then it's overwhelmingly likely he was using it as you say. Absent that assumption, which for this discussion is circular, what else is there to even suggest that?

Listening to the recordings of Zimmerman's SPD interviews after we had been discussing the other discovery for a few days, I found it striking that the keychain was never mentioned, by Zimmerman or the investigators.

It may be that Zimmerman, with his 'terrible memory', only recalled the keychain flashlight after the shooting. That would explain why he never mentioned it in the interviews. It would have seemed much less relevant than if he had used it before the shooting.   

I can't see any reason for Zimmerman going from John's lawn towards the T except to retrieve his keychain and if he did that, he would have put it in his pocket.

He might have wanted to stretch his legs for a last time before being arrested. He had some sitting to look forward to.

[RickyJim]

I would more readily believe that John only saw one flashlight and misspoke ...

Actually it is not hard to believe that refraction from the raindrops on John's second floor window caused the flashlight image to double. I see things like that all the time.

[RickyJim]

How do we know that?

If we assume Zimmerman dropped the keychain at the start of the struggle, then it's overwhelmingly likely he was using it as you say. Absent that assumption, which for this discussion is circular, what else is there to even suggest that?

Listening to the recordings of Zimmerman's SPD interviews after we had been discussing the other discovery for a few days, I found it striking that the keychain was never mentioned, by Zimmerman or the investigators.

It may be that Zimmerman, with his 'terrible memory', only recalled the keychain flashlight after the shooting. That would explain why he never mentioned it in the interviews. It would have seemed much less relevant than if he had used it before the shooting.   

He might have wanted to stretch his legs for a last time before being arrested. He had some sitting to look forward to.

He certainly made a big deal over the non working larger flashlight during the interviews and said he was trying to get it to work so he wouldn't have to go back in the dark.  It would make sense for him to use the only flashlight he could get to work.   Do you have any doubts that the fight started where W#11 says she first heard noises? 

I would feel crushed is there is no GPS data from any of the phones to be had and we will continue in the same vein during the year.   

[DebFrmHell]

I agree. The animation is an approximation. The video states that, and specifically notes we do not know where or how exactly the vehicle turned. Not knowing, I just put the solid U-turns in because they're easier to animate. (I'm not an animator, and the work is quite difficult and time consuming). I did put in a two-step turnaround for the vehicle moving from facing the mailboxes to GZ's final position, because it matches the visual evidence, and it seemed important to show that. I put the time into the things that were important, and where I could match the animation to the videos with accuracy. For example, those U-turns are three key-frames each, and there's probably a dozen or more keyframes getting GZ past the mailbox and around the bend.

The second turn on RVC could have been a genuine U-turn if the vehicle used the parking area in front of the clubhouse for extra radius. But without tests that would match the 2/26 footage to known paths of a Ridgeline there's no way to know for sure.

As the video states, we can't say definitively that the first two passes are the same vehicle as the third (which does have to be Zimmerman), but the probablity is pretty good.

--

The transcript looks a little 'biased' to me. I got a laugh out of 'f-ing puddles'.  He said 'coons', not that that means anything different than 'punks' in that context, or is evidence of bigotry (i elaborate on this at http://whonoze.wordpress.com/2012/05/27/why-coons-or-punks-doesnt-really-matter/).

I find it laughable that you would say that anything is a little biased. 

The reason I pointed out that transcript is that Lee is an audio specialist.  The important thing in that to consider is that only once does he mention what could be a gear shift.

The point is all about the times.  You "see" Smith's car arriving on Twin Trees when that is not credible.  For some reason, I read what you wrote is that it took well over a minute for Smith to arrive.  Going just from memory, I think he was there between 20-40 seconds after the shot.  I would have to go back and view the Event Log to be certain. In the meantime, I am using this one until I have time to go get one I can reference for you with a link.

1916:43 911 call placed by (redacted) where Zimmerman is heard screaming for help
1917:20 Shot fired; screams from Zimmerman cease
1917:40 Officer T. Smith arrives on scene


What you think is Zimmerman's truck, and I believe time wise that I can spot it too, neither of us can say without any doubt that it is the Ridgeline because there are no distinguishing factors that confirm it to be true.  I don't agree with your timeline.  If you were doing the animation correctly and making that three point turn it would chew up valuable seconds and that goes against your narrative.  The turning radius for that truck is greater than 21 ft.  21.3ft  IIRC.  That makes it nothing but speculation.

I applaud that you put in the split screens for the clubhouse and pool.  I thought that was very interesting because of the rain patterns.  Since that is way out of my paygrade, I appreciate the hard work.

I just am not convinced you have made your case.  Call it beyond reasonable doubt.

And it is a funny thing about the word you say he used.  When it was first played, I had read about it beforehand.  I heard the same as you.  I was shocked.  When it came out about the punks, I listened again and I could hear that word too.  IMO, you are going to hear what you need or want to hear.  Since the State has said/agreed it was "Punks," I will stay with that.

In the end, you are right.  It won't matter.  What I find to be...well...something...is that in both of the words and the phraseology, they were pluralized.  That would be a generalization.  Yet many think that it is directed solely at Trayvon Martin instead of considering the situation in general.

And since I  have noticed that you were complaining about your comments being deleted from here at another site, this has not happened.  There has been relatively good discourse about the video.  I have thought there were a couple of times both of our posts would be deleted and they weren't.  I also believe the statement RE: The Other Offensive "C" Word will has crossed the line here.  I suspect it will be gone along with this one.  We have already had stern warnings that if we wanted to discuss this in detail, we should go to the site from which it originated.

[nomatter_nevermind]

Do you have any doubts that the fight started where W#11 says she first heard noises? 

Yes.

I doubt Zimmerman and Martin ever had a fight, because I doubt they exist. The information I've received about them could be computer-generated signals fed into my vat-enclosed brain, or hallucinations produced by Descartes's Demon.

I chose my handle for a reason.

I hope I'm not the only solipsist on the forum. That would be lonely.

[nomatter_nevermind]

It would make sense for him to use the only flashlight he could get to work.

He forgot he was packing a double-action semi-automatic pistol. Why do you think he would remember he had a flashlight on his keychain?

[whonoze]

I  have noticed that you were complaining about your comments being deleted from here at another site...

I think you mistake me for someone else. I do not recall having a comment deleted here, so I certainly don't recall complaining about it. Until I discovered you were talking about the video I haven't posted anything on TalkLeft in at least 9 months. Back in the Stone Age I may have once posted something that breached rules I was not fully aware of, and had it deleted. If so I certainly wasn't upset about it.

I shall not respond to the fact that you prefer vague and proven-to-be inaccurate official documents over physical evidence. Res ipsa loquitor.

[RickyJim]

1916:43 911 call placed by (redacted) where Zimmerman is heard screaming for help
1917:20 Shot fired; screams from Zimmerman cease
1917:40 Officer T. Smith arrives on scene

Thanks Deb.  So one of the two flashlights S#6 reporgts seeing on his 911 call could have been Officer Smith's?

[whonoze]

Occam's razor would say the best explanation for a guy clearly saying he was seeing two flashlights is that he saw two flashlights.

But then Occam razor would say the best explanation for someone being prosecuted for murder making a long string of "mis-statements" about the facts of the case is that he's lying his ass off.

BTW, I think Team Z fails to realize that GZ's comment to Sean perfectly explains 'why Trayvon just didn't go home.'

'I don't want to reveal my address. I don't know where this creepy guy is at.'

He was, after all, being stalked no matter how you look at it...

[whonoze]

So one of the two flashlights S#6 reporgts seeing on his 911 call could have been Officer Smith's?

No.
That timeline has long since been proven BRD to be erroneous. It's pathetic that anyone claiming to be up on the evidence would post it here. Anyway, "on scene" refers to when Smith's car pulled into RATL. He wandered around for ~ two minutes before getting to the actual crime scene, his arrival clearly documented by multiple 911 calls with fixed time stamps. I know these times backwards and forwards. John made his comment over a minute and a half before Smith got there. Period. End of story.

[DebFrmHell]

I think you mistake me for someone else. I do not recall having a comment deleted here, so I certainly don't recall complaining about it. Until I discovered you were talking about the video I haven't posted anything on TalkLeft in at least 9 months. Back in the Stone Age I may have once posted something that breached rules I was not fully aware of, and had it deleted. If so I certainly wasn't upset about it.

I shall not respond to the fact that you prefer vague and proven-to-be inaccurate official documents over physical evidence. Res ipsa loquitor.

I went wading through a bunch of comments and I am afraid that I have mistaken you for someone else.  I am deeply sorry.  I shouldn't do something like that from memory.  I apologize.

Can you link to physical evidence you are citing?

I have to leave for work.  I will be late this evening and I will look for the link with time lines.  Those are computer generated.   I think it is in the 284 doc dump but will have it for you by morning.